For we walk by faith, not by sight

January 11, 2012 22 comments


For we walk by faith, not by sight (2 Corinthians 5:7)


If there is one thing I learned during the past 30 months, it is that faith is a very powerful thing and should neither be underestimated, nor ridiculed. This blog is all about faith and the impact it can have on someone’s life; including that of the person this entire website is dedicated to.

I wasn’t sure if I should write this blog, because I know it will again fuel suspicions about my intentions, and I will probably again be a subject of ridicule for some, but then I thought: who cares? It never stopped me from writing about any of the subjects I wrote in the past, why would it stop me now?

The reason I write this blog is because I want to explain to people why I think the religious topics on the forum DO matter for the sake of investigating this hoax. As most of you know, I created the new forum on to discuss subjects not directly related to the hoax, but that doesn’t mean in any way that I do not allow religious topics at all on the forum, quite the contrary because I think we might miss some important things by ignoring it.

I have no intention whatsoever to tell people what they should believe, nor do I want to offend anyone. I respect everyone’s beliefs and I would be the last person to judge people who do not believe at all, because when this hoax started I was agnostic myself and there was a time I was a hardcore atheist. In both cases I thought the Bible was written by evil men who wanted to control the masses, I thought Jesus never really existed and I thought the Catholic Church was one big evil scam that had too much power and too much money. I changed my opinion on 2 of the above; please allow me to explain why.


When I first learned of the possibility of the hoax, just a few days after Michael’s ‘death’, my first thought was that it was purely a PR stunt. As most of you know, I have never been a fan and knew close to zero about Michael. I did know he was a genius, and I did like his music, but I never understood what all the fuss was about. A huge PR stunt in the form of a giant real-life movie sounded reasonable to me and I was confident that he would reveal himself in the movie, or shortly before or after. But October 28 came and went, and no MJ… I was a little disappointed and I didn’t really understand why BAM didn’t happen. At that time I had lengthy chats with someone I will call ‘Bob’ for now (some of you might already have heard about him after last year’s forum drama) and Bob was a great help during the time we wrote the mind control and trial blogs. Both subjects that were pretty depressing and heavy and he always knew how to put a smile back on our faces. I know it was implied back then that he made us write about certain subjects and that he probably had an evil agenda or that the blogs were all his information but that’s a lie. Bob told us to look in certain directions and said we shouldn’t simply dismiss subjects like we did in the beginning. All he did was make us read the stuff for ourselves before judging. He opened my eyes and made me see the bigger picture of the hoax. Without him, I would probably have quit hoaxing shortly after This Is It premiered. Was he an insider? Yes, I absolutely believe he was. Whether Michael or someone close to him I do not know, but he showed me enough to convince me, and I am not easily convinced as you all will know by now. Besides that, he never contacted me; I decided to contact him when I thought he had some interesting information. Is it possible he was just another believer who liked to troll around? Sure, anything is possible, but in that case he would have been one lucky troll to say the least but still, everything that validated him could have been a coincidence if you believe in coincidences. That is where faith comes in. Faith doesn’t mean just believing everything you are being told or shown, faith always has a solid foundation. I had a solid foundation for my faith in Bob, and still have, even though I have never seen him in my life and cannot say for sure who he was. I haven’t spoken to him in nearly two years now, and I hope that if he reads this, he will contact me so that I can thank him for all the hours he has spent with us, which I know must have been frustrating at times.

Anyway, my faith in Bob renewed my faith in the hoax and in Michael, because I now saw that this was most likely not just for PR reasons, but Michael had bigger and more serious reasons for this, besides the entertaining part which of course is also a reason, he’s an entertainer after all. At the beginning the illuminati subjects weren’t received very positively, the reactions we got were Dave Dave reactions to the power ten and some people viciously attacked us for it and even sent death threats. That is when you know you have hit a nerve and that you are probably on the right track, whether or not every piece of information was accurate. Researching the illuminati, mind control and the trial made me look at the world we live in through different glasses. I don’t know why I rejected it so much early in the hoax, maybe because I thought ‘illuminati’ sounded too much like a Dan Brown thriller, and not a real life thriller. I am glad I changed my attitude and researched it for myself, because so many things in the hoax (and real life!) made so much more sense. But again time went by and no BAM. It turned very quiet at times and it seemed like the hoax had died. I spent those weeks and sometimes even months reading up on NWO subjects, the hoax and Michael’s life. I knew he is a religious man, but while researching his life I understood that he has way more religious than I thought. At first I couldn’t understand how a man who is so intelligent could even consider the Bible to be true, most definitely not because I thought it was written by the kind of occult groups he was so against. I decided to ignore the religious aspects of the hoax, until a few months had passed and I was still stuck on my hoax investigation. Every time I read something, something religious came up and I had zero knowledge of the Bible (yet still condemning it, talking about prejudice…). Even if I would have tried to read up on the Bible, I am sure I wouldn’t have understood a single thing because the OT is usually where you start reading, and I had a hard time even struggling through the first chapter, even more because I wanted to read it in English and not in my own language. I wanted to understand what Michael’s beliefs are, and why this mysterious Bible played such a big role in his life even though I was not religious myself at all, but I had no idea how. I did feel it was important to research, because I understood that if God played such a big role in his life, He definitely must have a big role in the hoax as well.

As if God had heard me, I met someone that turned my world upside down. I don’t think there is anyone walking this earth having more understanding of the Bible than he has. I know that seems like a big statement to make, but if you can explain even the most advanced Bible subjects in a way it even makes huge sense to me, then you are extremely gifted. After a few weeks of emailing, I again had the same question popping up because just like Michael, my Bible teacher is very intelligent and is against secret societies, NWO etc. How could he have so much faith in a book written by man and in an invisible man in the clouds? But then I realized that I was having the exact same kind of faith in Michael and in this hoax. Believing Michael hoaxed his death and will BAM one day, is absolutely no different from the Christian faith that Jesus will BAM in the near future. Christians have the Bible as their source; hoaxers have the media and the forum. Christians did the math on the ‘coincidences’ in the Bible and realized that there were way too many to be a coincidence; us hoaxers did the same with everything we have read and heard. Christians have faith in Jesus’ ‘BAM’ because of the evidence collected in the Bible; we hoaxers have faith in MJ’s BAM because of the evidence collected on the forum. The only differences are that Michael never died and that he isn’t God. Michael will have to BAM before he really dies; Jesus has eternity for His BAM. And I know that sounds crazy and impossible for an atheist, but after studying Bible prophecies and seeing the clear fulfillments of them to the exact year, then all I can say now is that there are things that go beyond our imagination and that we simply cannot wrap our pea-brains (of which we only use 10 to 15%) around certain things. Some people will never open up to the possibility, some might start studying the Bible themselves one day and see it, some people need a sign. I needed a sign and I got more than one. The first being my Bible teacher showing up, who is the reason why I have been pretty much absent from the forum the past couple of months. I wonder if there is anyone who has ever received so much Bible information in such a short period of time as I have. It fried my brain many times, but made me see that the foundation for the Christian faith is actually much stronger than the foundation for the faith we all have in Michael and the hoax. Like I said, I have no intention to convert anyone but if you are atheistic or agnostic, and you believe with 100% certainty, like me, that Michael is alive and will be back, then just consider studying the Bible. It won’t hurt you.

Anyway, of course I haven’t studied the complete Bible yet, that would be impossible in only a few months, but I mostly studied the EOW (end of world) subject. And even though my Bible teacher has some knowledge of the Jehova’s Witnesses beliefs about that, he isn’t one and never has been one and therefore is not able to answer all my questions. But God has a solution for everything and in the very beginning of my study my doorbell rang one morning. A Jehova’s Witness was at my door for the first time in years. Normally some of my JW family members go door to door and they avoid me because we are not really on good terms anymore, since they never hid their disgust for me because I would not be converted to their religion. The guy was amazed I let him in, since he has had doors slammed in his face for more than a year. I told him from the start that I was interested in his story, but that he would not be able to convert me. After we talked for about an hour or so, he said he had to go and I gave him some questions, asking him to study it and come back with answers. I never expected him to really return after I was so clear that he would not be able to convert me, but he did. The second visit we talked about the questions I gave him, but this time I was prepared and I was able to make him scratch his head more than once. Coincidentally, he had been studying the book of Daniel recently, just as I had been doing in between our meetings. He tried to distract me from the subject I asked about by trying to baffle me with his study on Daniel, but he ended up scratching his head even more when I started challenging him on that. I might have told him one or two things that triggered his interest, because believe it or not: he will be back a third time next week for another study. When I wanted to understand the Bible, I coincidentally met my Bible teacher and when I wanted to learn more about the JW beliefs, a JW turned up on my doorstep. Coincidence or another sign? I guess it depends on how strong the foundation of your faith is. There have been more signs like this, but I will keep it short.


On with the hoax and the religious aspects of it. Many people have rejected TS and TIAI because of the redirects to Bible passages or discussion about the EOW subject. Although I can understand why people want to dismiss the religious aspects, I would like to point out that this hoax was set up by Michael, who does believe in God, and in the Bible. Therefore, if we truly want to understand all the aspects of the hoax, we should not ignore that and research it. Even if you don’t feel like researching it, let others at least research it and just read their posts. Do not dismiss things solely for the reason that you don’t believe in God or in the Bible. Michael believes in God and in the Bible and that should be enough. I remember how my post about Dave Dave being Michael in disguise was attacked and ridiculed back at; now Dave Dave is accepted as a part of the hoax even by those who still don’t believe it was Michael. I remember how the illuminati and mind control blogs were viciously attacked and ridiculed; now this subject is widely discussed and accepted on the forum. History repeats itself and although most of the people who are still hanging on and are keeping the faith are the ones with manners and can at least complain with respect most of the time, again a subject of which I believe is important to at least investigate, is being ridiculed and dismissed. If you believe Michael hoaxed his death and if you believe he is trying to expose the evil side of our world, you should at least accept that Michael’s belief in God has influence on the hoax. And not just his belief in God, because believing in God and in the Bible automatically means a belief in the devil. Knowledge of the Bible is also of use when you believe in the illuminati, the powers that be, the men behind the curtain or whatever you want to call it to make it sound less like a Dan Brown book, simply because it is all linked. ‘Antichrist’ and ‘Satanism’ are not used that much in articles and books about the subject for nothing. You don’t have to believe in God or Satan yourself, all you have to understand is that those who pull the strings do and that alone should be enough to educate yourself to make sure you will not be deceived.


Here are some quotes on Michael and his beliefs. I do not know which beliefs he still shares with JW’s, but my guess is that there are still a lot of them. But his interest in other religions clearly shows that he was ever searching, looking for answers.

From Jermaine’s book ‘You are not alone’ about Michael’s faith:

Michael always said he was raised biblically. In fact, he was the only one of the Jackson 5 to be baptised. Michael prayed, I did not. Michael learned the Bible, I did not. I didn’t appreciate that Jehovah was the ultimate Father because we were made to believe that He can disown you if you don’t behave. The threat of abandonment – of being ‘de-fellowshipped’ – was ever-present. Michael would learn all about Jehovah’s threat of banishment in later life but in his childhood, the threat of it was a whip in itself.

Michael lifts his eyes from the floor. He looks the saddest I have ever seen him, but I can tell he just wants to talk. Up until now, he has rarely released his emotions in front of us. He has been controlled and resolute, speaking about his faith, how he trusts the judge of God, not the judge in a robe. But his controlled demeanour is now undone, no doubt triggered by yesterday’s testimony, and compounded by the frustration of this back injury.

Michael was dedicated to walking the higher path. I know that he confided in God and felt He was a presence you could never fool or hide anything from. In later life, he once told me he still felt a twinge of guilt for celebrating Christmas and birthdays.

Michael talked a lot about God with Rose. He was the only brother still attending the local Kingdom Hall and doing field service with Mother, La Toya and Janet, tour dates permitting. But different faiths and others’ relationship with God fascinated him, and Rose was Jewish.

For example, ‘I Just Can’t Stop Loving You’ came to him one morning when he was in bed. He grabbed his tape recorder and laid it down there and then. These flashes of inspiration were ‘God’s work,’ he said.

In the end, after allowing three weeks to pass, he followed his instinct and flew up. As photographer Harrison Funk tells it, he wanted to make his visit as low-profile as possible and was sneaked into the school in a detective’s car. When he arrived, he walked into an assembly of children in a large classroom and gave a passionate talk about hope, comfort and God.

Nanny Grace had already explained to me that the current security set-up wasn’t working for him and I suggested to him that he needed people who were not afraid of anyone and shared his trust in God.

People forgot that Michael’s faith in God was too strong to be swayed by any movement and the Nation was there for its
effective security, not any kind of ideology.

He left behind so many great deeds, far bigger than the superstar he was, and he did what every one of us should do: he lived his truth, undeterred by what anyone said and, forever kind, trusted God.

Mother ensured we made time for Bible study. The Old and New Testaments and the faith’s main publications, the Watchtower and Paradise Lost magazines, were always on the living-room table.

Michael always said, ‘My wife is my music and I’m married to my craft’ – and that was why he achieved greatness. But he was also a devout Jehovah’s Witness who lived his life in accordance with the Bible.

We ran to the main house and grabbed our jackets. Everyone was climbing into the convoy of vehicles. Michael, wearing his sunglasses, was already in the car. He was sitting next to Rebbie, who had the Bible in her hand: she was reading from the scriptures. As he listened, he rocked in his seat. ‘Why? Why? Why?’ he kept repeating, beating a fist into his right knee, ‘Why does it have to come to this?’ Rebbie went on reading as Randy climbed in beside her – and she continued to read all the way to court. During the previous weeks, Michael had privately attended two meetings at the local Kingdom Hall, returning to his Jehovah’s Witness roots in his darkest hour.


About Michael’s interest in the end of the world, also from Jermaine’s book:

I watched curtains twitching and used to count how many seconds it would be before the door was slammed in Mother’s face. Rejection didn’t faze her – she was serving Jehovah. Bless her, she’s still blazing a trail in His name in California to this day. The one lesson imprinted on our minds from our own Bible study was that we’d take a fast trip to Hell if we didn’t serve Jehovah and attend the Kingdom Hall. Our Judgement Day was Armageddon, when all evil life would be destroyed and a new world created for the chosen 144,000. Salvation hinged on our devotion to Jehovah. Just in case our young minds were not imaginative enough, the Watchtower illustrated what Armageddon would look like. I remember reading it with Michael, scanning vivid illustrations of buildings imploding and people falling into cavernous cracks in the earth, arms reaching out to be saved. The anxiety spread as we pondered the questions that would decide our fate. Do we honour Jehovah enough? Are we good enough for eternal life? Will we survive Armageddon? If we get into trouble with Joseph, does that mean we’re in trouble with Jehovah, too? ‘I want to go to Paradise!’ I said, more out of fear than enthusiasm. ‘Mother, are we going to be saved?’ asked Michael. The most important thing in life, she said, was to be good and be good to others: salvation is granted to those who keep the faith, do field service and live according to the scriptures. As an adult, Michael would later accept the Watchtower illustrations as ‘symbolism’, but as boys, it was still scary to wonder how Jehovah noticed the difference between us being good and, say, the mailman. What about the times Michael gave kids in the neighbourhood candy and I didn’t? Mother’s stock answer was the same: Don’t worry, He sees everything. And then there was the proximity of Armageddon. When was it going to happen? Next week? How long have we got? An inquisitive mind like Michael’s never could stop thinking about it. I can see him now looking up to an elder to ask some earnest question, only to be patted on the head and humoured. But witnesses seemed forever braced for the end of the world. The first Armageddon was estimated to be 1914. When that didn’t happen, it was changed to 1915 … And they’re still waiting. I distinctly remember when the Jackson family was convinced it was coming: 1963. The Russians seemed sure to bomb the US, JFK was assassinated, and then the suspected gunman, Lee Harvey Oswald, was shot – an event we watched on our black-and-white TV. Our household was sure all this was a prelude to the end of the world – and we brothers had never been so keen to get to the Kingdom Hall to honour Jehovah.


Michael’s own words in ‘Moonwalk’:

Every one of my albums or the group’s albums has been dedicated to our mother, Katherine Jackson, since we took over our own careers and began to produce our own music. My first memories are of her holding me and singing songs like “You Are My Sunshine” and “Cotton Fields.” She sang to me and to my brothers and sisters often. Even though she had lived in Indiana for some time, my mother grew up in Alabama, and in that part of the country it was just as common for black people to be raised with country and western music on the radio as it was for them to hear spirituals in church. She likes Willie Nelson to this day. She has always had a beautiful voice and I suppose I got my singing ability from my mother and, of course, from God.

My mother knew her polio was not a curse but a test that God gave her to triumph over, and she instilled in me a love of Him that I will always have. She taught me that my talent for singing and dancing was as much God’s work as a beautiful sunset or a storm that left snow for children to play in. Despite all the time we spent rehearsing and traveling, Mom would find time to take me to the Kingdom Hall of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, usually with Rebbie and LaToya.

Ed Sullivan may have been thinking of all this when he told me, “Never forget where your talent came from, that your talent is a gift from God.” I was grateful for his kindness, but I could have told him that my mother had never let me forget. I never had polio, which is a frightening thing for a dancer to think about, but I knew God had tested me and my brothers and sisters in other ways – our large family, our tiny house, the small amount of money we had to make ends meet, even the jealous kids in the neighborhood who threw rocks at our windows while we rehearsed, yelling that we’d never make it.

I’ve always joked that I didn’t ask to sing and dance, but it’s true. When I open my mouth, music comes out. I’m honored that I have this ability. I thank God for it every day. I try to cultivate what He gave me. I feel I’m compelled to do what I do.

I had always shouldered a lot of responsibility, but it suddenly seemed that everyone wanted a piece of me. There wasn’t that much to go around, and I needed to be responsible to myself. I had to take stock of my life and figure out what people wanted from me and to whom I was going to give wholly. It was a hard thing for me to do, but I had to learn to be wary of some of the people around me. God was at the top of my list of priorities, and my mother and father and brothers and sisters followed.


That last quote speaks volumes about Michael’s love for and faith in God. Why wouldn’t God be a part of this hoax as well? I will stop the quotes now to keep it as short as possible, but anyone who has seen or heard speeches from him, interviews with him etc., knows how strong and present his faith is in his life. Who is anyone to boot God out of the hoax?


The point I want to make is that I think that we should review the hoax again with this in mind. I absolutely believe there are religious references everywhere that might give us information we have overlooked. The new Thriller clip in This Is It for example has religious references, the rosary found on the death bed, the TMZ articles with biblical references that seeingclues once blogged about to name just a few of (in my opinion) many things that might be understood better if we would just look into it more than we have, whether you are a religious person yourself or not. We are still here after more than 2.5 years because we want to know the truth. That means we should investigate every single clue Michael is giving us, including the religious ones. So please keep an open mind and if you don’t want to discuss it then that is okay, but please do not complain when others do. Michael clearly had, and in my opinion still has, an interest for Armageddon, THE ultimate battle between good and evil. Looking at the lyrics of Thriller now, I believe this is about more than just a scary movie and Thriller happens to be the main theme for the hoax.

Also, is it a coincidence that the three (possibly just two) so called informers that are discussed the most on the forum, all three seem to have a clear religious background as well? And I know some people reading this will attack me again for defending any of them, but I want to say to them: go ahead! These verses say it all:

Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as [they were] from the beginning of the creation. For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: (2 Peter 3:3-6)

But, beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ; How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts. (Jude 1:17,18)

It doesn’t matter whether any of them is Michael himself, all that matters is that they share the same trust in God and have Michael’s best interest at heart. Those with a solid foundation for their faith in any or all of them are not being deceived or brainwashed, they see what is obvious; they have important information to share. The foundation for my faith in those three (or two) is solid for many reasons. Back clearly verified himself with his prophetic messages years ago, TS validated himself with his posts throughout the years and I trust Front for other reasons. If you have a problem with that, then I can’t help you because as long as no one can destroy the foundation of my faith with valid arguments instead of mumbo jumbo, they will have a platform for their messages on the forum. But most of all I have faith in Michael, and in his mission. May God protect him and guide him (and tell him to BAM soon before we all go completely insane! Lol).

Whosoever cometh to me, and heareth my sayings, and doeth them, I will shew you to whom he is like: He is like a man which built an house, and digged deep, and laid the foundation on a rock: and when the flood arose, the stream beat vehemently upon that house, and could not shake it: for it was founded upon a rock. But he that heareth, and doeth not, is like a man that without a foundation built an house upon the earth; against which the stream did beat vehemently, and immediately it fell; and the ruin of that house was great. (Luke 6:47-49)


“It’s all for love”

He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love. (1 John 4:8)

After all the things we tried to make out of the L.O.V.E., maybe it’s that simple: Michael does this for God, it’s all for God. And I am sure God has a hand in it all.

Michael wouldn’t appreciate the religious discussions on the forum? I think that assumption has no foundation at all. And to quote TS: Keep the faith, no matter what happens! We might not have seen Michael back in the flesh yet, but that should not be a problem, for we walk by faith, not by sight…

Challenging the non-believers arguments – part 1; “Michael would never do this to his kids”

April 3, 2011 63 comments


Most people on this website and forum believe Michael Jackson is still alive, but there are also people visiting here that say he is dead. Some do so in a polite way, some in a less polite way, but they all have the same arguments as to why Michael Jackson could never have hoaxed his death. Because it is going in circles mostly on the forum about this, I decided to resuscitate this blog and post my view on these arguments. This is only part one, more will follow whenever I have time.


One of the opinions that is most expressed by non-believers, is that Michael would never do this to his kids. I strongly disagree with that statement, and I will try to explain in this piece why I disagree. People are welcome to challenge my view, if they can and they are also welcome to reply to this blog and share other arguments that make you believe Michael is really dead. This is my attempt to show the non-believers why we think what we think and that we are in no way disrespecting Michael. We heard your side of the story, some of us even were on your side, now try to see this from our point of view, before accusing us of being disrespectful to Michael.


Let’s start with the person this is all about: Michael Jackson. Many of you know that I am not a fan, and that I never followed his life. That doesn’t mean I didn’t know and appreciate his work. I have always seen him as a fantastic artist and whenever Michael Jackson did something, it was something new, something different and often something shocking. He calls himself an innovator and a pioneer, and that is exactly what he is, and always has been when you look at his work. I’d like to start with some things coming directly from the horse’s mouth, before getting at the question if Michael would do this (hoaxing his death) to his children.


Michael holds a firm record with ‘Thriller’. Artists these days aren’t even trying to top that album, because they know beforehand that it’s most likely never going to happen. Not even Michael himself ever broke his own record. Does that mean he accepted that and planned some new albums that would probably do good, but never as good as Thriller, before he would retire and maybe even be ‘forgotten’ and replaced as the greatest entertainer? Or do you think he was planning something big that would shock the world? When I listen to some of his own words, I think the man had something up his sleeve for quite a while:


“But still, but still, I promise you; The best is yet to come!” on mark 9:21:



“My birthday wish is that you will join me in some new undertakings.” on mark 9:55:



“I’m very proud to be an entertainer and you ain’t seen nothing yet.” on mark 3:03:



Geraldo: “What’s the big plan, what’s the big picture at this stage in your life? What has been left unachieved, what would you like to do?”

Michael: “There are a lot of surprises… Film, I love film. […] It’s not so much film, but it’s innovating it and pioneering it. Taking the medium to a new place. […] And I’m having a lot of fun.” at the start:



Does this sound like another tour? Was that his big plan? It sounds more like a big movie project to me and certainly not another tour. Wouldn’t a real life Thriller, an interactive movie project with the whole world as a stage and an opportunity to expose the lies of the media be a movie project that Michael Jackson could have planned?


Okay, back to the children. One of the main arguments non-believers give for Michael being dead, is that he would never do this to his children. Fair enough, but that would mean that the original story (Michael died because of a Propofol overdose) is true, whether he was intentionally killed or not, because this is what the autopsy report says. So let’s have a closer look at the official story and draw some conclusions out of it.


According to reports, Michael was addicted to painkillers and anesthetics. He had trouble sleeping and shopped for RX, even begged doctors and nurses for propofol. On June 25, 2009, he came home after rehearsal and couldn’t sleep. Allegedly, doctor Murray gave him multiple kinds of drugs, before injecting the fatal dose of propofol in the morning.

Let’s assume this story is true. Whether Murray intentionally injected Michael with a fatal dose or not, we do know that Michael let Murray inject him voluntarily, since there was no sign of struggle on the crime scene, and no signs of struggle found on the body according to the autopsy report and Michael even had an IV. So either way, Michael was irresponsibly taking dangerous amounts and combinations of drugs, just to get some sleep. It means that if this were true, there are 2 scenarios for what happened that day:


1. Michael indeed was a hardcore drug addict, taking dangerous combinations of drugs for a long period of time and Murray just happened to be giving him the fatal shot, intentionally or not.


2. Michael was not a drug addict, but was stressed out and anxious about the upcoming concerts, had trouble sleeping and therefore hired an incapable cardiologist that doesn’t even know how to perform proper CPR, and pays him a shitload of money so he would administer him dangerous anesthetics.


People might argue that Michael thought that Murray was only going to put him on an IV for hydration, but Murray administered many other drugs before he allegedly administered the propofol. As reported, Michael was still not able to sleep, thus awake and knowing what Murray gave him. The drugs given to him do not feel like hydration, they effect you, whether they put you down or not.

People can then say that Michael didn’t stay awake and that Murray just kept giving him drugs while he was asleep, before giving him the propofol. That doesn’t make sense in either way. If Murray intended to kill Michael, he would have done it straight away, while it was still night and he could easily get away, after hiding the evidence and removing the bottles of propofol.

If Murray had good intentions it doesn’t make sense either, because if the drugs were working and Michael stayed under with the benzos, then why such a risk to give him propofol outside a hospital setting? He was already asleep, so no need for dangerous anesthetics.


So my point is, what sounds more plausible to you?


Michael being a hardcore drug addict who died because of a heavy addiction, risking his life and risking leaving his children without a father?

Michael is an irresponsible father, naive and stupid enough to let some incapable doctor administer a dangerous drug, just to get some sleep? That he wasn’t aware of the risks involved? That he is a dummy when it comes to medication? The man that rarely trusts anyone and who feared for his life, let some doctor inject him with stuff of which he didn’t really know what it was? Or that he did know and simply didn’t give a damn about the risks and therefore intentionally risking to leave his kids behind without a father?

Or do you think Michael is a genius, planned a complex death hoax for reasons that will only benefit his children and is maybe even seeing his kids on a regular basis? That Michael cares about this planet and his children enough to plan a death hoax that will bring some awareness, awakening and hope to people, that will benefit not only his and his children’s safety, but also that of you, me and planet earth, that will bring the proof that the media cannot be trusted -something he has been saying for years already- and on top of all that, will break each and every record and make him immortal?


You decide.


Does American Dream Have to Die With Michael Jackson?

October 21, 2010 9 comments

–The American Public Must Demand Honest Journalism.–


by Forbes Everett Landis


What does our silence about the attacks on one of the most visible achievers of the American Dream say? Are we not forfeiting our children’s future into the hands of bullies? Is it not time for us to speak up about the damage opportunistic journalism is doing to our culture?

Last year, the news of pop-superstar Michael Jackson’s premature death shocked the world. As I am a classical music fan, not a connoisseur of pop music or any of its stars, Jackson’s death did not immediately evoke any particular emotion in me. I just let it go.

But as the days went by, and as I passively soaked in more and more news reports on Jackson’s death, I began to feel increasingly uncomfortable. A man had passed away: What need was there for the media to so eagerly show humiliating images of how Jackson would have looked on his death-bed? I was prompted to look into the case more thoroughly.

After more than a year, although I am not now nor ever will be a Michael Jackson fan, and despite my sometimes skeptical view of the frenzied remarks often made by Jackson’s hard-core followers, I feel the need to say this:

To keep the American dream alive for our children, we should stop abusing our talented and creative spirits out of jealousy and misunderstanding.

Jackson had to deal with the media condemning him as strange, weird, and even labeling him a freak, both figuratively and literally. My opinion about this is clear: Though at times, to subjective eyes, Jackson might have looked ‘different,’ half of this eccentricity was due to the fact that he was born to be an artist inevitably different from others because of his imaginative and creative nature, and half because he was forced into being so unconventional by a degree of media pressure few, if any, have ever experienced. Being different from others does not equate being harmful to others. As long as one does not violate others’ human rights, one has the right to be him or herself. In a society that prioritizes human rights and freedom, I find no justification for attacks on people who are perceived to be ‘different.’ These kinds of attacks are especially sordid when they involve the spreading of knowingly false rumors for financial gain. After Jackson’s acquittal on alleged child related charges in 2005, several journalists, such as Aphrodite Jones, came forward to confess that most of the media in attendance intentionally put objectivity aside in covering the Michael Jackson case by fragmenting the facts divulged in court, reporting only anti-Jackson information.

The human race has quite often owed its scientific or artistic progress to the “weird” and the “eccentric.” Let us consider, for example, Galileo Galilei, who was charged for openly discussing Copernican theory, a concept seen as sinful and roundly condemned at that time; later, of course, this theory went on to become the accepted standard of scientific understanding of the universe. We might also stop to consider how treasonable the very idea of democracy once was, how dangerous the aristocracy felt it to be; later, democracy became the world’s prevailing political philosophy. We can also remember that the concept of equality between : women and men, different ethnicities, or diverse religions, was derided when it emerged. Also, had she not thought differently from others, might Mother Teresa not have been a stay-at-home mom instead of traveling to India and risking her life for humanity?

Keeping the history of these exceptional ideas and people in mind, I can almost guarantee that if one had killed all the “weirdoes” among our Australopithecine ancestors 3.5 million years ago, our species might not have made it to the 21st Century. We might very well have just remained a much more primitive species, one without the use of fire and the wheel, let alone an orchestra, democracy, or computers. Is it not, after all, diversity that allows for evolution?

In other words, “weirdness” is sometimes the inevitable result of an exceptional imaginative ability that sees no boundaries in search of all the creative possibilities. As long as such individuals do us no harm, we should let them be. It is our duty to be respectful of those who are different not only because every human being is entitled to freedom, but also because diversity is at the root of human survival.

To those who regard Jackson’s soft voice altered skin tone or facial appearance as weird, I would simply say this: You are revealing your own nature, at best : narrow-minded or obtuse ; at worst – unkind and bigoted. Nobody’s holy scripture deems it acceptable to criticize the physical appearance of people who have contributed so generously to the voiceless.

To those who think that the Jackson’s spoken voice was peculiar, I would say that I see no significance in it. The spoken voice cannot be uncoupled from the singing voice that so many lauded. It might also be helpful for you to consider this information in order to broaden your understanding of the global context: there are countries where people respect those who speak softly, in a calm, non-aggressive manner. The American standard, where a loud voice seems necessary to assertiveness, is not the only standard in the world.

To those who criticize the ‘King of Pop’ for purchasing Neverland, I pose this question: Would you have survived without buying a Neverland-sized residential property if you were in reality never able to explore any place alone without being horded by an ensuing media and public frenzy whenever you stepped out of your front door? A huge residence with a vast garden might have been the only possible way for this worldwide megastar to relax and enjoy some fresh air without constant intrusion from the public. After all, Jackson earned his money though incredible hard work and a perfectionist work-ethic. In light of his Guinness record-making support of no less than 39 charities, it may very well be hypocritical to criticize his spending habits.

Having demonstrated that there is nothing inherently wrong with living unconventionally, the question now turns to whether or not Jackson ever harmed anyone with his behaviors. Here I will discuss the child related allegations leveled against him. —

In discussing the two instances of allegations Jackson was faced with, I would like to focus my attention primarily on the 1993 case due to the fact that the more recent (2003-2005) accusations ended with Jackson receiving a full legal acquittal on all counts, the extremely low credibility of the accuser’s mother playing a significant factor in this exoneration. In other words, Jackson was found not-guilty so I believe we must discount this case.

Considering that the laws of most U.S. states set down one’s right to sue anyone without being counter-sued solely in retribution for one’s lawsuit, this means that one can safely sue anyone they wants to sue. Thus, the extortion of popular and wealthy persons is an increasingly attractive ploy for those seeking a quick buck. Fast and easy money may once have come at a personal price, that being distrust from one’s community. But, with cities growing ever larger and more impersonal, an individual’s local reputation is of gradually thinning importance, resulting in more room for thievery. To some mischief minded, the risk of exposure as an extortionist might thus seem lower when compared to the potentially enormous financial benefits of a scam. As a result, a millionaire, especially one whose professional value is greatly magnified by popularity, is more vulnerable than ever. According to the National Center for Child Abuse and Neglect, in 1998, 71% of the abuse reports were revealed to be false or unfounded. The false accusation rate even rises to over 90% when a custody battle and money is involved (as was the case between the plaintiff’s parents in the 1993 allegations against Jackson, who was a friend of the child’s mother). In the 1993 case, the charges never went to trial but were settled out of court.

The record illustrates that the financially troubled accuser’s father had previously approached Jackson’s representatives with a monetary request well before he sued for the alleged molestation, demonstrating that he would have refrained from filing suit in exchange for money. Would any parent with real care for the well-being of his or her children make such a deal?

As evidence for my position, I present the recorded phone conversation in which the accuser’s father is heard to say that everything [is] going “according to a certain plan,” that he would win “big time” and that Jackson would be ruined forever. These words sounds far more like the words of a mercenary than those of a father concerned with justice for his son.

It should also be emphasized that Jackson was never indicted on the 1993 allegations, even after an intensive 13-month investigation including interviews with over 400 witnesses in and out of the country, extensive searches of his residential properties, and even a 25 minute full-body examination in which Jackson had every part of his body photographed, videotaped and examined. And in the six years before the statute of limitation had expired, no criminal charges were ever filed. After the District Attorney’s office spent millions of tax payer dollars in hot pursuit of the singer, had they found any evidence of molestation, they would have been certain to indict Jackson. Civil settlement does not prevent criminal indictment. The 13-year-old boy at the center of the allegations refused to testify criminally and his father, the main individual behind the allegations, committed suicide within months of Jackson’s death.

Having discussed the mischaracterization of what people might dismiss as “weird,” and having made plain the falsity of the allegations made against Jackson, accusations that in my view look suspiciously extortionate, I would now like to consider the moral impact that Jackson might have had on our society.

Regarding integrity, Jackson’s deeds and lifestyle, apart from the media’s fabricated stories, remained consistently appropriate. In fact, his decency made him look almost old-fashioned, even when he was young, when compared with many entertainers’ indulgences in sex, alcohol, and drugs. Interviews with Jackson indicated that he felt it highly inappropriate to remark publicly on his sexual life. This, as far as I am concerned, is an example of his dignity and modesty. However, this very reserve may ironically have fueled baseless speculation about Jackson’s sexual orientation. I wish to ask : is publicly questioning a person’s sexual life not way more inappropriate than that person’s choice of silence out of a desire for privacy regarding the same? The fact that Jackson was not involved in a multitude of sex scandals with women, a fact which should normally invite respect, seems unfairly to have been justification for the media to pathologize Jackson. It is beyond ridiculous to construct the lack of lasciviousness and scandal as itself scandalous and suspect.

Many people have also remarked that Jackson did not curse at all, especially when he was younger. Only after suffering numerous hate campaigns founded on falsehoods did he insert a very small amount of profanity into his songs, in response to a world which had betrayed him so deeply. Even then, his use of profanity stayed away from vitriolic attacks , but came across more as an artistic expression of deep anguish.

Jackson also faced many accusations regarding his appearance. But, turning this around, what might this suggest about those themselves who so scrutinized the way he looked? What does it say about their own biases ? And about the people who claimed to know details about every surgical procedure Jackson allegedly had, calling him a freak without even having seen him actually ?
After the 2003 allegations, the media repeatedly and mockingly displayed pictures of Jackson in an emaciated state, not out of concern for his well-being, but seemingly simply in order to label him a freak. It may very well be argued that Jackson was indeed beginning to look fairly thin, but doesn’t taking somebody’s tired physical appearance as direct evidence of inner abnormality only reveal our own superficiality ? Maybe , just maybe anyone else would have looked equally fatigued had they suffered the anguish of having to relentlessly fight vicious and false allegations.

On the topic of morality : Which is more admirable, giving people hope by regularly visiting and donating to hospitals and orphanages, or telling scandalous stories based on speculation or lies? Which is more despicable, pursuing an exceptionally rigorous dedication to artistic perfection, or giving in to jealousy and greed to bring down an artist? The tabloid press, of course, uses this strategy on most celebrities and public figures. One might argue that Michael Jackson had learned to use the press as cynically as it used him, that he , especially in the early days, once believed that “all publicity is good, even bad publicity,” because it keeps their names in people’s minds. One might even go so far as to say that Jackson purposely flaunted his eccentricities to generate press. He did, after all, have a fine artistic sense of the dramatic, with drama selling newspapers. And Jackson always managed to keep his fame burning bright, even when he was not producing any new songs. As elaborated below, my issue, however, is not with Jackson’s handling of the media. Rather it is about what the media’s handling of Jackson says about societal norms and ethics.

Critics have accused Jackson of not opposing false information adamantly enough. Pondering that charge, I suspect that having been abused by the media intrusiveness from his early days in the spotlight, Jackson might have come to feel vulnerable and victimized. Having been taught by his parent always to be nice to the media and to his fans, he might have felt he should not defend himself too vigorously for fear of losing his popularity. Furthermore, had Jackson taken the time to fight every rumor thrown his way, he would not have had time to be Michael Jackson, the artist as he did explain to a close friend. In the end ,we must ask ourselves, who is more faithful and true, a person who calls someone a freak without knowing him personally and without possessing any evidence of wrongdoing, or a person who shows patience and courage in the face of hostility and simply expresses who he really is by letting his work speak for itself?

Some might argue that the attacks Jackson had to suffer from the media and from consumers can be justified as a natural price to pay for the fame and fortune. No, I say. That is too high a price being charged from a human being. Those attacks had exceeded all justifiable limits, And I wish to note that he was not paid to endure pain, but for his relentless efforts and dedication to his craft.

We first explored “weirdness” as necessary and beneficial diversity, specifically addressing the fact that Jackson’s physical appearance and spoken pitch seem irrelevant to his achievements. We then found that allegations of unethical behavior on Jackson’s part were in truth baseless. Then we analyzed Jackson’s non-aggressive stance during TV interviews, not as demonstration of guilt but as a sign of decorum. Lastly, we found that the cost of fame seems an insufficient justification for the extraordinary personal attacks Jackson went through.

We will now consider the implications of the behavior of the media and the public during the course of Michael Jackson’s career. The American media have disgraced themselves by displaying to the world the schoolyard bullying of a talented and creative soul with great philanthropic achievements . Now consider how this public bullying of a legendary figure might present itself to a new generation of youth, how it might play out in their minds and affect their morale … Might this type of public bullying not discourage the youngsters of today from pursuing their own creativity, their own inner diversity, for fear that they themselves might incur such abuse ?

The coverage of Michael Jackson’s life poses among others, these questions to America: Does fulfilling the American Dream require that one subject oneself to unending media intrusion, to lies about oneself for the sake of selling newspapers, and where one unproven accusation is enough to be convicted in the court of national opinion ? Do you want your children to live in a world where pursuing the American Dream involves the risks of a nightmare of mistrust and abuse?

I refer again to the journalists who later admitted their purposely distorted biased reporting on the Michael Jackson child molestation cases. If we recall for a moment the enormous number of journalists who surrounded the Santa Barbara County courthouse, one can surmise that the handful of journalists who came clean about their deception make up only the tip of the iceberg.I suspect that there were hundreds more who remained silent and who knowingly bent the truth to sell papers.

I also suppose that there are thousands of people who, having received one-sided information, once believed Jackson to be a freakish criminal, but who, after his death and the revelation of new information, have come to see him just as one of us, a burdened human being and a caring parent, as well as a uniquely talented artist and a devoted philanthropist. Perhaps these now better-informed members of the public have come to doubt the veracity of the media itself, not just when it comes to Michael Jackson, but in general.

I speculate that there is a pervasive notion that it is safer to say nothing when it comes to Michael Jackson for fear of being promptly stigmatized. However, we need to address the implications of such silent behavior. What does our silence about the attacks on one of the most visible achievers of the American Dream say? If we play it safe, we are forfeiting our children’s future into the hands of bullies. It is time for us to speak up about the damage opportunistic journalism is doing to our culture. As Edmund Burke once penned, “all it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.”



An hour with Jennifer Batten

June 21, 2010 32 comments

Jennifer Batten

Jennifer Batten, the guitarist who worked with Michael Jackson for 10 years and who joined him on his Bad, Dangerous and HIStory world tours, performed in The Netherlands last April.

Three days before Jennifer’s gig in Leeuwarden Mo was requested to do a photo shoot of another gig, and in return Mo asked her contact to put her in touch with the programmer of the venue where Jennifer was going to perform. Within a day everything was arranged and agreed on – the interview would take place on April 24th at 8:00PM.

Souza made the trip to the north again, and together we arrived at the venue on Saturday evening where we got a warm welcome from the programmer. We had already told him what we’re doing and what our website was about, but we asked him to give us the opportunity to explain this to Jennifer ourselves. Shortly after we arrived, one of the crew members took us upstairs to her dressing room, where she was finishing a radio interview. After these guys had left Jennifer invited us to sit down with her.

We started out with explaining to her what we have been doing the past 10 months, and we told her that we are running a death hoax website. We wanted to be completely honest with her from the start and we wanted her to know on what kind of website we wanted to publish this interview, as we didn’t want her to feel screwed afterwards if we wouldn’t have told her. We also offered her the opportunity to decline the interview in case she was not comfortable about it being published on a Michael Jackson death hoax website.

After we told her our story and pointed out that since the end of November we are focussing on who Mike is and what really happened to him she said: “Allright, go!”.

Since we read and heard Mike say the BAD tour was going to be his last tour, yet he continued with the Dangerous and HIStory tour and we couldn’t find any information on what might have changed his mind, or who changed his mind, that was our first question on the list.

“Well I think the whole idea used by a lot of artists is that they say ‘this is my last tour’. Partly, it’s to get people out. You know if you think somebody’s gonna be around every year, you’re not so likely to go get tickets. He may have sincerely thought that, that it was his last one, because he was getting.. I mean he was doing this since he was five and he really wasn’t enjoying that all that much. And you know being a prisoner of a hotel for a year is tough. Plus it was very exhausting to do all the shows. As far as the movie career, it just didn’t happen. You know I have no idea why. It could be the people at Hollywood just thought that… You know you get typecast. They need a pop star and he wants to be a movie star. People won’t take him seriously. It happens the same way around. You get movie stars that want to be rock stars, and it’s very difficult. So, but I’m just guessing, I have no idea why the movie thing didn’t take off. I was aware that he wanted to do that.”

We asked her if she knew why most of the staff was fired after the BAD tour?

“No I don’t, I don’t. I mean nobody ever said why, I wasn’t even aware that there was a different manager until I got on the next tour. It’s just rumours and there’s no need to put that out there. Most likely, somebody pissed him off. When everything is going wonderfully, then you would keep the people. So there must have been some stuff that went down businesswise that he wasn’t happy with. I mean that’s just logic.”

Jennifer Batten & Michael Jackson – Bad World Tour

Before we started writing down questions we read Jennifer’s interview with Charles Thomson again and something we noticed was that she said that people approached her to spill out some beans to the tabloids during the BAD tour. We wanted to know more about that, so we asked her if she remembered who that was.

“I don’t. Oh my god, it was 1987. It was just someone that was at a photoshoot or at an interview that I was doing, that I never saw again. Just some Hollywood goofball.”

Jennifer mentioned in that same interview she had with Charles that it seemed to be the same Michael during the Dangerous tour, yet she saw some differences in behaviour during the Dangerous tour compared to the BAD tour. We asked her if she could explain what those differences were.

“God, the only thing that I can think of, is that he didn’t rehearse as much as the BAD tour for the Dangerous tour or the HIStory tour. And he just explained he was showered with meetings. You know there were so many demands on his time. Other than that I don’t remember seeing his personality change, I didn’t notice that.”

We explained to her that for the public the change seemed extreme, by what was shown in the media. We all know he was portrayed as a weirdo by the media and that they always seemed to try too make him look strange. We told her we don’t think he changed that much and we asked her what her take was on it.

“No! He was consistent the whole time I knew him. The only thing that I can think of, is that he didn’t rehearse as much for the BAD tour for the Dangerous tour or the HIStory tour. He just explained that he was showered with meetings. You know there were so many demands on his time. Other than that I don’t remember seeing his personality change, I didn’t notice that.”

While going through the footage of Mike’s three world tours one thing becomes very clear – while his dancing was already incredible during the BAD tour, during the next two tours he kept on improving it until it was perfect. However, he started singing less songs live, which we actually didn’t understood as he’s a great live performer. This is what Jennifer had to say about it:

“Okay first of all, why do you think he wasn’t singing live? There are some songs where he’s doing some heavy dance moves. I’ll admit yeah. But he did sing live every tour. Not every song, but…he was getting older too. I know in the HIStory tour he would go back in between certain songs to go get some oxygen. He was working hard man!”

Did you ever notice that he had lung problems? That’s the story we’re being told now, that he had long problems, throat problems, inflamed lungs and stuff like that, for years already.

“I never heard anything about it, I would just hear him warming up before every show, with a vocal coach. And if he wasn’t going to sing, why bother hiring a vocal coach?”

Jennifer Batten & Michael Jackson – Dangerous World Tour

Jennifer told us she didn’t have contact with Mike after the HIStory tour. We asked her what her take is on the new band is, that we’ve seen in This is It.

“There was a whole new band. I think he wanted somebody younger, which I think was a very smart move to get Orianthi. I think he just wanted a fresh face, he wanted everything new. Because the songs were going be the same pretty much the same you know since people could pick their favorite songs, so rather than repeat the HIStory tour or the Dangerous tour, have something brand new with brand new people.”

“The odd thing about TII is that he changed a lot, he changed his whole wardrobe, different clothes, I don’t know if you have seen the costumes?”

“Oh they looked incredible! God yeah!”

“Still the songs were all the same as what we heard in the BAD tour, the Dangerous tour and the HIStory tour, there was not much new.”

“Well it was a greatest hits tour. That’s what it was. I mean in order to do a show, he never wanted to play stuff that hadn’t been on the radio, like in the top 10. When I first started with him on the BAD tour they had only just released Just Can’t Stop Loving You and BAD, and so we didn’t play any other stuff off the album until that stuff had been released. We did a whole year, we started out in Japan, went all over the world, then we went to Pensacola and we worked the entire show and added a lot more songs from BAD. So if he didn’t have a fresh record out, he’s not going to do new material.”

“So he changed the set list after some new stuff was released?”

“Yes, he didn’t want to do anything that people weren’t familiar with.”

At this point we started talking about Invincible, as it was huge in Europe but Jennifer didn’t know that. She was pleasantly surprised to hear that, because in the States it didn’t get any support at all. We wondered about why we didn’t hear more songs from Invincible during TII, as the 50 gigs were going to take place in the O2 so most of the fans that would have go see him there, would be from Europe. We did however hear small parts of Threatened and Speechless, while You Rock My World was left out despite it being a huge hit in Europe. Jennifer answered to that:

“Well I think he wanted the songs to be up on a certain point on the charts. You know there’s number 100 on the charts then some people aren’t going to be familiar with it. He mentioned that he wanted to play the songs that the fans wanted to hear. So if you’re getting votes on the internet it’s all going to be Billie Jean and Beat It, the top hits.”

“But the weird thing is, he did the press conference on March 5, and on March 13, the first set list was already released on the internet, and the voting was still going on.”


After talking a bit back and forth about Mike’s performances we ended up at the Superbowl halftime show in 1993. We’re sure everybody remembers that totally awesome performance, which was watched by 90 million to 100 million viewers in the United States and many more around the world. There’s something about this performance which many people want to know and we asked Jennifer about it: How did he get from score board to score board to the main stage?

“They [the ones on top of the score boards] were look-a-likes. In the beginning, those were look-a-likes. I didn’t even know they were gonna be there. When you look at that film, you’ll see the camera is looking at me and I’m looking up the air like…huh?? I had no idea. I didn’t even know all the cards were gonna be there with all the kids, haha!”

Here’s video of that performance, enjoy it, again!

The conversation took a turn and we started talking about things that happened in recent times. We ended up discussing the media, and all the news coverage of his death. We also talked about who is blabbing about what, and ended up talking about the interview Gene Simmons gave on Mike and how Charles Thomson responded to it. Jennifer’s opinion about Gene Simmons was very clear:

“What a bastard. He is so ignorant.

I don’t pay attention to the news because I know it’s 99% shit. I mean any news. It’s just made out and copy and paste and people.”

We also asked her if she watched the news after June 25th, and for her thoughts on what family members, friends and people involved with Mike have said.

“I didn’t watch a lot to tell you the truth. I mean I watched a little bit the day he died and then I saw the tabloid stuff start to kick in and it pissed me off. Whenever they smell money…easy target…?

I saw an interview with his security guards, and I thought it was great!”

“What do you think about the stories the family have been saying, that actually the doctor is the fall guy?”

“I wouldn’t doubt it, at all. I mean, I haven’t heard as nearly as much as you guys, I’m sure, but I understand the doctor wasn’t in the room at the time. Well I thought Jermaine do a thing when he said he knew who did it.”

“That’s the interview he had with the Australian radio station where he said he left for the airport ehhhh hospital?”

“Jermaine did?”

“Yeah, that’s what Jermaine said about Michael: Leaving for the airport ehhh hospital. But that’s not the point. Like La Toya, she was on a Dutch show two weeks ago and all she is talking about actually is conspiracies and being controlled and things like that. That there’s a much bigger story behind all this.”

“Oh I think there probably is, yeah.”

We asked her about the reports in the media about his drug addiction. One says he was a drug addict, the other says he has never seen him using drugs. Jennifer did three world tours with him, we asked her if she has ever noticed him being on drugs, she was pretty clear on this.

“Never, never. No.”

Jennifer is still in contact with Karen Faye. We asked her if she discussed the preparations of This is It with her and if there were things different from the previous tour.

“Not a lot, we just emailed about that. She thought that he couldn’t handle that many shows, and not that close together either.”

“That’s the strange part because Karen and some other people are claiming that he was too ill to do the 50 shows, and there are people that say that he was in perfect shape and he did a medical test which he passed. A few weeks ago we saw a documentary in which Navi said he saw Michael in London and he was in great shape and Susan Etok said he looked horrible and was skinny and was about to collapse…”

“Hmm. Well there’s a reason to this. People that were gonna make a bunch of money out of him say he was healthy. Karen warned people.”

“Was Karen let go after the trial, was she fired?”

“No, no.”

“We’re glad you could answer that because we have been searching for that kind of information for months and we couldn’t find anything about it. We always wondered what happened to her, because when you look at the rebuttal tapes they seem very close.”

“They were. He’d call her every once in a while and send her gifts. That happened right until the end.”

Jennifer Batten & Michael Jackson – Super Bowl performance

The rebuttal tapes of course brought us to the next subject: The Batshit tapes. We have investigated everything regarding the 1993 accusations and the trial, and we have found nothing against him, but we have found a lot of people and companies that would gain and have from this. We think that there’s a reason why Bashir did that interview. We asked Jennifer what her take on this subject is, and she had a lot to say…

“That was a big hoax right there. I mean, well Uri Geller suggested the guy, telling Michael here was a guy he trusts, and so Michael let off guards and told a lot of stuff. You know, it’s the same thing as the rabbi did. You take the message, and then after the fact, just post all this crap in it. I remember that there was one scene, it was that baby dangling scene that Bashir got in, I mean everything Michael was saying was normal, it was no big deal and people would have thought it was no big deal if Bashir didn’t come back and say: “I was really disturbed about his behavior”. Well nobody else would be if he didn’t post that in there. It was tabloid journalism. ”

About there being a deeper story behind it:

“Oh he got a butt load of money, I’m sure. That was a very covenant interview. You get it. ”

“Did he put a lot of trust into Uri Geller, do you know that?”

“He was friends with Michael, and so Michael trusted him when that journalist was recommended. But ultimately there wasn’t anyone he could trust.”

“We think someone placed him there to do the interview and twist it. ”

“You can bet on that. You know the thing – I was thinking about the Bashir thing. If you take Bashir’s comments out then that’s a really good thing to watch, and it’s really enlightening you know. Michael went off and told him the truth. “I’ve got vitiligo and what’s the deal with white people trying to get a tan and get dark”. You know, there’s a lot of wisdom in the words that he had to say. But Bashir did what he could…”

“The first part of the interview is good, but then there’s a turning point and I was like: “What the hell is happening now?!”. And you just saw Bashir flip around and…”

“Yes, just like the rabbi did, what a bastard! You know, that was supposed to be his friend, and Michael asked the rabbi to put his words out while the guy waited until he was dead and then fucked up everything.”

“We have bumped into a lot of people like that with bad intentions, and we have been digging on the Arvizos and…because we think there’s a connection between the Bashir tapes and the Arvizo plan, because Gavin’s mother met with an attorney 6 months before they met Michael.”

“And she insisted that he’d be in the Bashir special!”

“And later on she says she didn’t know he was in it, and she even filed a lawsuit because her son was used without her permission??”

“Oh she’s a nutcase! And the Chandlers were too, I mean…tsssss…look at it, can you spell dysfunction? It’s the most dysfunctional family on the planet!”

At this point we told Jennifer that we think Chandler was paid for what he accused Mike of, and that is it that stuff we try to dig out. Jennifer said she herself didn’t dig that deep, but voiced her opinion as to why Mike signed that settlement with the Chandlers while he first said he wanted to go to court.

“Well when you think about it, I mean, everybody hates the surface of a lawsuit. The thing is – it’s not about justice, but about who can convince the judge and jury. And he could have gone to jail forever, still being innocent, if the kid could convince these people.”

We pointed out to the taped telephone conversation between Evan Chandler and David Schwartz, and told her that it was obvious from that call that Chandler was going to extort Mike.

“Is that the part where he says: “there’s no way I can’t win”? Because I never heard him come out and say he was gonna extort him.”

We told her that the transcript of that call can be downloaded from our website, and she responded interested.

Jennifer Batten & Michael Jackson – Bad World Tour

Since Jennifer spent quite a lot of time with Mike we thought we’d try our luck an see if she could tell us what HIS signature was, because we have seen all kinds of contracts, letters and faxes with different signatures on them. Here’s what she had to say:

“Oh gosh I’m not sure. I never studied his signature. Honestly.”

We showed her the two different signatures on the AEG contract, which Mike according to the contract both signed, and she said:

“Oh really? Hmmm, well I can’t explain it. I don’t know anything about it. ”

We explained to her that this has been keeping us busy quite some time, also in relation to the alleged dept he would have had. We told her we think he is an excellent business man and we don’t have a comfortable feeling about all this at all. We told her that we are investigating for like 10 months now, everything and really everything, so also the things he did in the past – the gigs and the contracts he signed and why he did certain things. There are a lot of things that just don’t add up when you have them all together in the same line and that’s a little why we think he might not have signed everything himself. She listened attentively and then said:

“I was never part of his business. I actually have a picture that he signed, but I never paid that much attention to how the signature looks like.”

Our final question was about the Joe/Joseph issue, since this still is a point of discussion. We asked her if she knew what his middle name is.

“It’s Joseph…right..?:

“Well, here’s the thing: We have documents stating Joe and we have documents stating Joseph. And that’s the odd part. The stuff that’s signed with Joseph, seems off. The indictment of the 2003 trial says his legal name is Michael Joe Jackson. ”

“Well I don’t know really…”

This is where our interview ended, but we did chit chat for a while afterwards. Unfortunately we couldn’t stay and watch Jennifer perform and that we truly regretted, but Mo had to do the gig shoot she was asked to do that led to this intermezzo.

We thanked Jennifer for her time, for being prepared to talk to us, and promised we would attend her next gig in The Netherlands. Below a clip of Jennifer’s new CD “Whatever” and her official website. Make sure you check out the page about Mike and take the time to read the articles and listen to the great interview with Charles Thomson she put up. A summary of the interview can be found below as well, as an audio file.

A preview of her new CD “Whatever”

Jennifer’s Official Website

Our sincere thanks of course go to Jennifer Batten who really took her time to talk to us, but also to Froukje and Bobby, for setting this up. Thank you!

“In loving memory of…”

May 2, 2010 22 comments


This is actually a blog we made in December. Because of the Mind Control blog and the Trial blog, we decided not to post this, because we thought the other subjects were way more important. We are now working on two new blogs, and ran into this one again, so we decided to post it now, before the other blogs are finished. It’s the memorial stripped, with all the transcripts of the speeches and some thoughts.



Smokey Robinson reads messages from Diana Ross and Nelson Mandela. As we all know Diana Ross did not attend the memorial, nor did she attend the funeral.


Screen has a picture of Mike with:


In loving memory of

Michael Jackson

King of Pop

1958 – 2009


Interesting is that it says: Michael Jackson, King of Pop. As we all know Mike wanted to be seen as a person, a human being, not as a personality. To us this means that the King of Pop, the entertainer Michael Jackson died, not the man himself.



And we wait…. And wait…..And wait a little longer. Mike must be behind all this, he is always late.



Then it finally starts. The casket is being brought in by the brothers.



Andrea Crouch Choir perform Soon and Very Soon (“We are going to see the King”)



Soon and very soon, we are going to see the King

Soon and very soon, we are going to see the King

Soon and very soon, we are going to see the King

Hallelujah! Hallelujah! We’re going to see the King


No more crying there, we are going to see the King

No more crying there, we are going to see the King

No more crying there, we are going to see the King

Hallelujah! Hallelujah! We’re going to see the King


No more dying there, we are going to see the King

No more dying there, we are going to see the King

No more dying there, we are going to see the King

Hallelujah! Hallelujah! We’re going to see the King



The original version of this song is actually very happy:



The original lyrics:


Soon and very soon we are going to see the king

Soon and very soon we are going to see the king

Soon and very soon we are going to see the king

Hallelujah, hallelujah, we’re going to see the king


No more cryin there, we are going to see the king

No more cryin there, we are going to see the king

No more cryin there, we are going to see the king

Hallelujah, hallelujah, we’re going to see the king


No more dying there, we are going to see the King

No more dying there, we are going to see the King

No more dying there, we are going to see the King

Hallelujah! Hallelujah! We’re going to see the King


Should there be any rivers we must cross

Should there be any mountains we must climb

God will supply all the strength that we need

Give us strength till we reach the other side…


We have come from every nation, God has already signed our name. Jesus took his blood and he washed my sins.. he washed them all away. Yet there are those of us who have laid down our lives but we all shall meet again on the other side… soon and very soon.


Soon and very soon we are going to see the king

Soon and very soon we are going to see the king

Soon and very soon we are going to see the king

Hallelujah, hallelujah, we’re going to see the king


No more cryin there, we are going to see the king

No more cryin there, we are going to see the king

No more cryin there, we are going to see the king

Hallelujah, hallelujah, we’re going to see the king


No more dying there, we are going to see the King

No more dying there, we are going to see the King

No more dying there, we are going to see the King

Hallelujah! Hallelujah! We’re going to see the King


Should there be any rivers we must cross

Should there be any mountains we must climb

God will supply all the strength that we need

Give us strength till we reach the other side…


The bold part was not performed at the memorial. Maybe there wasn’t time, maybe it was on purpose and we should Google the lyrics to read the rest, to see the message the song contains. Actually the song says, whatever needs to be done to make it right, to cross the barriers of color and culture, we will have the strength to do it.



There are 9 flowers with the casket. 4 on each side of the casket, 1 on the casket. The colors of the flowers are white, yellow, purple, blue and dark blue, pink and red. 9 is a number we have seen quite often the last months, now what could it mean…? The colors of the flowers all have a different meaning.


White flowers:

White signifies purity and perfection and can represent a successful beginning.


Yellow flowers:

Yellow is the color of joy. Yellow stimulates creative and intellectual energy. It brings clarity to decision-making and improves concentration. Yellow also can be seen as the color of false mourning. There is an old historical tale about King Henry the 8th of England. He wore yellow on the day after his first wife died, he had found his second already, so some say it is the color of ‘false mourning’. (credits for this go to our breathing Wikipedia😉 As you can see in the footage and the pictures, Lionel Richie, Kenny Ortega, the male dancers and background singers have a yellow rose on their jackets. The brothers, Prince and Blanket have a yellow tie.


Purple flowers:

Purple is definitely the color of power and luxury, but it is also associated with good judgment and spiritual fulfillment. Purple stimulates peace of mind and is used in meditation. 


Blue flowers:

Blue is the color of the sky, the ocean and it is also the color that is associated with sleep. Conveying peace and tranquillity, blue is the coolest color and it provides rest for both mind and body, slowing down our metabolic rate. It’s a color that is particularly male.

Dark blue stands for truth and expertise. Pure blue is the color of inspiration and spirituality. Overall, blue gives a feeling of distance and is used to convey a sense of perspective, particularly outwards.


Pink flowers:

If anybody thinks about pink, then definitely thinks about the elements of grace, gentility, and happiness. Regardless of the shape of the flower – from the tight, small buds of a pink garden rose to the delicate, open petals of a pink caellia in full bloom – pink blossoms convey youth, innocence, and joy. Pink is the color that always turns the occasion of life into a memorable moment for generations to come.


Red flowers:

Red is believed to increase enthusiasm and interest, enhance human metabolism, raise blood pressure and increase respiration rates. A red rose is the eternal symbol of love.



Pastor Lucious Smith



Good morning and welcome, my name is Pastor Lucious Smith and I’m proud to call the Jackson family my friends. To millions around the world Michael Jackson was an idol, a hero, even a king, but first and foremost this man before us today was our brother, our son, our father and our friend. Michael Jackson was and always shall be a beloved part of the Jackson family and the family of man. So today we gather those who know and love Michael best and those who came to know and love him through his good works. We come together in this space where only days ago Michael sang, and danced and brought his joy as only he could. We come together and we remember the time. We remember this man by celebrating his life and all of the love that he brought to our own lives for half a century. Our hearts are heavy today because this man, this brother, this son, this father and this friend is gone far too soon. But as long as we remember our time with him, the truth is he is never really gone at all. As long as we remember him, he will be there forever to comfort us. In his very beautiful and very human heart Michael Jackson wanted nothing more than to give love to the world. To share of his singular talent and his soul and perhaps be loved back in return. Through his words, his music and his countless good deeds, Michael did so much to try and heal our world. And so for the Jackson family and for all who grieve his loss everywhere in our world, may this moment of remembrance, a moment of healing, a moment of music and a moment of love bring comfort to those who loved our friend. God bless you.


Remember the time, he mentions it a few times. Also later on we see Magic Johnson, who played a small part in the clip. Who also plays a role in Remember the Time is Eddie Murphy, also a master of disguise. We remembered blond lady (Mike in disguise?) holding hands with a black man with a black fedora.


In the early hours of May 2, 1997, Murphy was driving his wife’s SUV down Santa Monica Boulevard in West Hollywood. Murphy pulled over, and a transvestite hooker named Atisone Kenneth Seiuli (or “Shalomar”) got in. They drove off together, but didn’t get far before Murphy was pulled over by a Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department squad car.”

So maybe black fedora guy is Eddie Murphy? It could be possible in our opinion

BTW: Eddie Murphy, another black guy with a voice, quitting as a stand-up comedian overnight, to be an actor. Silenced as well?




Mariah Carey & Trey Lorenz perform “I’ll Be There”



You and I must make a pact, we must bring salvation back
Where there is love, I’ll be there

I’ll reach out my hand to you, I’ll have faith in all you do
Just call my name and I’ll be there

I’ll be there to comfort you,
Build my world of dreams around you, I’m so glad that I found you
I’ll be there with a love that’s strong
I’ll be your strength, I’ll keep holding on

Let me fill your heart with joy and laughter
Togetherness, well that’s all I’m after
Whenever you need me, I’ll be there
I’ll be there to protect you, with an unselfish love that respects you
Just call my name and I’ll be there

If you should ever find someone new, I know he’d better be good to you
‘Cause if he doesn’t, I’ll be there
Don’t you know, baby, yeah yeah
I’ll be there, I’ll be there, just call my name, I’ll be there

(Just look over your shoulders, honey – oo)

I’ll be there, I’ll be there, whenever you need me, I’ll be there
Don’t you know, baby, yeah yeah

I’ll be there, I’ll be there, just call my name, I’ll be there…


“You and I must make a pact, we must bring salvation back”. Indeed, that is what needs to be done and that is what Mike in our opinion wants us to do. Make a pact, stand together as one.

Why Mariah Carey and Trey Lorenz? Of course we know that Mariah was a friend of Mike and Trey is one of her long time supporting singer. BUT, there is more that could link them to this hoax.

Mariah made her recording debut in 1990 under the guidance of Tommy Mottola, who headed Sony Music Entertainment, parent of the Columbia label for 15 years. She married Mottola in 1993 and all the time she was with Mottola, business was good. But after leaving him in 1997, we all know why their marriage was not that happy, her popularity declined. As our bible Wiki says:

“Following her separation from Mottola in 1997, Carey introduced elements of hip hop into her album work, to much initial success, but her popularity was in decline when she left Columbia in 2001. She signed to Virgin Records but was dropped from the label and bought out of her contract the following year after a highly publicized physical and emotional breakdown, as well as the poor reception given to Glitter, her film and soundtrack project. ”

How come such a big selling artist looses that much popularity all of the sudden? Also, why only after she left Mottola? Makes you wonder, was she not obedient enough anymore? Was she fighting them? If you don’t do as they say, you carreer is over, you are on your own. We just mention it again: Michael Jackson – Invincible…enough said.

Trey Lorenz also has a connection with Sony. Trey was signed to Jermaine Dupri’s Atlanta-based So So Def Records label, but never put out any music under the label. The So So Def label was established in 1993 as a spinoff of Dupri’s production company of the same moniker, through a joint venture with Sony Music and Columbia Records. Its first act was female R&B group Xscape.

Dupri also worked with Mariah and Usher.




Queen Latifah



I’m here representing million of fans around the world who grew up listening to Michael, being inspired and loving Michael from a distance; all of you. Somehow when Michael Jackson sang or when he danced we never felt distant, we felt like he was right there; right for us. You believed in Michael and he believed in you. He made you believe in yourself. I loved him all my life. One of the first records my brother and I ever bought was dancing machine. And I’ll never forget the two of us getting the robot going trying to be like the Jackson 5. Thank you. Thank you. Michael was the biggest star on earth. He let me know that as an African-American, you could travel the world — there was a world outside of America, other people. All you people who came here to pay respect to someone who you felt was one of you, a human being first. This morning I spoke with perhaps one of our greatest posts Maya Angelou, and I’m so honored that she asked me to share some words that she wrote for Michael.

We Had Him by Dr. Maya Angelou

Beloveds, now we know that we know nothing, now that our bright and shining star can slip away from our fingertips like a puff of summer wind.
Without notice, our dear love can escape our doting embrace. Sing our songs among the stars and walk our dances across the face of the moon.
In the instant we learn that Michael is gone, we know nothing. No clocks can tell time. No oceans can rush our tides with the abrupt absence of our treasure.
Though we are many, each of us is achingly alone, piercingly alone.
Only when we confess our confusion can we remember that he was a gift to us and we did have him.
He came to us from the creator, trailing creativity in abundance.
Despite the anguish, his life was sheathed in mother love, family love, and survived and did more than that.
He thrived with passion and compassion, humor and style. We had him whether we know who he was or did not know, he was ours and we were his.
We had him, beautiful, delighting our eyes.
He … his hat, aslant over his brow, and took a pose on his toes for all of us.
And we laughed and stomped our feet for him.
We were enchanted with his passion because he held nothing. He gave us all he had been given.
Today in Tokyo, beneath the Eiffel Tower, in Ghana’s Black Star Square.
In Johannesburg and Pittsburgh, in Birmingham, Alabama, and Birmingham, England
We are missing Michael.
But we do know we had him, and we are the world.


On the screen we see Mike pointing at her, as far as we recall, it’s a picture of Mike performing ‘Man in the Mirror’ during the BAD tour or the Grammys.


Why Queen Latifah? Actually she was asked by Maya Angelou, who was unable to attend, so we better have a look at her. Maya Angelou was a member of the Harlem Writers Guild in the late 1950s, was active in the Civil Rights movement, and served as Northern Coordinator of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s Southern Christian Leadership Conference. So we can say she is a black woman with a voice.




Lionel Richie performs “Jesus Is Love”



Help Your children
And don’t let them fall
By the side of the road, mmm…mmm…

And teach them
To love one another
That Heaven might find
A place in their hearts

‘Cause Jesus is love
He won’t let you down
And I know He’s mine forever
Oh, in my heart

We’ve got to walk on
Walk on through temptation
‘Cause His love and His wisdom
Will be our helpin’ hand

And I know the Truth
And His words will be our salvation
Lift up our hearts
To be thankful and glad

That Jesus is love
He won’t let you down
And I know He’s mine
Deep down in my soul

Jesus is love
Oh, yes, He is
He won’t let you down
And I know He’s mine, He’s mine, He’s mine, He’s mine, all mine
Forever, oh, in my heart
Help me, heart, heart

(Deep in my heart)
I know, I know, I know, I know
Ah, ’cause His love’s the power (Power)
His love’s the glory (Glory)
Forever (Ever and ever)

Ooh, yeah (Yeah, yeah)
Ooh, yeah (Yeah, yeah)
Ooh, yeah, yeah (Yeah, yeah)

I wanna follow your star
Wherever it leads me
And I don’t mind, Lord
I hope you don’t mind

I wanna walk with you
And talk with you
And do all the things you want me to do
‘Cause I know that Jesus

(Jesus is Love, I know) ‘Cause I know, Lord
(And if you ask, I’ll show)
(Love is the word forever) And ever and ever

Who can bring you love (Jesus)
Who can bring you joy (Jesus)
Who can turn your life around (Jesus), oh

Ooh, yeah (Yeah, yeah)
Yeah (Yeah, yeah)

Who will pick you up (Jesus)
When you fall (Jesus)
Who’ll stand beside you (Jesus)
Who will love us all

Hey, hey, Jesus (Yeah, yeah)
Jesus (Yeah, yeah)
Oh, yeah (Yeah, yeah)

One thing I wanna say
Who can heal your body (Jesus)
Who can make you strong (Jesus)
Who can help you to hold out (Jesus)
A little while longer

Ooh, yeah (Yeah, yeah)
Yeah (Yeah, yeah)
Jesus loves you (Yeah, yeah), Jesus wants you
If you call Him, He will answer

(Jesus) Call him in the mornin’
(Jesus) Call him in the evenin’
(Jesus) Call him in the midnight hour

Hey, hey (Yeah, yeah)
Yeah (Yeah, yeah)
Yeah, yeah (Yeah, yeah)
Yeah, y’all say it for me

(Jesus is love)


It’s not one of Mike’s songs, which makes you think that the lyrics must be important. The song is all about love. Whatever happens, which temptations you might bump into in your life, remember to always be guided by love and love for each other. Teach your children to love others. As we both are not religious we might have a different interpretation, but the message remains the same: L.O.V.E. The bold parts were not performed.


Why Lionel Richie? Well he is a long time friend and was signed at Motown with the Commodores the same time as the Jackson 5.



Berry Gordy



He was driven by his hunger to learn to constantly top himself to be the best. He was the consummate student. He studied the greats and became greater. He raised the bar and then broke the bar. His talent and creativity thrust him and entertainment into another stratosphere. The Motown family mourns the death of our friend and brother Michael Jackson who was like a son to me. Our deep condolences go out to all his family, his parents; Joe, Katherine, his beautiful children, his sisters and brothers and his nieces and nephews. Michael Jackson was 10 years old when he and his brothers auditioned for me in Motown in Detroit that July day in 1968, and blew us all away. The Jackson 5 were just amazing, and little Michael’s performance was way beyond his years. This little kid had an incredible knowingness about him. He sang with such feeling and inspiration. Michael had a quality that I couldn’t completely understand but we all knew he was special. Aside from singing and dancing like James Brown and Jackie Wilson, he sung a Smokey Robinson song called Who’s Lovin’ You. He sang it with the sadness and passion of a man who’d been living the blues and heartbreak his whole life. And as great as Smokey sang it, I thought Michael was better. I went to Smokey and said hey man I think he got you on that one. Smokey said me too. That was Motown. Motown was built on love and competition and sometimes the competition got in the way of the love but the love always won out. We competed on everything. And California we had a baseball game every week, the Jacksons vs. the Gordy’s. Unfortunately for us, Tito and Jackie were big homerun hitters. They would knock the ball out of the park. But then so was my son Barry and I’m not going to tell you who won most of the games but I will tell you that the Gordy’s cried a lot. And even though little Michael was the catchers for the Jackson’s and missed a lot of balls we still cried a lot. But we swam and we joked and we played games and when Michael performed his songs you could feel the hipness in his soul because that’s what he loved to do. Michael inspired me so much that for days I walked around humming a bright little happy tune with him in mind…then I put a group together and we came up with 4 hit records for them, I Want You Back, ABC, The Love You Save and I’ll Be There. The Jackson 5 was the only group in history to have their first 4 records go to number 1. In 1983 the brothers reunited and returned to do Motown 25th anniversary show. After a high powered dazzling melody of their songs Michael took the stage alone and made pop history. From the first beat of Billie Jean, I was mesmerized. And when he did his iconic moonwalk, I was shocked. It was magic. Michael Jackson went into orbit, and never came down. At 10 years old, he had passion. He had passion to be the greatest entertainer in the world and he was willing to work as hard to do whatever it took to become what he indeed became the undisputed King of Pop, the world over. What kid wouldn’t give his right arm to fulfill his wildest childhood dreams? Michael loved it all, every moment on stage, every moment in rehearsal. Michael loved creating what have never been done before. He loved everything and everybody especially his fans. I must say though that he did have two personalities. Off stage he was shy, soft spoken and childlike, but when he took the stage in front of his screaming fans he turned into another person. A master, a take no prisoner show man. It was like kill or be killed. I mean Michael was awesome, totally in charge. In fact the more I think about Michael Jackson, the more I think The King of Pop is not big enough for him. I think he is simply the greatest entertainer that ever lived. Michael, thank you for the joy. Thank you for the love. You will live in my heart forever. I love you.



The picture on the screen is of Mike during a gig in The Apollo in 2002:


24 April 2002

A Night At The Apollo

New York, Apollo Theater


“I must say though that he did have two personalities. Off stage he was shy, soft spoken and childlike, but when he took the stage in front of his screaming fans he turned into another person. A master, a take no prisoner show man.” Does Berry address Mike’s alters here without being too blunt about it?

Why Berry Gordy? Being founder of Motown Records, working that many years with the Jackson 5, it’s not strange he attends.



Short clips of Mike.


Songs played are: Dirty Diana, Billie Jean, Ghost, Bad, They don’t care about us, Scream, You are not alone.


The biggest part is You are not alone, ending with “Together, Together”


Spoken words by Mike:


Again I want to say thank you, thank you God. In the past I’ve gone from ‘where is he?’ to ‘here he is again’. But I must confess it is good to be thought of as a person, not as a personality. Fame, fortune, they are all illusions.


Interesting words to put in the compilation. ‘Where is he?’ to ‘here he is again’?

Plus again pointed out that he is a person, not just a personality.



Stevie Wonder



This is a moment that I wished that I didn’t live to see come. But as much as I can say that and mean it I do know that God is good and I do know that as much as we may feel and we do that we need Michael here with us, God must have needed him far more. Michael I love and I told you that many times so I’m at peace with that. I as well told you that I never ever imagined that I would write a song that would be sent to Quincy Jones and you would hear it and my sister Renee would get me the cassette and I’d hear it back and be amazed that you did this song…we can’t help but love you forever Michael.


The song he plays before “Never Thought You’d Leave In The Summer” is I Can’t Help it, and he ends with the part that seems to be ‘You’re an Angel in disguise’, just something to think about.



Stevie Wonder performs “Never Thought You’d Leave In The Summer”/ “They won’t go when I go”


I never dreamed you’d leave in summer

I thought you would go then come back home

I thought the cold would leave by summer

But my quiet nights will be spent alone


You said then you would be the light in autumn

Said you’d be the one who’d lead the way

I never dreamed you’d leave in summer

But now I find my love has gone away


Michael, why didn’t you stay?


No more lying friends

Wanting tragic ends

Though they do pretend

They won’t go when i go


All those bleeding hearts

With sorrows to impart

Were right here from the start

And they won’t go when i go


And i’ll go where i’ve longed

To go so long

Away from tears


Unclean minds mislead the pure

The innocent will leave for sure

For them there is a resting place

People sinning just for fun

They will never see the sun

For they can never show their faces

There ain’t no room for the hopeless sinner

Who will take more than he will give

He ain’t hardly gonna give


The greed of man will be

Far away from me

And my soul will be free

They won’t go when i go


Since my soul conceived

All that i believe

The kingdom i will see

‘Cause they won’t go when i go


When i go

Where i’ll go

No one can keep me

From my destiny


Michael they wont go, they won’t go where you have gone.



They original lyrics of I never dreamed you’d leave in summer are:


I never dreamed you’d leave in summer

I thought you would go then come back home

I thought the cold would leave by summer

But my quiet nights will be spent alone


You said there would be warm love in springtime

That was when you started to be cold

I never dreamed you’d leave in summer

But now I find myself all alone


You said then you’d be the life in autumn

Said you’d be the one to see the way

I never dreamed you’d leave in summer

But now I find my love has gone away


Why didn’t you stay?


As you can see the bold part was left out of the song at the memorial, but more interesting is the changing of the lyrics (in red). Instead of life, Stevie sings light and instead of see the way, he sings lead the way. In autumn, the song This is It was released, part of the lyrics: I’m the light of the world. And is he the one to lead the way? We think he is, at least if people will see the message, understand it and join him.


They original lyrics of They Won’t Go When I Go are:


No more lying friends

Wanting tragic ends

Though they do pretend

They won’t go when I go


All those bleeding hearts

With sorrows to impart

Were right here from the start

And they won’t go when I go


And I’ll go where I’ve longed

To go so long

Away from tears


Gone from painful cries

Away from saddened eyes

Along with him I’ll bide

Because they won’t go when I go


Big men feeling small

Weak ones standing tall

I will watch them fall

They won’t go when I go


And I’ll go where I’ve longed

To go so long

Away from tears


Unclean minds mislead the pure

The innocent will leave for sure

For them there is a resting place

People sinning just for fun

They will never see the sun

For they can never show their faces

There ain’t no room for the hopeless sinner

Who will take more than he will give

He ain’t hardly gonna give


The greed of man will be

Far away from me

And my soul will be free

They won’t go when i go


Since my soul conceived

All that i believe

The kingdom i will see

‘Cause they won’t go when i go


When i go

Where i’ll go

No one can keep me

From my destiny


Again, the bold part was left out, but he merged two songs, so that would explain that, but it’s an interesting choice of songs.


Why Stevie Wonder? Stevie is also a child star. He signed with Motown Records at the age of eleven. On 1 December 2009, he was named a UN Messenger of Peace.




Kobe Bryant & Magic Johnson



Kobe Bryant:


“You all know that nobody ever gave on stage like Michael Jackson, but Michael was also a true humanitarian who gave just as much off stage as he did on the stage. Michael and his family came from humble roots and Michael always cared very deeply for those in need. And beyond all of his records that he wrote as a recording artist Michael even made the Guinness Book of World Records for most charities supported by a pop star. Because he gave so much for so many of us, for so long, Michael Jackson will be with us forever.”


Magic Johnson:


I met Jackie Jackson about 30 years ago and he was a season ticket holder for the Lakers as well as his brother Marlon. Jackie and I became friends and he began to invite me out to their home. Then I got to know the brothers and the sisters and his incredible mother and father. We love to play with fire crackers and just have fun. And Barry just like you lost to the Jackson’s in softball, so did I. And we had some incredible times together. Then Jackie invited me to go on tour with the brothers and then I got to see the genius of Michael Jackson. He was so incredible; he always had command of not only the band, his brothers but also the audience. I truly believe that Michael made me a better point guard and basketball player as I watched him be so great and be the greatest entertainer ever. From there, Michel called me one day and said I want to talk to you about being in a video Remember the Time. But I had to double check with Jackie to make sure it was really Michael because I was scared to death to go over to his house because this was my idol, he was everything to me. So I went over to his house to have dinner. The chef came out and said what would you like, I said some grilled chicken. So as we begin to talk about the video and what he wanted me to do, the chef brought me out the grilled chicken but he brought Michael out a bucket of Kentucky Fried Chicken. And I went crazy like wait a minute Michael you eat Kentucky Fried Chicken? That made my day. That was the greatest moment of my life. We had such a good time sitting on the floor eating that bucket of Kentucky Fried Chicken and I want to say this. This is a celebration of his life, of his legacy. I want to thank Michael for opening up so many doors for African Americans to be on day time shows, late night shows. He allowed Kobe and I to have our jerseys in people’s homes across the world because he was already there. And he opened all those doors for us. His three children will have the most incredible grandmother that god has put on this earth to take care of them. Michael’s three children will have incredible uncles and aunts to take care of them as well and they will have plenty of cousins to play with. So may God continue to bless this incredible family. We say that we’re praying for you, remain strong. We want to thank the city of Los Angeles for putting this on, AEG for putting it on as well and may God continue to bless you Michael.


The story that Magic Johnson tells about the KFC reminded us of our previous blog. We do believe Mike has been poisoned multiple times in his life. Why on earth would you order KFC if you have a cook who can make you anything you want? Was he afraid they would have put something in it? Makes us think he couldn’t even trust his own staff.


Why Kobe Bryant and Magic Johnson? Well we think that has something to do with our Dr. Conrad Murray. If you can pay in court with false dollars and still walk around as a free man while being the main suspect of the murder of Michael Jackson, there is no way you are real, so this must be a man with a mask. Being like 8 feet tall, big chance he is a basketball player, maybe at the Lakers, or a former player. But who could he be? We don’t know anything about basketball, so we’ll leave that up to you. An interesting thought is that Michael Jordan (who played a role in the “Jam” clip and is also called ‘MJ’, is about the same height as Conrad.


Also, Magic Johnson is a fighter, like Mike. He retired abruptly in 1991 after announcing that he had HIV, but returned to play in the 1992 All-Star Game, winning the All-Star MVP Award. After protests from his fellow players, he retired again for four years, but returned in 1996 to play 32 games for the Lakers before retiring for the third and final time.


In the summer of 2003, the sheriff’s office of Eagle, Colorado arrested Kobe Bryant in connection with an investigation of a sexual assault complaint filed by 19-year old hotel employee Katelyn Faber. Bryant had checked into The Lodge and Spa at Cordillera hotel in Eagle, Colorado in advance of undergoing knee surgery nearby. Faber accused Bryant of raping her in his hotel room the night before Bryant was to have the procedure. Bryant admitted an adulterous sexual encounter with his accuser, but denied her sexual assault allegation.

The accusation tarnished Bryant’s reputation, as the public’s perception of Bryant plummeted, and his endorsement contracts with McDonald’s and Nutella were terminated. Sales for Bryant’s replica jersey fell significantly from their previous highs.

However, in September 2004 the assault case was dropped by prosecutors after Faber refused to testify in the trial. Afterward, Bryant agreed to apologize to Faber for the incident, including his public mea culpa: “Although I truly believe this encounter between us was consensual, I recognize now that she did not and does not view this incident the same way I did.” Faber filed a separate civil lawsuit against Bryant, which the two sides ultimately settled with the specific terms of the settlement being undisclosed to the public.




Jennifer Hudson performs “Will You Be There”



Hold me

Like the river Jordan

And I will then say to thee

You are my friend


Carry me

Like you are my brother

Love me like a mother

could you be there?


Everyone’s taking control of me

Seems that the world’s

Got a role for me

I’m so confused

Will you show to me

You’ll be there for me

And care enough to bear me


(Hold me)

(Lay your head lowly)

(Softly then boldly)

(Carry me there)


(Hold me)

(Love me and feed me)

(Kiss me and free me)

(I will feel blessed)



(Carry me boldly)

(Lift me up slowly)

(Carry me there)


(Save me)

(Heal me and bathe me)

(Softly you say to me)

(I will be there)


(Lift me)

(Lift me up slowly)

(Carry me boldly)

(Show me you care)


(Hold me)

(Lay your head lowly)

(Softly then boldly)

(Carry me there)


(Need me)

(Love me and feed me)

(Kiss me and free me)

(I will feel blessed)


In our darkest hour

In my deepest despair

Will you still care?

Will you be there?

In my trials

And my tribulations

Through our doubts

And frustrations

In my violence

In my turbulence

Through my fear

And my confessions

In my anguish and my painS

Through my joy and my sorrow

In the promise of another tomorrow

I’ll never let you part

For you’re always in my heart



The original lyrics of Will you be there are:


Hold me

Like the river Jordan

And I will then say to thee

You are my friend


Carry me

Like you are my brother

Love me like a mother

could you be there?


When weary

Tell me will you hold me

When wrong, will you skold me

When lost will you find me?


But they told me

A man should be faithful

And walk when not able

And fight til the end

But I’m only human


Everyone’s taking control of me

Seems that the world’s

Got a role for me

I’m so confused

Will you show to me

You’ll be there for me

And care enough to bear me


(Hold me)

(Lay your head lowly)

(Softly then boldly)

(Carry me there)


(Hold me)

(Love me and feed me)

(Kiss me and free me)

(I will feel blessed)



(Carry me boldly)

(Lift me up slowly)

(Carry me there)


(Save me)

(Heal me and bathe me)

(Softly you say to me)

(I will be there)


(Lift me)

(Lift me up slowly)

(Carry me boldly)

(Show me you care)


(Hold me)

(Lay your head lowly)

(Softly then boldly)

(Carry me there)


(Need me)

(Love me and feed me)

(Kiss me and free me)

(I will feel blessed)


In our darkest hour

In my deepest despair

Will you still care?

Will you be there?

In my trials

And my tribulations

Through our doubts

And frustrations

In my violence

In my turbulence

Through my fear

And my confessions

In my anguish and my pain

Through my joy and my sorrow

In the promise of another tomorrow

I’ll never let you part

For you’re always in my heart


Again a part that was deleted from the version on the memorial. Why would they have left this out? It was just one song, and as Mike said in This Is It, he wants his songs to be exactly as he wrote it. There is also the crappy audio of the spoken words, as if Mike is speaking on the phone. The extra S in pains is something we have never heard on any records, so this must have been either live or recently recorded. The meaning? Most likely because you can’t call it pain anymore what he endured. Even pains is an understatement.


Here is a video which compares the original song with the Jennifer Hudson version:



Why Jennifer Hudson? Well, we have been searching and searching, couldn’t find a link. But she is carrying new life and wearing white, the color of purity, innocence and hope.




Rev Al Sharpton



All over the world today people are gathered in love visuals to celebrate the life of a man that taught the world how to love. People may be wondering why there is such an emotional outburst. But you would have to understand the journey of Michael to understand what he meant to all of us. For these that sit here as the Jackson family, a mother and father with 9 children, who rose from a working class family in Gary, Indiana. They had nothing but a dream; no one believed in those days that these kinds of dreams could come true. But they keep on believing and Michael never let the world turn him around from his dreams. I first met Michael around 1970 Black Expo, Chicago, Illinois. Reverend Jesse Jackson who stood by this family till now. And from that day as a cute kid to this moment he never gave up dreaming. It was that dream that changed culture all over the world. When Michael started, it was a different. But because Michael kept going, because he didn’t accept limitations, because he refused to let people decide his boundaries, he opened up the whole world. In the music he put on one glove, pulled his pants up and broke down the color curtain. When now our videos were shown and magazines put us on the cover, it was Michael Jackson that brought blacks and whites and Asians and Latinos together. It was Michael Jackson that made us sing ‘we are the world,’ to feed the hungry long before Live Aid. Because Michael Jackson kept going, he created a comfort level where people that felt they were separate became interconnected with his music. And It was that comfort level that kids from Japan and Ghana and France and Iowa and Pennsylvania got comfortable enough with each other so later it wasn’t strange to us to watch Oprah on television. It wasn’t strange to watch Tiger Woods’ golf. Those young kids grew up from being teenage comfortable fans of Michael to being 40 years old and being comfortable to vote for a person of color to be the president of the United States of America. Michael did that! Michael made us love each other. Michael taught us to stand with each other. There are those that like to dig around mess, but millions around the world we’re going to uphold his message. It’s not about mess; it’s about his love message. As you climb up steep mountains sometimes you scar your knee. Sometimes you break the skin but don’t focus on the scars, focus on the journey. Michael beat them. Michael rose to the top. He out sang his cynics. He out danced his doubters. He outperformed the pessimists. Every time he got knocked down he got back up. Every time you counted him out he came back in. Michael never stopped! Michael never stopped! Michael never stopped! I want to say to Mrs. Jackson and Joe Jackson, his sisters and brothers; we thank you for giving us someone that taught us love, someone that taught us hope. We want to thank you because we know he was your dream too. We know that your heart is broken; I know you have some comforts from a letter from the President of the United States and Nelson Mandela but this was your child, this was your brother, this was your cousin. Nothing will fill your heats loss but I hope the love that people have shown will make you know he didn’t live in vain. I want his children to know: wasn’t anything strange about your Daddy. It was strange what your Daddy had to deal with. But he dealt with it anyway. He dealt with it for us. So some came today, Mrs. Jackson, to say good bye to Michael; I came to say thank you. Thank you because you never stopped. Thank you because you never gave up. Thank you because you never gave out. Thank you because you tore down our divisions. Thank you because you irradiated barriers. Thank you because you gave us hope. Thank you Michael! Thank you Michael! Thank you Michael!


One of the most powerful speeches of the memorial, hitting the nail right on the head.


“Michael made us love each other. Michael taught us to stand with each other. There are those that like to dig around mess, but millions around the world we’re going to uphold his message. It’s not about mess; it’s about his love message. As you climb up steep mountains sometimes you scar your knee. Sometimes you break the skin but don’t focus on the scars, focus on the journey. Michael beat them. Michael rose to the top. He out sang his cynics. He out danced his doubters. He outperformed the pessimists. Every time he got knocked down he got back up. Every time you counted him out he came back in. Michael never stopped! Michael never stopped! Michael never stopped!”

And he still hasn’t stopped. Who’s in for the long ride?


On the screen: There’s nothing that can’t be done if we raise our voice as one.


These are words from one of Mike’s songs, We’ve had enough. Look at the lyrics, they are quite interesting if you believe the same as us as for why he pulled of this hoax:


We’ve had enough


Love was taken from a young life

And no one told her why

Her direction has a dimlight

From one more violent crime


She innocently questioned why

Why her father had to die

She asked the men in blue

How is it that you get to choose

Who will live and who will die

Did god say that you could decide ?

You saw he didn’t run

And that my daddy had no gun


In the middle of a village

Way in a distant land

Lies a poor boy with his broken toy

Too young to understand


He’s awaken, ground is shakin

His father grabs his hand

Screaming, crying, his wife’s dying

Now he’s left to explain


He innocently questioned why

Why his mother had to die

What did these soldiers come here for ?

If they’re for peace, why is there war ?


Did God say that they could decide

Who will live and who will die ?

All my mama ever did

Was try to take care of her kids


We’re innocently standing by

Watching people lose their lives

It seems as if we have no voice

It’s time for us to make a choice


Only god could decide

Who will live and who will die

There’s nothing that can’t be done

If we raise our voice as one


They’ve gotta hear it from me

They’ve gotta hear it from you

They’ve gotta hear it from us

We can’t take it

We’ve already had enough


They’ve gotta hear it from me

They’ve gotta hear it from you

They’ve gotta hear it from us


We can’t take it

We’ve already had enough


They’ve gotta hear it from me

They’ve gotta hear it from you

They’ve gotta hear it from you baby


We can’t take it

We’ve already had enough


Deep in my soul baby


Deep in your soul and let God decide


Deep in my soul


It’s up to me and i’m still alive


They’ve gotta hear it from us


We can’t take it

We’ve already had enough


It’s going down baby

Just let God decide,


It’s going on baby

Just let God decide


Deep in my soul baby


We’ve already had enough


They’ve gotta hear it from me

They’ve gotta hear it from you

They’ve gotta hear it from us


We can’t, we can’t

We’ve already had enough


Message of this song: Raise our voice as one, fight those who think they can decide for us. It’s not up to them to decide who will die, who will be hungry or who will be homeless, they shouldn’t control us, we shouldn’t let them, because we’ve had enough!




John Mayer performs “Human Nature”



The original lyrics of Human Nature are:


Looking out

Across the nighttime

The city winks a sleepless eye

Hear her voice

Shake my window

Sweet seducing sighs

Get me out

Into the night time

Four walls won’t hold me tonight

If this town

Is just an apple

Then let me take a bite


If they say

Why, why, tell ’em that it’s human nature

Why, why, does he do me that way

If they say

Why, why, tell ’em that it’s human nature

Why, why, does he do me that way


Reaching out

To touch a stranger

Electric eyes are everywhere

See that girl

She knows I’m watching

She likes the way I stare


I like livin’ this way

I like lovin’ this way


Looking out

Across the morning

Where the city’s heart begins to beat

Reaching out

I touch her shoulder

I’m dreaming of the street


So now all the words were cut out. Why? John Mayer can sing, why did he do an instrumental version? As good as John may be on his guitar, the voice is missed. Maybe it is to make us aware that if we have a voice, we should use it. Why not use something so powerful when you own it?


Why John Mayer? At the 49th Annual Grammy Awards in 2007 Mayer won Best Pop Vocal Album for Continuum and Best Male Pop Vocal Performance for “Waiting on the World to Change”. John Mayer is also involved in philanthropic activities through his “Back to You” fund and his concern over global warming. So he even won a Grammy with that voice? And not let him sing seems awkward, but maybe that is why HE was supposed to keep his mouth, to lay emphasis on the (missing) voice.




Brooke Shields



Michael was one of a kind. I was thinking back to when we met and the many times that we spent together and whenever we were out together and there would be a picture taken there would be a caption of some kind and the caption usually said something like ‘an odd couple’ or ‘an unlikely pair’ but to us it was the most natural and easiest of friendships. I was 13 when we met and from that day on our friendship grew. Michael always knew he could count on me to support him or be his date and that we would have fun no matter where we were. We had a bond and maybe it was because we both understood what it was like to be in the spotlight at a very young age. I used to tease him and I’d say I started when I was11 months old, you’re a slacker. You were what, 5? Both of us needed to be adults very early. But when we were together, we were two little kids having fun. We never collaborated together, we never performed together, or danced on the same stage although he did try in vain one night to unsuccessfully teach me the moonwalk and he just basically just shook his head and crossed his arms at my attempt. We never filmed a video or recorded a song, but what we did do was laugh. It was a competition to see who can make the other one laugh more or be sillier. Michael loved to laugh. His heart would just burst out of him when he was laughing. He adored it when I did silly imitations or told him stories about my life. MJ’s laugh was the sweetest and purest of anyone I had ever known. His sense of humor was delightful and he was very mischievous. I remember it was the night before Elizabeth Taylor’s wedding and he had called me prior and asked if I would join him, he didn’t want to be alone for all the festivities. And it was the night before the big day and Michael and I tried to sneak in to get the first peak of the dress and we were just giggling like crazy and we almost passed out in hysterics when we realized that Elizabeth was actually asleep I the bed. We thought she was in an entirely different room. And we had to laugh and sneak out and then at the point of the wedding when there was the first dance basically we had to joke that we were the mother and father of the bride. Yes it may have seemed very odd to the outside, but we made it fun and we made it real. When he started wearing the glove, I was like what’s up with the glove? I was like look if you’re going to hold my hand it better be the non gloved one because sequence really hurts me…it digs in. He would just shake his head and he would just smile. He loved to be teased. Seeing him smile made you feel like everything was going to be alright. To the outside world, Michael was a genius with unchallenged ability. To the people who were lucky enough to know him personally he was caring and funny, honest, pure, non-jaded and he was a lover of life. He cared so deeply for his family and his friends and his fans. He was often referred to as the King but the Michael I knew always reminded me more of The Little Prince. Thinking of him now I’d like to share a passage from the book:

What moves me so deeply about this sleeping little prince is his loyalty to a flower–the image of a rose shining within him like a flame within a lamp, even when he’s asleep… And I realized he was even more fragile than I thought. Lamps must be protected. A gust of wind can blow them out.

Michael’s sensitivity was even more extraordinary than his talent. And his true truth resided in his heart. As The Little Prince also said… Eyes are blind. You have to look with the heart. What’s most important is invisible. Michael saw everything with his heart. To his family, his brothers and sisters, Katherine, Joe and to his children, Prince, Paris, Blanket, my prayers are with you. Michael’s favorite song was not one of the countless masterpieces that he gave us but it was a song that Charlie Chaplin wrote for the movie Modern Times. It’s called Smile. There’s a line in the song that says ‘smile though your heart is aching.’ Today, although our hearts are aching we need to look up where he is undoubtedly perched in a crescent moon and we need to smile.

The story of The Little Prince is actually very touching and interesting.


Though ostensibly a children’s book, The Little Prince makes several profound and idealistic observations about life and human nature. For example, Saint-Exupéry tells of a fox meeting the young prince as he exits the Sahara desert. The story’s essence is contained in the lines uttered by the fox to the little prince: “On ne voit bien qu’avec le cœur. L’essentiel est invisible pour les yeux.” (“It is only with the heart that one can see rightly. What is essential is invisible to the eye.”) Other key thematic messages are articulated by the fox, such as: “You become responsible, forever, for what you have tamed” and “It is the time you have spent with your rose that makes your rose so important.”

Source: Wikipedia


Why Brooke Shields? Besides being a friend, she also was a child star.




Jermaine Jackson performs “Smile”



Smile though your heart is aching

Smile, even though it’s breaking

When there are clouds in the sky

You’ll get by…


If you smile

With your fear and sorrow

Smile and maybe tomorrow

You’ll find that life’s still worth while if you’ll just…

Light up your face with sadness

Hide every trace of gladness

Although a tear may be ever so near

That’s the time you must keep on trying

Smile, what’s the use of crying

You’ll find that life is still worth while

If you’ll just…


Smile though your heart is aching

Smile, even though it’s breaking

When there are clouds in the sky

You’ll get by…


If you just smile

Through your fear and sorrow

Smile and maybe tomorrow

You’ll find that life is still worth while

If you’ll just smile

That’s the time you must keep on trying

Smile, what’s the use of crying

You’ll find that life is still worth while

If you’ll just smile.


Jermaine is the master of slip-ups. Thank you Jermaine, for that nice “Slip-up”, we all got that immediately.




Martin Luther King Jr. III & Bernice A. King



Martin Luther King Jr. III:


First I must say to Mrs. Katherine Jackson, Mr. Joseph Jackson, the children of Michael Jackson, to Michael Jackson’s brothers and sisters and the entire Jackson family, our prayers and condolences are constantly with you. My father once said that in life one must discover what their calling is and when they do they must do their jobs so well that the living, the dead and the unborn cold do them no better. He constantly…to become our best by stating that if you cannot be a pine on the top of the hill why just be a shrub in the valley, but be the best little shrub on the side of the road. Be a bush if you cannot be a tree. If you cannot be the highway just be a trail. If you cannot be the sun, just be a star. For it isn’t by size that you win or you fail, you got to be the best at what you are. Michael Jackson was truly the best of what he was. Finally Martin Luther King Jr. said that in life if it falls…to be a street sweeper you must sweep streets so well. In fact you must sweep streets like Beethoven composed music. Sweep streets he said like Shakespeare wrote poetry. Sweep streets like Raphael painted pictures. Sweep streets so well that all the hosts of the heavens and earths would have to pause and say here lived the great street sweeper that did his house well. On June 25th because he was the best I believe heaven and earth did pause indeed to say of Michael Joseph Jackson here lived a great entertainer who did his job well.


Bernice A. King:


To the Jackson family, being a part of a world renounced family who has also experienced a sudden death on more than one occasion; my prayer is that no one and nothing public, fact or fiction, true or rumored will separate you from the love God which is in Christ Jesus. Because ultimately at the end of the day it is only God’s love that will anchor you, sustain you and move you to a higher ground far above the noise of life, there you will find the peace, comfort and joy to move forward to advance Michael’s legacy. And for all of us it is apparent that like our father and mother, Martin and Coretta King, Michael’s life and work was inspired by the love of God. Throughout the ages few are chosen from amongst us to use their gifts and talents to demonstrate God’s love in an effort to bring the world together in true sister and brotherhood. Michael was such a one. He epitomized the words of our father that an individual hasn’t started living until he can rise above the narrow confines of his individualistic concerns to the broader concerns of humanity. Michael was always concerned with others with humanity. And I want the world to know that despite being embroiled in accusations and persecutions, as a humanitarian he thought it not robbery to concern himself with one of this world’s other greatest humanitarians, our mother, during her illness just three months before her death. In October, 2005 I was with mom when Michael called to say…and although she couldn’t speak because of a debilitating stroke. She listened as he said to her that he had been praying on his knees everyday for her. That to him she was America’s true royalty and he wanted her to know if music was being played in her room because of its healing effect. My only wish is that he could have seen the glow on her face. If faces could smile as we know they do, that day Michael Jackson made our mother’s face smile in spite of her condition. What an unforgettable moment. He was such a thoughtful and selfless man, full of the unconditional love of God and good works that touched and changed lives. He was indeed a shining light. Like our father Martin and in remembrance of Michael, may we all be inspired to go and let our lights shine. Rest in peace our brother Michael.


On the screen: “The say the sky’s the limit, and to me that is really true”. A part of BAD, one of the songs we believe he wrote to those that wanted him down.


Why Martin and Bernice King? To have the children of Martin Luther King on stage, says something important too. Besides the fact that they were friends, they also had to deal with “The System” and their ways to get rid of those that wanted peace in this world.




Sheila Jackson Lee



I’m Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee and I hale from Houston Texas but I come to you on behalf of the many members of the United State’s House of Representatives. I come to you on behalf of the Congressional Black Caucus chairwoman Barbara Lee, a Californian. And I come to you as every man and every woman for I cannot write music, or dance or sing but I do know an American story. To Mr. and Mrs. Jackson and his wonderful families of brothers and sisters and cousins, to Michael, Joseph, to Katherine and Paris, Prince, all of these wonderful, beautiful symbols of America. And I can tell you as a member of the United States Congress. We understand the Constitution. We understand Laws and we know that people are innocent until proven otherwise. That is what the Constitution stands for. So I mourn today, I come too to thank you. For many people don’t understand the heats of entertainers. They don’t know how big their hearts are. They don’t know how they heal the world on behalf of America. When we’re at war our icons like Michael sing about healing the world and so he called us into public service. It did not matter whether we were black or white. He even told us to beat it, beat the violence. He told us to look at yourself in the mirror because it meant that if you were going to make a difference look at the man or woman in the mirror. I come to you today to say thank you. Some of you come from all faiths and we respect that here in America. But there is a story whose theme is so symbolic of this young and beautiful man. I love the story of the Good Samaritan because it talks about those who walk by the diminished, the devastated and the poor. This was a broken and beaten man lying along the road. No one stopped except someone called the Samaritan. It could be in any faith. It’ all about charity and love and I call Michael Jackson the Good Samaritan. I call him Michael Jackson who cared and loved for the world. It bothered me, I grew up with him as all of us and so many did. And so what an honor and a privilege to see him up close. When he came to the United States Congress in my office and looked some 15 African ambassadors, representatives of heads of states. Sitting in an office listening to Michael Jackson talk about caring and fighting HIV Aids. They looked at him, he had a twinkle, they listened, he listened. What a miraculous experience to be able to listen and see Michael in action. You know there were words cast about but I wonder if anybody was on his shoulder when he walked into Walter Reed Hospital and he walked along the aisles and the rows in the hospital rooms. This was in the mist of the Iraq War, doctors stopped, nurses stopped, and individual solders who had lost limbs stopped and were in essence moved and touched as Michael was by his desire to come and thank them for their sacrifices. So don’t tell me what an American story is all about; it is assault of the earth. With this family took the talent that God had given them and made it into a miraculous and wonderful story for America. I come today for you to recognize that the flag flies and the people who have spoken have spoken to the people’s house. They recognize and they speak and those of us who serve in elected office we respond to the people. Michael fought for the tolerance of all people. In fact I am reminded although I speak in the tongues of all faith that Michael fought the good fight. He was someone who understood and I hope Mr. and Mrs. Jackson and the family will know that the lord is our shepherd and we shall not want. Michael Jackson you got to know his story and it has not been told by all of what you’ve heard. He was someone who understood if he was burned, he built a burn unit. If a hospital needed beds, he built those beds. If they needed money for developing countries, Michael gave. If he was in…he went to orphanages. Michael never stopped giving and he touched those whose lives could be reconstructed, because the king, yes the king, the king stopped and said I care about you. That is why on the House floor on January 25, 2009 congressional black caucus and members of the House of Representatives stopped, stopped, stopped and had a moment of silence for this wonderful legend and icon. And so to the family let me simply come and someone that wishes she was long lost Sheila Jackson Lee but I’ll keep looking and seeing by coming to say to you that America appreciates and thanks you for Michael Jackson’s life. For that reason we have introduced into the House of Representatives this resolution 600 that will debate on the floor of the house that claims Michael Jackson as an American Legend and musical icon a world humanitarian. Someone who will be honored forever and forever and forever and forever and forever. We are the world and we are better because Michael Joseph Jackson lived. On behalf of myself and the people who have spoken, Michael Jackson, I salute you.


As we know now, this resolution did not make it. Congressman Peter King even had to say this about it:



“Let’s knock out the psychobabble. He was a pervert, a child molester, he was a pedophile. And to be giving this much coverage to him, day in and day out, what does it say about us as a country? I just think we’re too politically correct. No one wants to stand up and say we don’t need Michael Jackson. He died, he had some talent, fine. There’s men and women dying every day in Afghanistan. Let’s give them the credit they deserve.”


Who the f*** is he to talk like that? Let me tell y’all, this guy is fishy as hell and a first class racist. He requires some more investigation.




Usher performs “Gone Too Soon”



Like a comet

Blazing ‘cross the evening sky

Gone too soon


Like a rainbow

Fading in the twinkling of an eye

Gone too soon


Shiny and sparkly

And splendidly bright

Here one day

Gone one night


Like the loss of sunlight

On a cloudy afternoon

Gone too soon


Like a castle

Built upon a sandy beach

Gone too soon


Like a perfect flower

That is just beyond your reach

Gone too soon


Born to amuse, to inspire, to delight

Here one day

Gone one night


Like a sunset

Dying from the raising moon (original lyrics: Dying with the rising of the moon)

Gone too soon

Gone too soon


Dying from the raising moon? That’s an odd change, so we googled: ‘Meaning of raising moon’, which brought us a song: “Bad Moon Rising”. It’s about the end of the world… Here are the lyrics, you must admit they are pretty interesting. Coincidence? Don’t think so…


Bad Moon Rising


I see a bad moon a-rising

I see trouble on the way

I see earthquakes and lightnin’

I see bad times today


Don’t go around tonight

Well, it’s bound to take your life

There’s a bad moon on the rise


I hear hurricanes a-blowing

I know the end is coming soon

I fear rivers over flowing

I hear the voice of rage and ruin


Don’t go around tonight

Well, it’s bound to take your life

There’s a bad moon on the rise


All right!


Hope you got your things together

Hope you are quite prepared to die

Looks like were in for nasty weather

One eye is taken for an eye


Don’t go around tonight

Well, it’s bound to take your life

There’s a bad moon on the rise


Don’t go around tonight

Well, it’s bound to take your life

There’s a bad moon on the rise


Why Usher? First of all Usher is a child star too, starting to perform at age eleven. But because we have heard more about Usher, like the Usher dancers. The dancers wore the same jacket as Marlon did during the Pepsi ‘accident’. Also, the father of Judy Garland, a mind control victim, was accused of making sexual advances towards ushers:


Childhood and early life

Born Frances Ethel Gumm in Grand Rapids, Minnesota, Judy Garland was the youngest child of Francis Avent “Frank” Gumm (March 20, 1886–November 17, 1935) and Ethel Marion Milne (November 17, 1893–January 5, 1953). Garland’s parents were vaudevillians who settled in Grand Rapids to run a movie theatre that featured vaudeville acts. Garland’s ancestry on both sides of her family can be traced back to the early colonial days of the United States. Her father was descended from the Marable family of Virginia, and her mother from Patrick Fitzpatrick, who emigrated to America in the 1770s from Smithtown, County Meath, Ireland. Named after both her parents and baptized at a local Episcopal church, “Baby” (as Frances was called by her parents and sisters) shared her family’s flair for song and dance. Baby Gumm’s first appearance came at the age of two-and-a-half when she joined her two older sisters, Mary Jane “Suzy” Gumm (1915–64) and Dorothy Virginia “Jimmie” Gumm (1917–77), on the stage of her father’s movie theater during a Christmas show and sang a chorus of “Jingle Bells.”Accompanied by their mother on piano, The Gumm Sisters performed at their father’s theater for the next few years. Following rumors that Frank Gumm had made sexual advances toward male ushers at his theater, the family relocated to Lancaster, California, in June 1926. Frank purchased and operated another theater in Lancaster, and Ethel, acting as their manager, began working to get her daughters into motion pictures.




We now hear little Mike sing “Who’s loving you”




Smokey Robinson



I wrote that song. I thought I sang it. I wrote that song back in…and um 2 years later here comes this little kid and he’s 10 years old. Berry had this gathering at his house. He said come I want you to see someone very special so I go over there and these five young guys are there. And they sang and danced up a storm. A couple weeks later they recorded my song. And I heard it. I thought to myself…now they have pulled a fast one on us because this boy cannot possibly be 10 years old. This song is about somebody who has somebody who loved him but they treated him bad. They treated him so bad until they lost them. And now they are paying the price of wanting somebody back that they treated bad and lost. How could he possibly know these things? I quickly went over to him because I wanted to see his birth certificate. I did not believe that someone that young could have that much feeling and soul and knowing. Knowing, he had a lot of knowing. He had to know something to sing that song like that. It was wonderful thought. As a song writer man that’s a dream come true to have somebody sing one of your songs like that. I never thought I would be here on today. This is my little brother over there. And you just don’t think you’re going to see or you’ll live to see him gone. But he will never really be gone. He is going to live forever and ever and ever and ever. He has made an enormous impact on all of our lives all over the world. I have young kids coming up to me now; when I do concerts I sing Whose Loving You at concerts and young kids who were at the concert come up to me and say hey you’re singing Michael Jackson’s song huh. But he will live on forever. I am a firm believer in blessings and I have had so many, many blessings in my life. One of my greatest blessings was I got a chance to know the Jackson family and to know Michael. And to see him. I’m glad I lived in an era where I got to see what everybody has been coming up here saying, the greatest entertainer of all time. I’m glad that I lived in this era. I believe so much in God. I believe so much that this is not it. We have life after this is done. So my brother is in a place now where he is most certainly going to live forever in the year after. So he’s going to live forever twice because he’s going to live forever right here because the world will never ever forget Michael Jackson. I love you my brother. I celebrate your life. I am proud that I had a chance to know you. God bless you.


First of all, Smokey wrote that song in 1960, he might have forgotten that, but we looked it up. 2 Years later Mike was not 10, but 2 years old, not able to perform yet. Nothing strange, just to point out that apparently people are nervous and watching their words.


Why Smokey Robinson? Being one of the primary figures associated with Motown Records, second only to the company’s founder, Berry Gordy, there is nothing further to look for in our opinion. He worked with Mike for years.




Shaheen Jafargholi




Shaheen Jafargholi performs “Who’s Loving You”


When I had you

I treated you bad and wrong my dear

And since, since you been away (original lyrics: And since, since you been gone)


Don’t you know I sit around

With my head hanging down

And I wonder who’s lovin’ you


I,I,I,I should have never, ever

ever made you cry

And and girl since

since you been gone


Don’t you know I sit around

With my head hanging down

And I wonder who’s lovin’ you


Life with out love, huh…

It’s oh so lonely

I don’t think, I don’t think! I’m gonna make it


All my life, all my life baby yeah I’ve been lost to you only

Come on & take it girl

Come on & take it, because….

All, all I can do, all I can do since you’ve been gone is cry

And don’t you ever wonder or worry your head of what i do


Don’t you know I sit around

With my head hanging down

And I wonder who’s lovin’ you


ooooah ooooah hooooooooooooo yeaah aaaaaa aaa aaaaaaa aaa wonder who’s lovin’



I just want to say I love Michael Jackson and I tell you now I just want to thank him so much for blessing me and every single individual on this earth with his amazing music. And just thank you very much, I love you Michael Jackson.


Not ‘gone’ but away? Interesting how all the lyrics have been changed at the memorial😉 The bold part and the bridge were left out.


Why Shaheen Jafargholi? As far as we know Mike saw him perform and loved him. Being watched by over one billion people, we think he just helped him into the saddle by letting him perform.




Kenny Ortega



My name is Kenny Ortega…thank you and I was Michael’s partner in the creating and directing of many of his tours including This Is It. And Shaheen was invited by Michael to join him in London for the show so I just wanted to introduce him to everybody and to say thank you for coming all the way here to join us today Shaheen. We were here, we were right here a little less than a week ago and Michael was with us. And the band, and Michael Bearden, and the singers and the dancers and our choreographer and our crew, we were all here and we were a family. This was our house. So when the Jackson family and Randy Philips asked Ken and I to help put together this memorial we knew we had to do it here. We knew we had to invite the world to join us here in Michael’s house. We were immediately surrounded by countless family, artists and friends and dear hearts who unconditionally made this day possible. As we came together as a team we knew we had to celebrate Michael’s life through his music as well as commemorate his passing. Both Ken and I worked with Michael over the years and Michael and I were here in the final final stages of mounting what we all knew and we all saw, I promise you, was his triumphant return to the world. It was also I think his greatest personal work. We did it all right here in this place, the Staples. So before we conclude today’s memorial, we wanted to present a performance from the London This is It concerts, the fans have been asking for it. This was one of Michael’s very very favorite moments in the show, always. He created this and brought it to life. It is a living testament of his ability to be timeless and time lead. Musical and magical. This is for him, his living legacy. His care, his heart, his concern about our planet, about the human condition. Michael Jackson will live in our hearts for always. Heal the world, make this a better place for our children, for our children’s children. Michael, we love you more, join us.


Well Kenny has always interesting things to say. “We were here, we were right here a little less than a week ago and Michael was with us.” Well Kenny that is quite hard when you are supposed to be all stiff in your casket. Maybe he meant they were there to rehearse the memorial? Well at least thank you Kenny, we love your slip-ups.


Also he says that the following songs were Mike’s favorite moments. Two songs that stand for what he has been fighting for in his life. WE are the world. “Let us realize that a change can only come

When we stand together as one”. Heal the world, make it a better place.


Why Kenny Ortega? Well, that’s quite obvious.




“We Are The World”


There comes a time when we heed a certain call

When the world must stand together as one (original lyrics: come)

There are people dying

and its time to lend a hand to life

There greatest gift of all


We cant go on pretending day by day

That someone, somewhere will soon make a change

We are all a part of Gods great big family

And the truth, you know,

Love is all we need


We are the world, we are the children

We are the ones who make a brighter day

So lets start giving

There’s a choice we’re making

We’re saving our own lives

its true we’ll make a better day

Just you and me


Send them your heart so they’ll know that someone cares

And their lives will be stronger and free

As God has shown us by turning stones to bread

So we all must lend a helping hand


We are the world, we are the children

We are the ones who make a brighter day

So lets start giving

There’s a choice we’re making

We’re saving our own lives

its true we’ll make a better day

Just you and me


When you’re down and out, and there’s no hope at all (original lyrics: there seems)

But if you just believe there’s no way you can fall (original lyrics: we)

Let us realize that a change will only come (original lyrics: can)

When we stand together as one


We are the world, we are the children

We are the ones who make a brighter day

So lets start giving

There’s a choice we’re making

We’re saving our own lives

its true we’ll make a brighter day (original lyrics: better)

Just you and me




Again the lyrics are changed, and the cold part was left out. It’s interesting it’s that particular part, since we know the lyrics of that verse were changed in the 2010 version of we are the world, because this part is associated with the Devil tempting Jesus.


There are words from the song on the screen. Kenny says it’s Mike’s favorite moment of the show, which means we should pay attention to it.


The words are:






















































Well, that’s a clear message, isn’t it?




“Heal The World”


There’s a place in your heart

And I know that it is love

And this place

can be much brighter than tomorrow. (original lyrics: could)


And if you really try

You’ll find there’s no need to cry

In this place

You’ll feel there’s no hurt or sorrow.


There are ways to get there

If you care enough for the living

Make a little space, make a better place.


Heal the world

Make it a better place

For you and for me and the entire human race

There are people dying

If you care enough for the living

Make a better place

for you and for me.


If you want to know why

There’s a love that cannot lie

Love is strong

It only cares for joyful giving.


If we try we shall see

In this bliss we cannot feel

Fear or dread

We stop existing and start living


Then it feels that always

Love’s enough for us growing

Make a better world, make a better world.


Heal the world

Make it a better place

For you and for me and the entire human race.

There are people dying

If you care enough for the living

Make a better place for

You and for me.


And the dream we would conceived in

Will reveal a joyful face

And the world we once believed in

Will shine again in grace

Then why do we keep strangling life

Wound this earth, crucify it’s soul

Though it’s plain to see, this world is heavenly

Be God’s glow.


We could fly so high

Let our spirits never die

In my heart

I feel you are all my brothers


Create a world with no fear

Together we’ll cry happy tears

See the nations turn

Their swords into plowshares


We could really get there

If you care enough for the living

Make a little space to make a better place.


Heal the world

Make it a better place

For you and for me and the entire human race

There are people dying

If you care enough for the living

Make a better place

for you and for me.


Heal the world

Make it a better place

For you and for me and the entire human race

There are people dying

If you care enough for the living

Make a better place

for you and for me.


Heal the world

Make it a better place

For you and for me and the entire human race

There are people dying

If you care enough for the living

Make a better place

for you and for me.


There are people dying

if you care enough for the living

Make a better place for you and for me.

There are people dying

if you care enough for the living

Make a better place for you and for me.


You and for me / Make a better place

You and for me / Make a better place

You and for me / Make a better place

You and for me / Heal the world we live in

You and for me / Save it for our children

You and for me / Heal the world we live in

You and for me / Save it for our children

You and for me / Heal the world we live in

You and for me / Save it for our children

You and for me / Heal the world we live in

You and for me / Save it for our children



Ending with these songs says it all. We are the world, we should make it a better place, but we need to make a fist. The bold part was left ou, most likely because of time.



Jermaine & Marlon Jackson





Fans, friends, nieces, nephews, sisters, brothers, I’d like to thank everyone for coming out. As you know I’m lost for words. I was his voice and his back bone. I had his back, so did the family. But we thank you, that’s all I can say, we thank you very much.


On the screen a little joke from Mike: “Okay guys, that’s a wrap”





I hurt. I stand here trying to find words of comfort, trying to understand why the lord has taken our brother to return home from such a short visit here on earth. Michael, when you left us a part of me went with you and a part of you will live forever within me but also a part of you will life forever within all of us. Michael I will treasure the good times, the fun we had singing, dancing, and laughing. I could remember when we come home from school and we would grab a quick bite to eat and we’d try to watch the three stooges as much of it as possible before said it would come and say it’s time to go to the recording studio. I also Michael remember a time when I went in the record store and there was this man purchasing a lot of cds. And he would go and grab another batch of cds. He was an older gentleman, he had short afro but crooked teeth, his clothes were rumpled. I walked up behind him and said: “Michael, what are you doing in this store?”. He turned to me and said: “Marlon, how did you know it was me?”. I told him: “You are my brother, I can spot you anywhere regardless of your make-up. I know your walk, I know your body language and those shoes did not help.” Michael wore the same shoes wherever we went. But I guess that was his way of trying to experience what we take for granted. We would never, never understand what he endured. Not being able to walk across the street, without a crowd gathering around him. Being judged, ridiculed. How much pain can one take? Maybe now Michael, the will leave you alone. Michael was the voice of our angelic trumpets. And he will continue to be the voice, that angelic voice, in heaven. Nearest to our creator. And waiting us, when our day comes to pass. Michael I love you, I will miss… When we said our goodbyes I would hug you and say I love you and your response was: “I love you more”. You know the lord has a purpose for everything. And sometime we just can’t see it, or understand it. But it will be made clear to us, when we reach that ultimate, ultimate reward of being in His presence. Michael you’re there, you’re right there. You have finished your work here on earth and the Lord has called for you to come home with Him. So I thank you Michael, I thank you for all the smiles that you placed in many people’s hearts. And I thank you for anything you have done for others, across this globe, in the Lord’s name. And I have one request Michael, one request. I would like for you to give our brother, my twin brother Brandon, a hug for me. I love you Michael and I’ll miss you.

The interesting part is where he mentions Mike and his disguises. In our opinion there is a big chance we have seen Mike on screen the last months much more often as we might think. Also he says Mike always wore the same shoes, wherever they went. So I guess we need to watch some shoes😉

Also interesting is him addressing his twin, Brandon (uhm.. Maron Brando(n)?. We will not go into this further, because we have shared our thoughts on this already, and we all know what this caused.




Paris Jackson



I just wanted to say, ever since I was born, Daddy has been the best father you could ever imagine. And I just wanted to say, I love him so much.

‘Has been’, like someone already mentioned on the forum, ‘has been’ means something like ‘always was and still is’.




The casket is being carried away by the brothers and Man in the Mirror is played without lyrics.




I’m gonna make a change, for once in my life

It’s gonna feel real good, gonna make a difference

Gonna make it right…


As I, turn up the collar on my favorite winter coat

This wind is blowin’ my mind

I see the kids in the street, with not enough to eat

Who am I, to be blind?

Pretending not to see their needs

A summer’s disregard, a broken bottle top

And a one man’s soul

They follow each other on the wind ya’ know

‘Cause they got no where to go

That’s why I want you to know


I’m starting with the man in the mirror

I’m asking him to change his ways

And no message could have been any clearer

If you wanna make the world a better place

(If you wanna make the world a better place)

Take a look at yourself, and then make a change

(Take a look at yourself, and then make a change)


(Na na na, na na na, na na, na nah)


I’ve been a victim of a selfish kind of love

It’s time that I realize

That there are some with no home, not a nickle to loan

Could it be really me, pretending that they’re not alone?


A willow deeply scarred, somebody’s broken heart

And a washed-out dream

(Washed out dream)

They follow the pattern of the wind, ya’ see

‘Cause they got no place to be

That’s why I’m starting with me (br> (Starting with me)


I’m starting with the man in the mirror

I’m asking him to change his ways

And no message could have been any clearer

If you wanna make the world a better place

(If you wanna make the world a better place)

Take a look at yourself, and then make a change

(Take a look at yourself, and then make a change)


I’m starting with the man in the mirror

I’m asking him to change his ways

And no message could have been any clearer

If you wanna make the world a better place

(If you wanna make the world a better place)

Take a look at yourself, and then make a change

(Take a look at yourself, and then make a change)


I’m starting with the man in the mirror

I’m asking him to change his ways

And no message could have been any clearer

(If you wanna make the world a better place, take a look at yourself, and then make a change)

(You gotta get it right, while you got the time, couse when you close you’re heart, then you close your mind)


I’m starting with the man in the mirror

I’m asking him to change his ways

And no message could have been any clearer

If you wanna make the world a better place

(If you wanna make the world a better place)

Take a look at yourself, and then make a change

(Take a look at yourself, and then make a change)


Make that change.


V for Vendetta – V for Vengeance

February 19, 2010 18 comments

***Due to a bug in Mozilla Firefox this blog can not be read fully. We have encountered no problems with I.E., Safari & Google Chrome.***

We would like to start this blog by sharing our personal thoughts. At the time of the trial we both were busy with other things and therefore didn’t pay much attention to the coverage of the trial. Besides that, here in Holland it was not that much of a media circus as it was in the U.S. We knew about the accusations, the start of the trial, and we heard he was acquitted but that was about it, we never really looked further into it. Maybe because we are not fans (which some people still think is a crime while owning this website), maybe because we both never saw him as a pedophile and therefore never felt the urge to read up on it, because in our eyes justice was served.

But in this hoax everything should be investigated and stripped to the bone, so we both decided to read up on the trial and the 1993 accusations. We started with Aphrodite Jones’ “Michael Jackson Conspiracy” about the 2005 trial. This is a must-read! There is a lot of information in the book that was ignored by the mainstream media. If you want to know what happened in that courtroom, this is where you start and you will be amazed about the evilness in this world. As we already thought before, we now dare to say with absolute certainty: Michael Jackson was framed, both in 1993 and in 2003.

We will give you as much information about both cases in this blog as possible, but to be best informed about the 2005 trial you should really read Aphrodite’s book to get the full picture.

Besides facts articles and the summaries of both the 1993 accusation case and the 2005 trial, we also want to share our thoughts about why we think he was framed and by who at the end of this blog. Please note that everything besides the facts, is nothing more than our opinion, our theory. As we both never doubted his innocence, we now also wanted to KNOW, by researching both cases and see if we could link some things to support the conspiracy against him that is well known and supported by many.

Because there is so much information about these cases, we decided to split the blog in different parts, but that does not mean that the information that is not in this main article is less important, so we advise you to read it all if you are really interested in the absurd circumstances surrounding this that could have put Mike behind bars for decades without any proof, if it weren’t for the brilliant defense attorney Tom Mesereau that wiped his ass with the prosecution witnesses and for the 12 people of the jury that could see through the filthy lies of the accusers and exposed Tom Sneddon’s vendetta against Michael Jackson.


Please read the article by Mary A. Fisher as linked to below. There is a lot of information in it, an accurate timeline and interesting information about some of the key players. Below you will find the key players and some quoted from the article with some additional info about the case and the people involved.

Was Michael Jackson Framed?

The Untold Story

Mary A. Fischer

GQ, October 1994

Before O.J. Simpson, there was Michael Jackson — another beloved black celebrity seemingly brought down by allegations of scandal in his personal life. Those allegations — that Jackson had molested a 13-year-old boy — instigated a multimillion-dollar lawsuit, two grand-jury investigations and a shameless media circus. Jackson, in turn, filed charges of extortion against some of his accusers. Ultimately, the suit was settled out of court for a sum that has been estimated at $20 million; no criminal charges were brought against Jackson by the police or the grand juries. This past August, Jackson was in the news again, when Lisa Marie Presley, Elvis’s daughter, announced that she and the singer had married. As the dust settles on one of the nation’s worst episodes of media excess, one thing is clear: The American public has never heard a defense of Michael Jackson. Until now.

Read more

Evan Chandler

Father of Jordan Chandler who accused Mike of molesting his son. Chandler first welcomed Mike in Jordie’s life, but soon turned around and wanted to become rich over Mike’s back. You can find a lot of background info on Chandler in the article, so we will just highlights some quotes from the article regarding the case, to give you an impression of what kind of sick game he played.

  • According to sources, Chandler even suggested that Jackson build an addition onto the house so the singer could stay there. After calling the zoning department and discovering it couldn’t be done, Chandler made another suggestion — that Jackson just build him a new home.
  • At no time has Chandler claimed to have witnessed any sexual misconduct on Jackson’s part.
  • Dave Schwartz, Jordie’s stepfather secretly taped a phone conversation with Chandler in July, here are some of the statements he makes to Schwarz in that conversation:

“I had a good communication with Michael,” Chandler told Schwartz. “We were friends. I liked him and I respected him and everything else for what he is. There was no reason why he had to stop calling me. I sat in the room one day and talked to Michael and told him exactly what I want out of this whole relationship. What I want.”

Admitting to Schwartz that he had “been rehearsed” about what to say and what not to say, Chandler never mentioned money during their conversation. When Schwartz asked what Jackson had done that made Chandler so upset, Chandler alleged only that “he broke up the family. [The boy] has been seduced by this guy’s power and money.” Both men repeatedly berated themselves as poor fathers to the boy.

“It’s already set, there are other people involved that are waiting for my phone call that are in certain positions. I’ve paid them to do it. Everything’s going according to a certain plan that isn’t just mine.”

“Once I make that phone call, this guy is going to destroy everybody in sight in any devious, nasty, cruel way that he can do it. And I’ve given him full authority to do that.”

“And if I go through with this, I win big-time. There’s no way I lose. I’ve checked that inside out. I will get everything I want, and they will be destroyed forever. June will lose [custody of the son]…and Michael’s career will be over.”

“It’s going to be bigger than all of us put together. The whole thing is going to crash down on everybody and destroy everybody in sight. It will be a massacre if I don’t get what I want.”

“This attorney I found, I picked the nastiest son of a bitch I could find. All he wants to do is get this out in the public as fast as he can, as big as he can, and humiliate as many people as he can. He’s nasty, he’s mean, he’s very smart, and he’s hungry for the publicity.”

This is a leaked snippet from that taped call:

For the complete transcript of the call click here.

  • Chandler and his son met with Jackson and Pellicano in a suite at the Westwood Marquis Hotel. On seeing Jackson, says Pellicano, Chandler gave the singer an affectionate hug (a gesture, some say, that would seem to belie the dentist’s suspicions that Jackson had molested his son), then reached into his pocket, pulled out Abrams’s letter and began reading passages from it. When Chandler got to the parts about child molestation, the boy, says Pellicano, put his head down and then looked up at Jackson with a surprised expression, as if to say “I didn’t say that.” As the meeting broke up, Chandler pointed his finger at Jackson, says Pellicano, and warned “I’m going to ruin you.”
  • At a meeting with Pellicano in Rothman’s office later that evening, Chandler and Rothman made their demand – $20 million.
  • On August 13, there was another meeting in Rothman’s office. Pellicano came back with a counteroffer — a $350,000 screenwriting deal. Pellicano says he made the offer as a way to resolve the custody dispute and give Chandler an opportunity to spend more time with his son by working on a screenplay together. Chandler rejected the offer. Rothman made a counter demand — a deal for three screenplays or nothing — which was spurned. In the diary of Rothman’s ex-colleague, an August 24 entry reveals Chandler’s disappointment: “I almost had a $20 million deal,” he was overheard telling Rothman.
  • Before Chandler took control of his son, the only one making allegations against Jackson was Chandler himself — the boy had never accused the singer of any wrongdoing. That changed one day in Chandler’s Beverly Hills dental office. In the presence of Chandler and Mark Torbiner, a dental anesthesiologist, the boy was administered the controversial drug sodium Amytal — which some mistakenly believe is a truth serum. And it was after this session that the boy first made his charges against Jackson. Given the facts about sodium Amytal and a recent landmark case that involved the drug, the boy’s allegations, say several medical experts, must be viewed as unreliable, if not highly questionable:

    “False memories can be easily implanted in those under its influence. It is quite possible to implant an idea through the mere asking of a question. The idea can become their memory, and studies have shown that even when you tell them the truth, they will swear on a stack of Bibles that it happened.”

June Chandler

Mother of Jordan Chandler. June and Jordie spent a lot of time at Neverland. They went on tour with Mike, they went shopping at his costs and had holidays with him. Some quotes from the article:

  • June Chandler Schwartz had also become close to Jackson “and liked him enormously,” one friend says. “He was the kindest man she had ever met.”
  • Chandler talked of his concern for his son and his anger at Jackson and at his ex-wife, whom he described as “cold and heartless.” When Chandler tried to “get her attention” to discuss his suspicions about Jackson, he says on the tape, she told him “Go fuck yourself.”
  • At a graduation that month, Chandler confronted his ex-wife with his suspicions. “She thought the whole thing was baloney,” says her ex-attorney, Michael Freeman. She told Chandler that she planned to take their son out of school in the fall so they could accompany Jackson on his “Dangerous” world tour.
  • All along, June Chandler Schwartz rejected the charges Chandler was making against Jackson — until a meeting with police in late August 1993. Officers Sicard and Rosibel Ferrufino made a statement that began to change her mind. “[The officers] admitted they only had one boy,” says Freeman, who attended the meeting, “but they said, ‘We’re convinced Michael Jackson molested this boy because he fits the classic profile of a pedophile perfectly.’ “
  • By then, June Chandler Schwartz and Dave Schwartz had united with Evan Chandler against Jackson. The boy’s mother, say several sources, feared what Chandler and Rothman might do if she didn’t side with them. She worried that they would try to advance a charge against her of parental neglect for allowing her son to have sleepovers with Jackson.

June also testified in the 2005 trial, here is a part of the transcript:

  • Q. by Tom Sneddon – A. by June Chandler

    Q. Did you notice — I may not have asked this with regard to the third visit, but you indicated in at least the first visit that Jordan slept with you in your guest cottage, correct?

    A. Correct.

    Q. In the second visit, did Jordan sleep with you in your guest cottage?

    A. Yes, he did.

    Q. And the third visit, did Jordan sleep with you in your guest cottage?

    A. Yes, he did.


Q. And when you got to Las Vegas, where did you stay, what hotel?

A. The Mirage Hotel.

Q. And when you got to The Mirage Hotel, do you remember what time of day or night it was?

A. No.

Q. Do you remember how long you stayed in Las Vegas on this occasion?

A. Two or three nights.

Q. Now, when you got to Las Vegas, did you have — obviously you had a room —

A. Correct.

Q. — in The Mirage. And who was in your room when you first got there? Who was staying in your room?

A. Jordan, myself, Lily and Michael.

Q. All in the same room?

A. Correct.

Q. Now, did those arrangements change at any point in time?

A. Yes.

Q. And when did they change?

A. The second night things changed.

Q. With regard to “things changed,” could you tell me what changed first?

A. Well, there were approximately three bedrooms in that suite at the Mirage Hotel. Lily and I were staying in one bedroom, Jordie had another bedroom, and Michael had another bedroom. The second night, they were going to see a performance, Cirque du Soleil performance.

Q. “They” meaning who?

A. Jordie and Michael —

Q. Okay.

A. — and Lily and I. It was around 11 p.m. at night, and I got a call from somebody at Cirque du Soleil saying, “Where is Michael?” And I said, “He should be there with my son.” They said, “He’s not here.” A little while later, another call, he still didn’t show up. They still did not show up. And I — there’s a knock on the door and it’s Michael and Jordan, and they came back into the suite. Michael —

Q. Now, let me stop you right there, okay?

A. Yes.

Q. About what time is it when your son Jordan and the defendant in this case, Mr. Jackson, showed up?

A. Well, I think the performance started at 11:00, and I would say Jordan and Michael showed up around 11:30.

Q. Now, could you describe for the jury Mr. Jackson’s demeanor at the time that they came back to the room?

A. He was sobbing. He was crying, shaking, trembling.

Q. Michael Jackson was?

A. He was.

Q. And what about your son’s demeanor?

A. He was quiet.

Q. Now, at that point in time, did Mr. Jackson tell you why he was upset or crying?

A. Yes.

Q. All right. Tell the jury what he said.

A. He said, “You don’t trust me? We’re a family. Why are you doing this? Why are you not allowing Jordie to be with me?” And I said, “He is with you.” He said, “But my bedroom. Why not in my bedroom? We fall asleep, the kids have fun. Boys” —

MR. MESEREAU: Objection. Nonresponsive; narrative.

THE COURT: Narrative; sustained.

Q. BY MR. SNEDDON: All right. Tell us what – Mr. Jackson said that he wanted your son to sleep with him in his bed – what you said to Mr. Jackson.

A. What I said to Michael was, “This is not” — “This is not anything that I want. This is not right. Jordie should be able to do what he wants to do. He should be able to fall asleep where he wants to sleep.”

Q. Is this you talking or Mr. Jackson speaking?

A. I was saying this. And Michael was trembling and saying, “We’re a family. Jordie is having fun. Why can’t he sleep in my bed? There’s nothing wrong. There’s nothing going on. Don’t you trust me?”

Q. All right. How long do you think this conversation lasted between you and Mr. Jackson over where Jordan was going to sleep that night?

A. I would say 20 to 30, 40 minutes.

Q. So it was a back-and-forth conversation; is that right?

A. Yes.

What happened in those lost 30 minutes at The Mirage that made Mike so upset and why did he suddenly wanted Jordie to sleep in his room?

Jordan (Jordie) Chandler

The son of Evan Chandler and June Chandler Schwarz that claimed to have been molested by Mike. Read his deposition here.

The following quotes form the article will show that no such thing ever happened.

  • Until Michael Jackson entered his son’s life, Chandler hadn’t shown all that much interest in the boy. “He kept promising to buy him a computer so they could work on scripts together, but he never did,” says Michael Freeman, formerly an attorney for June Chandler Schwartz.
  • Without Jackson there, Pellicano “made eye contact” with the boy and asked him, he says, “very pointed questions”: “Has Michael ever touched you? Have you ever seen him naked in bed?” The answer to all the questions was no. The boy repeatedly denied that anything bad had happened.
  • In the presence of Chandler and Mark Torbiner, a dental anesthesiologist, the boy was administered the controversial drug sodium Amytal — which some mistakenly believe is a truth serum. And it was after this session that the boy first made his charges against Jackson.

So it is clear that Jordie found a father figure in Mike. He wanted to be near him as much as possible. If you are 13 years old and someone has molested you, you are scared stiff of that person and will grab any opportunity to stay away from that person. Jordie never did that, he wanted to be with him.

If Jordie really was molested by Mike, the conversation with Anthony Pellicano would have been his chance to get away, but he repeatedly denies it. Jordie only began making allegations towards Mike after they had given him a drug that can implant false memories. Jordie didn’t want to testify in 1994, and when he was asked to testify on behalf of the prosecution in 2005, he didn’t want to either.

David Schwartz

At the time June Chandler’s husband, although they lived separately since August 1993. He was the owner of Rent-a-Wreck, where Mike ended up after his car broke down. At first he and June didn’t believe the allegations her ex-husband made, but both of them later turned against Mike. Why would Schwartz turn against him? Why suddenly believe that Mike molested Jordie? The only answer we can think of is money. And that would make sense, since Tom Mesereau brings up the following to June Chandler in the cross-examination in 2005:

  • Q. by Tom Mesereau – A. by June Chandler

Q. Do you recall asking Michael Jackson if he would loan David Schwartz four million dollars?

A. Never.

Q. You say you never did that?

A. Never did that.

Q. Okay. Do you recall your ex-husband David Schwartz asking you to do that?

A. Never.

Q. Do you recall him being five million dollars in debt around the time you were associating with Michael Jackson?

A. No.

Q. Don’t recall that at all?

A. Not at all.

Barry Rothman

Evan Chandler’s attorney, with a history of questionable business.

  • “This attorney I found, I picked the nastiest son of a (bleep) I could find,” Chandler said in the recorded conversation with Schwartz. “All he wants to do is get this out in the public as fast as he can, as big as he can, and humiliate as many people as he can. He’s nasty, he’s mean, he’s very smart, and he’s hungry for the publicity.”
  • To a former employee, Rothman is “a demon” with “a terrible temper.”
  • Over the years, Rothman has made so many enemies that his ex-wife once expressed, to her attorney, surprise that someone “hadn’t done him in.” He has a reputation for stiffing people. “He appears to be a professional deadbeat… He pays almost no one,” investigator Ed Marcus concluded (in a report filed in Los Angeles Superior Court, as part of a lawsuit against Rothman), after reviewing the attorney’s credit profile, which listed more than thirty creditors and judgment holders who were chasing him.

Michael Freeman

June Chandler’s attorney for a short period of time. Freeman resigned because he didn’t trust Chandler’s intentions. Some quotes from the article:

  • “What parent in his right mind would want to drag his child into the public spotlight?” asks Freeman. “If something like this actually occurred, you’d want to protect your child.”
  • One officer, Federico Sicard, told attorney Michael Freeman that he had lied to the children he’d interviewed and told them that he himself had been molested as a child, says Freeman.
  • Her attorney, Michael Freeman, in turn, resigned in disgust, saying later that “the whole thing was such a mess. “I felt uncomfortable with Evan. He isn’t a genuine person, and I sensed he wasn’t playing things straight.”
  • So is it possible that Jackson committed no crime — that he is what he has always purported to be, a protector and not a molester of children? Attorney Michael Freeman thinks so: “It’s my feeling that Jackson did nothing wrong and these people [Chandler and Rothman] saw an opportunity and programmed it. I believe it was all about money.”

Bert Fields

Mike’s attorney at that time.

  • The police, Fields complained in a letter to Los Angeles Police Chief Willie Williams, “have also frightened youngsters with outrageous lies, such as ‘We have nude photos of you.’ There are, of course, no such photos.”
  • With the possibility of criminal charges against Jackson now looming, Bert Fields brought in Howard Weitzman, a well-known criminal-defense lawyer with a string of high-profile clients.
  • Pellicano began gathering evidence to use in the trial, which was scheduled for March 21, 1994. “They had a very weak case,” says Fields. “We wanted to fight. Michael wanted to fight and go through a trial. We felt we could win.”
  • Fields later told reporters that Jackson was “barely able to function adequately on an intellectual level.” Others in Jackson’s camp felt it was a mistake to portray the singer as incompetent. “It was important,” Fields says, “to tell the truth. [Larry] Feldman and the press took the position that Michael was trying to hide and that it was all a scam. But it wasn’t.”
  • On November 23, the friction peaked. Based on information he says he got from Weitzman, Fields told a courtroom full of reporters that a criminal indictment against Jackson seemed imminent. Fields had a reason for making the statement: He was trying to delay the boy’s civil suit by establishing that there was an impending criminal case that should be tried first. Outside the courtroom, reporters asked why Fields had made the announcement, to which Weitzman replied essentially that Fields “misspoke himself.” The comment infuriated Fields, “because it wasn’t true,” he says. “It was just an outrage. I was very upset with Howard.”
  • “There was this vast group of people all wanting to do a different thing, and it was like moving through molasses to get a decision,” says Fields. “It was a nightmare, and I wanted to get the hell out of it.”

Anthony Pellicano

Private investigator brought in by Mike’s attorney Bert Fields to help sort things out.

  • “After listening to the tape for ten minutes, I knew it was about extortion,” says Pellicano.
  • On seeing Jackson, says Pellicano, Chandler gave the singer an affectionate hug (a gesture, some say, that would seem to belie the dentist’s suspicions that Jackson had molested his son), then reached into his pocket, pulled out Abrams’s letter and began reading passages from it.
  • Pellicano resigned at the same time as Bert Fields.

Howard Weitzman – Johnnie Cochran Jr. – John Branca

Weitzman, a well-known criminal-defense lawyer with a string of high-profile clients, brought in by Bert Fields.

  • From the day Weitzman joined Jackson’s defense team, “he was talking settlement,” says Bonnie Ezkenazi, an attorney who worked for the defense.
  • With Fields and Pellicano gone, Weitzman brought in Johnnie Cochran Jr., a well-known civil attorney who is now helping defend O.J. Simpson. And John Branca, whom Fields had replaced as Jackson’s general counsel in 1990, was back on board.
  • In late 1993, as DAs in both Santa Barbara and Los Angeles counties convened grand juries to assess whether criminal charges should be filed against Jackson, the defense strategy changed course and talk of settling the civil case began in earnest, even though his new team also believed in Jackson’s innocence.

Larry Feldman

The civil attorney that was representing Jordie Chandler.

  • In mid-September, Larry Feldman, a civil attorney who’d served as head of the Los Angeles Trial Lawyers Association, began representing Chandler’s son and immediately took control of the situation. He filed a $30 million civil lawsuit against Jackson, which would prove to be the beginning of the end.
  • According to a member of Jackson’s legal team, “Feldman got dozens of letters from all kinds of people saying they’d been molested by Jackson. They went through all of them trying to find somebody, and they found zero.
  • The actual amount of the settlement has never been revealed, although speculation has placed the sum around $20 million. One source says Chandler and June Chandler Schwartz received up to $2 million each, while attorney Feldman might have gotten up to 25 percent in contingency fees.

Mark Torbiner

A dental anesthesiologist that was present when Chandler administered the controversial drug sodium Amytal to Jordie.

  • Torbiner makes housecalls to administer drugs — mostly morphine and Demerol — not only postoperatively to his dental patients but also, it seems, to those suffering pain whose source has nothing to do with dental work.
  • A check of Torbiner’s credentials with the Board of Dental Examiners indicates that he is restricted by law to administering drugs solely for dental-related procedures. But there is clear evidence that he has not abided by those restrictions. In fact, on at least eight occasions, Torbiner has given a general anesthetic to Barry Rothman, during hair-transplant procedures. Though normally a local anesthetic would be injected into the scalp, “Barry is so afraid of the pain,” says Dr. James De Yarman, the San Diego physician who performed Rothman’s transplants, “that [he] wanted to be put out completely.” De Yarman said he was “amazed” to learn that Torbiner is a dentist, having assumed all along that he was an M.D.
  • In another instance, Torbiner came to the home of Nylla Jones, she says, and injected her with Demerol to help dull the pain that followed her appendectomy.

Mathis Abrams

A Beverly Hills psychiatrist, who reported the case to the Los Angeles County Department of Children’s Services.

  • Rothman, seeking an expert’s opinion to help establish the allegations against Jackson, called Dr. Mathis Abrams, a Beverly Hills psychiatrist. Over the telephone, Rothman presented Abrams with a hypothetical situation. In reply and without having met either Chandler or his son, Abrams on July 15 sent Rothman a two-page letter in which he stated that “reasonable suspicion would exist that sexual abuse may have occurred.”
  • Chandler took his son to Mathis Abrams, the psychiatrist who’d provided Rothman with his assessment of the hypothetical child-abuse situation. During a three-hour session, the boy alleged that Jackson had engaged in a sexual relationship with him. He talked of masturbation, kissing, fondling of nipples and oral sex. The next step was inevitable. Abrams, who is required by law to report any such accusation to authorities, called a social worker at the Department of Children’s Services, who in turn contacted the police. The full-scale investigation of Michael Jackson was about to begin.
  • The investigation of Jackson, which by October 1993 would grow to involve at least twelve detectives from Santa Barbara and Los Angeles counties, was instigated in part by the perceptions of one psychiatrist, Mathis Abrams, who had no particular expertise in child sexual abuse. Abrams, the DCS caseworker’s report noted, “feels the child is telling the truth.”

Stella and Philippe Lemarque

Mike’s’ ex-housekeepers.

  • Tried to sell their story to the tabloids with the help of broker Paul Barresi, a former porn star. They asked for as much as half a million dollars but wound up selling an interview to The Globe of Britain for $15,000.

The Quindoys

A Filipino couple who had worked at Neverland.

  • Tried to sell their story to the tabloids as well. When their asking price was $100,000, they said ‘the hand was outside the kid’s pants,’ As soon as their price went up to $500,000, the hand went inside the pants.

The Bodyguards

Five former security guards who were planning to file a $10 million lawsuit alleging wrongful termination of their jobs. The case was thrown out of court in July 1995. As their depositions under oath reveal, it was clear they had never actually seen Mike do anything improper with Jordie or any other child:

  • “So you don’t know anything about Mr. Jackson and [the boy], do you?” one of Jackson’s attorneys asked former security guard Morris Williams under oath.

“All I know is from the sworn documents that other people have sworn to.”

“But other than what someone else may have said, you have no firsthand knowledge about Mr. Jackson and [the boy], do you?”

“That’s correct.”

“Have you spoken to a child who has ever told you that Mr. Jackson did anything improper with the child?”


When asked by Jackson’s attorney where he had gotten his impressions, Williams replied:

“Just what I’ve been hearing in the media and what I’ve experienced with my own eyes.”

“Okay. That’s the point. You experienced nothing with your own eyes, did you?”

“That’s right, nothing.”

Ex-Employee of Jackson Speaks of Threats During Earlier Inquiry

Blanca Francia

The maid.

  • Blanca Francia told Diane Dimond and other reporters that she had seen a naked Jackson taking showers and Jacuzzi baths with young boys. She also told Dimond that she had witnessed her own son in compromising positions with Jackson — an allegation that the grand juries apparently never found credible.
  • A copy of Francia’s sworn testimony reveals that Hard Copy paid her $20,000, and had Dimond checked out the woman’s claims, she would have found them to be false. Under deposition by a Jackson attorney, Francia admitted she had never actually see Jackson shower with anyone nor had she seen him naked with boys in his Jacuzzi. They always had their swimming trunks on, she acknowledged.

Brett Barnes – Wade Robson

Friends of Mike that had stayed over at Neverland as well.

  • Police seized Jackson’s telephone books during the raid on his residences in August and questioned close to thirty children and their families. Some, such as Brett Barnes and Wade Robson, said they had shared Jackson’s bed, but like all the others, they gave the same response — Jackson had done nothing wrong.

The both of them also testified in the 2005 trial:

  • Q. by Tom Mesereau – A. by Brett Barnes

Q. And how many times do you think you’ve stayed over at Neverland?

A. Every time.

Q. Okay. Did you ever stay in Michael Jackson’s room?

A. Yes, I have.

Q. How many times do you think you’ve done that?

A. Countless as well.

Q. And how would you describe his room?

A. It’s big. It’s pretty cool because it’s got lots of fun stuff to do there. Video games, such as stuff like that. And it’s probably the best as I can describe it.

Q. Have you ever stayed in Michael Jackson’s bed?

A. Yes, I have.

Q. How many times do you think you have?

A. Countless as well.

Q. Has Mr. Jackson ever molested you?

A. Absolutely not. And I can tell you right now that if he had, I wouldn’t be here right now.

Q. Has Mr. Jackson ever touched you in a sexual way?

A. Never. I wouldn’t stand for it.

Q. Has Mr. Jackson ever touched any part of your body in a way that you thought was inappropriate?

A. Never. It’s not the type of thing that I would stand for.

  • Q. by Tom Mesereau – A. by Wade Robson

Q. Mr. Robson, has anyone told you what to say in this courtroom today?

A. No.

Q. Is everything you’ve said the complete and honest truth?

A. Yes.

Q. Did Mr. Jackson ever do anything wrong with you?

A. No.

MR. MESEREAU: No further questions.

Diane Dimond

Correspondent for Hard Copy at the time of the allegations. After Mike’s ‘death’, Dimond became a daily contributor on Entertainment Tonight for its Michael Jackson “Investigation”. From 1993 on, Dimond has portrayed Mike as a pedophile in her coverage, paying for interviews and not presenting facts but only opinions from haters. Rumor has it that she shared a bed with Tom Sneddon and that’s why she would have had all the scoops, but of course no proof of that on the internet.

  • Purporting to take the journalistic high road, Hard Copy’s Diane Dimond told Frontline in early November of last year that her program was “pristinely clean on this. We paid no money for this story at all.” But two weeks later, as a Hard Copy contract reveals, the show was negotiating a $100,000 payment to five former Jackson security guards who were planning to file a $10 million lawsuit alleging wrongful termination of their jobs.
  • On December 15, Hard Copy presented “The Bedroom Maid’s Painful Secret.” Blanca Francia told Dimond and other reporters that she had seen a naked Jackson taking showers and Jacuzzi baths with young boys. She also told Dimond that she had witnessed her own son in compromising positions with Jackson — an allegation that the grand juries apparently never found credible. A copy of Francia’s sworn testimony reveals that Hard Copy paid her $20,000, and had Dimond checked out the woman’s claims, she would have found them to be false.

However, Dimond had one bright moment in her career, were she exposed people that were trying to ruin Mike:

Tom Sneddon

Tom Sneddon was the Santa Barbara DA at that time, and during the 2005 trial. Sneddon and his mates travelled around the world to find one boy that would want to testify against Mike, they found no one. They had no case. He also was the one that ordered the strip search on Mike, stating later that is was a match, while it wasn’t. There is a very interesting article on a blog that also brings up this strip search and the questions surrounding it. We will take some quotes from it, but the article itself is very interesting to read.

  • If Michael had accused of such (penetration), it can be medically disproven and no one could dispute this. But it is one of the worse crimes to be accused of, even if it would have shown his innocence to be substantial. This is exactly the reason why Evan Chandler didn’t make the accusations to be rape.
  • Taking photos of someone’s buttocks who was not accused of penetration seems a bit odd to me. I was under the impression that Sneddon wanted to see if MJ was gay for their own sick reasons. There were no allegations by Evan or Jordan of penetrative sex.
  • I guess they were interested to see if Michael Jackson was gay, being penetrated by anyone (or anything). Cause remember, homosexuality and pedophilia go hand in hand! But since penetration was never an allegation in 1993 from Jordie or Evan, it was just a nosy search to see if the rumors of Jackson being gay were true.
  • Vitiligo spots “marks” can move, and thus Jordan could claim there were marks, and if marks were on other places Sneddon still can claim there was “match”. Even though the only actual match could be that Michael indeed has genitals.
  • Why do people say they matched again? “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,” . Um yeah, the only problem with this whole statement is that Michael is NOT circumcised. Being Jewish may be a reason why Evan assumed he was. Someone explain to me how you mistake an uncircumcised penis for a circumcised one.
  • The photos were pretty much passed around the police station, where most of the officers said they couldn’t see a match. Also the two grand juries probably were given the description and they didn’t agree either. Also at the time, there were articles in the press saying that Jordan’s description didn’t match. Just over the years the story gone from no match to match, curtsy to people like Diane Dimond, Thomas Sneddon, etc. It was also reported back in ’93 that Sneddon wanted another set of pictures of Jackson naked be done. If true, it’s obvious he didn’t get what he was ‘looking’ for in the first set. Post trial verdict, in a brief interview, he admitted that he still has the photographs, and I quote, just in case more victims show up. Right.
  • Had Jordan’s description matched surely that would have been enough to at least arrest Jackson.

Read more

For those reading that are still not convinced of his innocence, let’s sum things up here:

  • No one has ever SEEN Mike molest Jordan, or any other child.
  • After months of investigation and questioning people and other boys all over the world, the DA had NO proof, NO ONE that wanted to testify and NO case.
  • The picture that Jordan made of Mike’s genitals was NO match, the thing he drew didn’t even look like a penis. Also the claim that Mike should have been circumcised was FALSE.
  • Jordan denied ANY wrongdoing by Mike until his father and Torbiner drugged him.
  • The case was presented to 2 different juries, twice they didn’t buy the accusations or anything Sneddon pushed to them…. those are the facts, those 2 juries were given everything Sneddon had.
  • Jordan has said to his friends repeatedly that Mike didn’t do a thing to him, that his parents made him lie. His friends were even ready to testify to this in court.
  • Evan was on tape admitting to a plan, a con as proved and written in the article by Mary Fisher.

The Criminal Investigation

When the boy who accused Michael Jackson of sexual abuse in 1993 refused to cooperate with authorities, the police investigation fell apart.

Police obtained Jackson’s telephone books and contacted about thirty children and their families. Although investigators allegedly used aggressive interrogation techniques to scare the children into making accusations against Jackson, they still could not find another accuser. All of the children questioned maintained that Jackson had never sexually abused them.

In an attempt to find corroborating evidence, the Santa Barbara Police Department subjected Jackson to a strip search to see if the description the accuser provided of Jackson’s genitalia was accurate. According to an article from USA Today: “photos of Michael Jackson’s genitalia do not match descriptions given by the boy who accused the singer of sexual misconduct.”

By February 1994, police still did not have a witness who was willing to testify against Jackson. Investigators consequently turned to the tabloids for leads, contacting several of Jackson’s former employees who had sold their stories to the media. For example, investigators flew to the Philippines to interview the Quindoys, a couple who had told the tabloids that they’d seen Jackson act inappropriately with a child. Police decided that their story was not credible based on the fact that the more money they received, the more salacious their story became.

Police also got in contact with Blanca Francia, Jackson’s former maid who had sold her story to Hard Copy for $20,000. On December 15 1993, Francia told the tabloid show that she had witnessed Jackson showering with young boys and that she had also seen him act inappropriately with her own son. Francia repeated these statements in a sworn deposition for the Chandlers’ civil lawsuit. While under deposition by one of Jackson’s attorneys, however, Francia admitted that she had exaggerated details during her Hard Copy interview and that the producers had paid her for her story.

In the mid 90s, Francia threatened to accuse Jackson of molesting her son unless she received money from the Jackson camp. To avoid the negative publicity that would have inevitably resulted from a second child abuse allegation, Jackson’s associates advised him to quietly settle the case. After receiving $2 million from Jackson, Francia did not go forward with the civil lawsuit.

While Francia seemed more than willing to make accusations against Jackson in exchange for financial compensation, she did not have anything incriminating to reveal when authorities questioned her during the criminal investigation in 1994. Contrary to what she had previously claimed (and to what she would claim in the future), Francia told investigators that her son had repeatedly denied being sexually abused by Jackson. Here is an excerpt from a USA Today article that was published on February 7th, 1994:

“Investigators from the county sheriff’s office recently arranged for the 13-year-old son of Jackson’s former maid to see a therapist. The boy was first interviewed by police after his mother told them he had spent time alone with Jackson. According to his mother, the child has repeatedly denied being abused in any way by the pop music star.

The offer of a therapist was made after the woman, an immigrant from Central America, complained about meetings and phone conversations sheriff’s deputies had with the boy while she was not present.

It made her “feel uncomfortable,” she said in a deposition, that she didn’t know what the deputies were talking about with the young boy. When she asked them “who should I talk to” about her concerns, they arranged for the woman and her son to see separate therapists at the county’s expense, she said in the sworn statement.”

In 1994, two grand juries were convened to hear evidence in the Jackson case but no charges were ever brought; in fact, evidence was so scant that prosecutors did not even ask for an indictment. According to a report from CNN that aired on May 2, 1994: “One jury member said no damaging evidence was heard.”

If the case against Jackson was so weak, why did District Attorney Tom Sneddon spend the next ten years slandering Jackson’s name in the press?


Questions surrounding this case

How come the car broke down and why that close to Rent-a-Wreck? It seems too much of a coincidence. Probably an expensive car with outstanding maintenance, Schwartz had an alleged $5 million debt and Chandler was lobbying with a film script and had some financial issues after claims from patients. Because Mike clearly was framed, we think this was all part of the plan. Mike was supposed to meet the Chandlers and we think deals were made before the car broke down near Rent-a-Wreck.

If Schwartz was part of the conspiracy, why did he tape the phone conversation with Chandler and played it to Pellicano? Could be blackmail. Maybe Chandler got cold feet, maybe it was in case Chandler would get cold feet. If Chandler would back out, they would have had nothing at all. Dave Schwartz actually has a link to District Attorney Tom Sneddon. Tellem, the PR firm working for Sneddon, also works for Dave Schwartz.

Why did June eventually turn against Mike? Because she was afraid to loose Jordie? Or did June have a hidden agenda? Rumor has it that June wanted to become Mrs. Jackson. Maybe she thought she could get close enough to Mike to get out of the deal and get rich by marrying Mike? Or she was supposed to get close to Mike. One other thing that bugged us was the drawing Jordie made of Mike’s genitals and while it wasn’t a match, there seemed to have been strong similarities. Of course he could have guessed there was discoloration, but the risk was that there was none at all. As far as we know Mike loved to swim and maybe at one point Jordie saw a glimpse while at the pool, we all know that can happen, but mostly that’s all it is, a glimpse. Not enough to see it long enough to draw a map of it if you know what we mean. We don’t think Jordie saw anything at all. What we did discuss is that there is a chance that Mike and June had an affair, or a one night stand. As we still assume he suffered from DID, it is actually quite possible he himself doesn’t even know if anything ever happened. Maybe June was the one that told Jordie what to draw? She was wrong about the fact that Mike was NOT circumcised, but maybe she focused too much on the discoloration and forgot about that. Having been married to a Jewish man might have let her assume that he was.

Why did Chandler approve of the relationship between Mike and Jordie at first and did that change later on, while Jordie hadn’t made any accusations against Mike and Chandler never had seen anything inappropriate with his own eyes? Mike didn’t help him with his film script so that could have made him pissed, but before accusations were made; Pellicano offered him a $350.000 film script deal which he turned down. He wanted more money, to be exact: $30 million was the first claim Feldman made. Now tell us, if your little boy would have been molested by anyone, doesn’t matter by who, would you ask for $30 million or would you want that person behind bars? Chandler turned to Rothman instead of the police, means that he didn’t want justice for his son, because nothing ever happened and Chandler was in for the $$$$.

The thing is that if they would file criminal charges first, they would have to go through trial. But they only had Jordie with a story that popped up after Chandler gave him a controversial drug that can implant false memories. The defense would have kicked ass with that fact. Also there was the taped conversation between Schwartz and Chandler which wouldn’t have helped the prosecution at all. No one had seen anything, the drawing that Jordie made of Mike’s genitals didn’t match so they had no case. They must have known that, that is why Chandler turned to a civil lawyer first because once you have lost a trial, you can say bye bye to the bucks. But turning to a civil lawyer doesn’t change the fact that there was no case. Mike wanted to fight, wanted to go to court and he would have won, we have no doubt about that. But then suddenly the settlement… Didn’t Mike want to fight anymore? We don’t believe that. He was strong enough to go through all the shit in 2005, why wouldn’t he have been strong enough in 1993? The strange part is that Mike suddenly became weak. He didn’t eat anymore, lost a lot of weight, his health was getting bad and Fields even said he was “barely able to function adequately on an intellectual level.” The settlement was signed for allegedly around $15 – $20 million. That was the best case scenario for Sneddon of course, since he would never have won if he had filed criminal charges. That might have been Plan A, but for plan B this was the best thing to happen, they had Mike look guilty by signing the settlement (which is BS, see link below) so there was a base for new accusations. When criminal charges were filed in 2003, the media already had convicted Mike without knowing anything about the case.

Info about the settlement

The fact that Mike went to rehab right after that gives us an uncomfortable feeling. As we have said before we think Mike has been drugged and poisoned and if you see he first wants to fight, then his health gets bad, he was barely able to function and he didn’t eat anymore, makes us wonder what they did to him to make him sign those papers. He didn’t eat anymore, was he afraid to eat? Did they get him by putting drugs in his food? Something is not right here.

Same with the lost 30 minutes at The Mirage. What happened that made him so upset? Why did they never arrive at the Cirque du Soleil performance? Who else was there? As you know we think Mike is a mind control victim and we think someone must have triggered him during those 30 minutes. Suddenly Mike insisted that Jordie slept in his bed, while on previous visits the Chandlers all slept at the guest houses. Something happened at the Mirage, we just can’t figure out what, but The Mirage will come back later in this blog because Mike also stayed at the Mirage when in 2003 Neverland was raided again:

Jackson Trashed Vegas Hotel Room As Police Raided His Home


With twenty-two hundred media people present, this trial has probably been the biggest media circus in history. The media had convicted Mike beforehand and the news coverage was one-sided. Even if he would be acquitted, the media had already put him behind bars. Just like in the 1993 case, his image would be ruined and a lot of people would always think he did it and got away with it.

Luckily one of the reporters that biased him saw the light and decided to have a better look at the case. While investigating the case, she came to the conclusion that Mike was the victim in this case, instead of Gavin Arvizo, the boy that claimed to be molested by Mike. Her name is Aphrodite Jones and she wrote a book about the trial “Michael Jackson Conspiracy”. If you have not read it yet, please take our advice and order it, she presents very accurate info about what happened IN the courtroom. There is also an online version.

Aphrodite’s book was a big help to us. Follow her blog and make sure you watch the promo for True Crime with Aphrodite Jones here.

We both never followed the case, other than that we heard he was accused, he would go to trial and that he was acquitted. The book has many “jaw-on-floor” moments and after reading it, even the biggest racist or Michael Jackson hater should acknowledge that he is innocent.

Two thumbs up for Tom Mesereau, who handled the case brilliantly! He would often start his cross examination with:

“My name is Thomas Mesereau and I speak for Mr. Jackson. Okay.

I’m on his side. All right.

Not the government. I’m on Mr. Jackson’s side. Okay.”

This is a timeline of the events from January 2003 until June 13, 2005, the day Mike was found not guilty on all 10 counts. Even though we will try to keep it as short as possible, it will be another long read.

Arvizo family allegations: Introduction and overview

The events prior to the trial

The Evidence

This is a brief summary of the evidence that has been presented.

The Molestation Charges

Jackson is accused of molesting Gavin Arvizo at his Neverland Ranch on several occasions in March 2003


  • Testimony of Gavin Arvizo, the alleged victim.
  • Testimony of Star Arvizo, who claims to have witnessed the alleged abuse on several occasions.

Defense Evidence:

  • Gavin Arvizo initially told authorities that the alleged molestation occurred before he and his family made videotaped statements in Jackson’s defense. This would also mean that the alleged abuse occurred before the boy defended Jackson to social workers in February. Gavin Arvizo now contends that the molestation took place after he repeatedly denied any wrongdoing on Jackson’s part. While it is understandable that the boy cannot remember the exact dates on which he was allegedly molested, his original assertion that the abuse took place before the videotape was made cannot be attributed to confusion on the boy’s part because he also told investigators that the videotape was made to cover-up the alleged molestation (see testimony of Sgt. Steve Robel).
  • Based on what District Attorney Tom Sneddon said in his opening statement, it’s possible that Michael Jackson was not even with the Arvizos at Neverland throughout the month of February. From pages 115-116 of Sneddon’s opening statement:

“I believe that the records from the ranch logs and the testimony from individuals involved here will show that from basically March the 2nd to March the 5th, that the defendant and the Arvizos were on the ranch together. That again, from March 9th until March 12th, when the Arvizos left for the last time, that the Jackson — Michael Jackson, the defendant in this case, was present.”

It suffices to say that if investigators did discover that Mr. Jackson was not with the Arvizos throughout the month of February (as Sneddon implied in his opening statement), they must have realized that Gavin Arvizo was lying when he claimed to have been molested sometime between February 7th and February 20th. Hence, the changing of the timeline from February 7th – March 10th (as stated in the original charges) to February 20th – March 12th (as stated in the current set of charges)

  • According to an investigator, the boy originally claimed that he was molested between five and seven times. Gavin Arvizo only testified to two incidences of alleged molestation.
  • Gavin Arvizo’s younger brother Star, who supposedly walked in on Jackson molesting his brother, said under cross-examination that there are seven locks on Jackson’s bedroom door and an alarm that goes off if anybody approaches. Yet somehow, Star Arvizo managed to walk into Jackson’s room unnoticed on two seperate occasions.
  • In his grand jury testimony and in past police interviews, Star Arvizo claimed to have witnessed Jackson rubbing his penis against Gavin Arvizo’s behind while the boy slept. While testifying at the trial, Star Arvizo denied ever having made such a statement.
  • When Jackson’s defense attorney pointed out that Star Arvizo’s description of the second incident of alleged molestation differed from an earlier description that he had given of the same incident, Mr. Arvizo suddenly claimed to have actually witnessed three incidences of alleged abuse.
  • Star Arvizo alleged that Jackson once appeared naked in front of him and his brother. During his testimony, Gavin Arvizo was asked whether or not he was aware of the fact that Jackson has a skin disorder called Vitiligo that eats away at his pigment. Mr. Arvizo acknowledged that he was aware of Jackson’s skin disease. Jackson’s attorney then asked him whether or not he was aware of the fact that Jackson has brown patches on his body, to which Mr. Arvizo replied, “I didn’t know about patches. I thought he was just all white.” There are various pictures of Mr. Jackson on the Internet where one can clearly see that his body is not white all over, as Gavin Arvizo claimed.
  • In spring 2003, after the alleged abuse took place, Gavin Arvizo told his principal that Jackson had not sexually abused him. Mr. Arvizo claims that he said this because he didn’t want the kids at school to make fun of him.

The Alcohol Allegations

Jackson is accused of supplying Gavin Arvizo with liquor to seduce the boy


  • Testimony of Gavin Arvizo
  • Testimony of Star Arvizo
  • Testimony of Davellin Arvizo
  • Testimony of Kiki Fournier, Jackson’s former maid. During her twelve years working at Neverland, Fournier claimed to have seen several minors who “might” have been intoxicated.

Defense Evidence:

  • Ms. Fournier conceded that she had never witnessed Jackson serve alcohol to minors.
  • The defense claims that the Arvizo children broke into Jackson’s wine cellar and drank his alcohol when he was not at Neverland.
  • In his testimony, Star Arvizo claimed that he and his brother got drunk with Jackson from the time they arrived at Neverland from Miami (February 7th) to the time they left the ranch for the first time with house manager Jesus Salas (February 12th). As mentioned earlier, the District Attorney said that Jackson was not at Neverland with the Arvizos during this time frame.
  • Star Arvizo admitted that he knew the exact location of the key to Jackson’s wine cellar.
  • The accuser’s older sister Davellin Arvizo claims that she walked into the wine cellar and witnessed Jackson serving alcohol to her younger brothers. Under cross-examination, it was revealed that she never made such a statement in her earlier interviews with police.
  • Davellin Arvizo claims that Jackson served her alcohol in the wine cellar. Star Arvizo, however, testified that Jackson served Davellin Arvizo alcohol in the kitchen.
  • When confronted with a conflicting statement that he had made regarding the alcohol allegations, Star Arvizo blamed the court reporter, claiming that she had misquoted him.

The Pornography Allegations

Jackson is accused of showing pornography to Gavin and Star Arvizo.


  • Testimony of Gavin Arvizo
  • Testimony of Star Arvizo
  • The boys were able to tell investigators where Jackson kept his stash of pornography.
  • The accuser’s fingerprints were found on one of Jackson’s porn magazines.

Defense Evidence:

  • The porn magazine with the accuser’s fingerprints was not tested for prints until after the boy handled the magazine at a grand jury proceedings in April 2004.
  • The defense claims that the boys went into Jackson’s room when he was not there and looked at the magazines on their own. In support of this theory, Star Arvizo testified that he knew the code to get into Jackson’s bedroom.
  • Jackson’s defense attorney revealed that the magazine that Jackson had supposedly shown Star Arvizo and his brother, was actually released in August 2003 – five months after the Arvizos had left the ranch for the last time.
  • In his grand jury testimony in April 2004, Star Arvizo testified that he and his brother had once surfed porn sites. When confronted with a transcript of this testimony, Star Arvizo replied “that’s just a paragraph that somebody wrote.”

The Conspiracy Charge

Jackson is accused of holding Gavin Arvizo and his family hostage at Neverland and forcing them to participate in a videotaped rebuttal to the controversial Living with Michael Jackson documentary that aired in February 2003.


  • Testimony of Davellin Arvizo
  • Testimony of Star Arvizo
  • Testimony of Gavin Arvizo
  • Testimony of Ann Marie Kite, a former Jackson employee who confirmed that Living with Michael Jackson was a public relations disaster. Kite also testified that one of Jackson’s associates wanted to paint Janet Arvizo, the mother of Jackson’s accuser as a “crack whore,” in the media.
  • Testimony of Louise Palanker, a comedian who befriended the Arvizos. According to Palanker, she received a panicked call from Janet Arvizo who told her that Jackson’s associates were “evil.”

Defense Evidence:

  • Kite only worked for Jackson for six days and never met or even spoke to him or his accuser.
  • Louise Palanker told police that she thought that Janet Arvizo was “wacky” and “totally bipolar.”
  • Jackson’s maid Kiki Fournier, who worked at the ranch during the time of the alleged conpsiracy, testified that she did not believe the family were held against their will.
  • All of the Arvizo children conceded that they had never asked for anybody’s help even though they had numerous opportunities to do so.
  • The prosecution contends that the Arvizos were forced to defend Jackson in February 2003. Gavin Arvizo, however, testified that he meant most of what he said in his videotaped defense of Jackson.
  • When the boy was still claiming that the alleged abuse happened before the rebuttal film was made, the prosecution claimed that the tape was made to cover up the alleged molestation. Now that the boy is claiming that the alleged abuse happened after the rebuttal film was made, the prosecution is claiming that the tape was actually made as part of a conspiracy to improve Jackson’s public image.

Past Accusations

Judge Rodney Melville ruled that past accusations of sexual misconduct on Jackson’s part will be heard by the jury.

The Ruling in the Michael Jackson Case Allowing Testimony About Past Molestation Allegations: Why It Was Wrong on the Law, and Unfair to the Defendant, Yet May End Up Hurting the Prosecution More

During an important hearing on March 28, 2005, District Attorney Tom Sneddon said that:

  • The son of Jackson’s former maid Blanca Francia will testify that Jackson touched him inappropriately on several occasions. The Francias received a $2 million settlement from Jackson in 1994.
  • Witnesses will testify that they saw a pair of Jackson’s underwear lying next to a pair of his original accuser Jordan Chandler’s underwear on the floor beside a bed that the two shared. Chandler, however, is not scheduled to testify.
  • Witnesses will testify that they saw Jackson act inappropriately with four teenage boys.
  • Two witnesses will testify that they heard Jackson encourage children to refer to him as “Daddy.”
  • Former Jackson employee Bob Jones claimed that he saw Jackson lick the head of a child.

In resonse, defense attorney Tom Mesereau argued that:

  • The other boys who have been named alleged victims by the prosecution all vehemently deny any wrongdoing on Jackson’s part. One of the alleged victims is former child star Macaulay Culkin, who has publicly defended Jackson and is still good friends with him today. The other alleged victims – Wade Robson, Brett Barnes and Jimmy Shafechuck – have also maintained that Jackson never did anything sexual to them.
  • The mother of the boy who will testify about inappropriate touching originally sold her story to the tabloids but later recanted her statements while under deposition by a Jackson attorney.
  • The former employees who claim to have witnessed inappropriate behaviour on Jackson’s part all sold their stories to tabloids. Five of the former employees also tried to sue Jackson for wrongful termination in 1995. Jackson denied the allegations and counter-sued, alleging that two of them stole belongings from his home and sold the items to tabloids. The jury sided with Jackson, awarding him $60,000 from the ex-employees who robbed him. The ex-employees filed for bankruptcy as a result.

Source: The Smoking Gun

In other develpoments, NBC’s Mike Taibbi reported that Bob Jones has recanted his allegation about having witnessed Jackson lick a child’s head.

Quotes from Mr. Mesereau regarding the admissability of the “prior bad acts.”

“Now, let’s look at what they’re trying to do. They have an alleged prior victim named Brett Barnes who tells us he never was touched improperly. They want to bring in four witnesses to talk about Brett Barnes. They don’t want to bring him in. Because the moment they bring him in, they’re done. So they want to bring in allegedly four honest witnesses – I guess they’re vouching for their credibility – to testify that Mr. Barnes was improperly touched. Who are their main witnesses? Their main witnesses sued Mr. Jackson in the mid ’90s… At numerous times during that six-month trial, the trial Judge made findings that the plaintiffs were lying, not being candid, changing their stories, even leaving the bench on a couple of occasions. And when the dust settled, the jury returned a verdict for Mr. Jackson, awarded Mr. Jackson damages, because the plaintiffs had stole from him. The Judge then awarded not only costs, but legal fees, and in the end Mr. Jackson obtained a judgment for over a million dollars against these lying plaintiffs. They want the Court to allow these lying plaintiffs to come in now again and try and testify to improper acts, when there is no alleged victim they intend to call. That’s just plain wrong. And if they suggest it wouldn’t be time-consuming to litigate that issue, all the Court has to do is look at the six-month trial and its length to know that’s not true, because they sold stories to tabloids, they were caught lying, and they had a big judgment against them.”

“First of all, Your Honor, I would note that in their motion, they mention someone named Bob Jones. And in very graphic — in a very graphic manner they told the Court that Mr. Jones had worked for Mr. Jackson for years, had traveled internationally with him, and would testify to all sorts of improprieties with children. We just were produced a police report by the prosecution where Mr. Jones flat out denies virtually everything they said in their motion. He has told the Santa Barbara Sheriffs, with counsel, that he never saw anything inappropriate happen when Mr. Jackson was in the company of any of these children.”

“Now, what happens if you allow third-party testimony about Mr. Chandler without allowing Mr. — forcing them, or ordering them, or requiring them to have Mr. Chandler, the alleged victim, testify? You then have people come in to say what they saw without any victim to confirm it. And what happened back in those days? In summary, this is what happened: Chandler’s parents had been divorced in 1986. The father had given up custody of the child. When these alleged events happened, the father jumped on the bandwagon and wanted to become a multimillionaire, and he fueled litigation. And all of a sudden, you had the parents suing Mr. Jackson, you had — the mother’s new husband then decided to sue Mr. Jackson for allegedly interfering with his business. He had an auto company, and he claimed that the publicity had interfered with his business. He wanted millions. After the settlement, the father then filed a new lawsuit against Mr. Jackson wanting 30 million more dollars. That was litigated and he lost. You have all sorts of collateral litigation, and eventually Mr. Chandler filed papers in Superior Court seeking legal emancipation from his parents. Where is the justice in this case of allowing parents to come in who collected lots of money because Mr. Jackson wanted to get this case behind him and pursue his music career? And indeed, all kinds of advisors were telling him to do that. You have parents playing each other off with the child and pursuing collateral litigation, all of that will obviously have to be explored, because the potential for financial interest, financial bias in a situation like that, is enormous, the motives for financial gain were enormous, and indeed, there was never any criminal prosecution despite Mr. Sneddon’s noble efforts to try and do one.”

“Then we come to Macaulay Culkin, who has repeatedly made statements that he’s a friend of Mr. Jackson and has never been molested. But they want to bring in evidence that he was molested. And they want to bring in witnesses who also were part of the gang that sued Mr. Jackson, and lost, with findings that they had lied and with enormous damages awarded against them.”

“Now, the fourth alleged victim is Jason Francia. Jason Francia and his mother were interviewed by the sheriffs and a deposition of the mother was taken. Money was paid to settle that case, again because Mr. Jackson didn’t want the press, didn’t want his family going through it, and wanted to pursue his music career. There never was a criminal prosecution, even though the alleged victim was interviewed by the Los Angeles District Attorney and the Santa Barbara District Attorney together. And after their interview with Jason Francia – which was so wishy-washy about what happened, they never decided to pursue a criminal case, because there wasn’t one. We have that taped interview – the mother, in a civil deposition in the Chandler litigation, began by saying she saw something and ended by saying she saw nothing. And indeed, stories were sold to tabloids, and money was paid to settle. He appears to be the only alleged victim they want to bring in. Five, Wade Robeson, who tells us nothing ever happened to him. And they don’t propose to bring him in as an alleged victim. They want to bring in the gang that basically has tried to accuse Mr. Jackson and get money from him for years, generally unsuccessfully, with the exception of Miss — Mr. Francia’s mother, and I’ve just talked about the problems in her sworn statement in discovery. The deposition is clear, she begins by saying, ‘I think I saw something.’ She ends by saying, ‘I didn’t see anything.’

“Six, Jimmy Safechuck, who we are informed says nothing happened. They don’t propose to call him as an alleged victim either, but they’ve got the same old gang again coming in to try and capitalize on the case, people who have been adjudged to be liars, and they are. People who asked for money from tabloids, who’ve asked for money from Mr. Jackson, et cetera.”

“Seven, Jonathan Spence, who we are informed says nothing happened and doesn’t intend to come in to support them at all. What do they want to do? Bring in the same crew again. Third-party witnesses with an axe to grind, all of whom have wanted money in the past, none of whom can substantiate that anything happened because the alleged victim says nothing happened.”

“The testimony that the prosecutor wants to introduce concerns seven alleged victims with only one scheduled to testify. This testimony has been presented to two criminal grand juries in Los Angeles and Santa Barbara, neither of which ever returned an Indictment, and it’s been rejected by one civil jury in the longest civil trial in the history of this courthouse.”


The Trial Timeline

February 28 (Day 1 of the trial) Michael goes to court with Katherine & Jermaine. District attorney Thomas Sneddon Jr gives his opening statement followed by Thomas Mesereau’s.

March 1 (Day 2) Michael goes to court with Katherine & Jackie. Mesereau completes his opening statement. The prosecution opens his case by showing the Martin Batshit documentary to the Jury before calling Batshit as the first witness. His testimony is followed by the one of Ann Gabriel.

March 2 (Day 3) Michael goes to court with Katherine & Jackie. Ann Gabriel is cross examined by the defense.

March 3 (Day 4) Michael goes the court with Jackie & Katherine. The prosecution shows a video of the Neverland search to the Jury. Deputy Sheriff Albert Lafferty testifies followed by Davellin Arvizo.

March 4 (Day 5) Michael goes to court with Katherine, LaToya & Jermaine. The prosecution shows the rebuttal interview of the Arvizo family made by Michael’s team. Davellin Arvizo Is cross examined by Mesereau.

March 7 (Day 6) Michael goes to court with Katherine, Joe & Jermaine. Mesereau finishes Davellin Arvizo’s cross examination. The prosecution presents the audio interview of the Arvizo family to the Jury before calling it’s next witness : Star Arvizo.

March 8 (Day 7) Michael goes to court with Katherine, Joe & Jermaine. Mesereau cross examines Star.

March 9 (Day 8 ) Michael goes to court with Katherine, Joe, Jermaine & Tito. Mesereau completes the cross examination. The next witness is Gavin Arvizo.

March 10 (Day 9) Michael arrives 1 hour late and dressed with pajamas with Katherine, Joe, Jermaine & Tito because a terrible back-ache took him to the emergency room of the hospital. Gavin’s testimony resumes.

March 11 (Day 10) Michael does not attend today’s hearing which is dedicated to motions.

March 14 (Day 11) Michael goes to court with Katherine, Joe, Jackie & Tito. Mesereau cross-examines Gavin.

March 15 (Day 12) Michael goes to court with Katherine, Joe, Jackie & Tito. Mesereau completes Gavin’s cross examinations. The following prosecution witnesses are Steve Robel & Jeff Klapakis.

March 16 (Day 13) Michael goes to court with Katherine & Joe. The prosection shows to the Jury the erotic material found during the Neverland search.

March 17 (Day 14) Michael goes to court with Katherine & Joe. Testimonies of Kiki Fournier & Fritz Coleman.

March 18 (Day 15) Special motions hearing without Michael & the Jury.

March 21 (Day 16) Michael is once again taken to the hospital because of back pain. He then goes to court with Katherine, Joe & Jackie where a doctor explains the health state of Michael to the judge who agrees to let him go home. Testimonies of detective Conn Abel, flight attendent Lauren Wallace & child molestation specialist Anthony Urquiza.

March 22 (Day 17) Michael goes to court with Katherine & Joe. Testimony of Louise Palanker.

March 23 (Day 18 ) Michael goes to court with Katherine & Joe. Testimonies of Robert Cooley, Craig Bonner & Dr Antonio Cantu.

March 24 (Day 19) Michael goes to court with Katherine, Joe, Jackie & Marlon. Testimonies of Dr Antonio Cantu & Lisa Hermann.

March 25 (Day 20) Michael goes to court with Katherine & Joe. Testimonies about Michael & Gavin’s DNA found on the same porno magazine.

March 27 Michael gives a radio interview to Reverend Jesse Jackson.

March 28 (Day 21) Michael goes to court with Katherine & Joe. Testimony of George Lopez.

March 29 (Day 22) Michael goes to court with Katherine & Joe. Testimonies of Jaimie Massada & Cynthia Ann Bell.

March 30 (Day 23) Michael goes to court with Katherine & Joe. Cynthia Ann Bell is cross examined.

The next prosecution witnesses are Stanley Katz & William Dickerman

April 1 (Day 24) Michael goes to court with Katherine & Joe. Testimonies of Jeff Klapackis, Jack Green, Larry Feldman & Jesus Salas.

April 3 Michael celebrates his daughter Paris 7th birthday at Neverland

April 4 Michael goes to court with Katherine & Joe. Jesus Salas is cross examined. The next witness is Jason Francia. Back at Neverland, Michael Is welcomed by many fans who led by Karen Faye have decorated the ranch gates with rose petals. To thank them, he invites them to his home where they meet Prince, Paris & Blanket + get each a signed box set of Michael’s Ultimate Collection!

April 5 (Day 26) Michael goes to court with Katherine & Joe. Jason Francia is cross examined. Then his lawyer Chriss Kallman & his mother Blanca Francia testify.

April 6 Michael attends the funerals of his old criminal lawyer Johnnie Cochran.

April 7 (Day 27) Michael goes to court with Katherine & Tito. Testimonies of Ralph Chacon & Adrian Mc Manus.

April 8 (Day 28 ) Michael goes to court with Katherine & Tito. Adrian Mc Manus is cross examined. Testimony of Phillip Lemaeque.

April 11 (Day 29) Michael goes to court with Katherine, Tito & Jackie. Testimonies of Bob Jones & Stacy Brown (who are writting a book on Michael) followed by Duane Swingler & June Chandler (Jordie’s mother!)

April 12 (Day 30) Michael goes to court with Katherine & Jackie. Testimony of Jay Jackson (Gavin’s stepfather)

April 13 (Day 31) Michael goes to court with Katherine. Jay Jackson is cross examined. He is followed by his wife Janet Arvizo Jackson who pleads the 5th amendment to avoid questions about her welfare fraud.

April 14 (Day 32) Michael goes to court with Katherine. Janet Arvizo Jackson’s testimony goes on.

April 15 (Day 33) Michael goes to court with Katherine. The prosecution shows the Jury surveillance videos of the Arvizo family by Brad Miller. Mesereau then begins the cross examination of Janet Arvizo Jackson.

April 16 (Day 34) Michael goes to court with Katherine. Mesereau finishes Janet’s cross examination. The next witnesses are her mother Maria Ventura, Michael Davy & Janet Williams.

April 20 (Day 35) Michael goes to court with Katherine Testimony of Brian Barron.

April 21 (Day 37) Michael goes to court with Katherine Cross examination of Brian Barron then Judge Melville hears several motions without Michael & the Jury.

April 25 (Day 38 ) Michael goes to court with Katherine & Joe. Testimony of Kaseem Abdul. Brian OXMAN is fired by Mesereau.

April 26 (Day 39) Michael goes to court with Katherine & Joe. Testimonies of Cynthia Montgomery & Hamid Moslehi.

April 27 (Day 40) Michael goes to court with Katherine, Joe & Jackie. Testimony of Debbie Rowe Jackson.

April 28 (Day 41) Michael goes to court with Katherine, Joe & Jackie. Cross examination of Debbie & then testimony of her lawyer Iris Finsilver.

April 29 (Day 42) Michael goes to court with Katherine, Joe & Jackie. Testimony of Ian Drew. The prosecution shows the Jury a book on children found at Neverland…in 1993!

May 2 (Day 43) Michael goes to court with Katherine & Joe. Testimonies of detective Craig Bonner & Beverly Wagner.

May 3 (Day 44) Michael goes to court with Katherine & Joe. Testimonies of Steve Robel, John Duross & Rudy Provencio.

May 4 (Day 45) Michael goes to court with Katherine & Joe. The prosecution rests its case after Rudy Provencio’s cross examination.

May 5 (Day 46) Michael goes to court with Katherine, Joe & Jermaine. The defense opens his case with the testimonies of Wade Robson & Brett Barnes (who stay at Neverland with their families)

May 6 (Day 47) Michael goes to court with Katherine & Joe. Testimonies of Joy & Chantal Robson + Marie & Karlee Barnes.

May 9 (Day 48 ) Michael goes to court with Katherine, Joe & Jermaine. Testimonies of Francine Contreras, Gayle Goforth, Violet Silva, Ramon Velasco & Joe Marcus.

May 10 (Day 49) Michael goes to court with Katherine & Joe. Cross Examination of Joe Marcus.

May 11 (Day 50) Michael goes to court with Katherine & Joe. Testimony of Macauley Culkin. The defense then shows the Jury the outtakes of the Batshit interviews.

May 12 (Day 51) Michael goes to court with Katherine & Joe. Testimonies of Carlos Velasco & David LeGrand.

May 13 (Day 52) Michael goes to court with Katherine, Joe & Randy. Testimony of Mark Geragos.

May 16 (Day 53) Michael goes to court with Katherine & Randy. Testimonies of Dr Jean Seamount, Tiffany Haynes, Carole Mc Coy, Kathryn Bernard, Maria Gomez, Shane Meredith, Brian Salce, Russ Birchim & Angel VIvanco.

May 17 (Day 54) Michael goes to court with Katherine & Randy. Cross examination of Angel Vivanco followed by the testimonies of Irene Peters, Karen Walker & Simone Jackson (Michael’s cousin)

May 18 (Day 55) Michael goes to court with Katherine & Randy. Cross examination of Simone Jackson followed by the testimonies of her brother Rijo , their mother Michelle Jackson (Michael’s aunt), Christian Robinson & Vernee Watson-Johnson.

May 19 (Day 56) Michael goes to court with Katherine. The judge refuses to allow the testimonies of Larry King & Michael Viner because they are “hearsay”. The next witness is Chris Tucker’ girldriend Azja Pyor. The defense then proceed by showing to the Jury a video presentation of Neverland.

May 20 (Day 57) Michael goes to court with Katherine & Randy. Mark Geragos completes his testimony.

May 23 (Day 58 ) Michael goes to court with Katherine. Testimonies of Mercy Manriquez, Michael Radakovitch, Marion Arvizo & Connie Keenan.

May 24 (Day 59) Michael goes to court with Katherine. Testimonies of Jay Leno, Sulli McCullough, Monica de los Santos, Mary Holzer, Anthony Ranieri, Karen Brando, Prudence Brando, Dr Philip Esplin, Julio Avila, Leslie Wraggs, Arlene Kennedy & Chris Tucker.

May 25 (Day 60) Michael goes to court with Katherine & Joe. The defense rests its case after Chris Tucker’s cross examination. The prosecution then opens it’s rebuttal with the testimonies of Timothy Rooney & Jesus Salas.

May 26 (Day 61) Michael goes to court with Katherine & Joe. Testimonies of Christine Klausner, Gearge Erwin & William Dickerman.

May 27 (Day 62) Michael goes to court with Katherine, Joe & Randy. Testimonies of Steve Robel & Craig Bonner. The prosecution rests it’s rebuttal by showin the Jury a video of Gavin police deposition in July 2003. The defense declines to make a rebuttal so Judge Melville declares the testimonies over.

May 31 (Day 63) Special hearing where the Judge & the lawyers determine the rules of Jury deliberations. Neither Michael, nor the Jury attend court.

June 1 (Day 64) Michael goes to court with Katherine, Joe & Randy where Judge Melville gives the Jury the rules of Jury Deliberations.

June 2 (Day 66) Michael goes to court with Katherine, Joe, Randy, Jermaine & Tito. Ron Zonen gives his closing staement followed by Tom Mesereau who doesn’t have time to finish.

Frank Tyson speaks for the first time to defend Michael in an interview to Prime Time Live on ABC.

June 3 (Day 67) Michael goes to court with Katherine, Joe, Janet and LaToya. Tom Mesereau completes his closing arguments.

June 3-13 While Jury deliberations take place, the whole Jackson family waits for the verdict at Neverland.

June 13 The Jury reaches a verdict. Michael and the Jackson family goes to court where he is acquitted on all counts! They go back to Neverland. The trial is over.

For those interested we also uploaded the court transcripts.

Some court transcript summaries

Martin Batshit

Court transcript cross-examination Martin Batshit (partially):

  • Q. by Tom Mesereau – A. by Martin Batshit

Q. Mr. Batshit, in the show you prepared, which we’ve just seen, Mr. Jackson made statements to the effect that nothing sexual was going on in his bed, correct.

A. Correct.

Q. To obtain the interview you had with Mr. Jackson when he made that statement, you told him that he was underappreciated, true.

MR. BOUTROUS: Objection, Your Honor, on the shield law grounds and First Amendment grounds, unpublished information, and the tape that the jury has seen speaks for itself.

THE COURT: All right. The objection is overruled. Do you wish to answer that question.

THE WITNESS: I’m standing on the broadest privilege and the shield law, Your Honor.

MR. MESEREAU: Objection noted, Your Honor.


MR. MESEREAU: Thank you.

Q. Mr. Batshit, in the show about Michael Jackson, Mr. Jackson says that nothing sexual went on in his bedroom. To obtain that statement, you told Mr. Jackson that your romantic development was partially shaped by his records, true.

MR. BOUTROUS: Objection, Your Honor. Same grounds. First Amendment; shield law.

THE COURT: Do you wish to answer that question.

THE WITNESS: No, Your Honor.

THE COURT: All right. The objection is noted.

Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Mr. Batshit, on the show we just saw in this courtroom, Mr. Jackson says that nothing sexual goes on in his bedroom. To obtain that statement from Mr. Jackson, you told him that when you looked at his relationship with children, it almost made you weep, correct.

MR. BOUTROUS: Same objections, Your Honor. California shield law and the First Amendment. And I object to that question as being ambiguous as well, the first phrase, “to obtain that statement.” Object to that.

THE COURT: The objection is overruled. Do you wish to answer that.

THE WITNESS: I don’t, Your Honor.

MR. MESEREAU: Objection noted, Your Honor.


Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Mr. Batshit, on your show, Mr. Jackson says that nothing sexual ever went on in his bedroom. To obtain that statement from him, you told him that you believe in his vision of an international children’s holiday, correct.

MR. BOUTROUS: Same objections, Your Honor. The shield law and the First Amendment.

THE COURT: Overruled. Do you wish to answer that question.

THE WITNESS: I don’t, Your Honor.

MR. MESEREAU: Objection noted, Your Honor.


Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Mr. Batshit, in this interview you did of Michael Jackson, he says that nothing sexual went on in his bedroom. To obtain that statement, you told him, “Neverland is an extraordinary, a breathtaking, a stupendous, an exhilarating and amazing place. I can’t put together words to describe Neverland.” True.

MR. BOUTROUS: Same objections, Your Honor. First Amendment and the California shield law.

THE COURT: Do you wish to answer that question.

THE WITNESS: I don’t, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Noted; objection noted.

MR. MESEREAU: Thank you, Your Honor.

And this goes on and on. The objections of Batshit’s attorney Theodore Boutrous, were sustained on the grounds that Batshit was protected by the California Shield Law, which states that reporters can not be forced to testify about things they learn while working on a story.

Batshit didn’t want to answer any questions regarding the promises he made to Mike in order to get him cooperate with the documentary without pay.

Anne Gabriel (true name Ann Marie Kite)

This woman, the ex-girlfriend of one of Mike’s attorneys David LeGrand, was brought in by the prosecution to support the DA’s charge that Michael Jackson and his associates had conspired to keep the Arvizos under tight control at Neverland, alleging that the Arvizos were being held captive by Mike and his “people” (Marc Shaffel, Ron Konitzer and Deiter Weisner. Kite was hired on February 9, 2003 to “resusicate” Mike’s career after the airing of the Batshit tapes. She had been terminated from het job within 6 days. She had never even spoken with Mike.

Court transcript cross-examination Anne Gabriel (true name Ann Marie Kite) (partially):

  • Q. by Tom Mesereau – A. by Ann Marie Kite

Q. When you had your interview with Santa Barbara sheriffs, you were asked by detective Zelis, if you knew if Michael Jackson was aware of what his team was doing. Do you remember that?

A. Yes, sir, I do.

Q. And you told detective Zalis, you had no idea wheter Michael Jackson knew what his team was doing, is that correct?

A. That’s correct. Because I never spoke with Mr. Jackson.

Davellin Arvizo

Davellin talked about The Laugh Factory and Jamie Masada. She told the jury that they met Jamie Masada in the summer of 1999 when she and her brothers were in a comedy camp. Davellin testifies about her brother, Gavin being diagnosed with cancer. She tells about Gavin’s wishes to meet Chris Tucker, Adam Sandler, and Michael Jackson, and that he had met two of them, Mike and Chris Tucker, who both reached out to him.

She then is asked by Sneddon about the first visit to Neverland and then something interesting comes up, the abusive father:

  • Q. by Tom Sneddon – A. by Davellin Arvizo

Q. BY MR. SNEDDON: What happened.

A. My parents were arguing back and forth, and my dad threw a soda can at my mom.

Q. And what happened after he threw the can at her.

A. He ran, like walked — stormed out of the room.

Q. And what was your mother’s reaction.

A. She just started crying.

MR. MESEREAU: Objection; hearsay.

THE COURT: Overruled. The answer is, “She started crying.”

Q. BY MR. SNEDDON: Now, during the time that you were living with your father and your mother and your brothers at the Soto Street residence, did you ever see your father strike your mother.

A. Yes.

Q. On how many occasions.

A. Too many to count. So many.

Q. Did he ever strike you.

A. Yes.

Q. How about your brothers. 600

A. Yes.

Q. On how many occasions.

A. Lots.

She also talked about a benefit for Gavin, to pay for medical expenses. Later on we will learn that all the expenses were covered by the medical insurance of Gavin’s father.

Something else that rang a bell is when Sneddon showed her pictures of her parents. Just like Mike doesn’t say “dad” to Joe and had to call him Joseph, Davellin refers to her father as David, while Janet is referred to as “mommy”.

Q. And I want to direct your attention to the exhibit marked as 31 in evidence. No, not that one. I’m sorry, my fault. There. 31. Do you recognize that person.

A. Yes.

Q. Who is that.

A. That’s my mommy.

Q. It’s your who.

A. Mommy.

Q. You say she doesn’t look like that now, because her hair — what’s different.

A. Her hair is darker and shorter.

Q. Other than that, it looks like your mom.

A. Yes.

Q. All right. The next one, let’s go to 35. All right. Who’s that.

A. That’s David.

Q. David who.

A. My father.

It is only after they are brought to Miami by Chris Tucker to meet Mike, that she talkes about a conspiracy. She states that they felt ‘captive’ in Mike’s hotelroom in Florida while Mike would take Gavin seperate in the bedroom a few times to talk and that they were prevented from watching the U.S. airing of the Batshit tapes.. Also after they returned to Neverland, she said they felt ‘uncomfortable’ being around Mike’s associates, that were claiming that the Arvizo’s were the subject to death threats. Later on we will learn that they went off the property many times without complaining to anyone and that there were many ways to ‘escape’ if they thought it was necessary, because the fences around Neverland are that low that you can just jump over it. She also stated that she had never tasted alcohol until she was handed an alcoholic drink by Mike.

Cross examination Davellin Arvizo; what stands out: Davelin calls her father David, not dad.

Regarding the rebuttal video: Mesereau asks Davellin if she met with any member of the prosecution team, any member of the sheriff’s department or her attorney the night before she testified. The answer is No. Next she testified that she called Steve Robel, a Santa Barbara Sheriff, the night before she testified. Steve Robel brought her the CD the very same night.

A couple of days before she testified Steve Robel’s wife picked her up for a meeting with Sneddon:

  • Q. by Tom Mesereau – A. by Davellin Arvizo

Q. How long did that meeting with Mr. Sneddon take place.

A. Like 15 minutes.

Q. Only 15 minutes.

A. Yeah.

Q. Did you discuss what you were going to be asked in court.

A. No. He just — he just helped me refresh my memory.

Q. Now, how did he help you refresh your memory.

A. They just gave me what I said.

Q. Do you mean police reports.

A. No.

Q. Would it be transcripts.

A. Yes.

Q. Did he tell what you transcripts he was giving you to read.

A. Just of the grand jury, and that’s all I remember. That’s the only one.

The following occurs several times during cross examination. When Mesereau asks Davellin if she discussed her testimony with her family members, she answers as quoted below. The same type of answers she also gives when Mesereau asks her if she discussed the Batshit documentary, the rebuttal video, shows on television that talked about her mother, her mother’s testimony or the JC Penney case. We find it hard to believe that she would not talk to her family members about any of these issues at all.

Q. Have you discussed what you were going to say today with Jay Jackson.

A. No.

Q. At any time.

A. No.

Q. Have you ever discussed this case with Jay Jackson.

A. No.

Q. Ever discussed this case with your mother.

A. No.

Q. Ever discussed this case with Gavin.

A. No.

Q. Ever discussed this case with Star.

A. No.

Janet Arvizo remarried before the trial. After she divorced her abusive husband David, she married a United States Army officer. The CIA is known for recruiting people for their MK Ultra program in the army. Mind that Davellin called her father David, not Dad.

Q. Now, your mother and Jay Jackson are married now, right.

A. Yes, he’s my stepfather.

Q. He’s still in the United States Army, right.

A. Yes, he is.

Q. As a reserve.

A. No, he’s active now.

Q. He is active now.

A. Yes, he is. He’s been since my mom — since my mom and them have been dating, he’s been in active duty.

Q. He was in the reserve at one point, wasn’t he.

A. They turned him back in because of the war.

About abuse:

Q. Okay. You told Carol Lamir stories about your mother, didn’t you.

A. No.

Q. You told her your mother would awaken you at 2:00 in the morning, correct.

A. No.

Q. You told her your mother would beat your father, didn’t you.

A. No. I told her my — I tried telling her that my father would beat my mother.

Q. You told Carol Lamir that your mother was telling you to attack your father, when, in reality, your mother was beating your father, right.

A. No.

Q. You never said anything like that to Carol Lamir.

A. No.

Q. You constantly told Carol about Janet hitting you and your brothers, true.

A. No.


Q. Okay. Did you ever tell Carol Lamir that Janet would take her children places and intentionally not feed them or bring food.

A. No.

Q. Did you ever tell Carol Lamir that it was Janet’s intent that the children be fed by whoever they were visiting.

A. No.

Q. Never said anything like that.

A. No.

Q. Are you saying you never complained about your mother at all to Carol Lamir.

A. No. My mom’s a very, very, very good mother to me.

Q. And you never complained about her one bit.

A. No.

Q. Never complained about her to Carol.

A. No.


Q. Okay. You told the police that you were being abused five times a week — five times a week, right.

A. We were abused every day, more than once, by my father.


A. At that point, I still liked Mr. Jackson. And that was the point that David had left and — I don’t know, I was just latching onto something, because I don’t know what a description of a father is. I had 16 years of just abuse. I don’t know what it is. I just latched onto something.

The Arvizos had friends among the LAPD (see Janet Arvizo’s testimony also).

Q. Okay. Do you ever remember police officers in Los Angeles having a fund-raiser to raise money for Gavin’s medical bills.

A. They didn’t have a fund-raiser for us. What the Los Angeles Police Department did was, Officer Lassak brought his old Christmas tree for us. And that’s all I remember them doing.

Q. Do you know who spoke to them about Gavin’s health.

A. Officers.

Q. Yes.

A. Officer Lassak spoke to the police department about it.

Q. Who is Officer Lassak.

A. I met him through my LAPD Explorers.

Q. He was a friend of your mom, right.

A. He was a friend of the family, yes.

Q. Do you know if your mother was in contact with Andrew Lassak during 2003.

A. I know he would come and visit us once in a while, but I don’t know.

Q. Do you know about your mother approaching Andrew Lassak about raising money to pay for Gavin’s medical expenses.

A. She never approached him that way.

Q. Now, how do you know that.

A. Because that never happened.

Q. It never happened.

A. No.

Q. And you’re not aware of any LAPD police officers trying to raise, you know, funds to pay Gavin’s medical expenses.

A. No. Not that I remember. Not that I know of.


A. That was after. I didn’t join the LAPD Explorers until 2001, I think.

Admitting that she and family members lied:

Q. Are you saying that, after that, your mother never left her cottage.

A. My mom didn’t leave her cottage.

Q. Were her meals served at the cottage, to your knowledge.

A. Yes, they were brought to her.

Q. Three times a day.

A. I think it’s — I don’t know. I wasn’t watching.

Q. Do you remember, your mother told the three social workers from the Los Angeles Department of Children & Family Services that she’s always at the main residence.

A. Yeah.

Q. Remember, she told those workers that she’s there all times of day.

A. Yeah.

Q. Do you think your mother was lying.

A. Yes.

Q. Do you think your mother lied throughout that interview.

A. Somewhat. I don’t know. But I know those comments can’t be true.

Q. And that was the day you lied about bringing girlfriends to Neverland, right.

A. Yeah.

Q. And you’re telling this jury that you’ve never brought any girlfriend to Neverland.

A. No.

Q. But you told it to the Los Angeles Department of Children & Family Services.

A. Yes, I did.

Not only does Al Malnik know Brett Ratner (see later on in the blog), the Arvizos do as well:

Q. Okay. Do you know someone named Brett Ratner.

A. Yes.

Q. Who is Brett Ratner.

A. He was the director for Rush Hour 2.

Q. Where did you meet him.

A. On the set of Rush Hour 2.

Q. Did Chris Tucker introduce you to him.

A. Yes, he did.

Q. Did you get to know him pretty well.

A. Somewhat. Not really.

Q. Were you ever at his house.

A. No.

Q. Did you ever hang out with him anyplace.

A. No.

Q. Did you ever see him off the set of Rush Hour.

A. Well, Chris took us to like — like a restaurant they were at. And we just sat with them for like a couple minutes, and then I think we went back to our hotel room.

Q. When did you last see him.

A. I don’t remember.

Q. Did you ever see Gavin talking to Brett Ratner.

A. While they were on the set, yeah. They would play with each other and laugh and stuff.

Caught in lies:

Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Okay. Do you remember, I asked you last week if you had ever discussed the J.C. Penney case with Gavin or your mom. Remember, I asked you that question.

A. Yes.

Q. You said you had not discussed it with either of them, right.

A. Yes.

Q. How could that be, if you attended those depositions.

A. I’m not talking to them about it.

Q. Before.

A. No. I haven’t talked to them about it at all. I’m just sitting there. I don’t know anything about the case. I was just sitting there to comfort my brother. He wanted me to be with him. I’m not even paying attention to what he’s saying. I’m just paying attention to how he’s looking. And that was during his chemo.

Q. So you had never discussed the J.C. Penney case with him before you attended his deposition.

A. No.

Q. And you never discussed the J.C. Penney case with any of your family members before you attended Star’s deposition.

A. Never.

Q. You never discussed the J.C. Penney case with Gavin or your mom or Star after Gavin’s deposition.

A. Never.

Q. And you never discussed the J.C. Penney case with Star, your mom or Gavin after Star’s deposition.

A. Never.

Q. You just kind of got there, silently listened, left, and never talked to anybody about it, right.

A. No.


Q. Your brothers had codes, didn’t they.

A. Yes.

Q. They had codes to the wine cellar, didn’t they.

A. I don’t remember that.

Q. They had codes to Mr. Jackson’s room, didn’t they.

A. I didn’t know they had that one.

Q. And they went up to the room without Mr. Jackson present, correct.

A. Anytime Mr. Jackson wasn’t on the ranch, they were with me.

Q. That’s not what you said last week, is it. Last week you said that when your brothers were on the ranch, they always left you alone, correct.

A. No. When Mr. Jackson wasn’t on the ranch, they were with me.

Q. Well, you had knowledge that your brothers were going into the main house when Mr. Jackson wasn’t even there, correct.

A. When Mr. Jackson wasn’t there, they were with me. There was no reason for us to be apart if Mr. Jackson wasn’t there.

Q. Well, you — correct me if I’m wrong, didn’t you tell the jury last week, “When I would visit Neverland, my brothers would go off and, for the most part, leave me alone”. Did you say that.

A. If Mr. Jackson was there, yes, I said that last week.

Q. So you’re — now you’re saying whenever Mr. Jackson wasn’t there, all three of you hung around together; is that right.

A. Yes.

Star Arvizo

In regards to the alarms at Neverland, Star tells Sneddon that Mike had given him the code of the alarm of the door that gives access to his bedroom. Besides this code, there was another code, the master code to all the doors. Star also knew that code:

  • Q. by Tom Sneddon – A. by Star Arvizo

Q. Now. Were there another set of numbers.

A. Yes, it was another code that was 1849 that got you in every door.

Q. And where did you get that code from.

A. I got it from the security guard.

Q. Do you remember the security guard’s name.

A. No.

Q. Do you remember what he looks like.

A. He was — he was white, but I don’t exactly remember his face.

Q. I couldn’t hear what you said.

A. I don’t remember his face.

Q. Okay. And do you remember when it was that you got that code from the security — let me ask it this way: At some point in time you went to Miami, correct.

A. Yes.

Q. And then after Miami, you came back to the ranch.

A. Yes.

Q. Now, with regard to the code number that Mr. Jackson gave you – all right. —

A. Yeah.

Q. When did you get that code number from him. Before or after you went to Miami.

A. After.

Q. And with regard to the code number that you got from the security guard, was it before or after you went to Miami.

A. After.

Q. I’m sorry.

A. After.

Q. So on the first occasion that you went to Mr. Jackson’s room, you did not have a code number.

A. No.

The Arvizo kids were involved with military programs:

Q. What was going on at the time that you were introduced by Mr. Bashir. Who introduced you.

A. Michael.

Q. Now, did you have an understanding — did you personally have an understanding that you were going to appear on film that day.

A. No.

Q. Did you eventually appear on film that day.

A. Yes.

Q. And what were you doing on film.

A. We were showing Michael one of our military cadences that we learned from a program, military program.

Q. What military program.

A. At that time we were in the NLCC. Stood for Naval League Cadet Corps. That’s what it — it was a Navy program.

Q. And do you remember when you joined that program.

A. I was 11.

Q. Before the Bashir — I mean in relation to the Bashir —

A. It was before.

Q. Are you still in that program.

A. No.

Q. Are you in another program. 1058

A. Yes.

Q. What’s that.

A. It’s Infantry Explorers.

Q. And what service is that connected with.

A. Army.

Q. And how long have you been in that program.

A. It’s going on four months. We barely joined.

Q. I’m sorry.

A. We barely joined four months ago.

Q. Were you ever in a Navy program.

A. Yes.

Q. What was that.

A. That was the Naval Sea Cadets. It was an older program. It’s for older kids. It’s from 13 to 17.

Q. And how long were you in that.

A. About a year.

The following occurs several times during cross examination. The exact same things happened when Star’s sister Davellin was cross examined. We find it hard to believe that Star would not talk to any of his family members about anything regarding the trial and the J.C. Penney case.

  • Q. by Tom Mesereau – A. by Star Arvizo

Q. Did you discuss yesterday’s testimony with anyone last night.

A. No.

Q. Talk to your mom about it.

A. No.

Q. Talk to your dad about it.

A. No.

Q. Talk to your sister about it.

A. No.

Q. Talk to Gavin about it.

A. No.

Q. Talk to the D.A. about it.

A. No.


Q. Okay. Before you testified yesterday, had you ever discussed what you were going to say with your mom.

A. No.

Q. Before you testified yesterday, had you ever discussed with Gavin what you were going to say.

A. No.

Q. Before you testified yesterday, had you ever discussed with your sister Davellin what you were going to say.

A. No.

Q. Have you ever discussed this case with your mom?

A. No.

Q. Ever discussed this case with Gavin.

A. No.

Q. Have you ever discussed this case with Davellin.

A. No.

The following stood out to us. During cross examination Star refers to DA Sneddon as “Tom”, DA Auchincloss as “Gorden” and DA Zonen as “Ron”. It’s our opinion that it’s highly unusual and impolite for a 14 year old boy to call the DA’s by their first names, unless they knew each other quite well.

Q. Have you ever discussed this case with an attorney?

A. Yes.

Q. Who.

A. Tom, Gordon and Ron.

Q. Excuse me.

A. Tom, Gordon and Ron.

Q. I’m sorry, we’re having trouble hearing the name.

A. Tom, Gordon and Ron.

Q. Tom, Gordon and Ron.

About the diagram about the inside of the plane:

Q. And what prosecutor did you go over that diagram with before you testified.

A. Um, let me remember. It was Tom.

Q. Is that Tom Sneddon.

A. Yes.


A. No. I knew it was a diagram. I was the one that drew it up for Tom.

Q. So you drew the whole diagram up for Prosecutor Sneddon.

A. No, I just drew a picture and I gave it to Tom.


Q. Did you then discuss that transcript with anybody.

A. No.

Q. Never.

A. No. Tom told us not to.


Q. Did someone tell you to read them.

A. Yes.

Q. Who.

A. Tom.

Q. Prosecutor Sneddon.

A. Yes.

Caught in lies:

Q. Well, when you met with Psychologist Stanley Katz, you also describe what you claim happened in Michael Jackson’s bedroom, right.

A. Yes.

Q. And would you agree that you’ve given different descriptions almost every time that you have described it.

A. I don’t remember exactly what I said.

Q. Well, you’ve given different descriptions about what Michael Jackson was wearing, right.

A. I don’t remember exactly what I said.

Q. You’ve given different descriptions of what Gavin was supposed to be wearing, right.

A. I don’t remember exactly what I said.

Q. You’ve given different descriptions about what you claim Michael Jackson did in the bedroom, right.

A. No.

Q. Well, there were times you said that Michael Jackson put his hand on top of your brother’s underwear, right.

A. I don’t remember saying that.

Q. And there are other times you said he put his hand inside his underwear, right.

A. Yes.

Q. And there are times you’ve said your brother was wearing pajamas, right.

A. Yes.

Q. There are times you said he was wearing underwear, right.

A. I don’t remember.

Q. And there are times you said that Michael Jackson touched his butt and not his crotch, right.

A. When was this.

Q. When you did some interviews, right.

A. About what.

Q. About what Michael Jackson, you claim, was doing in his bedroom, right.

A. I never said he touched his butt.

Q. Did you ever tell anyone that when you saw Michael Jackson in bed with your brother, he was rubbing his butt.

A. No.

Q. Never said that at any time to anybody.

A. No.

Q. Never said it to Mr. Katz, right.

A. No.

Q. Never said it to the sheriffs, right.

A. No.

Q. And never said it to a grand jury, right.

A. No.


Q. When you stated under oath in the J.C. Penney deposition in the year 2000 that your mom and dad never fight, were you telling the truth.

A. No.

Q. Did someone tell you to lie in that deposition.

A. I don’t remember.

Q. You don’t remember at all.

A. No. It happened a long time ago.

Q. You also said in that deposition under oath that your dad never hit you; do you remember that.

A. Not really.

Q. Would it refresh your recollection if I show you that page.

A. Sure.

MR. MESEREAU: May I approach, Your Honor.



Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Have you had a chance to look at that page of your deposition.

A. Yes.

Q. And does it refresh your recollection about what you said that day.

A. Yes.

Q. You were asked if your dad had ever hit you, and you said, “Never,” right.

A. Yes.

Q. Was that the truth?

A. No.

Q. Did someone ever tell you to lie about that under oath in your deposition in the J.C. Penney case.

A. I really don’t remember.

Q. Don’t remember at all.

A. No. I don’t remember nothing from there.


Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Have your — excuse me. Has — did your father ever coach you about what to say in the J.C. Penney deposition.

A. No.

Q. Did your mother ever coach you about what to say in the J.C. Penney deposition.

A. No.

Q. Please tell the jury why you lied under oath.

A. I don’t remember. It was, like, five years ago. I don’t remember nothing.

Gavin Arvizo

Unfortunately the first part of Gavin’s testimony is missing. We have searched the net for two days, but ended up empty handed…

We’re really curious as to why Gavin gave a 75k watch to Larry Feldman:

  • Q. by Tom Sneddon – A. by Gavin Arvizo

A. This is the watch that Michael gave me right before the plane took off.

MR. SNEDDON: Move that it be admitted into evidence, Your Honor.

MR. MESEREAU: No objection.

THE COURT: It’s admitted.

Q. BY MR. SNEDDON: Yeah, why don’t you —

A. Give it to you.

Q. No, just stand up and show it to them. Okay. Now I’m going to ask you a question about the watch. With regard to that particular watch, did Mr. Jackson make any statements to you about the value of the watch when he gave it to you.

A. He told me that it was $75,000.

Q. Now, did you keep that watch.

A. Yes.

Q. At some point, did you give that watch to somebody.

A. Yeah. I think I gave it to Tom.

Q. To me.

A. I mean — no, Larry.

Q. Larry.

A. Yes.

Q. Do you know who Larry is.

A. Larry Feldman, I think.

Q. And do you remember when that was. Had you left Neverland for the last time.

A. Yes.

Q. And that’s — and after that, you gave the watch to him.

A. Yes.

Like Star and Davellin, Gavin also said when he was cross examined that he didn’t talk about the J.C. Penney case with his mother, and he can’t remember when he talked to his mother for the last time about the Batshit documentary. We find it hard to believe.

  • Q. by Tom Mesereau – A. by Gavin Arvizo

Q. Did you and your mom talk about the facts of that case before your deposition was taken.

A. No, I don’t think we were allowed to.

Q. So you never discussed it with your mom before the deposition was taken.

A. No.

Q. Have you ever talked about the facts of this case with your mother.

A. No. I don’t think we’re allowed to either.

Q. So you’ve never discussed the facts of this case with your mother.

A. Um, no.

Q. Have you ever discussed the Bashir documentary with your mother.

A. Yeah.

Q. When.

A. We had talked about it with her sometimes, like how I felt about what I said on there.

Q. And when did you last discuss the Bashir documentary with your mother.

A. I do not remember.

Q. Pardon me.

A. I don’t remember.


The same thing that stood out to us in Star’s testimony occurs in Gavin’s testimony. During cross examination Gavin refers to DA Sneddon as “Tom”, DA Auchincloss as “Gorden” and DA Zonen as “Ron”. Again, it’s our opinion that it’s highly unusual and impolite for a 14 years old boy to call the DA’s by their first names, unless they knew each other quite well.

Q. Did you engage in a conversation with Mr. Sneddon over the weekend.

A. Yes, I did.

Q. Where did that conversation take place.

A. In a house.

Q. Okay. Did Mr. Sneddon come to see you.

A. No.

Q. Did you go to see Mr. Sneddon.

A. Yes.

Q. Where did you go to see Mr. Sneddon.

A. In a house.

Q. In his house.

A. In a house.

Q. Okay. Who was with you, if anybody.

A. Detective Robel. Mr. — Ron, Gordon and Mr. Sneddon, and I believe Mr. Mag was there.

Q. Okay. Let me just get it straight. Mr. Robel was there from the Santa Barbara Sheriffs, right.

A. Yes.

Q. Mr. Sneddon was there, right.

A. The attorneys were there.

Q. Prosecutors. Prosecutor Zonen was there, right.

A. All of the district — all of the attorneys were there.

Q. Prosecutor Auchincloss was there, right.

A. Auchincloss.

Q. Yes. The fellow seated right to my left.

A. Oh, Gordon, yeah.

Q. Anyone else there besides those four.

A. Mag.

Q. Who.

A. Mag. I don’t know his full name.

Q. Okay. Is this another sheriff.

A. No, this is an attorney.

Q. Another prosecutor.

A. He’s another attorney.

Q. So you met with four prosecutors and a Santa Barbara Sheriff over the weekend, right.


Q. Okay. Was anyone else present.

A. They were there, but they were in another room.

Q. Okay. Who was there but in another room.

A. Ron, Mr. Zonen, Gordon and Mag.


A. No. They told me that Tom was going to have to talk to me about some things.

Q. Okay. And Mr. Sneddon did talk to you about some things, correct.


  • Q. by Tom Sneddon – A. by Gavin Arvizo

Q. Morning, Gavin.

A. Hey, Tom.

The Arvizos had friends among the LAPD (see Davellin Arvizo’s testimony also)

Q. Okay. Do you know someone named Andrew Lassak.

A. No.

Q. Okay. Now, you mentioned —

A. Lassak. Police officer.

Q. Yes. Do you know him.

A. Yes.

Q. How did you meet him.

A. He was an LAPD officer that — I forgot, really, how we met him. I think he was — I don’t know. My mom met him or something, and then he visited us a lot.

Q. Do you know approximately when you first met this LAPD officer, Mr. Lassak.

A. After my father left. A few months after my father left, after I finished chemotherapy.

Q. And he was a friend of your family, correct.

A. Yes.

Q. He used to visit your house, correct.

A. Yes.

Q. You spoke to him, right. 2027

A. Yes.

Q. You saw your brother and sister speak to him, didn’t you.

A. Yes.

Q. And you saw your mother speak to him, right.

A. Yes.

Q. Do you recall anyone ever complaining to Los Angeles Police Officer Andrew Lassak that anyone was being held against their will.

MR. SNEDDON: Your Honor, I’m going to object to the question as vague as to time frame.

MR. MESEREAU: I’ll rephrase it, Your Honor.

THE COURT: All right.

Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: During the period you claim you escaped from Neverland three times, do you recall anyone in your family ever complaining to LAPD Officer Andrew Lassak that anyone was being mistreated or held against their will.

A. His name is Lassak, and I don’t remember anything happening like that.

We’re having a hard time believing the following:

Q. Okay. Now, you’re aware, are you not, that you have until the age of 18 to file a lawsuit against Mr. Jackson if you choose to, correct.

A. No.

Q. You’ve never discussed that with your mother.

A. No.

Q. Never discussed that with Larry Feldman, the attorney.

A. No.

Q. And never discussed it with Bill Dickerman, the attorney.

A. No.

Q. Okay. You’re also aware that if Mr. Jackson is convicted, you could automatically win that civil suit, right.

A. No.

Q. No one’s ever discussed that with you.

A. No. We said things like, oh, we don’t want his money, and stuff like that.

Q. Never discussed that issue with any attorney, right.

A. No.

Q. First time you’ve heard about it.

A. About that I can — you just told me now that I can sue him till I’m 18 or something like that. I didn’t even know about that stuff.

Q. Didn’t even know about that, right. And never heard your mother mention it.

A. No.

Janet Arvizo

Janet’s testimony started April 13 and ended April 19. Her testimony was devastating for the prosecution. A weird part is where Mesereau asks her about investigating Mike from January 2000, while she didn’t even met him until August 2000. An article about Janet’s LAPD friends can be found here.

  • Q. by Tom Mesereau – A. by Janet Arvizo

Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: When did you meet Michael Jackson?

A. I think it was, my best estimate, August of 2000.

Q. Do you remember signing a document prepared by the Santa Barbara Sheriff’s Department on December 18th, 2003?

A. Okay, I think — is it the paper you just showed me?

Q. Yes. But I have a —

A. I can’t answer unless you tell me exactly. You know, there was a lot of paperwork.

Q. Would you like to see it?

A. Well, I’m asking you, please, is it the same one that you just came up here and showed me?

Q. It is.

A. Okay. Then, yes. I’ve signed many paperworks of theirs.

Q. Let me ask you the question again.

A. Okay.

Q. Do you recall signing a document prepared by the Sheriff’s Department of Santa Barbara County on December 18th, 2003?

A. I think so.

Q. Would it refresh your recollection just to look at the date and your signature?

A. No. That’s — is that the one that you just showed me?

Q. It is.

A. Then — then, yes.

Q. You did sign that document —

A. Yes.

Q. — on December 18th —

A. Yes.

Q. — 2003?

A. Yes.

Q. All right. Now, do you remember signing a document prepared by the sheriff’s department that said the following: “From time to time, between January 1st, 2000, and the present date, I consulted one or more of those lawyers concerning Michael Jackson’s interaction with me and my children at Neverland Ranch in Santa Barbara County and elsewhere, in this and other states, and concerning the return of some furniture stored by or in the name of Brad Miller at Dino’s Storage in North Hollywood, Los Angeles County.” Do you remember signing a document that had those words?

A. Do you want me to have the document, like — we’ve had this discussion over since August.

MR. MESEREAU: Object, Your Honor.

THE WITNESS: Since August, the same thing —

THE COURT: Just a moment. I want you to answer the question. The question is, do you remember signing that document?


Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: And the document said that you had started investigating Michael Jackson sometime between January 1st, 2000, and the date you signed the document, which is December 18th, 2003, right?

A. Yes. If that’s — those words are on there.

Q. Why would you start investigating Michael Jackson around January 1st, 2000, if you didn’t meet him till August 2000?

A. Okay. Let me explain something to you. And this has already been discussed, and he knows the answers. This was discussed at the end of September.

MR. ZONEN: I’m going to object to this part of the answer as nonresponsive.

THE COURT: Sustained.

THE WITNESS: This — when the sheriffs were doing their investigation, they wanted to know every single detail about me. George Owen Feldman is — I think he’s associated in the same law firm of Rothstein. So the — the police department did an extensive, extensive search on me as a person, and so they want — they put everything in a general form so they can have access to everything about me and my past, because they wanted to verify and make sure that what they were going to do towards this goliath was going to be accurate and truthful. And that’s why this — this paper was made in such a general way.

Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Are you now telling the jury that George Owen Feldman did represent you?

A. No, he didn’t represent me.

Q. At any time?

A. No, he didn’t represent me. He is one of the people inside the civil law firm. But my understanding — my understanding was that it was only the Rothstein — Rothstein and another attorney named Adler, another attorney named Ramieri. That was my understanding, and it still is today.

Q. Let me try and ask the question again – okay? – in a clearer form, because perhaps I was not clear. And I apologize if I wasn’t. You signed a document that said from time to time between January 1st, 2000, and the date you signed the document, you were investigating Michael Jackson through various lawyers, correct?

A. Okay. There’s more information on that paperwork which he purposely has taken out of context. It’s — certain events are attached to specific attorneys. Certain situations are attached to certain attorneys. Like I said, the police wanted to do an extensive, thorough investigation on me prior to doing it on him. So they wanted everything about me. So they made it in a general form. But he keeps taking it out of context.

MR. MESEREAU: I don’t want to offend the Court, Your Honor. I don’t think I actually got an answer to that, but I will leave it to the Court’s discretion.

On we found a great summary that shows the madness of this woman:

What’s My Age Again?

In a recent defense motion, attorney Brian Oxman pointed out that the mother of Michael Jackson’s accuser “testified before the Grand Jury without the benefit of medications.” After reading through hundreds of pages of her testimony, I am inclinded to agree.

Janet Arvizo – who currently goes by the name Janet Jackson – made several bizarre claims throughout the grand jury proceeding. Most notably, she insists that Michael Jackson kidnapped her and her children and, in a cunning ploy to manipulate them into saying nice things about him on camera, convinced the Arvizos that killers were after them.

I wish I was making this up.

If you want to view the transcripts for yourself, click here, although I should warn you that you’re in for a major headache if you attempt to read them all, namely because Mrs. Arvizo (or is it Mrs. Jackson now?) doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. As one observer bluntly put it, reading Mrs. Arvizo’s testimony is like “walking into a wall of dumb.” Indeed. Within minutes of being sworn in, Mrs. Arvizo already comes across as somewhat confused when she tells the court that she has no idea how old she is:

Initially, I assumed that Mrs. Arvizo had misspoken. Perhaps she meant that she didn’t know how old she was when her sons were born. But then, there it is again on page 4, Janet Arvizo’s startling admission that she does not know her own age:

Of course, this doesn’t necessarily mean that Michael Jackson didn’t kidnap her family and molest her son but this isn’t an essay about Jackson’s guilt or innocence, it’s an essay about the merits of taking your medication. So let’s continue.

Read more

Debbie Rowe

Debbie testified on behalf of the prosecution. Although she was helpful to the defense, this must have hurt Mike.

About her reason to cooperate with the making of the rebuttal tape:

  • Q. by Ron Zonen – A. by Deborah Rowe

Q. BY MR. ZONEN: All right. What is it that you were intending to represent in this interview?

A. Michael as a wonderful person and as a great father and generous and caring.

Q. All right. Did you have information as to Michael Jackson as a wonderful father?

A. As I’ve known him?

Q. Yes.

A. Yes.

About her cooperating with the sheriff by recording phonecalls she had with Mike’s team:

Q. Okay. And at some point you were in contact with the Santa Barbara sheriffs about this case, correct?

A. They had called me, yes. And I did not return the first call.

Q. And eventually, you developed somewhat of a dialogue with Santa Barbara sheriffs about this case, right?

A. When they caught me on my cell phone on my way home from Palm Springs, yes, the number they got from Marc Schaffel.

Q. And you agreed to make what you called some pretext phone calls for the sheriffs, correct?

A. Correct.

Q. And a pretext phone call means basically you agreed to work with the sheriffs, telephone people and talk to them while the sheriffs were recording those calls; is that correct?

A. Correct.

Q. And the idea was that the people you would call would not know they were being recorded, right?

A. Correct.

Q. Only you and the sheriffs would know there were recordings, right?

A. Correct.

Q. Now, how many of these pretext phone calls do you think you made with or for the sheriffs?

A. I think there were a total of four to six. I’m not sure.

Q. And who were those pretext phone calls with?

A. Marc Schaffel. Ian Drew. And I think I may have tried to do one with Dieter.

Q. Were you able to do that one?

A. I don’t remember.

Q. Okay. So the only people you recall actually speaking with when they didn’t know the call was being recorded are Schaffel and Drew; is that right?

A. And Dieter, if I did one with him, he wouldn’t have known.

About Mike’s team; Konitzer, Schaffel & Weisner:

  • Q. by Tom Mesereau – A. by Deborah Rowe

Q. During the period of the interview — I say “during the period.” That’s a little bit vague. Let me withdraw that. Around the time of the interview, did you talk to Konitzer at all?

A. I spoke with him when I spoke with Mr. Jackson to arrange it. And he and Dieter and Marc had been on the phone. They had been on the phone to tell me about problems that were going on, yes.

Q. And you’ve also made statements to the sheriffs that you thought Dieter and Konitzer were manipulating Michael Jackson, correct?

A. Yes.

Q. You thought Dieter and Konitzer were taking advantage of Michael Jackson, true?

A. Yes.

Q. And you thought they were trying to manipulate Michael Jackson to make a lot of money, right?

A. Yes.

Q. Was it your perception, based upon what you observed of Schaffel, Dieter and Konitzer, that those three were working together?

A. Oh, yeah.

Q. You definitely got that impression?

A. Oh, yeah.

Q. Okay. And was it your impression that those three were working together to find ways to use Michael Jackson’s name so they could profit?

A. Yes.

Q. And at one point you told the sheriffs that you thought Michael Jackson was, in some ways, very removed from what those guys were doing, right?

A. In my past knowledge, he’s removed from the handlers, the people who are taking care of business, and they make all the decisions. There’s a number of times they don’t consult him.

Q. And you thought these three guys, Schaffel, Dieter and Konitzer, were doing just that, didn’t you?

A. Very strongly.


Q. Did Schaffel, in your mind, ever ask you to help him in his business dealings with Mr. Jackson?

A. No. He just bragged about either how he took advantage of an opportunity that I’m sure he knew nothing about or how he was going to do this, that or the other thing to make sure that Michael’s career was saved, and things of that nature.

Q. Did Schaffel tell you that he was involved in business matters with Dieter?

A. Yes.

Q. Did Schaffel tell you he was involved in business matters with Konitzer?

A. Yes. In Europe.

Q. Okay. And did you ever get the impression he was not giving Michael Jackson all the information about what he was up to?

A. He was like everybody else around Mr. Jackson. Yeah, he wasn’t telling him everything.

Q. Why did you think Schaffel was calling you?

A. To placate me. To say that, “Oh, no, I’m working on it. You’ll be seeing the kids. Michael’s very excited about it. Everything’s going to be great. They’re still in Florida.” You know, “As soon as they get home you guys will be together.”

Q. And you didn’t think he was being truthful, right?

A. Obviously he’s full of shit. Sorry. I’m sorry, Your Honor.

Q. You consider Marc Schaffel a liar, don’t you?

A. Yes.

Q. You consider Dieter a liar, don’t you?

A. Yes.

Q. You consider Konitzer to be a liar, don’t you?

A. Yes.


Q. He told you he wanted over a million dollars from Michael Jackson, true?

A. He said Michael owed him a million dollars.

Q. And approximately when did Marc Schaffel tell you he was going to sue Michael Jackson?

A. Six months ago maybe. It may have been longer than that, but I’m not really good with — if you could give me something to refer to at a time, I could say yes, it happened then. But I think it was about six months ago. And then he told me, about three months ago, that he and his lawyer were filing papers.

Q. And did you ever learn at some point that he had actually sued Michael Jackson?

A. He told me that they’d filed the papers.


Q. And correct me if I’m wrong, I think what you’re saying is that many hours of your interview don’t appear in that DVD, right?

A. I don’t see how I could have sat there for seven hours and only had three hours on tape. I don’t remember any breaks except for when the cameras were — the film was being changed. I interrupted the interview to tell them the film was — the camera was blinking, the light. I didn’t want to be in the middle of the statement and have to start over again, to tell them that the lights were blinking, to change the film. I saw cuts in that film, in that tape, that were — had nothing with me saying, “It’s blinking, take it off,” so there’s — there is stuff missing from that video.

Q. When Schaffel told you he’d made seven and a half million dollars off your interview, did he ever tell you who he made the money from?

A. I think he said it was FOX Network. And someone in Europe. But I don’t remember who it was in Europe.

Q. And was it your understanding that he kept all the footage of your interview?

A. Yes. It was all taken upstairs to a bedroom where they did the editing that night.

Q. Okay. How did you know they did the editing that night?

A. I was there for about an hour when they were doing it.

Q. Were you upstairs in the bedroom while they were doing it?

A. Yes.


Q. Now, Mr. Jackson wasn’t there for any of that interview, was he?

A. No.

Debbie obviously didn’t trust the three men. The more you read up on the trial, the more you will get the feeling that Mike had no idea what these men were doing. This is what we found on Wiesner:

Jacko Loses Logo; Manager Owns Sex Clubs

By Roger Friedman


“Michael Jackson’s got some big problems. And that’s besides being arrested for child molestation. Jackson has no idea that his current manager, Dieter Wiesner, the man who helped hire attorney Mark Geragos and is now calling the shots in the Jackson camp, is known for operating sex clubs and brothels at home in Germany.”

Malicious Prosecution?

The unfair treatment Mike has received since authorities raided Neverland:

  • During the raid of Neverland, police went into areas that they were not permitted to go into and took items that were not on the search warrant.
  • According to a motion filed by the defense, Sneddon conducted an illegal search of the office of Bradley Miller. Because Miller worked for Jackson’s former defense attorney Mark Geragos, anything taken from his office falls under the category of attorney/client privilege. Sneddon tried to justify his search by claiming he did not know that Miller worked for Geragos. In court, however, it was revealed that Sneddon was caught on tape admitting to having known about Miller and Geragos’ working relationship at the time of the raid. Sneddon claimed he was tired when he made this taped statement and did not mean what he said.
  • Sneddon waited until November 18th- the day Jackson’s Number Ones album was released- to raid Neverland. He claimed that he knew about the allegations since June but didn’t take action until November because of Halloween. (Yes, we wouldn’t want to upset anyone’s trick-or-treating experience, so let’s let an alleged pedophile run around for five months and finally raid his house on the day that his new CD comes out.)
  • During the press conference announcing the accusations against Michael Jackson, Tom Sneddon laughed and made several jokes at Jackson’s expense.
  • Sneddon acknowledged that Jackson was investigated for suspected child abuse in February but said “don’t assume it’s the same family.” He knew it was the same family, why did he make this statement?
  • At the press conference, Sneddon invited more victims to come forward.
  • Sneddon said that California law was changed so that child victims in a molestation case could be forced to testify. This was a lie; the law was changed so that if a civil suit was filed, it would remain inactive until the criminal trial was resolved.
  • Sneddon swore that the family was after justice and not money even though it is a widely known fact that they went to a civil lawyer first.
  • Jackson’s bail amount was set at $3 million; this amount is excessive compared to the amount that other Defendants in child molestation cases have to pay. Jackson’s lawyers recently filed a motion challenging the bail amount but their request was denied by Judge Rodney Melville. Melville sided with the prosecution, stating that because Jackson is rich, his bail should be higher than that of other Defendants. He did not use any laws to support his decision. (The court of appeals later questioned Melville’s ruling and asked him to provide a better justification for his decision)
  • Sneddon gave an interview to tabloid journalist Diane Dimond where he referred to Michael Jackson as “Jacko Wacko.”
  • Dimond admitted to knowing about the allegations months in advance. Why was the DA leaking information to a tabloid journalist?
  • Sneddon delayed filing charges until December so that the Santa Barbara Police Department could set up a website exclusively for members of the press.
  • Sneddon enlisted the help of a PR firm to deal with the media. Tellem, the PR firm working for Sneddon, also works for Dave Schwartz, the stepfather of Jackson’s first accuser.
  • Sneddon dismissed the Department of Children and Family Services investigation as an “interview” and accused the DCFS of being incompetent. It turns out that his own department also investigated Michael Jackson in February and came back with the same “unfounded” ruling as the DCFS.
  • In December, Jackson told Sixty Minutes that he was roughly handled by police officers when he was arrested; he showed photographic evidence to substantiate his claims. The SBPD responded to Jackson’s allegations by releasing audio clips of Jackson whistling in the car before he was booked. Jackson, however, did not claim that he was abused on his way to the station. The only mistreatment he alleged before the booking was when the handcuffs were put on but you can hear him on the audiotape complaining about the handcuffs being too tight.

    The actual abuse was not alleged to have occurred until Jackson was brought into the booking station. The SBPD did not show any footage of Jackson in the booking station, claiming that they did not film Jackson’s booking because they didn’t anticipate that there would be any problems. This contradicts their explanation as to why they recorded Jackson on his way to the station; they said they taped Jackson because it was a high-profile arrest and they wanted to ensure that everything was handled appropriately. In that case, why didn’t they tape Jackson in the booking station?

  • Sheriff Jim Anderson said that if Michael Jackson’s claims of police abuse turned out to be false, he would charge Jackson with making a false complaint. Since Jackson never actually made a formal complaint, Anderson’s statement is not in accordance with the law.
  • Attorney General Bill Lockyer was asked by Anderson to investigate Jackson’s claims in December; almost seven months later, he still has not issued any statement regarding his findings.
  • Jackson also alleged during the interview that he still had not received a list of what was taken from Neverland.
  • The alleged victim’s parents are currently in the midst of a custody battle. Sneddon wrote a letter to the judge in the custody proceedings requesting that the boy be kept from seeing his father. Why would the District Attorney care if the boy saw his father? What does this have to do with the molestation case? Perhaps Sneddon does not want the boy to change his story once he’s no longer under the influence of his mother.
  • To date, Sneddon has obtained 69 search warrants, including warrants to search Jackson’s bank statements, financial records and security boxes. Please tell me what evidence of child molestation does Sneddon hope to find in Jackson’s financial records?
  • Eight months after arresting Michael Jackson, Sneddon has still failed to hand over all of his evidence to the defense. How are Jackson’s attorneys supposed to prepare for the trial?
  • Court documents filed by the prosecution indicate that Sneddon sends his investigators to read fan discussion boards like MJJForum.
  • Sneddon took his case to a grand jury in order to avoid a public preliminary hearing. This is unfair to the Defendant.
  • The charges from the criminal complaint are completely different from the charges in the indictment. After the inconsistencies in Sneddon’s case were brought to the attention of the public, the timeline of alleged abuse changed, the number of times the abuse allegedly occurred changed and allegations of kidnapping have suddenly materialized. Why is this?
  • Jackson’s defense team recently filed a 126-page motion asking for the indictment to be thrown out. The document states that during the grand jury proceedings, Sneddon bullied witnesses, failed to properly present exculpatory evidence, refused to let the jurors question the prosecution witnesses and provided the jurors with a false legal definition of the term “conspiracy” (for which Jackson was indicted). The motion says: “There is simply no evidence that Mr. Jackson had the specific intent to agree or conspire with anyone about anything.”
  • The grand jury transcripts reveal that Sneddon allowed the accuser’s mother to refer to Jackson as “the devil” when she testified.
  • Although she has never even met Michael Jackson, a woman who worked for him for 10 days was the prosecution’s key witness to the alleged conspiracy. When she testified in front of the grand jury, she answered questions with: “I’m not sure,” “I guess,” “I assume,” “I don’t know exactly,” and “I think.” Sneddon allowed her to proceed even though she clearly had no knowledge of any alleged conspiracy.
  • A defense motion reveals that Sneddon used Jackson’s preference for a clean household as evidence that he was the mastermind of a criminal conspiracy. Seriously. The motion reads: “It is simply not reasonable to infer that Mr. Jackson’s preference for a well run household demonstrates the specific intent to commit crimes. Evidence that Mr. Jackson would complain to his staff when household chores were not done properly is not evidence that he was directing a criminal conspiracy.”
  • While at a District Attorney’s convention in Canada, Sneddon broke the gag order in the case and inadvertently revealed prosecutorial misconduct on his part. He told his fellow DAs that: “We sent letters to some people saying we intended to call them as witnesses in order to keep them off TV.” As it turns out, a journalist from the Globe and Mail was at the conference and printed his comments in a newspaper. Sneddon’s behaviour drew criticism from many legal experts who felt this was an abuse of power on Sneddon’s part. Jackson’s lawyers also brought Sneddon’s comments to the attention of Judge Melville, asking him to clarify whether or not Sneddon had violated the gag order.
  • According to a motion filed by the defense, the amount of search warrants that have been given to them by the prosecution does not match the amount of search warrants that have actually been issued by the prosecution. Six search warrants are missing, 10 affidavits used to support the search warrants have been heavily redacted and 49 affidavits used to support the search warrants have not been given to the defense at all. What is Sneddon hiding?
  • Sneddon has been ordered to testify about his illegal raid of Bradley Miller’s office. The accuser’s mother, her former civil lawyer Bill Dickerman and the therapist who reported the allegations to the police have also been subpoenaed to testify. Sneddon tried to quash their subpoenas so that they would not have to appear in court; the judge denied his request.
  • According to the defense team: “There is no case in the history of the state of California that has condoned anything like the abuse of power demonstrated in this grand jury proceeding.”


The Mirage

Again The Mirage pops up. Earlier in the blog you have read about the lost 30 minutes at The Mirage, after which the sleepovers began. Mike also was at The Mirage during the Neverland Raid and again when he was arrested, as you can read here.

“These photos show Jackson in a bathroom at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Lake Las Vegas, Nev. They were taken at least eight days after the arrest. Jackson had returned to the Mirage Hotel in Las Vegas, moved to a nearby resort before finally ending up at the Ritz Carlton.”

So he was at The Mirage when he was arrested, returned there but decided to leave The Mirage. There was not much we could find on The Mirage, other than this:

“The Mirage was built by developer Steve Wynn and designed by Joel Bergman. Wynn was born Steven Alan Weinberg in New Haven, Connecticut. His father, Michael, changed the family’s last name from “Weinberg” to “Wynn” when Steve was six months old “to avoid anti-Jewish discrimination” according to several sources.”

The Mirage hotel is one big mirror and after reading all the stuff about the mirror rooms and Mind Control, this just gives us a weird feeling, but we can’t put our finger on it.


Was this all part of a bigger plan? Was Chandler paid? Were the Arvizos paid? And by who? Who would gain $$$ by getting Mike behind bars? Lets have a closer look at Santa Barbara County, Sony & Motolla, Sneddon and everyone else involved to see if we can build a theory about this.

Let’s start with the one the most at the surface, Tom Sneddon. He might be infamous for his vendetta against Mike, but that is not all the dirt we found on him.

Tom Sneddon

After having spent millions of dollars on the Michael Jackson investigation in 1993, District Attorney Tom Sneddon did not find enough evidence to bring charges against the pop star.

Over the next few years, Sneddon and several of his employees made numerous statements to the press where they implied that there was indeed evidence to corroborate Jordan Chandler’s story. They failed to explain, however, why two grand juries did not indict Michael Jackson if such evidence actually existed.

According to reporter Geraldo Rivera, members of the Santa Barbara Police Department were shown footage of the strip search of Jackson’s genitalia. “I’ve got a videotape that was shown to every cop in Santa Barbara of Michael Jackson’s penis,” Rivera said.

In 1995, Jackson wrote a song about Tom Sneddon that appeared on his album HIStory: Past, Present and Future Book I. In the song (D.S.), Jackson claims that he was over-targetted by the DA’s office and accuses Sneddon of being obsessed with attaining political fame.

Many legal experts dismissed the idea that Sneddon would prosecute Jackson solely for his own self-aggrandizement but perhaps there are other motives involved. According to Thambiah Sundaram, a dentist who filed and won a lawsuit against Santa Barbara prosecutors in 1996, the commercial prospects of Neverland might be one factor influencing authorities’ relentless pursuit of Jackson.

In 1994, Sundaram attended a private fundraising event where he allegedly heard Sneddon discuss a plan to run Jackson out of Santa Barbara and turn Neverland into a winery. According to Sundaram, Sneddon planned to do this by finding another child to accuse Jackson of sexual abuse. While Sundaram’s allegations are difficult to prove or disprove at this point, it is a widely known fact that winemaking is the leading agricultural industry in Santa Barbara, accounting for about $360 million of the county’s annual economy. The Santa Ynez Valley, where Jackson owns almost 3,000 acres of land, is particularly well suited for growing grapes because of its ideal climate and soil conditions. Numerous wineries located in the Santa Ynez Valley are looking to expand but there isn’t enough available land in the area to do so.

Whether or not Sundaram’s allegations have any merit remains to be seen, but there are other facts that point to Sneddon having a vendetta against Michael Jackson. Sneddon said in a press conference that after 1993, he changed certain California laws pertaining to child molestation specifically because of the Michael Jackson case.

In 1995, Sneddon told Vanity Fair magazine:

“The state of the investigation [of Jackson] is in suspension until somebody comes forward.”

Upon viewing the Living with Michael Jackson documentary that aired in February 2003, Sneddon saw an opportunity to re-open the case. In a press statement released on February 6, 2003, Sneddon said:

“After conversations with Sheriff Jim Anderson, it was agreed that the BBC broadcast would be taped by the Sheriff’s Department. It is anticipated that it will be reviewed.”

Regarding Jackson’s comments that there is nothing wrong with sharing a bedroom with a child, Sneddon replied by saying it was, “unusual at best. For this reason, all local departments having responsibility in this are taking the matter seriously.” He then urged any victims to come forward. Read the full press release here.

Shortly after this statement was released, Sneddon gave an interview to tabloid reporter Diane Dimond where he discussed the 1993 case.

Coincidentally, the boy who appeared in Living with Michael Jackson – the documentary that Sneddon taped and watched – is the same boy who ended up becoming Jackson’s second accuser. Did Sneddon have something to do with this boy coming forward?

During his testimony at a pre-trial hearing, Sneddon admitted to having met with the second accuser’s mother in an empty parking lot to give her papers that would qualify her for a state victim’s fund. He also personally investigated the second set of allegations against Michael Jackson, a job that is supposed to be carried out by investigators.

Linda Fairstein, a leading sex crimes prosecutor, said of Sneddon’s actions:

“It’s way too personal. It’s way out of line. If he does any substantive parts of an investigation, he may become a witness in the case.”

She continued:

“It lets these very talented defense attorneys take him apart before the jury and explain that it’s not his place to do that. He creates trouble in and out of the courtroom for himself by taking on that role.”

Although the accusing family’s story had numerous holes in it, Sneddon went forward with the case and pressed charges.


  • Some of Sneddon’s friends wanted Jackson’s property to convert it into a thriving vineyard. Consistent with Sundaram’s claims, wine-making is the leading agricultural industry in Santa Barbara where Jackson owns 2,700 acres of prime real estate.
  • Authorities laughed and bragged about passing around pictures of Jackson’s genitalia, pictures that were taken during the 1993-94 investigation. This was done to embarrass Jackson. (These pictures were supposed to be sealed but are not. Even Geraldo Rivera admits that he has seen them)
  • Nicola lamented that they had done everything they could to get “that nigger” out of town but had failed. Apparently, authorities did not like the fact that Jackson was the richest resident in Santa Barbara, that he had married a white woman (Lisa Marie Presley) and that he owned all of that property. They promised they would not fail to get rid of him the next time around.
  • Sneddon allegedly stated that his goal was to get “some dirt to get him to leave” and that he wanted to “run him out of town.”

These tidbits of information have been challenged by Sneddon supporters and Jackson haters alike as unsubstantiated gossip. However, if this information has any kernel of truth to it (and we believe it does), then it makes the events of November 2003 a mere fulfillment of an alleged obsession with Jackson on Sneddon’s part.

Read more

Sneddon’s prosecutorial misconduct in the Michael Jackson case is not an isolated incident; in fact, several other people have accused him of malicious prosecution.

What’s Going On In Santa Barbara?

Interesting is the link Sneddon has with David Schwartz, who was Jordie Chandler’s stepfather during the 1993 allegations. Normally that could be a coincidence, but the fact that during his testimony at a pre-trial hearing Sneddon admitted to having met with the Janet Arvizo before the second accusations makes us think this was all planned. But what would Sneddon gain from all this? Did he hate Mike? And why? Justice was not a motive, because both cases were doomed to be lost by him, because he had NOTHING. Fame could be a motive, but who wants to be known for nailing the most famous and loved person in the world? That seems a little strange. So it must be money. Since we don’t believe that Sneddon’s paycheck was that big, he must have been paid by other parties. But by who? Who would gain enough by getting rid of Mike?

Ron Zonen

Sr. Deputy District Attorney during the 2005 trial. We found a little dirt on him as well. The source link doesn’t work anymore, that is why we are glad we save everything.

Ron Zonen Breaks the Law in ‘Hollywood’ Case ? – SBNP

Hollywood prosecutor admits to misdemeanor

9/21/05 By SCOTT HADLY


Prosecutor says he shouldn’t be disqualified The prosecutor in the Jesse James Hollywood murder and kidnapping trial may have committed a misdemeanor when he gave certain information to the makers of a new film, but that shouldn’t disqualify him from handling the case, according to court documents. Senior Deputy District Attorney Ron Zonen may have inadvertently given the makers of the yet-to-be released movie, “Alpha Dog,” rap sheets and information about witnesses, and while that might be “evidence of carelessness,” it doesn’t amount to bias, according to a district attorney’s motion submitted for a hearing Tuesday. After his March capture in Brazil, Mr. Hollywood, 25, pleaded not guilty to orchestrating the August 2000 kidnapping and killing of 15-year-old Nicholas Markowitz.

Prosecutors allege Nicholas’ death was the culmination of an escalating feud between Mr.

Hollywood and the teenager’s older half-brother over a $1,200 drug debt. After the teen’s body was found off West Camino Cielo, Mr. Hollywood disappeared. He and four others were indicted for the killing by a Santa Barbara County grand jury. While Mr. Hollywood was on the run, three of the co-defendants were tried and convicted and another pleaded guilty. All are now serving time and one, the alleged triggerman, Ryan Hoyt, is now on death row. “Alpha Dog,” which is set to be released early next year, stars Sharon Stone, Bruce Willis and Justin Timberlake. It has been shown once to preview audiences. Mr. Hollywood’s attorney, James Blatt, who saw the movie, said it is hewn directly from the prosecution’s version of events and depicts his client as “extremely manipulative, vicious, selfish and without any redeeming character traits whatsoever.” In a motion filed last week, Mr. Blatt called the cooperation between Mr. Zonen and the filmmaker, Nick Cassavetes, “unprecedented misconduct.”

Mr. Blatt said Mr. Zonen told Mr. Cassavetes’ researcher that the case against Mr. Hollywood and his four co-defendants would be his “legacy” and that he planned to write a book. But in the response written by Senior Deputy District Attorney Gerald Franklin for Tuesday’s hearing, Mr. Franklin points out that talking about writing a book and actually writing one are two different things. “There probably is a book in every prosecutor who has made a career of prosecuting serious felonies,” Mr. Franklin said. To show some sort of conflict, Mr. Blatt has to show that Mr. Zonen has a personal interest or financial benefit in the outcome of the trial and there is none, according to Mr. Franklin. “There is nothing in (Mr. Blatt’s) screed that remotely suggests that (Deputy District Attorney) Zonen has a personal interest in securing the conviction of Defendant Hollywood distinct from a professional interest in bringing all Santa Barbara murderers to book, apart from the sharpened focus that necessarily attends being assigned a particular case to prosecute and having to prepare it for trial (in this case five times over),” Mr. Franklin said in the motion.

“There is nothing to suggest that (Deputy District Attorney) Zonen is under the influence of a private party with a personal interest in securing Hollywood’s conviction.” … Mr. Blatt said Tuesday that he intends to respond to the district attorney by the end of this week. And he hopes to get a sworn declaration from Mr. Cassavetes, the movie’s writer and director. In court he told Judge Brian Hill that Michael Mehas, an attorney who helped Mr. Cassavetes research the case and write the script, had stopped cooperating with the defense. Mr. Blatt indicated that he might have to haul Mr. Mehas into court to ask him about what other kinds of information were given to him during his research. The next hearing is scheduled for November 1.


Sheriff Jim Thomas

Sheriff Jim Thomas conducted the investigation into molestation charges in 1993 and sent investigators all over the country and as far as the Philippines to investigate other reports of sexual molestation. Tom Sneddon, who was also the district attorney in the 1993 case, presented evidence from that investigation to a Santa Barbara grand jury at the time. But ultimately no formal charges were filed against Mike.

Thomas was elected sheriff in 1990, and ran unopposed for three terms before retiring, so he was the Santa Barbara County sheriff while Brooks Firestone represented the 35th District in the California State Assembly for two terms (1994-1998). Thomas has kept busy since he retired as sheriff in 2002 after 30 years with the department, but he didn’t loose his interest for Mike.

In December 2003, over a year after his retirement, Jim Thomas hit the spotlight again and told CNN there was a second child who claimed in 1993 that Michael Jackson molested him. Thomas told CNN the second accuser in 1993, a boy aged 9 or 10 at the time, decided he was too “ashamed” to testify against Jackson, and didn’t want his friends to know. The parents also did not want the boy or themselves subjected to a “take no prisoners” defense, Thomas said. “The child did not want to testify, and we can’t force a child to testify, so that never went forward,” he said. Thomas said he believed the second child would have gone forward with the allegations had other alleged victims come forward. He said the case was “strong,” but “it would have been up to a jury to decide, and it never got that far.”

On March 12, 2004, Jim Thomas appeared on MSNBC’s ‘The Abrams Report’ and blew the prosecution’s claims. This show was about a two month investigation done by the Santa Barbara Sheriffs department that ultimately cleared Jackson of these allegations, finding “no criminal activity” occurred. The investigation began Feb 18 2003 and ended April 16 2003, according to reports.

The public was told nothing about this investigation during any of Sneddon’s interviews with Diane Dimond and Art Harris. Sneddon didn’t volunteer this information during any of his joking and insulting press conferences. Neither was the information published on the prosecution’s media website. Nor was it released in a statement though it’s PR firm Tellum Worldwide.

Jim Thomas appeared on the ‘The Abrams Report’ trying unsuccessfully to put out this fire of doubt currently building in many media pundits who previously were absolutely sure-disgustingly so-that Jackson was guilty of a crime. Some are rethinking their preconceptions about this case and are actually asking questions about the situation instead of just accepting whatever nonsense prosecution sympathizers throw out.

Thomas said on the show:

“They opened the case but at that point you had no victim. The child had not confided in anyone until June. So the mother didn’t know. The siblings didn’t know and the case was started only because of suspicions based upon Bashir’s [documentary]. Nobody had ever come forward at that point and specifically said that Michael Jackson had molested that child. Certainly, that child had not said that and did not say that until June. So in essence you really had no victim until June.”

Read the complete transcript here


Thomas worked as a television analyst for MSNBC during the Michael Jackson child-molestation trial.

Sheriff Jim Anderson

On November 19 2003, Sneddon held a press conference where his behaviour led many to believe that he had a grudge against Michael Jackson stemming from the 1993 case. Despite the serious nature of the allegations, Sneddon and Sheriff Jim Anderson created a jovial atmosphere by making several jokes at Jackson’s expense. It appears that this video was removed from the internet on Sneddon’s request, but you can read it here.

Then we have the issue of how Mike was treated by the Santa Barbara Sheriff’s Department personnel:

Following that footage Sheriff Jim Anderson asked the state attorney general to investigate the allegations Mike levelled:

JEFF WILSON, Associated Press Writer

AP Worldstream


Dateline: SANTA BARBARA, California

The sheriff of Santa Barbara County has strongly denied Michael Jackson was roughed up by jailers during his arrest, and threatened to press charges against the pop star for making a false accusation against an officer.

Sheriff Jim Anderson said he asked the state attorney general to investigate the allegations Jackson leveled during a television interview on Sunday.

Jackson was treated “with the utmost respect and courtesy” during his arrest and booking Nov. 20 on suspicion of child molestation and was “in no way manhandled or abused,” Anderson said at a news conference on Wednesday.


According to Thomas Mesereau Mike never made a formal complaint about his treatment or requested an investigation, although he had bruises and received medical treatment after his arrest. Yet 163 witnesses were interviewed and 2,500 investigative hours were spent (who paid for that?) and the California Bureau of Investigation determined that Mike was not injured at the hands of Santa Barbara Sheriff’s Department personnel.


Jamie Masada

The owner of the Laugh Factory, who introduced Gavin to Mike and other celebs.

In 1985, Masada marched down Pennsylvania Avenue with Bob Hope, Phyllis Diller, Red Foxx, amongst many others in The Laugh Factory’s campaign to send the first comedian into space. The campaign drew so much attention that President Reagan asked Bob Hope to arrange a meeting with Masada.

Bob Hope was the alleged owner/handler of Brice Taylor:

Following the advice of her friend Jamie Massada, Janet consults a lawyer named William Dickerman. Dickerman sends the family to Feldman before any accusations have been made.

Uri Geller

Here is some information about Uri Geller.

Born in Tel Aviv, Israel, to Hungarian Jewish parents, Geller was the only child of Itzhaak Geller, a retired Army sergeant major, and Manzy Freud (Freud Manci). It is claimed that Geller is a distant relative of Sigmund Freud on his mother’s side, also has a twin called Adrian. He was brought to the United States for scientific investigation by Andrija Puharich.

Andrija Puharich, MD, also known as Henry K. Puharich, (February 19, 1918 – January 3, 1995), was a medical and parapsychological researcher, medical inventor and author, who is perhaps best known as the person who brought Uri Geller and Peter Hurkos to the United States for scientific investigation. His research included studying the influence of extremely low frequency ELF electromagnetic wave emissions on the mind, and he invented several devices allegedly blocking or converting ELF waves to prevent harm.

Extremely low frequency (ELF) is used to control behavior and mood patterns.

Recent research has revealed Puharich to have a distinctly sinister side. As an Army doctor in the 1950s, he was deeply involved with the CIA’s notorious MKULTRA mind control project. He – together with the infamous Dr Sidney Gottlieb – experimented with a variety of techniques to change or induce actual thought processes even to creating the impression of voices in the head. These techniques included the use of drugs, hypnosis and beaming radio signals directly into the subject’s brain. And, significantly, he was engaged in this work at exactly the same time that The Nine made their first appearance at the Round Table Foundation. The Foundation itself is now known to have been largely funded by the Pentagon as a front for its medical and parapsychological research. Puharich was still working for the CIA in the early 1970s, when he brought Uri Geller out of Israel.

Longtime friend Michael Jackson was best man when Geller renewed his wedding vows in 2001. Geller also claimed on a BBC Radio 5 Live interview with Nicky Campbell on the morning after Michael Jackson’s death (26 June 2009) that Jackson had agreed to let Geller hypnotise him to help him with a problem. Geller said that he did something “highly unethical” by asking him whether he had ever “touched a child in an inappropriate way.” Geller says that Jackson immediately denied it under hypnosis. Geller also negotiated the famous TV interview between Jackson with the journalist Martin Batshit: Living with Michael Jackson. He is also very well known inside the Pentagon.

Among conspiracy theorists there’s always been talk that Uri Geller was not just a psychic – that he was working for U.S. military intelligence. The work Puthoff and Targ were conducting – as well as other research into psychic powers, ESP, ELF and such was heavily funded by the U.S. military.

The belief is that the U.S. was locked in a covert sort of psychic arms race with the Soviets, both sides conducting research in how to use this stuff for spying, for mind control, and for weapons. Moreover, it is believed that Geller himself had put his psychic powers at the service of the Israeli intelligence agency, the Mossad.

You might think “What is so interesting about this?” But Uri Geller is the one that introduced Batshit to Mike and we all know what happened after Batshit came to visit. He claims to be his friend, but we all noticed Uri likes to promote Uri. Is he Mike’s friend? Maybe, but we think he is not. If you look at his background and connections, it is way more likely that Geller introduced Batshit to Mike for a reason, and not to make Mike look better.

Martin Batshit

The way Batshit works is devilish. He promises he will help you spread a message, make something clear in your interview, he makes you trust him and then he will air something complete different than agreed, making you look bad. We know he did that to Mike, but Mike was not his own victim. In 1992 he did the same to a victim of satanic rituals, read her story here.

Batshit was in our eyes of good use: hungry for fame and without any morals.

Malnik, Lansky, Mottola & Ratner

After Mike’s “death” his former friend Al Malnik hit the news several times, saying that he’s godfather to Blanket, and that, last Malnik knew, he was executor of Mike’s estate. His wife Nancy published photos showing Malnik and his family with Mike in 2003.

Quote Daily Mail:

“In pictures taken from the same party, Jackson and his children are allegedly pictured with the children of close friends Al and Nancy Malnik.The 76-year-old American millionaire has triplets Jarod, Spencer and Nathan, who are now 11. Mr Malnik had been friends with the singer for more than ten years and the singer stayed with him at the height of the child abuse scandals. Jackson is godfather to Spencer, who is understood to be featured in the pictures sitting on the steps of Mr Malnik’s Miami mansion with Paris.”

According to Gordon Novel, known for several controversial investigations, allegations connected with intelligence agencies and currently for his commitments to fight the alleged conspiracy of free energy suppression, the friendship between Mike and Al Malnik ended in 2003. The two men had a falling out after Mike began to believe that Malnik, who has known Mafia ties and was once a close associate of Meyer Lansky, was trying to wrangle Mike’s rights to half the Beatles catalog of songs from him, rights that are worth an estimated half billion dollars.

According to Novel, Mike said he was lured to Malnik’s house in Miami Beach by film director Brett Ratner to see a house so beautiful it would make him catatonic. He said that once he was there, however, Malnik, who according to Mike had Mafia ties, wanted to put his fingers in his business. Mike also said he received a call from Tommy Mottola while he was there, which aroused his suspicion.

Al Malnik and Brett Ratner indeed know each other:

(from left to right): Shareef Malnick, Al Malnick, Serena Williams, Michael Jackson, Chris Tucker, and Brett Ratner (front).

(from left to right): Brett Ratner, Michael Jackson, Al Malnik (standing), Chris Tucker.

Al Malnik

A little search on Malnik results in the following information about Mafia connections:

A lawyer, real estate developer and proprietor of the supertrendy Miami Beach hot spot The Forge, Malnik is also owner of Title Loans of America, a national chain that lends money legally at annual percentage rates reaching 264% – higher than most loansharks’ vig.

The feds opened their first dossier on Malnik in 1963. It was two years after he graduated, first in his class, from Miami Law School. He had helped set up the Bank of World Commerce in Nassau, the Bahamas, an alleged loot laundry that investigators said involved “some of the nation’s top gangsters.”

Acquitted on tax fraud charges in 1964, Malnik was heard discussing Lansky two years later on bugs placed by cops probing whether casino profits were invested overseas on the mobster’s behalf.

In 1964, he made his first venture into showbiz, organizing a video jukebox company, Scopitone, that was touted as a music-industry revolution.

In 1966, the U.S. attorney in New York secretly indicted Malnik on charges of using the mail to defraud Scopitone investors.In 1971, prosecutors quietly dropped the case.

Meanwhile, after Malnik opened The Forge in 1969, it rose quickly to the top of Miami’s night scene, attracting celebrities such as Frank Sinatra, Judy Garland, Richard Burton and even Richard Nixon, who came with his shady financier pal, Bebe Rebozo.

Alvin Malnik, the man once regarded as the heir apparent to mobster Meyer Lansky, … described by federal authorities as a top associate of organized crime figures … Among his friends, Malnik counts Saudi royalty.

The sole owner of a Georgia company, Title Loans of America, Malnik runs a national chain of loan stores that make millions of dollars from the interest charged on quick cash offered to people in desperate need of money. … Attorney General Bob Butterworth [Florida] likens the business to ‘legalized loan sharking.’ … ‘It was a known fact among the criminal underworld that dealing with Al Malnik was the same as dealing with Meyer Lansky,’ [said] Vincent Teresa, ‘a convicted criminal and frequent government witness currently in the federal Witness Protection Program,’ …

When Lansky died in 1983 at age 81, Reader’s Digest named Malnik his ‘heir apparent.’ … ‘He is not welcome here,’ James Hurley, the chairman of the New Jersey Casino Control Commission … ‘He’s done nothing to overcome his reputation of being closely identified with Meyer Lansky and other organized crime figures.’ … In 1962, Malnik was listed as a director of the Bank of World Commerce, a Bahamas-based institution that involved ‘some of the nations’ top gangsters,’ … In 1978, a Bahamian company named Appolonia Investment Limited paid $3.35 million to buy the property just north of Malnik’s Ranch. … Malnik refuse to divulge Appolonia’s owners.


Meyer Lansky

(born Meyer Suchowljanski) (July 4, 1902 – January 15, 1983; known as the “Mob’s Accountant”) was a Jewish-American organized crime figure who, along with his associate Charles “Lucky” Luciano, was instrumental in the development of the “National Crime Syndicate” in the United States.

Lansky developed a gambling empire which stretched from Saratoga, New York to Miami to Council Bluffs Iowa and Las Vegas; it is also said that he oversaw gambling concessions in Cuba. Although a member of the Jewish Mafia, Lansky undoubtedly had strong influence with the Italian Mafia and played a large role in the consolidation of the criminal underworld (although the full extent of this role has been the subject of some debate).


According to Gordon Novel he was originally contacted by Jermaine and said that Mike and the family wanted Novel to gather proof of the Malnik/Mottola conspiracy and further find evidence that Mottola was behind the criminal child molestation charges.

Novel said he flew in March 2005, about a month into Mike’s trial, from his home in New Orleans to the Los Angeles home owned by Mike’s parents, where he stayed several days before Jackson finally had him over to Neverland Valley. He said the two of them met in a bungalow on the property before Mike drove him around the ranch in an old pickup truck.


“The whole thing centered on Tommy Mottola setting him up,” Novel told me. “Mottola and him were at odds, and Jackson’s information was that Mottola and Malnik got together to fuck him. He said he believed Malnik was representing the Mob.”

He said Jackson had special loathing for Malnik because he felt betrayed by him. When I told him that Malnik was saying that Jackson had made him executor of his estate, he was dubious.

“He had split up with Malnik,” said Novel. “He never said anything about Malnik being executor of his will. And based on how pissed off Jackson was at him at the time, I wouldn’t believe it on a bet.”

When asked what Jackson was like at the meeting, Novel didn’t hesitate: “He was afraid, very very afraid. He didn’t want to go to jail and didn’t think he would be treated very well there.”

Was he fearful that he would be killed in prison?

“Yeah, you can say that,” Novel said.

But he also said that Jackson’s mental state was “excellent” and that the pop star was lucid and extremely intelligent. He didn’t believe Jackson was on any drugs during the meeting.

I asked Novel if he believed Jackson’s theory about the conspiracy against him. He said that he thought Jackson was not guilty of the criminal charges and that he was probably set up, but he had no idea if Mottola was involved.

“He thought that Mottola was Mob-connected and that Malnik was representing the Mob, but I can’t vouch for any of that shit,” Novel said. “I don’t have anything against Tommy Mottola and don’t know if what he thought was true or not. I don’t want to get on Mottola’s bad side. My sources in New York say he’s a dangerous guy.”


Tommy Mottola

A search also results in articles which mention Tommy Mottola’s alleged mob ties.


“Do you know this guy has a Mafia background?” a senior Sony executive quotes the CBS man as saying. “What are you doing tainting this wonderful company you just bought from us with a guy who has a background that would make the F.B.I. cringe?”

Rattled, Sony contacted F.B.I. director William Sessions, requesting a quiet background check. The response was a qualified O.K. “The F.B.I. said, ‘No, this guy is not somebody who will start dealing with people we should worry about, but he has friends who do,'” says a former senior executive at Sony. “We said, ‘As long as he’s clean, we won’t worry.’ And that was the basis on which we didn’t.”



Opportunistic from the get-go, Mottola converted to Judaism as a young man in order to marry the daughter of tough ABC Records creator Sam Clark, yet has spent the rest of his life playing the mobster angle to whatever advantage he can. He named his first management company “Don Tommy”; as head of Warner Music, Michael Fuchs recalled to New York magazine that Mottola spoke of Morris Levy as a personal hero, and in fact Mottola was an investment partner of Levy’s up until Levy’s conviction. In the racketeering trial of Gambino family capo Greg De Palma, a former undercover FBI agent stated under oath that De Palma bragged of wining and dining with Mottola and his then-wife Mariah Carey.

Vanity Fair reported that Colombo family boss-turned-FBI-informant Michael Franzese told journalist Frederic Dannen (author of best-selling industry exposé Hit Men), “Tommy, we knew he was a friend of ours.” Mottola makes light of these connections, dismissing it all (in certain company, at least) as sensationalism and hearsay, yet as long as these associations continue to work for him more often than against him, he seems content to perpetuate them.


Brett Ratner

A little search on Ratner lead us to this information, showing a close, personal connection to Malnik:


“Had he been realistic and realized what the odds were that he would succeed to the extent that he has, he probably wouldn’t have tried at all,” says Shareef Malnik, owner of the landmark Miami Beach restaurant The Forge.

Shareef’s father Al Malnik was a friend of Ratner’s paternal grandfather, developer Lee Ratner. Brett was raised by his mother and maternal grandparents, who are Cuban and Jewish. They all lived in a house a block away from The Forge. The elder Malnik mentored Ratner while he was a going to Hebrew Academy and then Beach High.

“He grew up as my little brother,” Shareef says. He calls my dad Dad.


Flash frames show Malnik with a slew of the big names across the years-from world-famous attorney and mentor Jake Ehrlich to Rat Pack stars Dean Martin and Sammy Davis Jr., to his first son, Shareef, and his “11th son,” famed director Brett Ratner, to a bevy of beautiful women and a host of others-until, suddenly, the camera pauses, and Malnik finds the love of his life-Nancy.


The Firestone Family

Sneddon was allegedly overheard in 1994 discussing a plan to get Mike out of Santa Barbara and turn Neverland into a winery. Winemaking is the leading agricultural industry in Santa Barbara, and while searching for the wineries in Santa Barbara, we bumped into the Firestone Family.

Like mentioned above, Thambiah Sundaram attended a private fundraising dinner in 1994 where Tom Sneddon and other government officials allegedly discussed their plans to get rid of certain individuals in Santa Barbara who owned substantial amounts of land. Michael Jackson’s property was allegedly brought up during this meeting; Sundaram claimed that authorities wanted to acquire Neverland for vineyards.

Slick Gardner is a horse rancher who owns 2,000 acres of land in Santa Barbara. In 2003, Gardner was investigated for animal abuse after his neighbours reported that some of his horses looked unhealthy. Around the same time the allegations hit, Gardner ran for 3rd District Supervisor against John Buttny, Steve Pappas and Brooks Firestone. Firestone – who owns a successful winery in Santa Barbara and who also has political ties to Tom Sneddon and former Sheriff Jim Thomas – won the election by a landslide. As a result of the bad publicity from the animal abuse allegations, Gardner got the least amount of votes.

While investigating Gardner for animal abuse, Santa Barbara authorities also stumbled upon evidence of grand theft. Gardner was charged with 12 felony counts and hired defense attorney Steve Balash to represent him in the case. Balash later backed out of the case saying it was too complicated.

According to Gardner, Sneddon has had a grudge against him for 30 years and is only prosecuting him out of spite. “It just seems like it’s almost a vendetta deal. These guys are going so far out of their way to do things to me that normally wouldn’t be done,” Gardner said.

“The same thing that’s happening to Michael Jackson happened to me. One day Sneddon is going to wake up with a boot up his ass with a white glove in it, and it will be about time.”

Let’s have a closer look at the Firestones.

Harvey Firestone’s son Leonard was an attendee at Bohemian Grove. A staunch Republican, Leonard Firestone was delegate to Republican National Convention from California in 1944 (alternate), 1948 and 1952. In 1954 he was elected to the city council of Beverly Hills.

Leonard Firestone was chairman of the Nelson Rockefeller campaign in the California Presidential primary in 1964. Firestone was appointed U.S. ambassador to Belgium by President Richard Nixon in 1974, and was reappointed by President Gerald Ford, serving until 1976. He was later chairman of the Richard M. Nixon Foundation.


The Nixon/Illuminati connection

President Gerald Ford’s connections to MK Ultra are described in Cathy O’Brian’s book “Trance Formation of America”.


The Vice-President under Ford was Nelson Rockefeller.

Leonard Firestone’s first marriage produced three children, of which one is a son named Brooks Firestone. Brooks Firestone represented the 35th District in the California State Assembly for two terms (1994-1998), and is the former Santa Barbara County, California Third District Supervisor (2004-2008).


In the early 1970s, Harvey’s son Leonard, a former United States Ambassador to Belgium, established a family ranch in Santa Barbara County’s rugged Santa Ynez Valley. At the time, Santa Barbara County barely registered on California’s winegrowing radar, but Leonard saw immense potential in the region’s coastal climate and amenable soils. He decided to plant a vineyard, with the initial intent of selling the grapes to North Coast wineries.

Soon thereafter, Leonard was joined by his son Brooks and Brooks’ wife Kate, and together they decided to take their winegrowing adventure to the next level by establishing Santa Barbara County’s first estate winery.

In 1987, Los Angeles Times Magazine noted: “Brooks Firestone’s importance to the California wine industry is first of all historical: He was a pioneer, an inspirer, and expander of possibilities; he took a chance on an untried wine area, then stuck with it and made it pay…”


We are not saying anything with this, but the connections of the Firestones are interesting to say the least.


Sony turns out to be more interesting then we thought as well. The origin of the name SONY is not very clear, but many people seen to think it is an acronym of Standard Oil of New York. This is what Leroy Fletcher Prouty had to say about it.

It just happens that I was ordered to Tokyo during the early days of the Korean War period, and was assigned the job of “Military Manager of Tokyo International Airport” during the period of the U.S. military occupation of Japan. At that time it was the third busiest airport in the world, not only because of the Korean War activity; but because of just such business activity as Burnham describes on the part of Mr. Morita. Many other Japanese entrepreneurs were doing their best to revive from the losses and damage of WWII; but even more important was an another enormous business phenomenon.

I began to notice that day after day the few Japanese transport aircraft available, and countless large commercial aircraft from USA Charter Companies began to jam the parking ramp on Tokyo Airport. They were loaded with items from the States.

US money and manufactured material was flooding the place. Have you ever really thought why Mr. Morita, a fine Japanese businessman, would name his company SONY? That is not a Japanese word, nor is it a Japanese acronym.

The name SONY began to appear at the airport after the flood of post-war recovery money, and one of the meanings of those four letters is “STANDARD OIL OF NEW YORK”. That has always been SONY or SOCONY. (The Standard Oil Company of New York)

THE ROCKEFELLERS had arrived to re-finance Japan.

What this meant was that during those “MacArthur” days Rockefeller money was flooding Japan; and money such as that (Yes, I’m using the term MONEY) kind of “money” began the amazing job of rebuilding Japan.


Leroy Fletcher Prouty (January 24, 1917 – June 5, 2001) was an American colonel in the United States Air Force, author, banker, and critic of U.S. foreign policy, especially as regarded the activities of the CIA.

As a critic of the CIA, Prouty pointed out its influence in global matters, outside the realm of U.S. congressional and government oversight. His works detail the formation and development of the CIA, the origins of the Cold War, the U-2 incident, the Vietnam War, and the John F. Kennedy assassination. Prouty’s book JFK claims that these events are proof of a secret “global elite” at work.

He has subscribed to the theory that oil is not derived from fossils but from carbon deposits deep within the Earth (abiogenic petroleum origin theory).

The Col. L Fletcher Prouty Reference Site

So if this is true, SONY also has links to the Rockefellers (Illuminati), just like the Firestones. Click here for information about Standard Oil.

Besides that, Mike owned half of SONY ATV, that owns the rights to songs by Elvis Presley, Eminem, Akon, Bob Dylan, and Willie Nelson. The value of Sony/ATV Music Publishing has varied in reports. Industry experts have estimated the company to be worth as much as $1.5 billion.

So that means big bucks. Others say that the worth of SONY/ATV is even higher than that. Sony had been pushing to buy Mike’s entire share in their music catalog venture for years. Sony had something to gain from Mike’s career failing because if Mike’s career or financial situation were to deteriorate, he would have to sell his catalog.

Here is another interesting read about Sony, mentioning Mottola, Malnik, Rattner, and others.

Source: This is a thread from


Well, it is clear that he was framed…twice! But how and why? There are too many similarities between the Chandlers and the Arvizos. There is a link with David Schwarz and Tom Sneddon and Sneddon admitted he met with Janet Arvizo before the accusations. Makes us think that Sneddon planned this and that the Arvizos and the Chandlers are on the payroll?

But what’s in it for Sneddon? Fame? Not in a good way because putting Mike behind bars means he will gain millions of haters, some even mad enough to hunt him down and kill him.

Because he thought he was guilty and wanted the child molester behind bars? Doesn’t make sense either, because he was presented all the facts and evidence supporting Mike, he must have known he was innocent. If we can already see that by reading on the net, he must have seen that as well. So why hunt him down for so many years? Must have been for $$$$, we don’t see another reason. But who was paying Sneddon to get Mike?

We do have our thoughts on this, but after reading all the above, we think you can draw your own conclusion.

We heard that the support Mike got from his fans was ignored by the mainstream media, but there was a lot of support, all over the world:

If you still doubt his innocence, you must have missed the FBI files, you can download them here.

FBI Files Support Jackson’s Innocence; Media Reports Otherwise

By Charles Thomson

Links of interest

What’s Going On In Santa Barbara?

February 16, 2010 1 comment


While it is obvious that District Attorney Tom Sneddon has a vendetta against Michael Jackson, there are other allegations of abuse on Sneddon’s part that have been ignored by the mainstream media. The following people have accused Sneddon and his employees of malicious prosecution, conspiracy, abuse of power and civil rights violations.

And these are just the cases that have been made public…

Gary Dunlap

In November 2003, Santa Barbara defense attorney Gary Dunlap filed a $10 million lawsuit against Tom Sneddon, accusing him of racketeering, witness tampering, conspiracy and malicious prosecution. Earlier that year, Sneddon had charged Dunlap with perjury, witness intimidation, filing false documents and preparing false documents in a case that Dunlap had handled. Dunlap was acquitted on all charges but claims his reputation has been irreparably harmed as a result of the proceedings. In an interview with Online Legal Review’s Ron Sweet, Dunlap claimed that Sneddon stacked the charges against him in order to get a conviction on at least one count; apparently, this is a common occurrence in Sneddon’s office. Dunlap also discussed Sneddon’s frequent abuse of power and claimed that there are other lawyers who have seen this. A judge recently upheld most of Dunlap’s lawsuit and the case will soon go to trial unless a civil settlement is reached.

In related news, Dunlap’s lawyer Joe Freeman recently sent a complaint asking that federal, state and county officials investigate Tom Sneddon and members of the Santa Barbara Police Department for misconduct. “In my opinion, the matters to be investigated are the possible criminal violations of several felony and misdemeanour statutes, including conspiracy, illegal taping, deceiving a court and a prosecutor illegally assisting the defense of a case,” Freeman said in his complaint. “I respectfully request that the U.S. Attorney, the California Attorney General, the Santa Barbara County Grand Jury and the State Bar open investigations and seek whatever sanctions are found to be warranted against Sneddon and his staff.” In response to the allegations, the SBPD’s attorney Jake Stoddard said that Sneddon and his employees are immune from legal action because they are prosecutors.

Efren Cruz

In 2001, a man named Efren Cruz filed a federal lawsuit against Santa Barbara prosecutors accusing them of negligence and conspiracy to keep him in prison. The lawsuit also accused District Attorney Tom Sneddon of malicious prosecution. Cruz was incarcerated for four years after being convicted of murder in 1997. The lawsuit claimed that prosecutors had evidence favourable to Cruz but failed to hand it over to the defense before the trial. After Cruz was convicted, the real murderer was caught on tape confessing to the crime. Regardless, Santa Barbara prosecutors stood by their conviction until the case was taken to a higher court where Cruz was exonerated.

Thambiah Sundaram

Thambiah Sundaram’s contentious relationship with Santa Barbara authorities began when he opened a non-profit dental clinic in the county and began to attain political status as a result. After unsuccessfully trying to have the clinic shut down, authorities arrested Sundaram for grand theft, impersonating a doctor and malicious mischief. His wife was also arrested and an employee at the clinic was later charged with committing a drive-by shooting. All three were found not guilty. Sundaram sued Sneddon and his employees for conspiracy, false imprisonment and several civil rights violations. He was awarded almost $300,000 in damages.

Sundaram also attended a private fundraising dinner in 1994 where Tom Sneddon and other government officials allegedly discussed their plans to get rid of certain individuals in Santa Barbara who owned substantial amounts of land. Michael Jackson’s property was allegedly brought up during this meeting; Sundaram claimed that authorities wanted to acquire Neverland for vineyards.

Slick Gardner

Slick Gardner is a horse rancher who owns 2,000 acres of land in Santa Barbara. In 2003, Gardner was investigated for animal abuse after his neighbours reported that some of his horses looked unhealthy. Around the same time the allegations hit, Gardner ran for 3rd District Supervisor against John Buttny, Steve Pappas and Brooks Firestone. Firestone – who owns a successful winery in Santa Barbara and who also has political ties to Tom Sneddon and former Sheriff Jim Thomas – won the election by a landslide. As a result of the bad publicity from the animal abuse allegations, Gardner got the least amount of votes.

While investigating Gardner for animal abuse, Santa Barbara authorities also stumbled upon evidence of grand theft. Gardner was charged with 12 felony counts and hired defense attorney Steve Balash to represent him in the case. Balash later backed out of the case saying it was too complicated.

According to Gardner, Sneddon has had a grudge against him for 30 years and is only prosecuting him out of spite. “It just seems like it’s almost a vendetta deal. These guys are going so far out of their way to do things to me that normally wouldn’t be done,” Gardner said.

“The same thing that’s happening to Michael Jackson happened to me. One day Sneddon is going to wake up with a boot up his ass with a white glove in it, and it will be about time.”

Judge Rodney Melville, the same judge who will be presiding over Michael Jackson’s trial, is also involved in Gardner’s case.

Adams Bros. Farming, Inc.

In 1997, the Adams brothers purchased 268-acres of land in Orcutt and began agricultural grading on the site. 95-acres of their land was deemed an “environmentally sensitive wetland” by Santa Barbara authorities, which prevented the farmers from using it.

The brothers filed a lawsuit against the County in 2000, alleging that officials had falsely designated a portion of their land as wetland in an attempt to jeopardize the company’s financial earnings. At the request of Santa Barbara County officials, Judge Rodney Melville dismissed the brothers’ action. The brothers took their case to an appeals court where Melville’s decision was overturned.

The Court of Appeals ruled that the County had violated the company’s constitutional right to use its land and that the County and a county consultant had conspired to interfere with the company’s income.

Emilio Sutti

Emilio Sutti is a dairyman and farmer who recently filed a $10 million lawsuit against Santa Barbara County, claiming to have been the target of a government conspiracy to interfere with his company’s profits. Sutti alleged that Santa Barbara authorities have been targeting his family’s land for years. The battle began when Emilio’s brother and business partner Ed was sued by Santa Barbara County Planning and Development for alleged environmental and grading ordinance violations.

After winning a partial victory in the lawsuit, Ed Sutti was arrested and indicted for arson, witness intimidation, making terrorist threats, making false statements to an insurer, giving false deposition and four counts of state income tax evasion.

Emilio’s Sutti’s civil lawsuit was handled by Judge Rodney Melville.

Nuevo Energy Company

According to an article from The Lompoc Record: “Nuevo Energy Company has a launched a three-pronged legal attack on Santa Barbara County, claiming it violated state environmental law in using wrong baseline data in an environmental impact report, wasn’t the correct lead agency to prepare the report and wrongly applied mitigation measures in denying the Tranquillon Ridge project.” Judge Rodney Melville presided over the case.

Art Montandon

Santa Maria City Attorney Art Montandon recently filed a claim against the Santa Barbara County District Attorney’s Office, alleging that they falsely accused him of bribing a defense attorney in a case that Sneddon was prosecuting. Montandon had evidence favorable to the defense and prosecutors tried to stop him from interfering by threatening to bring bribery charges against him. A judge later ruled that Sneddon’s office had no right to stop Montandon’s involvement in the case.

In a letter, Montandon denied any wrongdoing and lashed out at Sneddon and his employees, saying: “Unlike (Assistant District Attorney Christie) Stanley and current and former members of her office, I have never had my license to practice law suspended by the State Bar, have never been convicted of a crime, and have never been terminated from any attorney job.”

At the end of his letter, Montandon said he would reveal in court: “the full and complete story of not only the District Attorney’s unprofessional conduct, but the inappropriate conduct and motives of others working behind the scenes to cause community conflict.”

Recently, Montandon requested that the State Bar investigate Sneddon and his office for obstruction of justice.

William Wagener

William Wagener ran for 5th District County Supervisor in 2002 and was arrested shortly before the election. Because he was a convicted felon, Wisconsin authorities claimed that he had no right to run for political office. As a result, Wagener was arrested by Santa Barbara authorities.

In response, Wagener’s attorney John Holland said that his client’s prior conviction should have had no effect on his right to be a political candidate. He also said that because the terms of Wagener’s probation had been given to the SBPD in 1998, authorities were already aware of his record when they allowed him to run for office.

The charges against Wagener were dropped and he was released from jail. Still, his attorney accused Sneddon’s office of making sure Wagener was: “defamed and ridiculed in the local media in order to destroy his campaign for public office.” Wagener filed a lawsuit against the city of Santa Maria, Santa Barbara County and former Police Chief John Sterling, accusing them of violating his civil rights.

The lawsuit alleges that Police Chief John Sterling “had actual, advance knowledge of the plan by other defendants to falsely arrest, inaccurate and violate (Wagener’s) California and Federal civil rights.” Wagener claimed that authorities conspired against him because they wanted his opponent Joe Centeno to win the election.

Diana Hall

According to Gary Dunlap, when a local judge refused to change her ruling in Sneddon’s favour, Sneddon brought bogus charges against her, ruined her career and publicly humiliated her by exposing that she was a lesbian. When it became apparent to Sneddon that this judge would be a witness in the Gary Dunlap case, he threatened to bring more charges against her. The judge in question is Diana Hall.

On September 29, 2003, Hall was acquitted on charges of battery but eight months later found herself accused of violating campaign laws. On January 16th, 2004, she showed up at Michael Jackson’s arraignment because she wanted to see how Judge Rodney S. Melville handled motions. Hall told reporters: “I’m not being treated well. This has ruined my reputation, and I’m just not going to take it any longer.”

Members of the SBPD

In 2002, Santa Barbara County law enforcement groups filed a lawsuit against Tom Sneddon for threatening the police officers’ right to privacy. The lawsuit stems from a policy which allows the District Attorney’s office to give information about police misconduct to defense attorneys at its own discretion. According to Sgt. Mike McGrew, “It’s confusing. He’s an aggressive DA. There are actually no files right now on any officers in Santa Barbara. We really don’t know why he did this.” Future blackmail material perhaps?

David Allen Richardson, Carina Richardson and George Beeghly

In a civil lawsuit that was settled out of court, David Allen Richardson, Carina Richardson George Beeghly sued Sheriff Jim Thomas and several Santa Barbara police officers for unreasonable search and seizure, false arrest/false imprisonment, excessive force, retaliation for exercise of speech and petition rights, conspiracy to violate civil rights, violation of First Amendment right of association, malicious prosecution, negligence, battery and conspiracy and other charges.

The Case Sneddon Ignored

Is Tom Sneddon a concerned government official seeking justice for an allegedly abused child or is he merely a prosecutor with a grudge trying to get a conviction? Sneddon’s handling of a past child molestation case would indicate the latter.

In 2002, David Bruce Danielson, a forensic investigator for the Santa Barbara Police Department, was accused of molesting a 14-year-old girl. After returning home intoxicated, Danielson climbed into his bed where the girl, who was a guest at his home, was sleeping. Danielson admitted to “accidentally” molesting her, claiming he had mistaken her for his wife. Sneddon closed the case stating that there was no evidence to corroborate the girl’s claims.

The girl involved in the case wrote her feelings down in a letter that was published in the Santa Maria Times. “I am astounded at the stupidity the DA showed by allowing this man to be released of all charges. David Danielson may be free, but I am still emotionally trapped. There is not one day that I don’t wish I wouldn’t have come clean.”

About Sneddon’s handling of the Michael Jackson case, the girl’s father said, “Maybe it’s because it is high profile… but still, in her mind it’s the same situation. She’s still angry.”

While it seems that child abuse might not be Tom Sneddon’s first priority, the question still remains whether or not he would really pursue seemingly false allegations in order to carry out his own personal agenda. After learning the facts about the Michael Jackson case and reading through the numerous accusations that have been made against Tom Sneddon, I’ll let you draw your own conclusions about that…

Druyan Byrne

In September 2003, a drama teacher named Druyan Byrne was arrested after police were told that Byrne had photographs of a partially nude 15-year-old girl on his camera. Although the photographs were taken for an art project and were not sexual in nature, authorities insisted on going forward with their case against Byrne.

The girl in the photographs, who was brought in for questioning on five separate occasions, repeatedly denied that anything sexual had transpired between her and Byrne. In response, police told the girl that she was a liar and that it was “obvious to everyone around here that there is some kind of relationship going on.”

Santa Barbara Police Detective Stuart Gardner then lied to the girl, falsely stating that police had proof of Byrne’s past sexual relationships with minors. Although no such evidence actually existed, Gardner convinced the girl that Byrne was a sexual predator and that it was up to her to prevent him from harming anybody else. “I’m just telling you the pattern with these guys. And he fits it to a tee,” Gardner told the girl. “Do you see how this could happen to other girls? Do you see how important you are that this isn’t going to happen to any other girls?”

After being interrogated for hours, the girl finally told Gardner that she and Byrne had kissed on the lips, a statement that she later recanted. “I felt the only way I was going to get out of that room was to tell [Gardner] what he wanted and tell him something happened,” she testified.

The case against Druyan Byrne is still pending. Thanks to MJEOL for the info.

Conrad Jess Zapien

In 1985, Conrad Jess Zapien was arrested for allegedly murdering his brother-in-law’s mistress. While jury selection was underway, Deputy District Attorney Gary Van Camp and investigator Harry Heidt inadvertently came across a tape that belonged to Zapien’s defense counsel. The tape was in a sealed envelope that bore the name of Zapien’s attorney Bill Davis.

Upon finding the package, Van Camp allegedly urged Heidt to open the envelope and listen to the tape. Van Camp later denied ever having made such a statement and both he and Heidt denied ever having listened to the tape, an act that would have violated Zapien’s attorney-client privileges. Rather than return the package to Zapien’s attorney, Heidt discarded of the package by throwing it in a dumpster.

Zapien’s attorney argued that by getting rid of the package, Heidt had “deprived the defense of the only physical evidence it could use to impeach Heidt and Van Camp regarding whether they unsealed the envelope and listened to the tape.” For example, if the envelope was unsealed, he argued, such evidence would have contradicted both Van Camp’s and Heidt’s assertion that they did not open the package. Furthermore, tests could have been conducted on the tape to determine whether or not it had been listened to.

Zapien later filed a motion asking that Tom Sneddon and the entire Santa Barbara County District Attorney’s office be recused from the case. Zapien argued that although Sneddon had taken Van Camp off of the case, he failed to properly investigate the violation of Zapien’s attorney-client privileges. He further argued that Sneddon brought an auto theft charge against him even though there was no credible evidence to support the charge. Zapien’s motion was denied.

Anthenasios Boulas

In 1985, a man named Anthenasios Boulas retained a lawyer after being arrested for selling cocaine. Shortly after hiring the lawyer, referred to in court documents as “Attorney S,” Boulas also hired a Private Investigator named William Harkness. On Boulas’ behalf, Harkness got in contact with sheriff’s deputy Scott Tunnicliffe to inquire about a possible plea bargain. In exchange for leniency, Boulas would provide authorities with the names of several drug dealers in the area. “Attorney S” was not aware of this potential deal.

After meeting with Boulas and Harkness, Tunnicliffe broached the subject of a plea bargain to Robert Calvert, the Deputy District Attorney at the time. Calvert said that he would only agree to the deal if Boulas fired his attorney and hired a lawyer that met with his approval. After being convinced by Tunnicliffe that “Attorney S” was a drug addict who could not be trusted, Boulas fired him and attempted to find another attorney. Taking the advice of Sheriff’s deputies, he hired “Attorney C,” who later backed out of the case.

Without a lawyer representing him and under the pretense that he would be receiving a plea bargain, Boulas met with authorities and gave them information about several drug dealers in the area. After giving them this information, Boulas was told by authorities that the plea bargain would no longer be possible.

Several months later, Boulas filed a motion to have the charges dismissed. The court ruled that although “conduct by the district attorney’s office and the sheriff’s department interfered with his rights to counsel and to a fair trial,” they would not drop the charges against him.

Boulas then took his case to a higher court where the case was ultimately dismissed. According to documents, the court found the conduct of Sneddon’s office: “outrageous in the extreme, and shocking to the conscience; we are, thereby, compelled to order the dismissal of the present case.”

James William Herring

In 1993, the Santa Barbara District’s Attorney’s office was admonished for making racially insensitive comments during the trial of James William Herring, a biracial man who had been accused of rape. During closing arguments, prosecutors described Herring as “primal man in his most basic level… his idea of being loved is sex. He wouldn’t know what love was. He’s like a dog in heat.”

Herring’s conviction was overturned because of the highly prejudicial, unfounded comments that prosecutors made about him throughout the trial. Prosecutors described him as a “parasite” and made the inference that because Herring was unemployed, he was more likely to have raped the complaining witness. Furthermore, prosecutors made inflammatory comments about defense attorneys in general, saying: “my people are victims. His people are rapists, murderers, robbers, child molesters. He has to tell them what to say. He has to help them plan a defense. He does not want you to hear the truth.” Such a statement created the false impression that anyone who is accused of a crime is guilty.

The Court of Appeals ruled that “the prosecutor’s… statements about a biracial defendant are, at the very least, in bad taste” and that his unfounded remarks about Herring’s defense counsel lead to an unfair conviction. As a result, Herring’s conviction was overturned.

Richard Joal Wagner

In the early 1970s, Richard Joal Wagner was convicted in a Santa Barbara court of selling marijuana. He appealed the jury’s conviction, claiming prosecutorial misconduct during his own cross-examination because prosecutors implied that he had been caught dealing narcotics in the past. Some of the questions asked include:

“Q. Isn’t it true, Mr. Wagner, that in Alaska you are not only in the business of putting up fences, but you are also in the business … of furnishing cocaine a drug, for sale, illegally, isn’t that correct?

“Q. … Isn’t it true that you have in fact sold heroin?

“Q. … To your knowledge, at your place of business, is there any illegal sale of narcotic activity going on?

“Q. … Isn’t it true that on December 30, 1971, that you have received … a shipment of ‘pure pharmacy’ cocaine?

“Q. … Now, isn’t it true that on December 30, 1971, you had in your possession approximately three kilograms of pure pharmacy cocaine . .?

“Q. … Isn’t it true that those three kilograms of cocaine were in a shoebox?”

Although prosecutors failed to present any evidence of Wagner’s alleged past offenses, they created the impression in the minds of the jurors that Wagner had been involved in the sale of narcotics before, thus leading to an unfair conviction. Sneddon was not the District Attorney at the time but he was one of the led prosecutors on the case. The appeals court ruled that the conduct of the District Attorney’s office was prejudicial to the defendant and thus overturned Wagner’s conviction.