I really wanted to believe that Michael Jackson was just a harmless eccentric.

I really did.

But I started doubting it after I read the declaration that was provided by the 13-year-old (J. Chandler) that alleged Jackson molested him 10 years ago. At the time, it seemed like the father was just trying to extort money from Jackson to make the accusation go away. Money changed hands (estimated at $20 million, although the exact figure is not known). The case didn’t go to trial ultimately because the boy refused to testify.

The Smoking Gun has a copy of the Chandler boy’s statement, which I have read. The tone of the declaration, the details presented, combined with my evaluation of Jackson’s psychology, make me believe the accusations were true.

California law has changed since then (largely because of that specific case), and kids can now essentially be forced to take the stand. Michael’s money can’t protect him this time.

A lot of the rumors about him are, indeed, false. But it is apparent that he was abused as a child by his father, definitely physically (his own father, Joe, stated as much in an interview, and split hairs as well: “I never beat him. I whipped him with a switch and a belt. I never beat him. You beat someone with a stick”), probably emotionally. I do not think it was sexual abuse. But obviously as a boy, Michael was under a lot of pressure and stress with his brothers to get rich and famous with their talent. Joe Jackson was determined to make those kids into his meal ticket.

Of the kids, only Michael and Janet turned out to have any real talent. Janet’s is significant, but is eclipsed by the extraordinary gift that Michael has for song and dance. I like his music, and I do believe he is one of the premier musical talents of our time.

He has always expressed an intense interest in the welfare of children, donating large amounts of money to humanitarian causes that help kids all over the world, and inviting terminally ill kids (and others) to his sprawling theme park home at Neverland Ranch. He has a childlike quality of his own, an innocence and naivete that is at times difficult to believe.

I think Michael has spent his life in search of the childhood he was denied. This could be both a symptom and a cause of his extreme gullibility and self-indulgence. He is reportedly quite intelligent, and capable of some shrewd self-marketing. But as time went on, he grew to rely more and more on people around him to handle things (such as his money). These people were not always honest, and thieves and con men gravitated to him like sharks scenting blood.

He became wealthy at an early age, and likely got used to just pointing at something he wanted and being accustomed to getting it. People who have been close to him say that he doesn’t accept being told he can’t have or can’t do something. So he surrounds himself with yes-men, who steal from him even as they hide his dwindling fortune and his overextended credit.

He also has an obsession with his physical appearance. Regardless of his various claims, it is obvious that he has had numerous plastic surgeries to alter the shape of his face (not just his nose). The distinctively “black” facial features he had as a child (dark skin, full lips, broad nose) are gone, replaced by a thin, pointy nose, thinned, wide lips, a dimpled chin, sharp cheekbones, and very light skin.

Some people accuse him of “trying to be white”. Michael himself says he is pursuing a personal ideal of beauty. Both could certainly be true. He has said before that he has vitiligo, a rare skin disorder that causes melanin production to be erratic, resulting in blotchy white patches on his otherwise dark skin. That may be true. It may not. But presumably he has a choice of whether to use light or dark makeup to conceal this.

Concomitant with this concern over his appearance is a marked tendency toward extremely gaudy, flashy, or just plain odd clothes. He often wears gloves, and usually wears a mask of some kind over his face in public. At times it is a surgical mask-type thing, other times it’s a silken veil or some other fashionable material. I don’t know what the motive for this is, but he also goes to great lengths to avoid being photographed except when HE decides to be photographed. He is very secretive and reclusive, in ways that go far beyond the prudence of someone extremely famous.

Because Michael has been able to exist into his adult years (he is 45 this year) in such an isolated, controlled environment, he has maintained a pathological immaturity. His quest for childhood is the driving force that sustains it, and external influencing forces are kept at a minimum.

He seeks out children for peers, rather than adults, and has been so desperate for kids of his own that he now has 3 by two different women. One of these women remains an unknown and unseen surrogate. It’s unclear whether these kids even share any of Michael’s DNA. The one he dangled over a railing in Germany had very light, Caucasian skin. He keeps these kids covered up, too. Their faces have not been seen, to my knowledge.

Someone like this, having normal adult sexual drives, would incorporate that sexuality into the immature psychology. His emotional attachments, his affections, are directed almost exclusively at children. It is, therefore, not unbelievable that his sexual urges would be directed to kids as well.

I think in Michael’s mind this is not harmful or ill-intentioned. He has stated he would never, ever harm a child in any way. I think he means that. But I also think that he is in denial about the harm he does to them with his sexual advances. He genuinely loves children and seeks to form affectionate, loving bonds with them.

He knows on some level, though, that this is not appropriate. He has explicitly denied in interviews that he has ever had any sexual contact with a child. His Neverland Ranch is a private enclave where his own bedroom is concealed and no one is allowed inside. The children’s guest bedroom has only one exit, which goes through Michael’s bedroom before continuing to the rest of the house.

He plies the children (and their families) with lavish gifts of money, cars, and other material goods. Certainly these could be innocent gifts of friendliness from a man with a ton of money, but the fact that the kids are the ones invited for pajama parties — alone with no adult supervision except Michael himself — is obviously suspicious.

Even after the accusations 10 years ago, he did not stop inviting kids to his home for parties, and continued to show an unusually strong interest in interacting with small children. It doesn’t look parental, when you watch video of him.

These are all classic pedophile behaviors; giving children gifts, inventing ways to be alone with them such as having sleepovers and camping trips with no other adults around, trying to be a child’s friend/peer rather than a parental figure such as an uncle. I would guess that Michael has engaged in some of the other typical behaviors, too, such as asking the kids to keep the abuse a secret, even from their parents.

It is also true that pedophiles sometimes view their activities as loving and harmless, as a natural continuation of affection for kids. Some allege that the kids come on to them, rather than the other way around. It will be interesting to see if Michael makes any such claim.

I predict that Michael Jackson will commit suicide at some point during these criminal proceedings, perhaps upon the rendering of a guilty verdict (if such is made). My mother believes he will try but fail. My vote is for a drug overdose.

[Kyle adds]: Me being me, I can’t resist riffing a sociopolitical point off the above. A key aspect of mature adult psychology is a sense of limitations. The adult world is one of limits, trade-offs, opportunity costs and cost-benefit ratios. Adults understand that they can’t have everything they want, and because of that they learn to arrange their values hierarchically and work to achieve them as best they can within the restrictions posed by the resources available to them. Children focus on “I want.” Adults move on to other questions like “How much will it cost me? Is it worth it? What alternatives are precluded by pursuing this?” And so on. If a child gets too many of the things it wants without grasping the true effort needed to obtain them, the adult questions (and corresponding modes of reasoning) play a much less significant role in their psychology. The result is arrested psychological development.

In other words, your parents were right when they said that failure builds character.

Now, the sociopolitical point. One of the things I find striking about many activists on the left is how immature they seem. Their protests often look like temper tantrums writ large. (Thankfully today’s protests in Britain didn’t seem to fall into that category; good for them.) And the left’s political program sounds like a child’s Christmas list — lots of expensive goodies without any consideration of whether Daddy/the taxpayer is capable of working enough to pay the credit card bills when they come due in January.

This probably explains why I often wish I could grab the leftist-du-jour, smack them in the head and say “Oh, grow up.”

(Thomas Sowell wrote more extensively on these issues in his excellent book The Vision of the Anointed, which I recommend to anyone who has ever talked to a leftist and walked away wondering “What they hell are they thinking?”)

107 Responses to “Michael Jackson: Pedophile”
  1. Low-Tech Redneck says:

    I don’t know about suicide, though I would bet some money he’s gonna try to flee the country, maybe move in with Roman Polanski. Whining the whole way about how he was driven out by persecutors who wouldn’t just leave him alone

  2. dumb kid says:

    the mask over his face is cuz half his nose rotted off and he either needs that or a fake nose tip to wear. you can see pictures at http://www.awfulplasticsurgery.com

  3. vgobar says:

    read with interest. the only thing i would add is that michael jackson is a RICH pedophile.

  4. Mary says:

    excellent article. His behavior, at best, is disturbing and totally inapprpriate. I’m no bible fanatic but I can’t help recalling this scripture from the great Aposlte Paul. “When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.”

    Michael is not a child/man, if there is such a thing. He is a grown man with an arrested emotional development and he needs to get some help.

    I do hope you’re wrong about the suicide though. That would be a sad ending to a pathetic downward spiral.

  5. perplexed says:

    what i cant understand is why some people still defend this freak, believing he can do no wrong, and has done no wrong. how can they believe he is not a pedophile? all the evidence is in plain view. normal people do not hang out with children and sleep with children. why cant they see this?

  6. Lucie says:

    Well, just to answer “perplexed” You know, some fans have been, well fans of Michael for decades, and they aboslutely adore the man, so these accusations seem false to them, cuz in their eyes he’s perfect.
    I think that this article is good, and I agree with most ppl when I say that it would indeed be very sad if he ended up killing himself, because a legend like him just shouldn’t.

  7. Deoxy says:

    Other than the statement by that kid from a few years ago (which could certainly have been coerced by his folks for money – there’s no way to know one way or the other), there is no EVIDENCE of the actual deed (PUBLIC evidence, I mean). To say that it’s all in plain vew is simply false.

    All the evidence is there to strongly SUGGEST he is a pedophile. I would be surpirsed if he isn’t… but that doesn’t mean he actually has abused any children. If he hasn’t sexually abused any children, then, no matter how weird he is (and barring other crimes, of course), then he is innocent.

    That said, I would be genuinely shocked if he is truly innocent, and very surprised if he is FOUND innocent if court (though, if he is innocent, I certainly hope he is found to be).

    Summary: Unless I have just plain missed something, the “evidence” perplexed mentioned is simply not “in plain view”. (But I would never leave my child with MJ for a second!)

  8. Anne Haight says:

    I agree that there is no obvious public evidence of criminal wrongdoing on MJ’s part, and of course I believe in “innocent until proven guilty”.

    But like Deoxy, my gut reaction is that the guy is a pedophile in mind if not in fact, and probably is in fact, too.

    Anyway, I read in the news today that part of the evidence seized from Neverland ranch is explicit love letters and poems that MJ wrote to the kid who is accusing him.

    That doesn’t establish a crime, either, since you’d have to prove that the kid had seen these letters. It’s within the realm of possibility that MJ never showed them to anyone.

    But considering that the DA seems to be working hard to follow the rules in prosecuting this case, my guess is that most of the evidence will not be publicly available until after the trial is over (perhaps not even then). I generally reserve judgement on cases like this, because only the jury and the judge really know the whole body of evidence.

  9. ronnie schreiber says:

    The term “innocent until proven guilty” is a legal concept, not necessarily the moral truth. Even in criminal proceedings we do not declare the accused innocent, but rather “not guilty”, meaning the case has not been proven.

    Yes, a jury of one’s peers is one of the foundations of what Americans consider to be justice, but we’re not so stupid or gullible to think that 12 people can’t get it wrong.

    I can’t understand two things, one much more serious than the other.

    The first is that I can’t understand how anyone can continue be a fan of his music. Sure, he was a talented kid and he made two or three very commercially successful albums, but will those albums stand the test of time? How many of MJ’s songs will end up on oldies stations? Maybe Thriller, Billy Jean and Bad. That’s it. Jackson’s musical significance has always paled besides his success in the marketplace.

    The Jackson 5 came on the scene at the tail end of Motown’s run of success. Even with the great Motown songwriters and producers that assisted the Jacksons, the Jackson 5 material seems to be considered by Motown afficianados to be a notch below the real greatest hits.

    If you want to check out some real vital music, how about:
    The North Mississippi All Stars
    Drive By Truckers

  10. ronnie schreiber says:

    (Hit post too soon)
    The second thing that I don’t understand is that in light of prior accusations and MJ’s demonstrably weird behavior that there are still parents that will let their children anywhere near him.

  11. Gene says:

    “And the left’s political program sounds like a child’s Christmas list — lots of expensive goodies without any consideration of whether Daddy/the taxpayer is capable of working enough to pay the credit card bills when they come due in January.”

    Huh? Talk about outdated stereotypes. Did you see this?

    The Democrats are amateurs comapared to these guys.

  12. Chris says:

    It’s interesting to see a similar conclusion to my assesment of Michael Jackson, in that he will end his life. I remember turning to my wife at the end of the British documentary that was done on Michael and asked her “How many times did Michael (When faced with the tough questions like ‘What would he do if your children were taken away?’) answer that he would kill himself?”. We were pretty sure Michael mentioned killing himself three times during the interview. Many people would “throw away” that response as a common blanket statement but given his present situation and the fact that if convicted of the charges he now faces he would lose his children forever, those words could prove prophetic.

  13. J. Andersten says:

    Let’s all admit that Michael Jackson is strange and that he must have psychological problems. But to be calling Michael a pedophile is amazing to me because known of your opinions are based on facts. If courts were ran in a similar way to how you people think, there would be no need to collect evidence. Your opinions are only based on his strange behavior and nothing else.

  14. Dexter Dogg says:

    Pretty Young Thing? Get On The Floor? I Can’t Help It? Beat It? Hmmm…sounds like some guilty titles to me. And if you play the second chorus of Billie Jean backwards at half speed you can hear a male voice (Michaels?) saying “Jordy this is our little secret”. True.

  15. mar says:

    The comments made Dexter Dogg were stupid and ignorant. Listeb to the lyrics, idiot. He is innocent until proven guilty.

  16. mar says:

    The comments made by Dexter Dogg were stupid and ignorant. Listen to the lyrics, idiot. He is innocent until proven guilty.

  17. Anonymous says:

    And why would you play Billie Jean backwards? Are you looking for things like that. You are sick……

  18. Anne Haight says:

    If I were on a jury and presented with much more complete evidence, of course my conclusions would be different.

    With respect to playing “Billie Jean” backwards (I assume that the ‘Jordy’ being referenced is the J. Chandler of the first accusations in 2000), you do realize that the song was originally published in 1982?

  19. maria says:

    you rite the BILLIE JEAN SONG WAS OUT IN 1982


    THAT :


















  20. stu says:

    Nice job, Maria. I haven’t seen the English language butchered so badly in quite some time. I sure needed a good laugh!

    I heard that Michael Jackson has been spending alot of time in Walmart lately because he heard that little boys’ pants are half off. He’s a FRIGGING PEDOPHILE, no doubt, and they will nail him this time before he nails any more young boys!

  21. reality says:

    the only reason Michael Jackson is not having nightly gang rectal probes by prison inmates (who know how to show pedophiles a good time)
    is because he is a multi-millionair mega-popstar

    any common middle-aged pedophile would have provoked a reinactment of the angry villagers with torches from the film frankenstein

    if MJ was just a harmless freakshow like most of us thought in the 80’s.. a rich eccentric, there would be no problem..

    but this guy is not harmless freak, he is a sicko who fancies little boys, how obvious does it need to get before people get it? hallooo!

    he didn’t even have the common sense to stop having pajama orgies after the last time he was accused.. even Ed Wood was more discreet about his perversions

    does Jackson have to produce a film like Glen or Glenda before people get that he’s a 5 star wacko?

    get a clue

  22. Perdita says:

    Actually, Plato, and Socrates both were phedophiles as well. Tells you something, don’t it?

  23. Anne Haight says:

    No, I don’t see the connection. Can you elaborate?

  24. Perdita says:

    Okey dokey.

    Plato was misunderstood and his beliefs were often shunned by the romans and others who thought that they were paganistic.

    Sound familer? Also, he is renowned for broadening the world of education, and is considered a good man, despite his preferences.

    Now for Socrates.

    1. Socrates died from a self-administered dose of hemlock.

    2. Socrates died as a consequence of a gross miscarriage of justice.

    3. Socrates died after a court found him guilty of corrupting the youth of Athens.

    4. Socrates was forced to drink hemlock because he was found guilty of corrupting the youth of Athens.

    This could be a case of history repeating itself, folks.

  25. Perdita says:

    And if it IS, then there is a good chance that Michael could be on the verge of killing himself (As earlier mentioned in the boards.) if people continue to prosecute him.

  26. stu says:

    I couldn’t care less if socrates or plato were boy-fuckers….it still doesn’t make it right, perdita. Are you a pedophile? What posesses you to justify poking young boys? Or to glorify the antics of those who desire boy butts? Michael Jackson deserves to be man-handled in a prison, where he should have been placed 10 years ago. He’s not even worth the pack of cigarettes that he will be traded for. I hope that they send him away for life so that we won’t have to be tortured by his awful music any more.

    Better yet, he should kill himself and save the cash-strapped Californians the trial costs. Good riddance to bad rubbish!

  27. stu says:

    I think Perdita is a pedophile… why else would someone justify this type of behavior? Perditas neighbors need to hide their children!

  28. reality says:

    with Michael Jackson’s millions.. and high paid attornies, could this become another O.J. Simpson trial?.. it seems innocence can be bought
    in california

  29. Sick of it all says:

    Geez…he’ll get off!!!….does anyone doubt that? He can buy his freedom…but I guarantee if any good mannered average joe on the street were accused of molestation, he would have already been locked up and the key would have been thrown away…I just wish that they would take it to trial and get it over with, regardless of the outcome…I’m sick of being bombarded with it on television, the radio, and the internet…whoever pushes this crap on the public to this extreme should also be charged with disturbing my peace…Good Lord, I can’t even believe I contributed to this…

  30. jeremy says:

    I hope the freak blows his brains out. God, why would anyone in their right mind like such a freak? I say Good Riddance! One less pervert in America

  31. Randy says:

    I think Michael is addicted to plastic surgery
    and is unable to disconnect the child from the
    man! He is incapable of detaching himself from this “Peter Pan” fantasy and his disturbing concept of loving relationships with young male children.THIS IS A TRADGEDY, HE REQUIRES IMMEDIATE PSYCHIATRIC HELP! But for heavens sake
    don’t let him near anymore children. Everybody seems to be worried about “poor Michael”, but it seems to me that everybody has forgotten all of the children that he may have already damaged permanently!

  32. A Generic Health Practioner says:

    The post by Maria (or perhaps “Sean” the quintessential university student with a sense of mirth) was indeed amusing. However, the fact remains that all actions point to a seriously disturbed adult that knows right from wrong, yet has decided upon wrong. Whatever the motives for Michael Jackson’s behaviour, the fact remains they are not in the best interest of the implicated children. That should be the basis upon which you judge him. As for the references to the gallavanting Greeks, Socrates and Plato, it was acceptable behaviour in those days, particularly when the typical life expectancy for a male was in his mid to late 30’s. The very founders of North America were known for their child brides (Samuel de Champlain had a 12 yr old bride). Acceptable behaviours change and children and women are no longer the cheap chattle of men (at least in most parts of the world). Keep things in perspective. I do admit that I look forward to Mr. Jackson’s suicide and would give anything to participate in the autopsy as I have been wagering with some of the pathologists and forensic clerks in the lab as to the extent and magnitude of Mr. Jackson’s alterations.

  33. Vincent says:


  34. Reality Check says:

    1.Jacko was only in the police station for 30 minutes. Another prisoner witnessed the booking and said he was treated like a V.I.P.(pedophile).
    2.How can you flap your arms waving your hands
    and flashing the peace symbol at the reporters
    when you have a dislocated shoulder?
    3.Do you think a lawyer like Geragos would let any
    potential police abuse to occur in his presence, ie; the “handcuff bruises” or getting locked into
    the “shitter” for 45 minutes? I THINK NOT!
    4.Why did his spokesman resign?

  35. Beep Show says:

    I think that people (especially the ones on this stupid Website) are just being assholes and embarrassing themselves. I love Michael Jackson, he is my idol-and he is no different from anyone else. There must be at least 1,000 of these same exact cases across the whole U.S. and none of them are made national. People forget who Michael Jackson is…and that makes me mad. I will never forget who he is or what he did for the world of music. I look up to him for everything he has done and does. No matter what people think I will know that they are wrong. In this country a man is innocent until proven guilty. What people are doing is just like stoning someone. He didn’t do anything. And I hope that he can get through this big mess knowing that all of his fans including me are behind him all the way and love him and his music. I cry when I listen to his music or see him because there is no greater music or person. And that asshole who did that “Living with Michael Jackson” interview needs to step off and check himself. Michael invited him into his home and everything, and did that fuck care? No, he just wanted what every other hipacrit wanted…to set him up as a joke. How can people think that? It’s pathetic and imature. And isn’t it funny how the mother of that kid sued a basketball player for the same thing. Geez, she knows all the ins and outs of things like this huh?…Michael- If you are reading this I just want you to know that I believe in you and your music. Your my idol. I look up to you for everything that you do. And I really wish you could know that…

  36. Keith Richard Radford Jr. says:

    Dart Test…
    A young man named Rickey, relates an experience he had in a seminary class, given by hir teacher, Dr. Smith. He says that Dr. Smith was known for his elaborate object lessons. One particular day, Rickey walked into the seminary and knew they were in for a fun day. On the wall was a big target and on a nearby table were many darts. Dr. Smithtold the students to draw a picture of someone that they disliked or someone who had made them angry, and he would allow them to throw darts at the person’s picture. Rickey’s friend drew a picture of who had stolen her boyfriend. Another friend drew a picture of his little brother. Rickey drew a picture of Michael Jackson, putting a great deal of detail into hir drawing, even drawing a loc of hair in frontof his face. Rickey was pleased with the overall effect he had achieved. The class lined up and began throwing darts. Some of the students threw their darts with such force that their targets were ripping apart. Rickey looked forward to his turn, and was filled with disappointment when Dr. Smith, because of time limits, asked the students to return to their seats. As Rickey sat thinking about how angry he was because he didn’t have a
    chance to throw any darts at hir target. Dr. Smith began removing the targets from the wall. Underneath the target was pictures of Jesus. A hush fell over the room as each student viewed the mangled pictures of Jesus; holes and jagged marks covered His face and His eyes were pierced. Dr. Smith said only these words… “In as much as ye have done it unto the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto Me.” Matthew 25:40. No other words were necessary; the tears filled eyes of the students focused
    only on the picture of Christ. This is an easy test; you score 100 or zero. It’s your choice. If you aren’t ashamed to do this, Jesus said, “If you are ashamed of me, I will be ashamed of you, before My Father.” Not ashamed … pass this on.

  37. Anne Haight says:

    Beep Show,

    You say that this child accuser has previously been involved in a similar lawsuit against a basketball player? Can you point me to a source for that information? I wasn’t aware of this and haven’t seen this fact mentioned anywhere.

    For the record, I also like Michael Jackson’s music. I own several of his albums and listen to them regularly. He is undoubtedly one of the most gifted entertainers ever.

    That, however, is not a valid defense against accusations of criminal behavior. Plenty of talented and likable people have been criminals throughtout history.

    It would be a terrible shame if Michael were guilty of the charges against him. As an armchair sociologist, I have to concur that there is a lot of behavioral evidence supporting the idea that he is a pedophile. Even if he is, I do not think he is a cruel man, or intentionally harmful. I’m sure that in his mind, it’s an expression of love.

    If it can be proven conclusively that Michael did not molest this kid, that doesn’t necessarily mean he never molested any other kids. But I would be very glad to see him innocent, for many reasons. I mean, I like the guy.

    I also must stop you when you say that public criticism is “just like stoning”. This is an all-too-frequent modern equivocation; that words are the same as actions.

    Look folks, that just isn’t true. Verbal criticism and expressing opinions and speculation is not the same thing as throwing rocks at somebody. To suggest that they are the same is a vulgar insult to everyone who has ever been the victim of physical violence, and shows a profound lack of understanding of the concept of free speech.

    Sure, verbal criticism can be damaging, generally to one’s reputation. And there are cases where slander and libel have resulted in demonstrable economic harm to a person or company. Those are sometimes criminal actions if they can be proven.

    But attacking someone’s reputation is not the same as throwing rocks at them. C’mon. Think for a second.

  38. Beep Show says:

    Anne Haight

    Sorry Sweetie but you really have no clue what you are talking about…think before you speak…make up your mind…and please stop trying to sound like you know what you are talking about. Thats ur opinion and that was mine…now u can either learn to except it or fight with everyone who comes along with their -own- opinin….

  39. Beep Show says:

    Anne Height,

    And another thing…clean the shit out of your ears and give me ur opinion not ur mom’s or these fucked up news crews.

  40. Anne Haight says:

    Beep Show,

    I asked you a question. You assert that Michael’s accuser has been in a similar lawsuit against a basketball player. I asked you for a source on that information, and/or more details. It’s a relevant question, because otherwise you are merely smearing the boy’s family with no evidence.

    Let’s see, you’ve resorted to condescension and personal insults, but you haven’t actually responded to any of the issues I raised. I can only conclude that you have no counter argument, and therefore I consider myself to be the victor in this particular discussion.


    Thats ur opinion and that was mine…now u can either learn to except it or fight with everyone who comes along with their -own- opinin….

    So basically you’re saying that if I disagree with you, I’m wrong, since my alternative is to, well, disagree.

    A person’s opinion is not necessarily true just because they say it. Not all opinions are equally valid. People have a right to speak, but that doesn’t make them correct.

  41. Beep Show says:

    Anne Height,
    Well, I don’t see how you could have missed it, it was on the news hun. And like I said…If you are ganna state ur opinion…listen to mine too and clean the shit out of your ears. And You can either except that…or you cant sweetie. I didn’t write that statement for you…so get over yourself. I have no choice to believe that you only go on this site to start fights with people you don’t even know. Now that-is what I call low. And please stop trying to sound all perfesional…you don’t come off as a smart person so don’t try to pretend you are. Now, with that stupid “You think my opinion is wrong” thats bullshit. I made a statment and u commented…so please Fuck off

  42. Sister of Perpetual Misery says:

    Dear Beep Show

    Your 15 minutes are up, so shut-the-fuck-up!

  43. Anne Haight says:

    Sister of Perpetual Misery, that was the best laugh I’ve had in several days. ๐Ÿ™‚

  44. Anne Haight says:

    Beep Show,

    Well, I don’t see how you could have missed it, it was on the news hun.

    Well I did. And if it’s such common knowledge, I’m sure you won’t have any trouble finding me a link, now will you?

    And like I said…If you are ganna state ur opinion…listen to mine too and clean the shit out of your ears.

    I am listening. I just don’t find you persuasive or credible.

    And You can either except that…or you cant sweetie.

    The word you’re looking for is “accept”.

    I didn’t write that statement for you…so get over yourself.

    If that statement was not for me, then who were you talking to? That’s another common technique used by people with no argument when they get challenged on something; “Oh, I wasn’t talking about you.”

    I have no choice to believe that you only go on this site to start fights with people you don’t even know.

    1. This is my site. Or have you been paying so little attention that you don’t realize you are debating one of the two people who owns this blog, and for whom the blog itself is named?

    2. Does disagreement = fighting in your mind? So I guess a perfect world would be one where everybody agrees with you?

    And please stop trying to sound all perfesional…you don’t come off as a smart person so don’t try to pretend you are.

    It’s spelled “professional”, and I don’t need you to tell me whether or not I’m a smart person. I know that I am, and your opinion doesn’t matter a damn to me. Hey, at least I can spell.

    Now, with that stupid “You think my opinion is wrong” thats bullshit. I made a statment and u commented…so please Fuck off

    This is my blog, so if somebody’s gonna leave, it would have to be you. And you were the one who brought up the whole issue of “I’m just stating my opinion”.

    Like I said, the fact that you say it doesn’t make it true, so don’t pretend that it does. I can disagree with you without “fighting”, as you put it. I have been polite throughout this conversation, which is more than I can say for you.

    That doesn’t help your credibility, you know.

  45. Beep Show says:

    Fuck off i dont care anne

  46. Me says:

    Anne get a fucking life… i agree with beepshow your opinion is a bunch of meaningless crap put together… Beepshow was stating her feeling if you were smart you would see that that was all she was doing … get a life and stop trying to make yourself sound smart..

  47. Sandy Costinzo says:

    Anne Haight,

    I a lso agree with Beep Show and “Me” lol, because you didn’t have one problem with anyone else on this page other than the people who disagree….
    Beep Show,
    I agree,I love him too and I think he is innocent.
    Your wrong sorry, and your page sucks

  48. Gina says:

    Yea, I agree to with Sandy, + Beep Show.
    I have something to say too-He doesn’t sleep in the same bed as the kids. They sleep in the bed and he sleeps on the floor. Nad that was only ONE kid. All you stupid people just shut the fuck up because you don’t know what you are talking about, which means you Anne. Like Beep Show said, clean the shit out of your ears.

  49. Anne Haight says:

    Just for entertainment’s sake, let’s take a look at the IP addresses of Beep Show, “Me”, Sandy Costinzo and Gina.

    Beep Show:


    Sandy Costinzo:

    Gina (drum roll):

    Lemme let you in on something, Beep Show. When you want to make fake posts agreeing with yourself, you need to at least use a different computer each time.

    Changing your spelling, punctuation, and narrative tone helps somewhat too, as well as not exactly parroting your own previous remarks.

    Just trying to be helpful. ๐Ÿ˜‰

  50. Sister of Perpetual Misery says:

    Rock on Anne! Hey kids, watch A&E this evening,
    pay strict attention to the announcer…you just
    might “learn something”. Otherwise, kids, please
    practice your spelling and grammar when conversing
    with adults about subjects obviously beyond your
    own extremely limited mental capabilities.

  51. sactofunk says:

    What am I missing? Are we a bunch of attorneys? How does anyone in this room know, for sure, whether he is guilty or innocent? We do not know what the evidence is, we do not know “specifically” what the accusations are. We have no idea how strong the prosecution’s case is! The only people that know these things are the lawyers behind the scenes. As for all this bickering, it is nothing but speculation and frankly a waste of everyone’s time. Let the legal system play itself out, and let the jury, the finders of FACT, designated by law, do their job and make a wise determination between guilt and innocence. Even though Michael Jackson did pay a large sum of money to settle the case ten years ago, that fact will be inadmissible in this case, since settled cases are excluded as evidence for use by the prosecution. So in this case, his previous settlement will in no way, shape, or form, have any bearing whatsoever on the present trial, unless of course, a juror lies during voir dire and carries with him/her what the law deems an “unfair” bias toward the accused, MJ. So, in conclusion, stop fighting about it, cuz there really is no reason. Nobody in this room knows the facts of this case but everyone does know one fact for sure. Be happy it aint YOU defending your life in a courtroom. Until then, dont pass judgments and try to retain faith in our criminal justice system to distinguish between guilt and innocence. Not to say the system is perfect, OJ OJ, but give it a chance because it is much more effective than the general public would like to lend credence to. Im out! Peace!

  52. vince says:


    1. He only invites boys to his ranch, no girls.
    He’s a gay pedophile.

    2. He has enough money to bribe networks to show his “true (B.S.) side” documentaries etc. Remember: he is an actor (Remember Thriller?).

    3. Macaulay Culkin. Doesn’t it look like he is keeping his mouth shut? Maybe it’s because of all those bodily fluids Michael has pumped into his mouth.

    4. What kind of person loves children (boys) that much that they would sleep (i.e. masterbate with)naked with?

    5. Michael doesn’t believe in God. If he did, he’d feel guilty right now.

    6. Janet seems intelligent, why isn’t she standing behind her brother this time like the rest of his stupid family?

    7. Michael needs to be executed.

  53. sactofunk says:

    1. For how long of a period of time did you kick it at his ranch? How do you know he only invites “boys” to his ranch. If I remember correctly, he’s surely had girls there as well, but again, how do you know?

    2. Networks have more money than Michael Jackson. Sure the media can be shady, but you really think he “bribed” them to go on air and discuss having sleepovers. Come on man. They were probably paying him! He boosted their ratings, not the other way around.

    3. Maculay Culkin most likely wasnt molested or sexually assaulted, so he probably just doesnt have anything to say. Silence should not equate to suspicion. The fifth amendment gives us the right to remain silent, and that right should remain free from prejudice.

    4. Again, sleepovers with young kids is weird. but it doesnt mean he masturbated with them or waived his dick in their face like, umm, President Clinton to female state workers in Arkansas.

    5. Leave God out of it. But if you choose to include him, why would God let MJ take advantage of these children? Just leave God out of it, simple enough. HE has nothing to do with it.

    6. Maybe cuz Janet has a creer to worry about and the thought of publicly standing behind someone so publicly scrutinzed probably wouldnt do too much for her future record sales. Sad but true. Sometimes the green takes priority over the fam.

    7. Nah. MJ doesnt need to be executed. But if he is indeed guilty, a little cutting procedure a prisonmate named Bubba would work as a great deterrence.

    8. And MY point, is the accused (MJ) are INNOCENT until proven guilty and unfortunately the media is trying to sway public opinion. I’ll repeat myself, stop spitting facts of this case you gto from the Fox News Channel and use your own head. Dont rely on everything the media feeds you. They are filters designed to influence the thought process of the public at large. Be strong, be impartial, but most importantly, be REASONABLE and OBJECTIVE. When the trial begins on court tv or what have you, THEN analyze the facts and try to come to your own conclusions. Until then, stop slaving yourself to pop culture and radio and television talk shows, or else yer a sucker just like the majority. Peace! I’m out.

  54. sactofunk says:

    Anne- Change the subject to something alittle more fruitful. This is nothing but pure specualtion and people using as ammunition the things they hear on radio and tv. Lets debate something of more substance. I think you and I could respectfully debate each other, but lets get off the MJ tip and let Santa Barabara and the DA take care of that mess. Any suggestions for a change of issue? Maybe, the war or the upcoming presidential election, or welfare, or affirmative action, or abortion, SOMETHING! I would almost rather watch that video of Saddam getting a flashlight in his grill over and over again than debate something that really is indebatable.

  55. sactofunk says:

    Anne! One more thing, alluding to your opening statments on your page and than I’m done. Just because on “The Smoking Gun” you read the declaration and found it to be detailed doesnt mean anything. Detailed pleadings and declarations are a legal strategy used by plaintiff’s attorneys to innoculate to the public that they are indeed telling the truth. It makes you ask yourself, “How could they make this shit up in such detail? This must be true.” Come on Anne. Be objective. Anybody can accuse anybody of anything. What you really need to do is find out if this declaration was ever VERIFIED! Verification makes the declaration more than just words on a piece of paper. It means that the parties attest to the truthfulness of the statements made and are willing to face the penalty of perjury if ANY of the facts are untrue, or even “spun”. Did the plaintiff’s counsel ever verify the declaration? I’m not attacking you at all. I’m just curious because verification can, and normally does, make an initial pleading (complaint) much more valuable to the party asserting the claim. I’m asking out of sheer curiosity is all.

  56. sactofunk says:

    I just thought of a good issue, especially all y’all NAACP lovers. I heard on the news last night that the NAACP, for their upcoming image awards, has decided to honor one of the most repectable and looked up to African Americans in our country and perhaps the world. R. Kelley will be this year’s recipient of the NAACP Image Award of 2004. Now lets discuss this. Michael Jackson is dealing with ALLEGATIONS of being a pedophile while the whole world has seen video of R. Kelley committing child (statutory) rape, and R. Kelley gets an image award? Discuss amongst yourselves.

  57. Anne Haight says:


    This is not a general discussion board. This is the comments section of one blog entry that I made, and back in 11/03, at that.

    Plenty of other stuff has been written since, which you are welcome to comment on. You might try navigating the page using the Main and month listings.

    As for R. Kelly, I think the main difference is that Michael Jackson is famous the world over and has a long and distinguished career as a musician and a social Odd Duck.

    R. Kelly is just a flavor of the week rapper with no talent (like most of them), so nobody really gives a shit.

  58. sensiblyirate says:

    nice post, anne. i found this randomly while trying to find some hint of where janet stands in all of this.

    i know this has all been talked to death, but i wanted to bring up another point:

    i think he’s guilty.
    the fact that i (and most everyone) thinks he’s guilty makes me sad.
    we’ve got these psychological indicators,
    these actions and statements coming from michael jackson, and they all seem to point to pediphelia.

    don’t you think it’s sad
    that our society has become so backwards
    that extreme philanthropy (in this case focused on children) becomes a calling card for deviant behavior?

    i wish he were innocent.
    because his guilt only shortens the gap
    between the noblest of intentions and the reality of those intentions.

    again, nice post.

  59. Jacob says:

    I think hes a goddam pervert, I beat him like I do my muthafuckin kids if I had him, little son of a bitch, I told my fuckin kids if they don’t listen to me there gonna be like that gay muthafucka, and then I beat em some more, little bastards

  60. quatorzejames says:

    anne haight said,
    “R. Kelly is just a flavor of the week rapper with no talent (like most of them), so nobody really gives a shit”
    . . .

    r. kelly is not a rapper.
    he is a singer, songwriter and producer.
    he does not rap.
    most people familiar with r&b music woud take issue with your suggestion that he has no talent.
    he has written a few standards, among his many huge hits and his music is loved by millions around the world and is recorded by many artists.
    this has nothing to do with his alleged (or apparent) crimes, of course.
    i’m just pointing out that you clearly don’ t know what you’re talking about in this case.
    to ask why r. kelly gets respect as an artist and more fair press coverage than michael jackson is a legitimate question, and it deserves more scrutiny than your flip and uninformed response suggests.

  61. fuzzywzhe says:

    I have a few comments I wanted to make.

    First, why did Michael Jackson suddenly start molesting boys again just when he was trying to make a comeback? He’s been trying to rekindle his career, the accusations against him seem oddly timed. This would be the worst time for MJ to try to molest a kid.

    Second, why were these parents allowing their child to even be with MJ alone? Did they have no doubts at all from the first accusation 10 years ago?

    Third, if Michael Jackson was innocent the first time he was accused, why would he settle for some undisclosed amount of money the first time, and then disappear for a decade?

    Fourth, isn’t it a little bit odd that Michael Jackson named his compound “Neverland”? It’s peter pan reference, were children never grow up. That is odd.

    Fifth, why did Michael Jackson lie about the treatment he received from the police?

    What I’m getting at is that I think MJ was guilty the first time, and may be innocent this time.

  62. Read It says:

    Read the declaration by the kid that claimed he was molested in 1993.


  63. Anne Haight says:


    Congratulations. You have just been banned for comment spamming.

  64. A person with a message says:


    I saw that you asked why Michael paid that family in ’93 and disappeared for a decade. If anyone actually LISTENS to Michael they would know that on the Primetime Live interview he did with Diane Sawyer a few years back he said his lawyers advised it and that he just wanted to get on with his life(he also stated this on Living With Michael Jackson). And he did not “disappear” for a decade. In 1995 he relased “HIStory: Past, Presnt, and Future Book 1” and in ’96 he went on his WORLD TOUR for that album. Then in ’97 he relased “Blood on the Dancefloor HIStory in the mix” which is the largest selling remix album of all time (though few people know it.)He has been on tv, did interviews, everything, and yet you and alot of others say after ’93 he disappeared. But I ask this in question about the ’93 case and i’m sure the question has been raised often. If your child was molested by Michael Jackson, why would you accept MONEY OVER JUSTICE? Wouldn’t you not rest until his ass was in jail? Why would you even accept an agreement to make it all go away? Why wouldn’t you fight? Maybe because the family got what they were after in the first place: MONEY. It’s the root of all evil. The love of it is. Not to metion the fact that Jordy Chandler was given Sodium Amytal by a dentist shortly before giving the allegations. Sodium Amytal is a drug that is used for amnesia patients that can give the reciever false memories.

    According to Chandler in this conversation, “This guy [his attorney, Barry Rothman] 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.” Later in the conversation, Chandler added, “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… Michael’s career will be over… It will be a massacre if I don’t get what I want.”

    Chandler’s plan was to accuse Michael Jackson of child molestation, but unfortunately for Chandler, Jordy refused to implicate Jackson in any way whatsoever. To solve that problem, Chandler took his son to dental anesthesiologist Mark Tobiner. Tobiner injected into Jordy the barbiturate sodium Amytal, under the influence of which a person is highly impressionable; the effect is similar to hypnosis. With sodium Amytal swimming through his system, Jordy said for the first time that Jackson had molested him.

    That is a tidbit I derived from http://webpages.charter.net/jasonevines/mj.htm You can read the full story there also. If you all who have such strong opinons have nothing to back them up, they mean nothing. Of course if this does not impress you, I will gladly share more. TA TA!

  65. Anne Haight says:

    Not to metion the fact that Jordy Chandler was given Sodium Amytal by a dentist shortly before giving the allegations. Sodium Amytal is a drug that is used for amnesia patients that can give the reciever false memories.

    That’s interesting if true. The dentist in question, a certain Mark Tobiner, appears to be a man of questionable ethics. His apparent reputation is that of drug supplier to celebrities, in which he makes housecalls to provide various prescription drugs that are commonly abused (such as morphine and Demerol).

    Sodium Amytal (a brand name for Amobarbital) is primarily used to treat chronic insomnia. It is also used in a psychiatric process known as a therapeutic interview, in which the drug helps to relax psychological inhibitions that may be blocking repressed memories of trauma.

    It isn’t a drug typically used by dentists, being psychotropic in nature, and there are plenty of drugs for dentistry that are much safer.

    Although “truth serum” is generally misunderstood (it can’t force people to tell the truth under questioning; it merely makes them more suggestible under a controlled interview situation), it would certainly be one possible method of implanting memories in a vulnerable person, such as Jordy Chandler.

  66. A person with a message says:

    Here goes some more facts about this whole drama that escolated to what we are dealing with now:

    Was Michael Jackson Framed? By Mary A. Fisher GQ Oct. 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.

    It is, of course, impossible to prove a negative — that is, prove that something didn’t happen. But it is possible to take an in-depth look at the people who made the allegations against Jackson and thus gain insight into their character and motives. What emerges from such an examination, based on court documents, business records and scores of interviews, is a persuasive argument that Jackson molested no one and that he himself may have been the victim of a well-conceived plan to extract money from him.

    More than that, the story that arises from this previously unexplored territory is radically different from the tale that has been promoted by tabloid and even mainstream journalists. It is a story of greed, ambition, misconceptions on the part of police and prosecutors, a lazy and sensation-seeking media and the use of a powerful, hypnotic drug. It may also be a story about how a case was simply invented.

    Neither Michael Jackson nor his current defense attorneys agreed to be interviewed for this article. Had they decided to fight the civil charges and go to trial, what follows might have served as the core of Jackson’s defense — as well as the basis to further the extortion charges against his own accusers, which could well have exonerated the singer.

    Jackson’s troubles began when his van broke down on Wilshire Boulevard in Los Angeles in May 1992. Stranded in the middle of the heavily trafficked street, Jackson was spotted by the wife of Mel Green, an employee at Rent-a-Wreck, an offbeat car-rental agency a mile away. Green went to the rescue. When Dave Schwartz, the owner of the car-rental company, heard Green was bringing Jackson to the lot, he called his wife, June, and told her to come over with their 6-year-old daughter and her son from her previous marriage. The boy, then 12, was a big Jackson fan. Upon arriving, June Chandler Schwartz told Jackson about the time her son had sent him a drawing after the singer’s hair caught on fire during the filming of a Pepsi commercial. Then she gave Jackson their home number.

    “It was almost like she was forcing [the boy] on him,” Green recalls. “I think Michael thought he owed the boy something, and that’s when it all started.”

    Certain facts about the relationship are not in dispute. Jackson began calling the boy, and a friendship developed. After Jackson returned from a promotional tour, three months later, June Chandler Schwartz and her son and daughter became regular guests at Neverland, Jackson’s ranch in Santa Barbara County. During the following year, Jackson showered the boy and his family with attention and gifts, including video games, watches, an after-hours shopping spree at Toys “R” Us and trips around the world — from Las Vegas and Disney World to Monaco and Paris.

    By March 1993, Jackson and the boy were together frequently and the sleepovers began. 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.”

    Jackson’s personal eccentricities — from his attempts to remake his face through plastic surgery to his preference for the company of children — have been widely reported. And while it may be unusual for a 35-year-old man to have sleepovers with a 13-year-old child, the boy’s mother and others close to Jackson never thought it odd. Jackson’s behavior is better understood once it’s put in the context of his own childhood.

    “Contrary to what you might think, Michael’s life hasn’t been a walk in the park,” one of his attorneys says. Jackson’s childhood essentially stopped — and his unorthodox life began — when he was 5 years old and living in Gary, Indiana. Michael spent his youth in rehearsal studios, on stages performing before millions of strangers and sleeping in an endless string of hotel rooms. Except for his eight brothers and sisters, Jackson was surrounded by adults who pushed him relentlessly, particularly his father, Joe Jackson — a strict, unaffectionate man who reportedly beat his children.

    Jackson’s early experiences translated into a kind of arrested development, many say, and he became a child in a man’s body. “He never had a childhood,” says Bert Fields, a former attorney of Jackson’s. “He is having one now. His buddies are 12-year-old kids. They have pillow fights and food fights.” Jackson’s interest in children also translated into humanitarian efforts. Over the years, he has given millions to causes benefiting children, including his own Heal The World Foundation.

    But there is another context — the one having to do with the times in which we live — in which most observers would evaluate Jackson’s behavior. “Given the current confusion and hysteria over child sexual abuse,” says Dr. Phillip Resnick, a noted Cleveland psychiatrist, “any physical or nurturing contact with a child may be seen as suspicious, and the adult could well be accused of sexual misconduct.”

    Jackson’s involvement with the boy was welcomed, at first, by all the adults in the youth’s life — his mother, his stepfather and even his biological father, Evan Chandler (who also declined to be interviewed for this article). Born Evan Robert Charmatz in the Bronx in 1944, Chandler had reluctantly followed in the footsteps of his father and brothers and become a dentist. “He hated being a dentist,” a family friend says. “He always wanted to be a writer.” After moving in 1973 to West Palm Beach to practice dentistry, he changed his last name, believing Charmatz was “too Jewish-sounding,” says a former colleague. Hoping somehow to become a screenwriter, Chandler moved to Los Angeles in the late Seventies with his wife, June Wong, an attractive Eurasian who had worked briefly as a model.

    Chandler’s dental career had its precarious moments. In December 1978, while working at the Crenshaw Family Dental Center, a clinic in a low-income area of L.A., Chandler did restoration work on sixteen of a patient’s teeth during a single visit. An examination of the work, the Board of Dental Examiners concluded, revealed “gross ignorance and/or inefficiency” in his profession. The board revoked his license; however, the revocation was stayed, and the board instead suspended him for ninety days and placed him on probation for two and a half years. Devastated, Chandler left town for New York. He wrote a film script but couldn’t sell it.

    Months later, Chandler returned to L.A. with his wife and held a series of dentistry jobs. By 1980, when their son was born, the couple’s marriage was in trouble. “One of the reasons June left Evan was because of his temper,” a family friend says. They divorced in 1985. The court awarded sole custody of the boy to his mother and ordered Chandler to pay $500 a month in child support, but a review of documents reveals that in 1993, when the Jackson scandal broke, Chandler owed his ex-wife $68,000 — a debt she ultimately forgave.

    A year before Jackson came into his son’s life, Chandler had a second serious professional problem. One of his patients, a model, sued him for dental negligence after he did restoration work on some of her teeth. Chandler claimed that the woman had signed a consent form in which she’d acknowledged the risks involved. But when Edwin Zinman, her attorney, asked to see the original records, Chandler said they had been stolen from the trunk of his Jaguar. He provided a duplicate set. Zinman, suspicious, was unable to verify the authenticity of the records. “What an extraordinary coincidence that they were stolen,” Zinman says now. “That’s like saying ‘The dog ate my homework.’ ” The suit was eventually settled out of court for an undisclosed sum.

    Despite such setbacks, Chandler by then had a successful practice in Beverly Hills. And he got his first break in Hollywood in 1992, when he cowrote the Mel Brooks film Robin Hood: Men in Tights. 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. Chandler’s dental practice kept him busy, and he had started a new family by then, with two small children by his second wife, a corporate attorney.

    At first, Chandler welcomed and encouraged his son’s relationship with Michael Jackson, bragging about it to friends and associates. When Jackson and the boy stayed with Chandler during May 1993, Chandler urged the entertainer to spend more time with his son at his house. 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.

    That same month, the boy, his mother and Jackson flew to Monaco for the World Music Awards. “Evan began to get jealous of the involvement and felt left out,” Freeman says. Upon their return, Jackson and the boy again stayed with Chandler, which pleased him — a five-day visit, during which they slept in a room with the youth’s half brother. Though Chandler has admitted that Jackson and the boy always had their clothes on whenever he saw them in bed together, he claimed that it was during this time that his suspicions of sexual misconduct were triggered. At no time has Chandler claimed to have witnessed any sexual misconduct on Jackson’s part.

    Chandler became increasingly volatile, making threats that alienated Jackson, Dave Schwartz and June Chandler Schwartz. In early July 1993, Dave Schwartz, who had been friendly with Chandler, secretly tape-recorded a lengthy telephone conversation he had with him. During the conversation, 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.”

    “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.

    Elsewhere on the tape, Chandler indicated he was prepared to move against Jackson: “It’s already set,” Chandler told Schwartz. “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 [his attorney, Barry K. Rothman, presumably] 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.”

    Chandler then predicted what would, in fact, transpire six weeks later: “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.”

    “Does that help [the boy]?” Schwartz asked.

    “That’s irrelevant to me,” Chandler replied. “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.”

    Instead of going to the police, seemingly the most appropriate action in a situation involving suspected child molestation, Chandler had turned to a lawyer. And not just any lawyer. He’d turned to Barry Rothman. “This attorney I found, I picked the nastiest son of a bitch 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.” (Through his attorney, Wylie Aitken, Rothman declined to be interviewed for this article. Aitken agreed to answer general questions limited to the Jackson case, and then only about aspects that did not involve Chandler or the boy.)

    To know Rothman, says a former colleague who worked with him during the Jackson case, and who kept a diary of what Rothman and Chandler said and did in Rothman’s office, is to believe that Barry could have “devised this whole plan, period. This [making allegations against Michael Jackson] is within the boundary of his character, to do something like this.” Information supplied by Rothman’s former clients, associates and employees reveals a pattern of manipulation and deceit.

    Rothman has a general-law practice in Century City. At one time, he negotiated music and concert deals for Little Richard, the Rolling Stones, the Who, ELO and Ozzy Osbourne. Gold and platinum records commemorating those days still hang on the walls of his office. With his grayish-white beard and perpetual tan — which he maintains in a tanning bed at his house — Rothman reminds a former client of “a leprechaun.” To a former employee, Rothman is “a demon” with “a terrible temper.” His most cherished possession, acquaintances say, is his 1977 Rolls-Royce Corniche, which carries the license plate “BKR 1.”

    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. In addition, more than twenty civil lawsuits involving Rothman have been filed in Superior Court, several complaints have been made to the Labor Commission and disciplinary actions for three incidents have been taken against him by the state bar of California. In 1992, he was suspended for a year, though that suspension was stayed and he was instead placed on probation for the term.

    In 1987, Rothman was $16,800 behind in alimony and child-support payments. Through her attorney, his ex-wife, Joanne Ward, threatened to attach Rothman’s assets, but he agreed to make good on the debt. A year later, after Rothman still hadn’t made the payments, Ward’s attorney tried to put a lien on Rothman’s expensive Sherman Oaks home. To their surprise, Rothman said he no longer owned the house; three years earlier, he’d deeded the property to Tinoa Operations, Inc., a Panamanian shell corporation. According to Ward’s lawyer, Rothman claimed that he’d had $200,000 of Tinoa’s money, in cash, at his house one night when he was robbed at gunpoint. The only way he could make good on the loss was to deed his home to Tinoa, he told them. Ward and her attorney suspected the whole scenario was a ruse, but they could never prove it. It was only after sheriff’s deputies had towed away Rothman’s Rolls Royce that he began paying what he owed.

    Documents filed with Los Angeles Superior Court seem to confirm the suspicions of Ward and her attorney. These show that Rothman created an elaborate network of foreign bank accounts and shell companies, seemingly to conceal some of his assets — in particular, his home and much of the $531,000 proceeds from its eventual sale, in 1989. The companies, including Tinoa, can be traced to Rothman. He bought a Panamanian shelf company (an existing but nonoperating firm) and arranged matters so that though his name would not appear on the list of its officers, he would have unconditional power of attorney, in effect leaving him in control of moving money in and out.

    Meanwhile, Rothman’s employees didn’t fare much better than his ex-wife. Former employees say they sometimes had to beg for their paychecks. And sometimes the checks that they did get would bounce. He couldn’t keep legal secretaries. “He’d demean and humiliate them,” says one. Temporary workers fared the worst. “He would work them for two weeks,” adds the legal secretary, “then run them off by yelling at them and saying they were stupid. Then he’d tell the agency he was dissatisfied with the temp and wouldn’t pay.” Some agencies finally got wise and made Rothman pay cash up front before they’d do business with him.

    The state bar’s 1992 disciplining of Rothman grew out of a conflict-of-interest matter. A year earlier, Rothman had been kicked off a case by a client, Muriel Metcalf, whom he’d been representing in child-support and custody proceedings; Metcalf later accused him of padding her bill. Four months after Metcalf fired him, Rothman, without notifying her, began representing the company of her estranged companion, Bob Brutzman.

    The case is revealing for another reason: It shows that Rothman had some experience dealing with child-molestation allegations before the Jackson scandal. Metcalf, while Rothman was still representing her, had accused Brutzman of molesting their child (which Brutzman denied). Rothman’s knowledge of Metcalf’s charges didn’t prevent him from going to work for Brutzman’s company — a move for which he was disciplined.

    By 1992, Rothman was running from numerous creditors. Folb Management, a corporate real-estate agency, was one. Rothman owed the company $53,000 in back rent and interest for an office on Sunset Boulevard. Folb sued. Rothman then countersued, claiming that the building’s security was so inadequate that burglars were able to steal more than $6,900 worth of equipment from his office one night. In the course of the proceedings, Folb’s lawyer told the court, “Mr. Rothman is not the kind of person whose word can be taken at face value.”

    In November 1992, Rothman had his law firm file for bankruptcy, listing thirteen creditors — including Folb Management — with debts totaling $880,000 and no acknowledged assets. After reviewing the bankruptcy papers, an ex-client whom Rothman was suing for $400,000 in legal fees noticed that Rothman had failed to list a $133,000 asset. The former client threatened to expose Rothman for “defrauding his creditors” — a felony — if he didn’t drop the lawsuit. Cornered, Rothman had the suit dismissed in a matter of hours.

    Six months before filing for bankruptcy, Rothman had transferred title on his Rolls-Royce to Majo, a fictitious company he controlled. Three years earlier, Rothman had claimed a different corporate owner for the car — Longridge Estates, a subsidiary of Tinoa Operations, the company that held the deed to his home. On corporation papers filed by Rothman, the addresses listed for Longridge and Tinoa were the same, 1554 Cahuenga Boulevard — which, as it turns out, is that of a Chinese restaurant in Hollywood.

    It was with this man, in June 1993, that Evan Chandler began carrying out the “certain plan” to which he referred in his taped conversation with Dave Schwartz. 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. Chandler became irate and, say several sources, threatened to go public with the evidence he claimed he had on Jackson. “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.”

    Jackson asked his then-lawyer, Bert Fields, to intervene. One of the most prominent attorneys in the entertainment industry, Fields has been representing Jackson since 1990 and had negotiated for him, with Sony, the biggest music deal ever — with possible earnings of $700 million. Fields brought in investigator Anthony Pellicano to help sort things out. Pellicano does things Sicilian-style, being fiercely loyal to those he likes but a ruthless hardball player when it comes to his enemies.

    On July 9, 1993, Dave Schwartz and June Chandler Schwartz played the taped conversation for Pellicano. “After listening to the tape for ten minutes, I knew it was about extortion,” says Pellicano. That same day, he drove to Jackson’s Century City condominium, where Chandler’s son and the boy’s half-sister were visiting. 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. On July 11, after Jackson had declined to meet with Chandler, the boy’s father and Rothman went ahead with another part of the plan — they needed to get custody of the boy. Chandler asked his ex-wife to let the youth stay with him for a “one-week visitation period.” As Bert Fields later said in an affidavit to the court, June Chandler Schwartz allowed the boy to go based on Rothman’s assurance to Fields that her son would come back to her after the specified time, never guessing that Rothman’s word would be worthless and that Chandler would not return their son.

    Wylie Aitken, Rothman’s attorney, claims that “at the time [Rothman] gave his word, it was his intention to have the boy returned.” However, once “he learned that the boy would be whisked out of the country [to go on tour with Jackson], I don’t think Mr. Rothman had any other choice.” But the chronology clearly indicates that Chandler had learned in June, at the graduation, that the boy’s mother planned to take her son on the tour. The taped telephone conversation made in early July, before Chandler took custody of his son, also seems to verify that Chandler and Rothman had no intention of abiding by the visitation agreement. “They [the boy and his mother] don’t know it yet,” Chandler told Schwartz, “but they aren’t going anywhere.”

    On July 12, one day after Chandler took control of his son, he had his ex-wife sign a document prepared by Rothman that prevented her from taking the youth out of Los Angeles County. This meant the boy would be unable to accompany Jackson on the tour. His mother told the court she signed the document under duress. Chandler, she said in an affidavit, had threatened that”I would not have [the boy] returned to me.” A bitter custody battle ensued, making even murkier any charges Chandler made about wrong-doing on Jackson’s part. (As of this August [1994], the boy was still living with Chandler.) It was during the first few weeks after Chandler took control of his son — who was now isolated from his friends, mother and stepfather — that the boy’s allegations began to take shape.

    At the same time, 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.” Importantly, he also stated that if this were a real and not a hypothetical case, he would be required by law to report the matter to the Los Angeles County Department of Children’s Services (DCS).

    According to a July 27 entry in the diary kept by Rothman’s former colleague, it’s clear that Rothman was guiding Chandler in the plan. “Rothman wrote letter to Chandler advising him how to report child abuse without liability to parent,” the entry reads. At this point, there still had been made no demands or formal accusations, only veiled assertions that had become intertwined with a fierce custody battle. On August 4, 1993, however, things became very clear. 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 counterdemand — 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 overhear 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. A newsman at KCBS-TV, in L.A., reported on May 3 of this year that Chandler had used the drug on his son, but the dentist claimed he did so only to pull his son’s tooth and that while under the drug’s influence, the boy came out with allegations. Asked for this article about his use of the drug on the boy, Torbiner replied: “If I used it, it was for dental purposes.”

    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.

    “It’s a psychiatric medication that cannot be relied on to produce fact,” says Dr. Resnick, the Cleveland psychiatrist. “People are very suggestible under it. People will say things under sodium Amytal that are blatantly untrue.” Sodium Amytal is a barbiturate, an invasive drug that puts people in a hypnotic state when it’s injected intravenously.

    Primarily administered for the treatment of amnesia, it first came into use during World War II, on soldiers traumatized — some into catatonic states — by the horrors of war. Scientific studies done in 1952 debunked the drug as a truth serum and instead demonstrated its risks: 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,” says Resnick. But its effects are apparently even more insidious: “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,” says Resnick.

    Recently, the reliability of the drug became an issue in a high-profile trial in Napa County, California. After undergoing numerous therapy sessions, at least one of which included the use of sodium Amytal, 20-year-old Holly Ramona accused her father of molesting her as a child. Gary Ramona vehemently denied the charge and sued his daughter’s therapist and the psychiatrist who had administered the drug. This past May, jurors sided with Gary Ramona, believing that the therapist and the psychiatrist may have reinforced memories that were false. Gary Ramona’s was the first successful legal challenge to the so-called “repressed memory phenomenon” that has produced thousands of sexual-abuse allegations over the past decade.

    As for Chandler’s story about using the drug to sedate his son during a tooth extraction, that too seems dubious, in light of the drug’s customary use. “It’s absolutely a psychiatric drug,” says Dr. Kenneth Gottlieb, a San Francisco psychiatrist who has administered sodium Amytal to amnesia patients. Dr. John Yagiela, the coordinator of the anesthesia and pain control department of UCLA’s school of dentistry, adds, “It’s unusual for it to be used [for pulling a tooth]. It makes no sense when better, safer alternatives are available. It would not be my choice.”

    Because of sodium Amytal’s potential side effects, some doctors will administer it only in a hospital. “I would never want to use a drug that tampers with a person’s unconscious unless there was no other drug available,” says Gottlieb. “And I would not use it without resuscitating equipment, in case of allergic reaction, and only with an M.D. anesthesiologist present.”

    Chandler, it seems, did not follow these guidelines. He had the procedure performed on his son in his office, and he relied on the dental anesthesiologist Mark Torbiner for expertise. (It was Torbiner who’d introduced Chandler and Rothman in 1991, when Rothman needed dental work.)

    The nature of Torbiner’s practice appears to have made it highly successful. “He boasts that he has $100 a month overhead and $40,000 a month income,” says Nylla Jones, a former patient of his. Torbiner doesn’t have an office for seeing patients; rather, he travels to various dental offices around the city, where he administers anesthesia during procedures.

    This magazine has learned that the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration is probing another aspect of Torbiner’s business practices: He 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. He arrives at the homes of his clients — some of them celebrities — carrying a kind of fishing-tackle box that contains drugs and syringes. At one time, the license plate on his Jaguar read “SLPYDOC.” According to Jones, Torbiner charges $350 for a basic ten-to-twenty-minute visit. In what Jones describes as standard practice, when it’s unclear how long Torbiner will need to stay, the client, anticipating the stupor that will soon set in, leaves a blank check for Torbiner to fill in with the appropriate amount.

    Torbiner wasn’t always successful. In 1989, he got caught in a lie and was asked to resign from UCLA, where he was an assistant professor at the school of dentistry. Torbiner had asked to take a half-day off so he could observe a religious holiday but was later found to have worked at a dental office instead.

    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.

    On August 16, three days after Chandler and Rothman rejected the $350,000 script deal, the situation came to a head. On behalf of June Chandler Schwartz, Michael Freeman notified Rothman that he would be filing papersituation came to a head. On behalf of June Chandler Schwartz, Michael Freeman notified Rothman that he would be filing papers early the next morning that would force Chandler to turn over the boy. Reacting quickly, 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.

    Five days after Abrams called the authorities, the media got wind of the investigation. On Sunday morning, August 22, Don Ray, a free-lance reporter in Burbank, was asleep when his phone rang. The caller, one of his tipsters, said that warrants had been issued to search Jackson’s ranch and condominium. Ray sold the story to L.A.’s KNBC-TV, which broke the news at 4 P.M. the following day.

    After that, Ray “watched this story go away like a freight train,” he says. Within twenty-four hours, Jackson was the lead story on seventy-three TV news broadcasts in the Los Angeles area alone and was on the front page of every British newspaper. The story of Michael Jackson and the 13-year-old boy became a frenzy of hype and unsubstantiated rumor, with the line between tabloid and mainstream media virtually eliminated.

    The extent of the allegations against Jackson wasn’t known until August 25. A person inside the DCS illegally leaked a copy of the abuse report to Diane Dimond of Hard Copy. Within hours, the L.A. office of a British news service also got the report and began selling copies to any reporter willing to pay $750. The following day, the world knew about the graphic details in the leaked report. “While laying next to each other in bed, Mr. Jackson put his hand under [the child’s] shorts,” the social worker had written. From there, the coverage soon demonstrated that anything about Jackson would be fair game.
    “Competition among news organizations became so fierce,” says KNBC reporter Conan Nolan, that “stories weren’t being checked out. It was very unfortunate.” The National Enquirer put twenty reporters and editors on the story. One team knocked on 500 doors in Brentwood trying to find Evan Chandler and his son. Using property records, they finally did, catching up with Chandler in his black Mercedes. “He was not a happy man. But I was,” said Andy O’Brien, a tabloid photographer.

    Next came the accusers — Jackson’s former employees. First, Stella and Philippe Lemarque, Jackson’ 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, followed. When their asking price was $100,000, they said ” ‘the hand was outside the kid’s pants,’ ” Barresi told a producer of Frontline, a PBS program. “As soon as their price went up to $500,000, the hand went inside the pants. So come on.” The L.A. district attorney’s office eventually concluded that both couples were useless as witnesses.

    Next came the bodyguards. 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 1, with the deal in place, two of the guards appeared on the program; they had been fired, Dimond told viewers, because “they knew too much about Michael Jackson’s strange relationship with young boys.” In reality, as their depositions under oath three months later reveal, it was clear they had never actually seen Jackson do anything improper with Chandler’s son 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.”

    (The guards’ lawsuit, filed in March 1994, was still pending as this article went to press.)

    Note: The case was thrown out of court in July 1995. The Press Reports.

    Next came the maid. 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. 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.

    The coverage, says Michael Levine, a Jackson press representative, “followed a proctologist’s view of the world. Hard Copy was loathsome. The vicious and vile treatment of this man in the media was for selfish reasons. [Even] if you have never bought a Michael Jackson record in your life, you should be very concerned. Society is built on very few pillars. One of them is truth. When you abandon that, it’s a slippery slope.”

    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.” In an era of widespread and often false claims of child molestation, police and prosecutors have come to give great weight to the testimony of psychiatrists, therapists and social workers.

    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 evidence was very good for us,” says an attorney who worked on Jackson’s defense. “The other side had nothing but a big mouth.”

    Despite the scant evidence supporting their belief that Jackson was guilty, the police stepped up their efforts. Two officers flew to the Philippines to try to nail down the Quindoys’ “hand in the pants” story, but apparently decided it lacked credibility. The police also employed aggressive investigative techniques — including allegedly telling lies — to push the children into making accusations against Jackson. According to several parents who complained to Bert Fields, officers told them unequivocally that their children had been molested, even though the children denied to their parents that anything bad had happened. 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.” 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. Sicard did not respond to requests for an interview for this article.

    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.’ ”

    “There’s no such thing as a classic profile. They made a completely foolish and illogical error,” says Dr. Ralph Underwager, a Minneapolis psychiatrist who has treated pedophiles and victims of incest since 1953. Jackson, he believes, “got nailed” because of “misconceptions like these that have been allowed to parade as fact in an era of hysteria.” In truth, as a U.S. Department of Health and Human Services study shows, many child-abuse allegations — 48 percent of those filed in 1990 — proved to be unfounded.

    “It was just a matter of time before someone like Jackson became a target,” says Phillip Resnick. “He’s rich, bizarre, hangs around with kids and there is a fragility to him. The atmosphere is such that an accusation must mean it happened.”

    The seeds of settlement were already being sown as the police investigation continued in both counties through the fall of 1993. And a behind-the-scenes battle among Jackson’s lawyers for control of the case, which would ultimately alter the course the defense would take, had begun.

    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. 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

    Over the months, lawyers for both sides were retained, demoted and ousted as they feuded over the best strategy to take. Rothman ceased being Chandler’s lawyer in late August, when the Jackson camp filed extortion charges against the two. Both then hired high-priced criminal defense attorneys to represent them.. (Rothman retained Robert Shapiro, now O.J. Simpson’s chief lawyer.) According to the diary kept by Rothman’s former colleague, on August 26, before the extortion charges were filed, Chandler was heard to say “It’s my ass that’s on the line and in danger of going to prison.” The investigation into the extortion charges was superficial because, says a source, “the police never took it that seriously. But a whole lot more could have been done.” For example, as they had done with Jackson, the police could have sought warrants to search the homes and offices of Rothman and Chandler. And when both men, through their attorneys, declined to be interviewed by police, a grand jury could have been convened.

    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.

    Once news of the suit spread, the wolves began lining up at the door. 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.”
    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 — including John DeLorean, whose trail he won, and Kim Basinger, whose Boxing Helena contract
    dispute he lost. (Also, for a short time this June, Weitzman was O.J. Simpson’s attorney.) Some predicted a problem between the two lawyers early on. There wasn’t room for two strong attorneys used to running their own show.

    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 still in control of Jackson’s defense, they adopted an aggressive strategy. They believed staunchly in Jackson’s innocence and vowed to fight the charges in court. 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.”

    Dissension within the Jackson camp accelerated on November 12, after Jackson’s publicist announced at a press conference that the singer was canceling the remainder of his world tour to go into a drug-rehabilitation program to treat his addiction to painkillers. 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 indictmentold 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.” Fields

    “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.” Pellicano, who had received his share of flak for his aggressive manner, resigned at the same time.

    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.

    Why would Jackson’s side agree to settle out of court, given his claims of innocence and the questionable evidence against him? His attorneys apparently decided there were many factors that argued against taking the case to civil court. Among them was the fact that Jackson’s emotional fragility would be tested by the oppressive media coverage that would likely plague the singer day after day during a trial that could last as long as six months. Politics and racial issues had also
    seeped into legal proceedings — particularly in Los Angeles, which was still recovering from the Rodney King ordeal — and the defense feared that a court of law could not be counted on to deliver justice. Then, too, there was the jury mix to consider. As one attorney says, “They figured that Hispanics might resent [Jackson] for his money, blacks might resent him for trying to be white, and whites would have trouble getting around the molestation issue.” In Resnick’s opinion, “The
    hysteria is so great and the stigma [of child molestation] is so strong, there is no defense against it.”

    Jackson’s lawyers also worried about what might happen if a criminal trial followed, particularly in Santa Barbara, which is a largely white, conservative, middle-to-upper-class community. Any way the defense looked at it, a civil trial seemed too big a gamble. By meeting the terms of a civil settlement, sources say, the lawyers figured they could forestall a criminal trial through a tacit understanding that Chandler would agree to make his son unavailable to testify.

    Others close to the case say the decision to settle also probably had to do with another factor — the lawyers’ reputations. “Can you imagine what would happen to an attorney who lost the Michael Jackson case?” says Anthony Pellicano. “There’s no way for all three lawyers to come out winners unless they settle. The only person who lost is Michael Jackson.” But Jackson, says Branca, “changed his mind about [taking the case to trial] when he returned to this country. He hadn’t seen the massive coverage and how hostile it was. He just wanted the whole thing to go away.”

    On the other side, relationships among members of the boy’s family had become bitter. During a meeting in Larry Feldman’s office in late 1993, Chandler, a source says, “completely lost it and beat up Dave [Schwartz].” Schwartz, having separated from June by this time, was getting pushed out of making decisions that affected his stepson, and he resented Chandler for taking the boy and not returning him.

    “Dave got mad and told Evan this was all about extortion, anyway, at which point Evan stood up, walked over and started hitting Dave,” a second source says.
    To anyone who lived in Los Angeles in January 1994, there were two main topics of discussion — the earthquake and the Jackson settlement. On January 25, Jackson agreed to pay the boy an undisclosed sum. The day before, Jackson’s attorneys had withdrawn the extortion charges against Chandler and Rothman.

    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. The rest of the money is being held in trust for the boy and will be paid out under the supervision of a court-appointed trustee.

    “Remember, this case was always about money,” Pellicano says, “and Evan Chandler wound up getting what he wanted.” Since Chandler still has custody of his son, sources contend that logically this means the father has access to any money his son gets.

    By late May 1994, Chandler finally appeared to be out of dentistry. He’d closed down his Beverly Hills office, citing ongoing harassment from Jackson supporters. Under the terms of the settlement, Chandler is apparently prohibited from writing about the affair, but his brother, Ray Charmatz, was reportedly trying to get a book deal.

    In what may turn out to be the never-ending case, this past August, both Barry Rothman and Dave Schwartz (two principal players left out of the settlement) filed civil suits against Jackson. Schwartz maintains that the singer broke up his family. Rothman’s lawsuit claims defamation and slander on the part of Jackson, as well as his original defense team — Fields, Pellicano and Weitzman — for the allegations of extortion. “The charge of [extortion],” says Rothman attorney Aitken, “is totally untrue. Mr. Rothman has been held up for public ridicule, was the subject of a criminal investigation and suffered loss of income.” (Presumably, some of Rothman’s lost income is the hefty fee he would have received had he been able to continue as Chandler’s attorney through the settlement phase.)

    As for Michael Jackson, “he is getting on with his life,” says publicist Michael Levine. Now married, Jackson also recently recorded three new songs for a greatest-hits album and completed a new music video called “History.”

    And what became of the massive investigation of Jackson? After millions of dollars were spent by prosecutors and police departments in two jurisdictions, and after two grand juries questioned close to 200 witnesses, including 30 children who knew Jackson, not a single corroborating witness could be found. (In June 1994, still determined to find even one corroborating witness, three prosecutors and two police detectives flew to Australia to again question Wade Robson, the boy who had acknowledged that he’d slept in the same bed with Jackson. Once again, the boy said that nothing bad had happened.)

    The sole allegations leveled against Jackson, then, remain those made by one youth, and only after the boy had been give a potent hypnotic drug, leaving him susceptible to the power of suggestion.

    “I found the case suspicious,” says Dr. Underwager, the Minneapolis psychiatrist, “precisely because the only evidence came from one boy. That would be highly unlikely. Actual pedophiles have an average of 240 victims in their lifetime. It’s a progressive disorder. They’re never satisfied.”

    Given the slim evidence against Jackson, it seems unlikely he would have been found guilty had the case gone to trial. But in the court of public opinion, there are no restrictions. People are free to speculate as they wish, and Jackson’s eccentricity leaves him vulnerable to the likelihood that the public has assumed the worst about him.

    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.”

    To some observers, the Michael Jackson story illustrates the dangerous power of accusation, against which there is often no defense — particularly when the accusations involve child sexual abuse. To others, something else is clear now — that police and prosecutors spent millions of dollars to create a case whose foundation never existed.

    I know this is quite long, but this case is no simple nor uncomplicated case. If THIS doesn’t impress you, I don’t know what can. You all who THINK he’s a Pedo will probably still think he is one WHEN he is proven INNOCENT of all charges. You will say “He just got off ’cause he’s a celebrity” or “He payed the court people or something. There’s no way that freak is innocent”. Just remember one thing: Misloaded weapons have a way of backfiring.

  67. A person with a message says:

    Now I know I don’t have all you guys keeping your thoughts in. What, you all have nothing to say now? I will take that as a good sign that my point have been well proven then…

  68. sactofunk says:

    To A person with message:

    I’m a law student and do plenty of reading. Its not that there are no more comments. Noone wants to spend 20 to 30 minutes of their time reading the article, that’s all. Plus, the article is ten years old. A fart in the wind. Not worth the time.

  69. sactofunk says:

    Misloaded wepaons have a away of backfiring! Oh my…I wonder what would happen if someone said that to Jason Williams’ face

  70. bystander says:

    sactofunk, you mean you are willing to make a decision on someone’s guilt, but you can’t be bothered to spend 20 or 30 minutes of your life to obtain the facts? And you’re in law school? Have you considered applying for a position in Santa Barbara? I know someone who might be a good mentor for you.

    So typical. It is only those who are willing to invest the time to learn the facts know of Michael Jackson’s innocence. People who intentionally allow themselves to remain ignorant are the ones who profess Michael’s guilt.

    A person with a message — thank you for trying to inform people of the truth behind these extortion plots against Michael. It won’t be long before Michael’s innocence will finally be proven in a court of law. That is… if Sneddon doesn’t find a way to weasel out of the current court case due to lack of evidence. It is time that the facts of the 1993 and this current extortion plots are revealed to everyone.

    And take heart… while people may not be replying to your message, people ARE listening. I was not a fan of Michael’s until he was charged last November. I became interested in the case and started educating myself on the facts. I ran into quite a few articles and information, such as the ones you posted, that helped me to understand what had happened in 1993. I’ve been watching this current case very closely, and it’s clear Michael is innocent this time around as well. This will come out in the trial, I am certain (as long as Sneddon doesn’t back out). Your words are NOT lost on everyone. There are more and more people like me who are listening and learning. The majority of the people out there now see his innocence even if they aren’t necessarily “fans” of his music or persona. Keep posting. People are listening!

  71. TR Wolf says:

    I personally think that Michael lost his childhood, so a LARGE part of the sleepovers and Neverland etc are due to wanting to do the things he missed out on etc, but I also think that these accusations are true to an extent. Its true that MJ only seems to invite boys to his ranch on the sleepovers (I think its odd that ANY parent would let their child stay over at a house with one adult and no others, just kids, especially knowing MJ’s accused past!), and he WAS found guilty of giving the kids “Jesus Juice” which was wine hidden in a soda can. I think maybe there have been instances of sexual contact such as with Jordy,but since then feel that many others have taken advantage of this and jumped on the bandwagon with their own fake accusations. The sexual stuff probably happened (and to those of you defending him, just look at the evidence. I know you love him and he’s generally a cool guy, but dont force yourself into thinking that its not possible for the sexual stuff to have taken place just because he’s michael jackson).

    So summed up, I think he IS trying to recapture his youth and think he probably did do sexual stuff with a few of his young male friends, but I think its a desire and he feels bad about it afterwards until it happens again, its almost like an addiction, but I dont think he ever abused any of the boys.

  72. Jackson Fan says:

    When Jordy told the officers or whoever what Michaels Genitalier (I know its probabaly spelt wrong) looked like he mentioned discoloured. When the people photographed Michael, They tried to match up as much as possible to Jordys accusations. Nothing Matched at all.

  73. AH HA says:

    “Before O.J. Simpson, there was Michael Jackson — another beloved black celebrity seemingly brought down by allegations of scandal in his personal life.”

    The person who wrote this article believes that OJ is innocent. Nuff said.

  74. AH HA says:

    It was funny that Jackson never filed an extortion charge until a newpaper bought up that point.

    “Michael Jackson]’s representatives have offered few details of the alleged extortion attempt. Nor have they taken the alleged extortion to police,
    according to Los Angeles police Capt. William O. Gartland, as quoted in the Times. Gartland’s division handles extortion cases, and “nobody’s brought anything to us,” he told the paper.”
    David Von Drehle, Jessica Crosby. The Washington Post. Washington, D.C.: Aug 27, 1993. pg. A.01

    “Michael Jackson’s security consultant, Anthony Pellicano, says he delayed telling police about an alleged extortion attempt on the singing star for more than two months in order to “buy time” and “discredit” those making allegations against the entertainer.”
    Ian Katz. The Washington Post. Washington, D.C.: Aug 30, 1993. pg. B.01

    “The Los Angeles Police Department is now examining the extortion claim. But a former colleague of Pellicano says the private
    investigator had admitted to him he was simply trying to protect Jackson.”
    — John Mullin, ‘Out To Lynch In L.A.’ (The Guardian, 8/31/93)

    “Even the first sketchy media accounts of the investigation, which surfaced a few days later, contained Pellicano’s spin on the case. Initial reports contained no reference to molestation, but quoted the investigator saying police were acting on “an extortion attempt gone awry.” While sifting through the interview requests, Pellicano and Weitzman began dealing privately with the Los Angeles Police Department, providing information that led the LAPD to open an investigation into the alleged extortion attempt. Amid the confusion, some other private investigators raised questions about Pellicano’s approach. Why, they wondered, did Pellicano tell the media that
    he had not tape-recorded the alleged extortion demands? Under California law, the secret taping of phone calls is allowed if there is reasonable fear of extortion. That would have been a sure-fire way to document the allegation.”
    DAVID FERRELL, CHUCK PHILIPS. The Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles, Calif.:
    Sep 3, 1993. pg. 1

    “Pellicano’s big production number came last Wednesday: the presentation of the ‘extortion tapes’. These purported to show how the dentist tried to extort money, allegedly dollars 20 million, from Jackson on 17 August, the day the boy made his accusations to a therapist.
    But the tapes contained no clear attempt at extortion and he was unable to explain how he, a tapes expert, had not recorded other conversations, which according to his own allegations, must have been more damaging.”
    — Christopher Reed, ‘Jackson: The good, the bad and the just plain
    sleazy’ (The Observer, 9/5/93)

    Pellicano’s claim that Jordy denied the allegations in a private conversation, saying that the charges were a setup by his dad…yet,
    though he made this claim, he had no recordings of the conversation to prove it. Funny, you’d think if the conversation had actually occurred that Pellicano would’ve seized the opportunity to document it. For that matter, if necessary, he was certainly smart enough to call in witnesses and then ask Jordy to repeat it. So why didn’t he do that? Pellicano’s claim, by the way, is documented in several news sources, including the news article ‘Dangerous Time For Star’ (The Advertiser, 12/23/93)

    “Pellicano said the pop star gets 25 to 30 extortion attempts a year.” Jessica Crosby. The Washington Post. Washington, D.C.: Aug 25, 1993. pg. D.01

    “Pellicano, meanwhile, was a high-profile spokesman for Jackson in the first weeks after news of the criminal investigation broke. Pellicano, a private investigator with a reputation for aggressive tactics, challenged the
    allegations with ferocity, accusing the boy’s father of attempting to extort $20 million out of Jackson and of resorting to the child molestation
    accusations only after Jackson’s representatives rebuffed his extortion attempts.
    But he too drew fire for his work on Jackson’s behalf. In an effort to bolster the extortion claim, for instance, Pellicano released a tape recording of what he said was evidence of the extortion attempt, but the tape was HEAVILY edited.
    A trial date in the lawsuit has been set for March 21, and Jackson is scheduled to be deposed on Jan. 18.”
    JIM NEWTON, SONIA NAZARIO. The Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles, Calif.: Dec 22, 1993. pg. 1

    “Then, on Jan. 24, the day before the settlement was disclosed, the L.A. prosecutor’s office announced that they had found no credible evidence that the 14-year-old’s father, a Beverly Hills dentist and aspiring screenwriter, had tried to extort $20 million from Jackson in return for his son’s silence, as the Jackson camp had claimed when the molestation charges were brought”. DODGING THE BULLET , By: Hewitt, Bill, Stambler, Lyndon, People, 00937673, 2/7/94, Vol. 41, Issue 5

    “When police wired Jackson’s maid Blanca Francia, whose son was one of the boys involved in the investigation, according to someone on the prosecution team, they heard Pellicano beg her not to go to the police with her information.”
    — Maureen Orth, ‘Losing His Grip’, (Vanity Fair, April 2003)

    Last but not least, Pellicano was an expert in audio. I’m saying was because he is currently in jail.

    “…Even the FBI envied his lab, he told clients. Pellicano gave reporters tours of the facility. On one occasion in the early 1990s, he demonstrated to a Times reporter how an innocent conversation could be altered to appear
    incriminating or embarrassing…” L.A. Times 2/01/2004

  75. Arnold Schwarzenegger says:

    me grab a woman, he molest a boy but rich and powerful always rule the nation.

  76. Rafa says:

    One Evil Glove

    Your glove is off and a path of action is about to be pursued in a ruthless and uncompromisingly aggressive way. And it will reach unto those that help thee also they shall pay the price, because you have summoned the soothsayers? To hinder our journey, for it was not in us, that cause thee to fall, but the great dragon that keeps the fire, so have you caused the fire to fall upon thyself, because of thy greed and thy swelling and thy perverse inclinations. You have walked down the erroneous path to thy own hurt and obliteration. We were thy right hand and you abhor us. Thy safety was sure, until our eyes were open and we withstood thee because of thy evil heart against the innocent little ones. You sent your soothsayers to denote us, with harm and to chastise us with ruin and death, our sacred families were disposed to walk no more and our struggle to keep them above the waters became excruciating. Who shall save us without price? The Great Spirit is our hope. You have been living in a world that is not reserved for humans, unclean spirits had you to believe that you were a god and a kingdom was yours, because you were called a king and that fooled you.

  77. Chloe says:

    i was researching an assignment for a feature article i was thinking about writing on the changing perceptions of michael jackson since he was accused of abusing young children. i have not followed the whole story, however am a fan of MJ’s music. I read about 25% of the articles when it occured to me that here are a bunch of ppl sitting here judging a man they dont even know. It hurts and concerns me that so many ppl would want this man dead. Which leads me to wonder whether you all have issues of your own to want a man of such talent to end his own life. And yes michael has his own issues but use all need to sit back and let the man be. I have just one thing to share with you all
    For all you non-fans out there these are lyrics from one of MJ’s songs. In other words dont judge a man before you’ve walked two moons in his mocassins (shoes) You should all be praying to have talents like he’s, or else, get on with your own lives!

  78. k says:

    the kids skin is light bc their mother is white.

    Vitiligo is by no means rare AND in its early stages he used brown makeup (this is why he is seen very llight brown in early 91) using brown is useful up to a certain point –when 80% pigment is gone, coloring yourself black every few hours is no way to live. He reluctantly changed to white makeup in late 91.

    thousands of children have come forward in michaels defense. 2…very shady…families have made accusations.

    have you looked at this from any other perspective than that of a media absorber? Try using your own brain, doing your own research, and forimng your own opinion bSED ON Fct, not media misrepresentation. It might do you good to talk to a “crazy” fan. The fans know every nook and cranny. they know the background info on everyone and can even tell you which self proclaimed reporters should have lost their access to the airways long ago.

    I do give you credit for attempting a different point of view–but please start checking your sources. Make sure that they are unbiased and that your statements are based on fact. You have insulted the vitiligo community among others.

  79. k says:


    boys and girls of all ages visit the ranch. 13 yr old boys just make for better punch lines

    Mccaulay culkin has been speaking alot lately with his new movie out. He knows mj is innocent–if anyone knows its him.

    IGNORANCE = blind fools


  80. Anne Haight says:

    You have insulted the vitiligo community among others.

    Gimme a fuckin’ break. My comments about MJ don’t reflect on other people with vitiligo. So ok, maybe MJ does have vitiligo. Big deal. He’s still a nut.

  81. wanikki says:

    A wicked wind bloweth and the eyes of humanity are blind feeding upon the fallen stars…

  82. lala says:

    I myself was a fan, it was so hard for me to come to this fact that he was a molester.but i had to tell myself this is who he is . the evidence is sitting right here upon my very eyes. how could i ever say this man is innocent.
    i had special connections by michael and he was wonting to meet me . because my friend had wonted me to meet him cause it was my dream but i was affraid. it scared me so bad knowing that he could have molested me if i didnt get that courage to tell him i think its for the best we go our seperate ways.i sat in my room and cried for hours i was so unhappy for days. cause i keep thinking what if he is innocent what if??????? i knew more then anything he needed help and i wonted to be the one to help him. people say he takes pain killers and has over did him self to where his body guards would have to pick him up. there could be a chance of him killing himself.. but in my heart i hope he doesnt i hope he”ll find help. and he”ll start a new fresh life…this is all i hoped for…but then one day my friend calls me up and tells me that these people found bruises on his to boys on their upper leg.their where no bruises on the girl. it hurt me so bad to think how could a father a man whos helped so many children would wont to do this to his own children.. i think hes done that. im not saying he did someone ele could have. michael has made a statement saying he lets his children sleep with other people. but still how sick.there are these urges that people get if you have been molested yourself or abused . i think maybe michael got those urges cause himself was abused i dont know about being molested but michael did grow up around sex because of his brothers. when it comes to michael jackson in my heart it hurts so bad to where i need to sit down and just scream and tell him you need HELP.my grandfather himself was a molester and all these signs that are comeing from michael like parties slumberparties children that ador him and love him. are the same things my grandfather did. it comes to me that michael can be 100 precent innocent the same way he could be 100 precent guilty.

  83. Russ says:

    Michael Jackson Is no fuckin pedophile. People know he has a shit load of money so they make up shit to get money out of him and its BULLSHIT.

  84. Anonymous says:

    I would like to respond to those who can’t seem to understand why people think Michael Jackson may be innocent. What evidence shows he’s guilty of the crime? Let me be frank here! The mother has changed her stories repeatedly, the timeline has changed, and even the DA has changed the charges around. This woman had plans to sue Jackson before meeting him! If the accusers were telling the truth, then we wouldn’t have had
    several versions of the child molestation account. The reason many of you insist that he’s guilty is because he’s too weird for your taste. History has shown that strange people are demonized. The Salem witch hunt cost innocent people their lives, because they were seen as unusual by the society in which they lived. The
    double standard against Michael Jackson is unbelievable! I guarantee that this same Media would have definitely questioned the obvious lies
    told by these accusers if this was Bruce Sprinsteen! I can only hope that after this
    Michael Jackson realizes that there are different
    sets of rules for different people.

  85. Sara says:

    “LEAVE HIM ALONE” he is totally inersent and u r going 2 reck his whole music singing career!!! And no one can replace the old michael it would be INPOSIBEL because he is INCRIDABLE!! KING OF POP!!

  86. David Gable says:

    Jackson and his lawyers are trying so hard to delay this case, so the 12 year old cancer victim her sexually abused will die. Jackson and his lawyers are the scum of society. He prays on sick children for his sexual pleasure. I couldn’t care less if he ever sings again. Also, please consider this. Someone with such a decayed personality as Michael Jackson did not stop at two or three over 2 or 3 decades of abuse. Perhaps we should start looking at missing children, particularly children who may have been in contact with Jackson. I would be digging up the entire ranch; we need to know how far this paedophile has gone – he does seem to associate his sexual arousal with sick or near death children. This is very worrying.

  87. Kohut's Dog says:

    Michael Jackson is a pathological narcissist, variations of which are not that uncommon in the entertainment business. Whether he became that way due to abuse from his father, or overindulgence from early stardom, is a matter of debate. Being a narcissist means that he thinks himself special, entitled and unique, exempt from rules that restrict the actions of ordinary mortals. It also connotes an obsession with an appearance of perfection, and potential rage at receiving criticism–being preceived as anything less than godlike may expose the narcissist to an underlying shame and self-hatred. Jackson’s lifestyle, and in particular his shifting and applied identity, offers ample evidence of those characteristics.

    Pathological narcissists have been known to commit incest with their own children, seeing them, as they see practically everyone, existing primarily to provide comfort and pleasure. It would hardly be a stretch, then, for a narcissist to molest the children of others, especially if predilection and wealth provided opportunity. Beholden to no higher power than his own grandiose ego, he would see nothing wrong with it. The issue, to his mind, would be distorted–the problem would not be the sin, but those who held the sinner accountable. Damage to the narcissist’s beloved perfect image would be considered by him to be far more grievous than damage to an impressionable child’s identity.

    Fortunately, society takes a different view. When a star loses touch with reality and molests children he publically professes to cherish, intervention is necessary. Whatever his contribution to culture, he crosses the line and becomes a predator.

    Suicide? Narcissists rarely hurt the one they love most–themselves. But they often die alone, abandoned by those no longer able to tolerate their abuse and selfishness.

  88. Patriot says:

    I have read most of the comments on this page, and I am extremely disillusioned by the unmerciful nature of people here. I can understand each of us sharing our beliefs of whether this music legend is innocent or guilty, but I cannot understand any person wishing misery upon another human being. I have tried to imagine Michael Jackson as he is characterized by some, doing harm to children, whom he says “show me in their playful smiles the divine in everyone.” In his Oxford University Speech, he is an advocate for children, on his Invincible CD, his song “The Lost Children” he encourages prayer for the children and their families, in his book Dancing The Dream, he says “What we need to learn from children isn’t childish. Being with them connects us to the deep wisdom of life.” With a humble kind and accepting mind, Michael Jackson understands the importance of being taught by the children. In the scriptures, in reference to children, it says “for such is the Kingdom of Heaven.” In reviewing the cruelty of mind and heart on this forum, I am brought to an understanding of why Mr. Jackson would choose the company of a child instead of an adult. It is the children who are full of love, peace, mercy and acceptance. Looking at the horrific writings of this page, where people are wishing injury, death, and destruction upon a man who has the right to be innocent until proven innocent (because he will not be proven guilty), I see that there are people not yet accused, but who are guilty of crimes of the spirit. If Michael Jackson had done anything wrong, then why would we want him harmed instead of helped? Some have spoken of evidence before our eyes, and I have seen much of it. Though the evidence points to Mr. Jackson’s innocence, and to the guilt of people who will destroy an undeserving person in order for their own personal gain. If the persecutors (not prosecutors) had evidence as they want us to believe, why would they waste time and money to raid Neveland again, just 3 days prior to the time when both sides were to exchange evidence, in preparation for a trial that would begin in 6-7 weeks? The prosecution successfully forced the defense to request a continuance of the trial, which was part of the stragegy of the persecuters to make the defense appear inadequate. Also, it would allow the persecuters more time to add more non-existent witnesses, and send the defense on more wild goose chases. It is frequently mentioned about the 1994 settlement of the 1993 case. I hope you have all gone online and read the settlement agreement, and learned there is no mention of molestation in the agreement. The settlement was for negligence, which MJJ did not acknowledge such behavior, but allowed it to be settled as a way of resolving the conflict that existed at that time. Every day, cases are settled out of court, all over the country, for all sorts of reasons, because that is the most convenient, expedient, and cost effective way to resolve a legal dispute. Our country only found something wrong with it in this case because it was Michael Jackson, and some want so badly for him to have done something wrong. It is my opinion that Michael Jackson was innocent in 1993 and he is innocent in this current case. I am thoroughly convinced of his innocence, to a point that any attempt to pursuade me otherwise would be a fruitless effort on the part of my opponent. I have read the GQ Magazine article (previously posted), I have read Geraldine Hughes book entitled “REDEMPTION: The Truth Behind The Michael Jackson Child Molestation Allegations.” I have listened to a tape by another victim of the Santa Barbara Prosecutor’s Office, when he speak about the criminal activity of the Santa Barbara Sheriff Department, Prosecutor’s Office, and other law officials. In addition, I have read daily, everything I could find about this case. Each time the media mentioned something in opposition to Michael Jackson, there would be a contradiction soon to follow, which the media did not bother present to the public, especially not in the same continuous and repeated manner that they announced the insults (i.e., the mentally ill man who recently claimed he was molested when he was 18 years old by Michael Jackson. Hopefully you know that he was exposed by his girlfriend for planning the story several weeks/months before he claimed to have recovered his suppressed memory of the incidents). There are many more, including the love letters that were claimed to have existed, they never surfaced because in fact they did not exist. Michael Jackson is being accused of the one crime that everyone knows you need no evidence to cause extensive damage to a person’s life. We know that the world wants to protect our children, as we should, so we ask no questions, but pass judgement immediately. Now I suggest reading the statistics for unsubstantiated accusations of child molestation, and you will probably be as disheartened as I was to see it. We need to protect our children, but we need to protect the falsely accused as well. When we condemn a person, and destroy their livelihood on the false accusations of a child, how will that same child feel when they are adults, and understand the devastation they have caused to an innocent person. Last but not least, let us all remember that we must reap that which we sow. Although we may be doing well at the moment, we too can be victimized by the unrighteous efforts for the personal gain of another, and how would we want to be treated if we are accused.

  89. Rach says:

    I cannot understand ‘fans’ saying they KNOW MJ is 100% innocent. How do they KNOW this? I KNOW he is 100% guilty. Oh wait that is ridiculous, I cannot know that. Think people!
    There is an awful lot of evidence over the past decade and more that would have any sane person questioning his motives with children. He himself admitted sharing beds with children who are not his own. If my 56 year old father wanted my 13 year old cousin or our young neighbours to share his bed however ‘innocent’ it may be in his eyes I would be outraged. As I’m sure would anyone else be when they think of it in that way. Don’t let your admiration of someone blind you to their faults. That is very dangerous. As history does show.
    I am also studying Law (4th year) and I think the case against him is quite strong. I do however have a terrible feeling his money will buy his innocence.
    Anne: great website. I really loved some of the comments as well. Wasn’t Beep Show hilarious? I loved when he/she sent 4 messages in 20 minutes using different names but with the same opinion, grammar, spelling and tone. Not the brightest spark I fear!
    A person with a message: I really doubt many people read your long comment. Maybe you should link to it and have a one paragraph explanation?

  90. Mordred says:

    They won’t find MJ guilty because the american courts/government are afraid that black americans will riot – just the same as with the OJ Simpson trial.

    As with OJ – MJ is GUILTY! Anyone who cannot see this is blind and ignorant!

    Here is my favourite MJ Peedy joke :-

    Q. What does MJ have in common with Cognac Brandy?
    A. They both come in tots!


  91. SURVIVOR says:

    Michael Jackson is a very talented human being who I also believe is unfortunately also a pedophile. Many pedophiles are highly intelligent and talented — they need to be in order to cover up what they do for so long. Having high intelligence and talent does not excuse someone for preying on children. The fact that these children come from so called “dysfunctional” families only reinforces my belief that they were abused, because a child who does not get what he or she needs is more vulnerable, they look to strangers for the love and attention they may not get at home and it is easy for them to be manipulated into secrecy/compliance by a sexual predator because of strained relations with parents or a lack of understanding of what “normal” parent-child/adult-child relationships are like. Also if the parents are all nutty with alcoholism, marital issues, domestic violence, etc., they are not always watching carefully the dynamics between the predator and their child. In the same way that it is easier for a serial killer to choose prostitutes as victims, because they are less likely to be missed — it is easier for a sexual predator to pick kids who come from damaged homes or who have behavior problems. (That way when they report what is happening, “dirt” on the family and “dirt” on the child can be used to distract people from the sexual predator’s improper behavior or take away the accuser’s credibility.)

    Someone up in the discussion thread asked why there were no witnesses. Think about it. If you were going to sexually molest or rape a little kid, would you be dumb enough to do this right in front of credible witnesses? Would you make sure the parents knew all about it? Would you be dumb enough to have CNN there to tape the incident? Of course not. Sexual crimes are committed in PRIVATE with witnesses who you know can be frightened or bought off or who have a checkered past (so their credibility is not good if they say what they saw) but most desirably crimes like these occur with no witnesses at all. And this is why so many kids don’t speak up, they know they have no proof, it is their word against their perpetrators, and if they talk, there will be emotional and other consequences that are very painful. I think it is hard for anyone to be sexually abused but it is especially hard for little boys, because of all the sexism and homophobia in our society. It is almost expected in our society for GIRLS to be the victims because they are assumed to be weaker, while boys are supposed to be able to fight off an attacker, be strong, resist harm, and if the sexual predator was able to get the boy to acheive orgasm, that is even worse because the kid questions if he is gay, is afraid of being gay-bashed if he tells people, is afraid something is wrong with him for “enjoying it”, etc.

    I speak as someone who knows first hand what it is like to be the victim of a sexual predator, and who never told what happened until I was a grown adult, and now deal with the pain of knowing that the person who harmed me will never ever be apprehended and may have harmed others. This child speaking out against someone so rich, respected and politically and socially connected as Michael Jackson is a very courageous little boy. For his sake I hope Michael Jackson is found guilty. And for ours, because if this man is allowed to continue playing media and other games to avoid facing responsibility for his wrongdoing that will only feed his ego and his sickness and he will get bolder, thinking he will keep getting away with it. I wonder then if the sexual kick that someone like this gets about concealed sexual antics with little boys directly under everyone’s nose will be enough to satiate that psychological urge, I wonder if it will escalate to needing something more, if he will realize what he is and hate it and take that self hatred out on his child love interests over time. I wonder, if the U.S. media machine keeps helping this man escape, if children will disappear never to be found in the environs of Neverland Ranch. And what will be done about it. And how many children hurt it takes before something is done.

    No matter what happens I hope that little boy has someone positive in his life who can help him cope with the hurt and anger of having been sexually abused so that the cycle ends and he does not become like his abuser. I am grateful that I had someone like that in my history and that today I can say I am FREE of the things that happened to me in the past. The more I read and hear this boy’s account of what happened, the more I believe him. More important than nailing Michael Jackson for what he is doing is getting the proper help and support to this child. I wonder if any of the adults involved (the parents, the lawyers, the investigators) are remembering that fact.

  92. SURVIVOR says:

    P.S. To that person in the discussion thread who went on and on about how much Michael Jackson has to say about how wonderful and beautiful children are — you are missing the point, or perhaps you don’t know enough about how many pedophiles, etc. operate.

    Not all pedophiles are John Wayne Gacy and want to maliciously harm and kill kids, a lot of time they are wonderful people who happen to have a very sick fetish that they grapple with and are fighting every day, some of them start off being very beneficient and turn into violent offenders later.

    Many of them absolutely adore kids, appreaciate kids, understand how kids think, see better than most what is special about them, etc. They LOVE kids to the point of obsession. They spend years cultivating trusting and wonderful relationships with kids. They love being around children, helping children, etc., and usually have jobs or hobbies that allow them to be around children all the time (teachers, coaches, clowns/mimes, chld entertainers, etc.). Usually the person who is the local pedophile is not the strange guy in the dark cloak in the hedges at the playground but someone who loves kids, has a long history of interacting well with them, has the respect and trust of other children and of the parents in the community and is literally the LAST person you would ever think could have it in them to harm or molest a child. When predators like these (“santa claus” predators I think they are called) say they love the child they have picked as their victim, they are speaking very truthfully — they literally fall in love with/become obssessed with that child in a very dramatic, emotional, intense, Romeo and Juliet way. The problem is that the way a child loves another child or a parent or teacher is not the same thing as a mature, fully psychologically developed, adult love. I would agree that a child’s love is purer, and this is what these people are drawn to because of whatever hole they have in thier own soul and their own past. A pedophile of this type understands but is so “love struck” (in his mind) that he or she cannot fully accept that the physical contact and level of maturity a child has when it comes to love, affection, etc. is NOT the same as the kind of affection, love, etc. two consenting adults have with each other. The pedophile in his or her “love” for this special child, has to bridge this developmental gap by teaching the child to be sexual in the same way that adults are sexual and loving to one another, and the pedophile, because he LOVES the child so much (and because he is selfish/narcissist) does not understand or care how “teaching” the child to love him back in a more adult way is hurtful to the child. He wants the child to know that he “loves” him in the same way an adult would love another adult and is not happy until the child can understand and reciprocate in a more sexually mature manner, and this is what leads to acts that we call “molestation”. The pedophile knows that what he is doing is wrong, partly because society frowns on this type of “love” but also because he knows on some level that pure thing he loves so much in children, he has a hand in taking away when he reveals his true feelings and teaches the child to engage reciprocally (physically) towards him. Which is why a lot of times he no longer is attracted to or in love with his victim once he’s fully succeeded in completely stealing the kids’ innocence. That innocent part of the child, the thing that caused him to “fall in love with” (or become obsessed with) his victim/lover in the first place is gone and he mourns it and moves on to the next child (if they are lucky he isn’t sick to the point of having a major violent streak and the kid gets to live).

    The pedophile does indeed LOVE children, advocates for children, cares about children, is generous and caring towards children. But he or she does not see how making this child LOVE him back in a way that the child is not developmentally prepared or able to love back, is hurting the child. In the same way that Michael Jackson could not understand/didn’t get it when Bashir tried to explain to him that sleeping with children in his bed was not “pure” but inappropriate, not a mark of a trailblazing social nonconformist but the mark of someone who behaves and interacts inappropriately and intrusively with other people’s kids.

    As a survivor of sexual abuse I can say honestly that in his own way, my perpetrator did sincerely love me. He loved me with all his heart. He would have given me anything, done anything for me, defended me to the death. In my own way, I loved him back, which is why the molestation was so damaging to me (as it is to other children). Children who are the victims of these type of very sick adults are not touched until they are SEDUCED in the same way that a man madly in love with a woman showers her with gifts, charms her, wins her trust and respect, etc. I loved and trusted my perpetrator, if I had not, he would never have been able to lure and abuse me. Of course these children said in the beginning that they loved, respected, admired, trusted, and were in awe of Michael Jackson. That is textbook. You don’t sleep beside a person you don’t trust, you don’t keep secrets about or try to “protect” someone you don’t admire or care for on some level.

    But as much as my perpetrator loved me, there was another side to his love, a side that was rooted in sickness (not necessarily a cold, calculated, murderous malice but a sickness that was probably put there long ago when he was also a trusting little child). It is that sickness that is the problem.

    YOur commenting on all the wonderful things Michael Jackson does for children, all the over the top, maudlin, emotional and apparently completely sincere teary eyed and eloquent pronouncements about the “pure”, “special”, “loving”, etc. nature of children, only REINFORCES the profile that he totally FITS as a sexual predator.

    This is a very sick and confused man who also spends a lot of time in pain, who has needed help for a very long time and has not received it, and part of me does feel sorry for him. But as much as I feel sorry for him and realize that his incarceration would be such a grave loss in the music/entertainment world, the fact is that this man is probably a sexual predator, he is breaking the law and it is not a “no parking” law, it is a law that protects the most innocent people in our world, and if he indeed is guilty he needs to be put away for a long time (I would prefer for life) so that he can never ever ever harm or psychologically damage another child or wreck a family ever again. If he was touching those children in the way that they say there is NO amount of humanitarian aid to kids that will make up for it. All the children he has helped fall under the taint once it is proven how gravely he’s harmed other kids.

    I really wish more people, more kids, who may have been touched inappropriately by Michael Jackson would come forward and not be afraid. I think that is the only chance we have of putting this sick individual away, more people must come forward. I do not believe that these 3 from the 1990’s and early 2000’s are the first ones to have been victimized, I think this has been going on for a while and he’s fine tailored his methods and surroundings to insulate himself from being appropriately held accountable for his behavior. I also think there may be other former staff members who have witnessed things who are not speaking up because he has money and power and media contacts and they are afraid. As long as people are afraid to speak out, the narcissist/pedophile wins. More people need to come forward, there are simply too many kids coming in and out of Neverland for me to believe its only been 3 or 4 kids. And I think we need to worry about his children. Although a lot of times they will not go after their own, only other people’s, kids.

  93. Jin says:

    I read on here near the top by Mary

    “what i cant understand is why some people still defend this freak, believing he can do no wrong, and has done no wrong. how can they believe he is not a pedophile? all the evidence is in plain view. normal people do not hang out with children and sleep with children. why cant they see this?”

    This person must be the most ignorent brainlus sheep in the world. I can’t believe people say he’s guilty when they have no grasp on what the evidance is saying. There is no evidance against Jackson. The Chandler family did a civil law suit against Jackson before the criminal trial. You tell me why they did that. Michael didn’t pay them off he gave them what they wanted. The family told police that Michael’s penis looks like this and that. The police took photos and nothing matched up. If it had there would have had to have been a criminal trial. Also why didn’t the family proceed with a criminal trial after their law suit was settled. No contract can stop a family from doing a criminal trial, otherwise people would be running around comiting crimes and making people sign contracts. There would be some major loops in the justice system.

    Also just because some scientist analysis one side of a testimony and analysis the psychology of some one through the T.V, doesn’t mean it’s the gospel. I mean there’s scientists saying we didn’t land on the moon. That must mean their right b’cos there scientists right?

  94. Jin says:

    I read on here near the top by Mary

    “what i cant understand is why some people still defend this freak, believing he can do no wrong, and has done no wrong. how can they believe he is not a pedophile? all the evidence is in plain view. normal people do not hang out with children and sleep with children. why cant they see this?”

    This person must be the most ignorent brainlus sheep in the world. Normal people don’t be world famous from 10 and be million airs from 11 and work constantly from 5, and become the most famous person in the world from 25, so thats not valid about normal people not doing this and that. MJ just doesn’t understand that falling alseep next to a child is seen as wrong. I can’t believe people say he’s guilty when they have no grasp on what the evidance is saying. There is no evidance against Jackson. The Chandler family did a civil law suit against Jackson before the criminal trial. You tell me why they did that. Michael didn’t pay them off he gave them what they wanted. The family told police that Michael’s penis looks like this and that. The police took photos and nothing matched up. If it had there would have had to have been a criminal trial. Also why didn’t the family proceed with a criminal trial after their law suit was settled. No contract can stop a family from doing a criminal trial, otherwise people would be running around comiting crimes and making people sign contracts. There would be some major loops in the justice system.

    Also just because some scientist analysis one side of a testimony and analysis the psychology of some one through the T.V, doesn’t mean it’s the gospel. I mean there’s scientists saying we didn’t land on the moon. That must mean their right b’cos there scientists right?

    Also this crap about pedophiles loving kids. Therefore Jackson must be a pedophile. Does not make sense, my Dad loves kids, I love kids… maybe this means we’re pedophiles to huh?

  95. jessica says:

    The first post said that in the declaration there were a lot of details in Jordan Chandler testimony, Evan Chandler the father was a script writer he wrote a year before Robin Woods : Men in Thigths. The writers of movies like Seven, Mystic River, Usual Suspects and so on have detailed, believable story so this argument doesnt stand on its own really. Especially that the mother said in this trial that the father own $5000 to his kid because he helped him with this script (this is on the actual transcript of the current case said by the mother herself) 5000 is a lot so what exactly did Jordan wrote, he had clearly a vivid imagination. You have to take that in consideration. Also in the declaration Jordan Chandler use Michael jackson “explanation on conditionning” as a way to say “look this isnt wrong people think it is but its not…”. Michael Jackson talked about this in an interview back in the 70’s that some adults were conditioned as “brainwashed” by society “normal norms”. Michael Jackson has been raised and grew up on stage so you can understand this kind of comment, they used this as I said in the testimony. The fact to say that Jackson said keep the secret to the kid is logical so not very convincing…
    Also there is a rumor about 12 years that the genital descritpion matched. In Ray Chandler book, i havent read it, but he uses a drawn of Jordan and inscritpions that the father wrote. The father is the one who talked about decoloration spotches (sp?) not the kid and anyone who opens a book about Vitiligo can found this or someone who “turn himself white”. The kid drawning of penis is not eloquent as there is no 36 ways to drawn a penis! he said Jackson was circomstized he is not (the father is Jew he probably is himself)
    Michael Jackson didn’t settle is insurrance compagny did. The document released not a long time ago clearly states that they settled despite ” the protest of Mr Jackson and his legal team”. They took the money and run.
    On the 06th of January 1994 Jordan Chandler decided to not participate in the criminal investigation who went on altogether for 16 months. Sneddon has never been able to explain why because Jordan Chandler wasn’t going to testify they had no case…
    Michael Jackson had two grand juries in 1994 one in Santa Barbara and one in Los Angeles. One juror said at the time on CNN that “no damaging evidence was heard”.
    The media never report this.
    The third partie witness who went on tabloid and testified in the current case sued Jackson and lost and own him now 1.5 millions of dollars. It was also established that they didn’t say the same story and one of them added more ludicrous details over the years. This is highly questionnable. Notice also that “touch of the butt” or “hand in the pants” was said to happen only to Robson, Culkin and Barnes at the age of 8-9 so this is convenient because the prosecution can claim they didn’t realise it and they always denied anything inapropriate.The only graphic testimony was for Jordan Chandler, who isn’t testifying, so he can not confirm or deny the story. Convenient. The fact that you like Jackson or not is irrelevent (im not talking about you personally) he risks jail time this is everybody s concern. You all may be tired to hear this but Jackson had/has an important childhood trauma added with the abuse of his father. He is not living on this world because since the age of 5 (when he became lead singer of the Jackson 5) he hasnt had a foot in the real world. When you listen carefully to jackson lyrics such Childhood, Will you be there, Money, you understand better. The sleepovers are more sad than anything else, he feels very lonely and everyone lonely knows that the nights are the “hardest”. Jackson has two way of loving children : first one he has kept a childLIKE quality because of his trauma, also because of his cold, authoritary father he is affectionate and believes he can give to kids what he didnt have to make them have a happy and normal chidlhood. There is also the adult Michael who raises money for them with speeches, associations, help, visits to hospitals and so on…
    Michael Jackson is much stronger that anyone can think he was suppose to kill himself 12 yrs ago and never come to USA 12 yrs ago… You have seen some stars going down or on drugs or loosing their self-control for much less than being accused of pedophilia. His father, his childhood, and many other things forged his character. Being sensitive and express pain or doubts is not being weak, its being human and unshameful of their feelings.
    Michael also said that he loved kids because “they dont care who you are, they dont ask you any questions they just want to be your friend” Once again more sad that anything else…
    Michael Jackson has choosed to not being fabricated as all those blondes that you see or the same man on the magazines he is his own man and has made himself despite scandals, hate, loneliness, despair, violence and so on
    He is an example of how a man should stay faithful to his ideals no matter what and determination.

  96. dude says:

    Weather or not michael is a pedophile…I think hes a very stupid man for hanging around children like that and acting as if hes peter pan….Everyone grows up, and sadly we live in a corrupt and messed up world with real pedophiles who act kindly like him. If he is innocent, He left himself wide open to sumbags who took complete full advantage of his naiveity and kindness. People can be real bastards.

    Take Indonesia, they threw a innocent girl into jail for a crime she didnt commit and unlike Jackson, there are protestors calling for he to be executed…She was used as a unsuspecting mule for a drug syndicate in Australias airports…someone slipped 4 kilos of marijuana into her unlocked bodyboard bag and the indonesian customs officers handled the evidence without rubber gloves and even forced her to take out the drugs without gloves….the security cameras and records were wiped both in indonesia and australia…the indonesians ignored all her evidence (and there was plenty) that proved she was innocent. They ignored the fact that NOBODY ever took marijuana INTO bali, they ignored all witnesses who spoke of drug dealers using people in shipping drugs via the planes and they ignored the fact that she never ever took drugs and was tested clean of drugs and doesnt have the money to buy over 4 kilos of drugs and they ignored the fact she never had a contact list of buyers of the drug that all dealers have and they ignored the fact she doesnt know any drug dealers or buyers which proves shes innocent, and they ignored the fact that many drug dealers operate in airports and use people like you and me to ship drugs by using our luggage and if we have a lock on our bags, they pick the lock and shove in the drugs, and the indonesians treated her like a real criminal when she isnt and now shes stuck in a revolting prison for 20 years for a crime she didnt do and the prosecutors are asking for her sentance to be changed to life..while the public want her shot because they hate all westerners and just want to kill someone for drugs and they dont care if she was a unsuspecting mule…they think shes guilty because the drugs were forgotten to be removed or were put in her bag by mistake and they didnt take them out again.

    Michal jackson is no different…if he genuinely is innocent, then hes ruined…but thank god he wasnt arrested in Bali or he’d be demonised by the people there and executed.

    Also a warning to all of you……Lock your baggage up and wrap it with chicken wire if you have to…..Drug traffikers operate in our airports and you could be next…and the evil people in countries like indonesia will enjoy demonising you for a crime you’d never do.

    Beware….take care……trust NO-ONE….the world has gone to hell….there is no god or justice now……protect yourselves.

  97. QueenOfBondage says:

    All Mike needs is some pussy, some black pussy I might add. Mike, email me for a good time. I guarantee you that you won’t want to play with little boys after being with a grown woman….Cum on Mike…I’ll always be the lady in your life…

  98. QueenOfBondage says:

    All Mike needs is some pussy, some black pussy I might add. Mike, email me at queen_of_bondage_and_domination@yahoo.com for a good time. I guarantee you that you won’t want to play with little boys after being with a grown woman….Cum on Mike…I’ll always be the lady in your life…

  99. ben says:

    no-one likes a trashy ugly attention whore “attempting” to change michael jackon but in the end he just goes after her 2yr old son. lol

  100. QueenOfBondage says:

    You don’t have to like what I typed, but the truth remains: Michael Jackson needs some black pussy. Once he busts a good nut in some wet black pussy, he won’t be thinking about no kids, Neverland Ranch, or candy….Mike, if you’re reading this, email me for a good time. I am tall and sexy and I’ll take you to the moon and you won’t have to leave your room. queen_of_bondage_and_domination@yahoo.com

  101. QueenOfBondage says:

    You don’t have to like what I typed, but the truth remains: Michael Jackson needs some black pussy. Once he busts a good nut in some wet black pussy, he won’t be thinking about no kids, Neverland Ranch, or candy….Mike, if you’re reading this, email me for a good time. I am tall and sexy and I’ll take you to the moon and you won’t have to leave your room. queen_of_bondage_and_domination@yahoo.com

  102. QueeOfBondage says:

    All Mike needs is some pussy, some black pussy I might add. Mike, email me for a good time. I guarantee you that you won’t want to play with little boys after being with a grown woman….Cum on Mike…I’ll always be the lady in your life…

  103. Keith Richard Radford Jr says:

    Again and again, political proponents of harming other, need desperately to expand there horizons as does most mushroom people who us old outdated information to create a law.
    See some real number at:
    The huge and destructive mistake made by the original therapist who said sex offenders are stuck in a rut of abuse have since been proven completely wrong and society only knows the lie.
    When a government uses religious motives with inaccurate information they look and sound like other countries who stone their young. No good can come from this nor will any country respect their people who chose to tear down or harm it people. More damaging is the fact that the truth was hidden due to greed. That is not how people who want to best look out for it people placing priorities on destroying the fabric that makes community’s strong, namely Family. Honest mistakes is how most get on the registry.

  104. Keith Richard Radford Jr. says:

    Please watch for our movie in the works by Keith Richard Radford Jr. targeting hate groups who for political reasons use hate to sway public opinion for personal and political gain.
    The torture sex offenders have endured wile laws have been misdirected as a smoke screen to further the hate agenda of a nation intoxicated with greed and prejudice’s to keep fear alive. Interviews of over 50 sex offenders at many levels of assessment and how they have been used by lawmakers, politicians, and community’s, also including many Doctors, Journalists, Ministers, Writers, and other parties offering their solutions to the basic fundamental flaws in the construction of such laws. If Michale would like to be interviewed we would be honnored to include him.

  105. Terry Wagar says:

    The authority’s frame people as pedophiles all the time, they call it “pedofied” and they do it because they can get away with murder by pedofying someone they want dead.
    I am a witness as well as a victim of these tactics and I have them admitting to it on a audio file.
    It’s the easiest thing in the world for authority’s to frame someone as a pedophile.
    They can hack your computer and upload you know what on your computer and the next day the sheriff’s are kicking down your door and charging you as a pedo, and it’s your word against there’s.
    It’s there faverite way to kill people because they die as the bad guy’s and the authority’s that framed them look like the good guy’s.
    If someone in authority has it out for you they will give you a criminal record without you ever being charged or going to court.
    They will put something like “under investigation for child porn” on your record.
    Good luck getting a job now, and a prospective employer will not tell you that’s on your record, they simply wont hire you.
    If you find out about it and complain to authority they will simply pretend error.
    If they want you dead, then they will “investigate” you by going to your neighborhood and go door to door giving your description but not your name claiming there looking for a pedophile in the neighborhood.
    They do this KNOWING it will give you a reputation, the kind of reputation that will get you shot.
    Sometimes they pedofy people already behind prison walls by simply telling other prisoners behind your back that your a pedophile.
    Don’t you think the prisoners will kill someone which they believe is a pedophile?
    Don’t you think the accusation by a prison guard behind your back is good enough for someone in the shower to stab you?
    The authority’s don’t have to formally charge you as a pedophile to frame you as one, the accusation alone is good enough in this country to get you killed and authority’s hands are clean.
    I already have authority’s on an audio file admitting they pedofy people they want dead for the purpose of getting away with murder.
    They don’t even care if I tell any one about it because when it comes down to it, who’s going to arrest them?
    No one.
    Think about it, how easy it is to turn hundreds or thousands of people against someone with just that acusation.
    That’s why the authority’s privatly call it pedofied.
    They will never admit to it because it is premeditated murder and they KNOW it, they KNOW it gets people killed.

  106. Dee says:

    Dexter dogg ‘beat it’ is talking about fighting dumb ass…In my opinion i don’t think he did it, and you guys might as well say it’s your opinion too, because you weren’t there to know and i agree with you: J.Anderstan, sara and russ.

  107. venturahwy1 says:

    To all the haters who wished Michael so much malice. To all of those who said he would be convicted: How do you feel now that Jordan Chandlers dad ended up commiting suicide very few months after Michael died. Also finally admiting that he had drugged his own child and said child had to get a restraining order against his own dad because said dad (biological parent) tried to hit his own son with a hammer?
    How do you feel not that Michael was aquited of all charges?
    How do you feel now that he is dead and no one ever said I am sorry for the things I said about you?
    How do you feel now, because what you do and say in this world heaps coals on your head in the next one.
    Peace and God Bless you

Leave a Reply