SpecialEd said:

Sneedon got 2 grand juries together.....Neither found enough credible evidence to indict. Jordy is now grown. What's stopping him from talking? If the photos matched of Michael's privates matched Jordy's description, that would have been evidence. 2 different juries found no credible evidence.

fcukthepolice said:

Where are all of these accusers? Why didn't they testify? The only one that I recalled during the last court case was some fool crying because MJ tickled him. You're just making blanket accusations with no evidence to back it up. MJ has been around thousands of children. Two, children, both with less than stellar parents, accused him of molestation.

Jordy's father was an extortionist asshole. He could have received a settlement, and still put MJ in jail. He never went to the police. He went to a lawyer. What kind of bullshit is that? Yet you choose to believe this type of tabloid nonsense. If MJ was a pedophile, as many children as he has been around, you would have heard/seen something before the 84 accusations. But nobody said shit unless there was money involved. You mean to tell me that all of those adults around MJ didn't see a thing for all of those years, and then now, all of a sudden, after the media frenzy, they all saw something? Please.

The whole point of the payout is to silence the claimant in both legal and media terms. You didn't answer why some can get millions from MJ and most couldn't. The stuff about greedy selfish parents is a smokescreen.

fcukthepolice said:

sources

SpecialEd said:

I recommend that you read the leaked documents from the 1993-94 case. If the description of the drawing had matched, the prosecution would have had no choice but to further pursued a criminal investigation. One can have both a civil and criminal settlements. Having one does not exclude the other.

Rodya24 said:

don't cater to these swine,
they don't know what they're talking about
they're just slinging bull shit

Rodya24 said:

Smokescreening again, to pursue the criminal case you may get a payout but risk coming away with less than the pre-trial offer or in the worst case nothing at all.

Nobody is answering why some boys get paid off and others don't which is key.

i don't know if he did anything criminal or not. i wasn't there and two juries found him not guilty, so take it however you will.

as for people "knowing" he wouldn't do that to a child...hmm, how can you? and would you be so gracious in your conclusion about the guy down the street or the guy across town? you don't know these people and you don't know their hearts or minds.

Guys I have noticed that some members here know nothing about trial, check and read the court transcripts of the cross-examination of bob Jones under oath , MJ's lawyer ripped him to pieces , court transcripts don't lie, bob jones is nothing but a disgruntled ex-employee who’s mad at his boss because he got fired.

SpecialEd said:

Absolutely NOT. There was NO match. Do you trust the Drudge Reports? Drudge extensively discussed the non-match of the drawing to MJ. Drudge was so angry with Sneddon's photo session of MJ that he said maybe now Sneddon should have his pee-pee photographed LOL.
Please read REDEMTION by Geraldine Hughes. Well if you're interested in the truth.

bboy87 said:

Damn, that's a good one. That book is about as reliable a guide to Mike as Harry Potter is an accurate account of the English schools system.

mrsnet said:

YES they did match
jacko is a pedo

fcukthepolice said:

NO there wasn't a match, do your homework b4 even making a comment!! - it's been well documented & on another note La Toya took back what she said as she was being bullied into doing so by her ex-husband Jack Gordon who used to make her do anything to take advantage of the publicity $$$

kremlinshadow said:

Yes there was a match.

Latoya was speaking the truth

Do you care more about MJ than innocent children?

I was a big MJ fan all my life BTW

fcukthepolice said:

Everyone was an MJ fan at one stage or another. I don't understand this zealous behaviour regarding his personal life though. I can't imagine claiming the innocence of or defending my favourite musicians at all. How do I know? Why would I care?

The madcap antics of his fanbase is another reason the accusers don't go on record and have to hide. They get death threats a plenty and go into hiding.

Can't ever be sure about his being guilty but there sure is a list of reasons to see him as highly suspect.

fcukthepolice said:

There wasn't a match, man. Simple as that

fcukthepolice said:

There were only 2 during the trial. Gavin and Michael's former maid's son Jason.
Gavin's story was inconsistent, and Jason's mother kept changing her story when people offered her more money. Jason also is married to Tom Sneddon's daughter.

Here's Gavin's transcript on the stand:
QUESTIONS BY MEZ

Timeline

Q. Do you remember telling Mr. Sneddon and the
19 sheriffs on one occasion that you were molested
20 before the video was done?
21 A. No.
22 Q. Would it refresh your recollection if I show
23 you a transcript of that interview?
24 A. Yes. Please.
25 MR. MESEREAU: May I approach, Your Honor?
26 THE COURT: Yes.
27 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Have you had a chance to
28 look at that transcript?

1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Does it refresh your recollection that
3 Mr. Sneddon was interviewing you about when these
4 acts of molestation allegedly occurred?
5 A. Yes. But the thing was, I don't -- even to
6 this day, I don't remember exactly when everything
7 happened exactly, so I mean --
8 Q. Well, do you remember being asked, "The acts
9 of molestation, had they already begun by the time
10 you did this video, do you know?" And you said, "I
11 think so."
12 And then Mr. Sneddon said to you, "So, in
13 your mind, one of the things that you're thinking
14 is, they're doing this video that they want you guys
15 to do so that if you ever told them the truth about
16 being molested, nobody would believe you," and you
17 say, "Yeah," right?
18 A. Well, I --
19 Q. Do you remember saying that to Mr. Sneddon?
20 A. That's more of my opinion - you know what I
21 mean? - right there. That last statement you just
22 said on that transcript, it's more of my opinion
23 than a state of fact.
24 Q. Well, Mr. Sneddon asked you last week when
25 this inappropriate touching supposedly occurred, and
26 you said it was after the rebuttal video was made,
27 correct?
28 A. Yes.

1 Q. But in an interview with Mr. Sneddon before
2 this trial ever began, you told him differently,
3 correct?
4 A. That's what it says right there. But it
5 happened after.
6 Q. Did someone


Q. Did someone ever say to you, "You have to
7 say it happened after, because on the rebuttal video
8 you deny he's ever done anything wrong"?
9 A. No. No one's ever told me that.
10 Q. Then why does your story change?
11 A. I don't know. It happened after. I mean --
12 Q. Well, at some point did you go to Mr.
13 Sneddon and say, "I'm changing my story about when
14 this inappropriate touching happened"?
15 A. No.
16 Q. At some point did you go to the sheriffs and
17 say, "I'm changing my story about when this
18 inappropriate touching happened"?
19 A. No.
20 Q. You just suddenly got on the stand and
21 changed it?
22 MR. SNEDDON: Object as argumentative, Your
23 Honor.
24 THE COURT: Sustained.
25 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Have you ever had any
26 discussion at any time with Mr. Sneddon where you
27 used words to the effect, "I'm changing my story
28 about the time this molestation happened"?

1 A. No.
2 Q. Okay. When Mr. Sneddon asked you questions
3 last week about when this molestation supposedly
4 occurred, was that the first time you said to Mr.
5 Sneddon it happened after the rebuttal video?
6 A. I don't think so.
7 Q. You don't think so?
8 A. I don't think that was the first time I ever
9 told him that it happened after the rebuttal video.
10 Q. So are you saying that at different times
11 you gave Mr. Sneddon different accounts of when the
12 molestation supposedly happened?
13 MR. SNEDDON: Your Honor, I'm going to
14 object to that question. Assumes facts not in
15 evidence, and it's argumentative and speculative.
16 THE COURT: Overruled.
17 Do you want the question read back?
18 THE WITNESS: Yes.
19 (Record read.)
20 THE WITNESS: Sometimes I would talk to
21 Mr. Sneddon without having like an interview -- or,
22 like, have a recorder or something. And I would
23 talk -- like, Mr. Sneddon was being really nice to
24 me. Like he was helping me, and he was making me
25 feel better about what happened and stuff. So he's
26 been really nice to me
27 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Do you remember telling
28 the Santa Barbara Grand Jury that after the Miami

1 trip, your brother stayed in Michael's room with you
2 every night until the last few days?
3 A. Yeah, he stood in my room -- he stood in the
4 room with me and Michael pretty much every day.
5 Some days he wouldn't stay there.
6 Q. Do you remember telling the grand jury that
7 until the last few days, your brother Star stayed
8 with you in Michael's room all the time?
9 A. He stood with us -- well, he -- the last --
10 the last week or two, or a few days, or something
11 like that, he didn't. Well, because my brother
12 wasn't there when it happened, so I'm pretty sure it
13 wasn't -- he stopped staying there the last few
14 weeks.
15 Q. Do you remember telling the Santa Barbara
16 Grand Jury:
17 "Q. Was your brother staying in the room
18 with you during that time?
19 "A. Well, the last few times he didn't, but
20 he was, like, when Michael was there -- when
21 Michael was there --
22 "Q. Uh-huh.
23 "A. -- he stood with me for all the time
24 when Michael was there. But, like, toward the
25 end, toward the last few days, he wasn't staying
26 with me no more."
27 Do you remember that?
28 A. Uh-huh.


Contradicts Star

Q. And you've also told this jury that the two
2 times you claim Michael Jackson inappropriately
3 touched you Star wasn't there, correct?
4 A. Yes.


Gavin contradicts "I was scared"

Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Now, your brother Star had
8 just said that going to Neverland Ranch was
9 something you always looked forward to, right?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And at one point you realized you probably
12 weren't going to be returning to Neverland Ranch,
13 right?
14 A. After it was all over, I didn't want to go
15 back.
16 Q. At some point you realized you weren't going
17 to be in Michael Jackson's family, you weren't going
18 to Neverland Ranch, and it wasn't until then that
19 you ever came up with these allegations of
20 molestation, right?
21 A. I didn't want to go back after I came back.
22 Q. Please answer my question.
23 It wasn't until you realized that you and
24 your mother and your brother and your sister were
25 not going to be part of Michael Jackson's family
26 that you ever told anybody about any molestation,
27 right?
28 A. It wasn't as if we got together and realized it. It wasn't -- so your question isn't really
2 working.
3 MR. MESEREAU: Your Honor, could I request
4 that the witness be instructed to answer the
5 question?
6 THE WITNESS: I don't really understand the
7 question.
8 THE COURT: All right. Go ahead. Rephrase
9 your question.
10 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Okay. It wasn't until you
11 realized you were not going to be part of Michael
12 Jackson's family, you were not going to meet Michael
13 Jackson in Brazil, you were not going to be going to
14 Neverland, that you ever came up with these
15 allegations of molestation, right?
16 A. I didn't come and talk to the -- to the --
17 my mom always wanted to leave. She was the one that
18 was able to realize and get us out of there. I
19 liked being there.


Star caught making up stories. He says he saw no touching in grand jury. He was also caught quoting something he read in the newspaper

Q. Now, Prosecutor Sneddon asked you what you
23 meant when you told the grand jury you hadn't seen
24 Michael Jackson touch Gavin's genitals or penis.
25 Do you remember that?
26 A. Yes.
27 Q. And your response to Mr. Sneddon was, "Well,
28 I was just talking about the dinner table," right?

1 A. Yes.
2 Q. How come you never mentioned "dinner table"
3 to the grand jury when you made that statement?
4 A. I don't know if they asked me.
5 Q. Well, let me just go through what you said.
6 A. Okay.
7 Q. Okay?
8 "Q. What kind of things?
9 "Fix his shirt.
10 "Q. What else?
11 "A. He looked like from -- if you're
12 standing in front of him, it looked like he's
13 trying to fix his shirt. But it's hard to
14 explain. But he would like fix it, like he would
15 touch -- well, it was weird.
16 "Q. He would be touching him a lot?
17 "A. Yeah.
18 "Q. Not his genitals, not his penis?
19 "A. I never saw that. But I saw it in the
20 paper."
21 A. I don't know what I meant by "paper," but I
22 was trying to say that I didn't see it that time.
23 Q. But you never mentioned any kitchen table,
24 right?
25 A. But it wasn't the kitchen table.
26 Q. But you never mentioned any table at all,
27 correct?
28 A. I know.

Q. When did you come up with that explanation?
2 MR. SNEDDON: Object; argumentative.
3 THE COURT: Sustained.
4 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Did you discuss with
5 Prosecutor Sneddon that you were going to be asked
6 that question?
7 A. No.
8 Q. Have you ever discussed the statement you
9 made to the grand jury about not seeing genitals or
10 penis; ever discuss that statement with Mr. Sneddon?
11 A. No.
12 Q. Ever discuss it with any prosecutor?
13 A. No.
14 Q. Ever discuss it with anyone in the sheriff's
15 department?
16 A. No.
17 Q. You don't mention that kitchen table in this
18 context anywhere in the police reports, do you?
19 A. I don't know

SpecialEd said:

Hey I like alot of people like MJ music, no one knows the real MJ here..apart from maybe his family..He may not be a nice guy..who is?

BUT MJ's to blame for all of this, we all live and die by our choices!

Why did Jordy's father offer to accept money in exchange for silence?

Once you pay off someone your never going to be seen as a "victim" MJ should never have done this, it's his fault the jury will always be out on MJ that's basis of the Channel 4 program and it's what people will always think of MJ..he should have known this, he was a grown man..the buck stops with him

We would all like to hear Great New Music from MJ but unless he's going to tell the truth in his songs and own up to his faults..who will buy it? wishey washi POP / R'n'B is all around us...who needs it?

LondonStyle said:

There was really no winners in that case. Michael's been in terrible shape, Evan(Jordan's father) is now living penniless and trying to get money from his son, and Jordan is now living alone in Aspen and being friends with MJ fans

yes, thats true

Wow, never knew that about Ribera [offer for him and his family]. Thats crazy.

SpecialEd said:

Jordan never accurately described the marks on Michael’s genitalia. In fact, he wasn’t even the one who drew it in the first place; Evan did. In January 1994, USA Today printed an article confirming that, “photos of Michael Jackson’s genitalia do not match descriptions given by the boy who accused the singer of sexual misconduct.” Some tabloid reports may indicate otherwise but keep in mind that the District Attorney brought his “evidence” in front of two grand juries and charges were not filed. If the photos matched the boy’s description, the case would have gone to trial.

If I a was an abused victim as a child, I wouldn’t want nor accept money. If a child and/or a parent settles for money they’re fucking disgusting disgrace to human beings. If I was a victim of rape, I want that prick to be in jail getting himself raped, and see how he likes it. You do not accept money from a criminal who violated your son or daughter. A better question is why take money to forget you were molested? Why do people ask why did MJ pay? Why did they want money! lol How can you “pay” the silence of victims? So if Michael had in fact, payed his victims off in attempt for them to keep quiet, what exactly would that solved? They A) Already made the accusations B) How can/does payment prevent said persons, or make them, silent? They [and the family] are no longer able to speak because now they have money?

What a lot of people simply do not understand is that there was never, ever a single iota of information which connected Jackson to the 1993 allegations, and yet there was an absolute wealth of information which suggested he was innocent.

What people also don’t realize is that when Jackson paid his settlement, he was settling a civil case not a criminal case; he was not being prosecuted, he was being sued. There is a clause in the settlement which states that Jackson in no way acknowledges any wrongdoing by signing the settlement.There is another clause which specifically states that a settlement in the civil case in no way affects the recipients’ right to testify in a criminal case. The reason no criminal case was brought in 1993 was that the allegations were ludicrous and they couldn’t find any information to back them up. Tom Sneddon presented the case to two grand juries and both of them laughed him out of court. He wasn’t even allowed to bring charges because his case was so pathetic.

The lies that he ‘bought his way out of jail’ has been perpetuated by the media for too long now, its getting annoying and redundant every time I hear it. There was never a case against Jackson in 1993 and that was evident over a year prior to the settlement. With the criminal case in limbo because it was so moronic and the allegations hanging over his head until the media got some resolution, a settlement was the only way Jackson could make everything disappear.

If you actually take the time to research each case for yourself rather than reading biased reports by journalists with dollars signs in their eyes, you soon realize that what they’ve been telling you all these years is utterly incorrect. And so you see… if you look at the evidence in the 1993 case rather than succumbing to the mindless hysteria and the wealth of misinformation, the allegations fall apart. They barely made any sense, they were supported by no evidence, and yet there was a wealth of contradictory evidence.

Every subsequent allegation was made off the back of that one… so if the first allegation was proven to be fraudulent to as great an extent as is possible, then it would be a bit of a coincidence if it turned he actually was a child molester, but that particular instance was just made up. That makes no sense whatsoever. If the allegation which opened the floodgates was fraudulent, it stands to reason that all subsequent allegations were fraudulent too - a notion upheld by the fact that every accuser besides Arvizo accepted a paycheck and never went to the police… if you had been molested and somebody tried to buy you off, would you tell them to shove it and report them to the police? I would.

It’s worth remembering, too, that the Arvizo’s did approach several civil suit lawyers about suing Jackson and only went to the police after they all rejected them. It is worth remembering also that the Arvizo’s approached a civil suit attorney about suing Jackson for child molestation before they’d even met him. The only reason they bucked the trend was because nobody would take them on, not because they didn’t try.

Diane Dimond known for her antics to try to make anything Michael Jackson even bigger than what it was, had leaked the actual documents. In the documents one find many interesting things. For example, in the document Michael Jackson denies ever having any sexual contact with Jordan Chandler. And to make things even more interesting, the parents of Jordan Chandler, Evan and June Chandler agreed to that denial. Here is that part of the document:



Also, in the document it actually says the Chandlers can only speak of the case in a court of law. For 10 years the media has been spreading the lie that the settlement somehow stopped the Chandlers from testifying against Jackson. Another myth destroyed by the factual document.



Another myth that the settlement was for more than 30 million when in fact it was only 15,331,250, both Evan and June Chandler obtained 1.5 million while Larry Feldman obtained 3 million and 10% of the settlement which would bring his earnings to 5 million dollars.



And how much Jordan Chandler got? The most he could’ve gotten was 8 million dollars. Who leaked this private document? The only party that had this particular document was Lisa Marie Presley’s attorney at the time. So who gave it to Diane Dimond? Hmmm.

Entire document here:

http://www.thesmokinggun....acko1.html

Last year in July, Evan Chandler struck his son with a dumbbell and basically tried to murder him. What a great, caring dad.

http://lawlibrary.rutgers...5.opn.html

Evan Chandler was caught on tape speaking about his extortion plans on the telephone. I can't find the audio yet, but I have the transcript. I'll post it later, its too long to post it now in this thread.

mrsnet said:

Oh, but according to MJ haters, the reason why they [employees] didn't say anything than was because he threatened them if they left, and one of them told me he had hired thugs from Los Angeles to scare them from leaving and/or reporting the police.

whatsgoingon said:

Nah, according to MJ haters, Michael payed him to silence him.

Thats their answer for everything.

fcukthepolice said:

LMFAO, you're an idiot. Lets see those 'facts' right? You haters who are always talking about undisputed evidence never bother to show us, yet we can point to you every single example of any aspect for the case just like a snap of the finger, and you find dumb ass excuses to get around it.

LaToya Jackson as your witness? LaToya was married off to Jack Gordon, and was isolated from her entire family from 1989-1996. How the hell would she have known if Michael "paid children off", or worse, abused any children period? You are believing, picking and choosing, whom you want to believe. No matter how illogical they may be.

sassybritches said:

That analogy never works. Michael has been famous all of his life, and as celebrity, he has been under the microscope. Its far easier to try and understand Michael's situation in his position, than Joe Smith.

SpecialEd said:

What a piss poor excuse. Oh, they got threats so the accusers hide and don't go on record. (Um, if that didn't stop Gavin and his family, what difference would it have made for other so-called victims?) You people on the prosecution's side never provide any sources, proof or evidence to your tired claims. Just statements. Than get mad when nobody believes you LOL.
[Edited 10/25/07 16:09pm]

floetcist said:

floecist brings the heat, once again!

I think we may have a new nwo member...

bboy87 said:

If you want to be friends of MJ fan's why don't you go on the record with MJ and tell the truth? If you have blood money give it away to the poor and needy what good is it to you? everytime you spend it you'll bring back the memories or is he (jordan) running away just like MJ...but from who? and why? and what? may be the Winners!

floetcist said:

Handle yo bidness girl! Let 'em know.

LondonStyle said:

According to an article in GQ magazine, Jordy's father adminstered sodium penothol (truth serum) to him, and then coerced him about the allegations. Jordy really might not be able to discern the lie from the truth regarding the matter. I don't blame him. He was just a child. But his punk ass dad needs his ass whooped.

Floetcist you went on a long rant but again didn't answer why these little boys get a pay out but I wouldn't be able to get one and nor would the next 100 claimants. What made them especially worthy of being paid off?

And again you repeat the rhetoric about greedy parents who take cash rather than get a paedophile locked away. Their character isn't of interest as much as why they were in a position to get paid in the first place.

SpecialEd said:

Fans need to face the fact that the pay offs plus the sleepovers are what makes Michael look guilty. I don't think it is the case that peeps have got loads of hard-core physical evidence against him, if that were the case he wouldn't have been found Not Guilty 14 times. But the sleepovers and the out of court settlements have meant people are prepared to think the worse of him and documentaries like that of last night just fuel that belief.

whatsgoingon said:

According to the book Redemption, MJ's first legal team along with private eye Anthony Pellicano, were prepared to take the case to trial. When the lawyers were changed and Johnny Cocrhan was brought in , the second legal team came in wanting to settle and convinced MJ that it would be easier and make all of his problems go away. In retrospect, I wish that he had fought it out in court also.

illimack said:

Thanks you have named the second Winner - Channel 4, GQ Magazine

Who's next why doesn't Jordy and MJ Stop this and Tell the Truth?

What was the money for?

illimack said:

He should have fought the case in court, but more importantly he shouldn't have gotten so close to these kids that they were spending night after night with him. The sleepovers is the one piece of damning evidence they have against him. You take away that the police or the media don't really have any evidence against him, they can't even do him for possession of child porn, which is practically the easiest thing to get a Pedo on, i.e. R.kelly and Gary Glitter.