"It's like you have a denial for each and everything."- NO. I have a factual answer for each and everything.

BabyBeMine said:

I'm starting to think you're Tom Sneddon. Your obsession with this is scary. You seem crazy as hell right now.

The difference between you and MOL is that you seem to have some REAL, personal, deep-seated anger, as if he touched your wittle privates. MOL is trying to counter your emotional outbursts with some sense of logic and counter arguments.

Chandler's father was sued for sexual abused shortly after the settlement. In fact, he was sued many, many times afterwards. Does that mean he was guilty of every accusation? Or could it be *gasp!* that some people are motivated by the prospect of money?

he was sued???

totally forgot what thread i was postin in
[Edited 9/11/09 13:52pm]

dearmother said:

Evan Chandler was sued many times. In fact, in 2006, Evan was sued by Jordan Chandler. You can read it in one of my posts.

In 2006, Jordan Chandler accused his father of abuse. The accuser, now 26, says his ex-dentist dad Evan Chandler “struck him on the head from behind with … (dumbbell) weight … sprayed his eyes with Mace or pepper spray, and tried to choke him” last year, according to court documents filed in New Jersey. Jordan sued his father because in mid 2005 (now his father is suing him as well) his father tried to KILL HIM. How do I know this? COURT PAPERS. Jordan Chandler accuses his father of hitting him over the head with a 12-pound weight, spraying his eyes with mace and trying to choke him.

Why isn’t this information all over TMZ? Because the world may be afraid to know why EVAN CHANDLER would do something like that to his own SON. I would think that Evan Chandler trying to take out his son would be ALL OVER THE NEWS. I’m wrong. These folks don’t care about Jordan Chandler and what happens to him if it not related to Michael Jackson. But, who says it isn’t? Some alleged Evan and Jordan dispute is over money! You know that money they got from Michael Jackson’s insurance. I wonder, if Evan Chandler was capable of causing such injuries to his own son over what some allege is money, then why wouldn’t he be capable of falsely accusing a rich celebrity to get that money. It seems nothing stands in the way of Evan Chandler. Not even Jordan Chandler

Karen71 said:

Huh. Im not the one calling ppl names. We can say MOL is obsessed because he/she keeps trying to prove MJ was innocent. We are responding equally.

You just look at my post as obsession cause i think he was a pedophile and i don't think MOL points prove he was 100% innocent.

Im not the one upset here.There are many ppl in this world who think MJ was guilty. You can't argue with all of them. We are allowed to have our own opinions. I was able to debate without insulting which shows i wasn't the crazy one.
[Edited 9/11/09 14:07pm]

You believe he was innocent and i think he was a pedophile. Move on to another topic. He was a great entertainer though i will admit. Used to be a huge fan.

Move On

BabyBeMine said:

Please go back and re-read your posts. I can just imagine you stomping up and down, pounding into your fingers into the keyboard with veins the size of straws bulging from your neck, face crimson red, spittle spewing from your mouth as you shout every word you type in all caps.

Sure many people think he was guilty. But you're the only one insistent on arguing the case every single day for hours on end, week after week, months after his death. You're the only one who keeps re-typing and spewing the same old mess.

The alleged victims have moved on, hell, Michael's even moved on to another life form but here you sit--absolutely intent on convicting a DEAD man.

Just to end the discussion: BabyBeMine; you didn't read my posts, did you? Confess it! =P

Baby, honey, the day you open your mind go to this site: http://mjthekingofpop.wordpress.com/

Karen71 said:

And your the one who keeps explaining why you think he's innocent. Like i said im not the one angry or upset. Die hard fans get pissed off at ppl who think he was guilty. Let it go.

Do you over explain your self if there are 20 ppl that think MJ is guilty and your in a store, mall, club. ETC. Let it go cause ppl will have there opinions.

MJ has slept in the same bed as kids unrelated for 20 years. That's not saying he was guilty but that part is true. So many ppl just do not look at that as normal. Move On Now

Is this forum moderated at all???

BabyBeMine said:

I KEEP explaining???

I gave my two cents, returned WEEKS later and there you were--going strong EVERY SINGLE DAY.

I throw in another two cents and another week and several days elapsed while I LIVED MY REAL LIFE--something you clearly don't have outside of Michael's guilt or innocence.

Please understand there is a HUGE difference between drive-by postings every few weeks or so, and the maniacal OBSESSIVE stuff you've been doing NON-STOP.

When will you take your own advice and MOVE ON--like the accusers and much of the thinking world has done?

Karen71 said:

LOL...Im sure you are aware that the MJ defenders who participate respond just as quickly as myself. You just choose to pick out the one who is not on your side.

Let me tell you about me. I used to be a MJ fan and defended MJ using the GQ arfticle as my defense for many years so i am not some random hater trying to annoy you. I just examined the overall picture over a long stretch and came to my decision. I do not just look at the major things, but the small things like MJ's relations with women, his time gap between The Lisa Marie cover up ends in 1996 and now he goes back to the pre 1993 of never being seen with women. We all know he was not with Debbie Row so that don't even count.

I look at not the details described by Jordie Chandler, but the small things such as trips outside the country together and sleeping in the same bed. Jordie's mother is very attractive, yet MJ chooses to spend more quality time with her son. Keep in mind there are out the country. Please name a grown man 35 years old living in the USA that has taken a 13 year old boy outside the country and slept in the same bed as that kid with a very attractive mother not to far away? I don't care how shy a man is, 99 percent of men would put that shyness on the line and still try and get with that women. Jordie's mom was very attractive and MJ didn't want her, just like he didn't want Brooke Shields or Tatiana. I already told you there stories on MJ.

Tatiana was fired from the Bad tour from Michael's manager caused she kissed on tour. That's a weak excuse cause MJ called all the shots and if he was feeling Tatiana he could have kept her. Brooke Shields called MJ asexual. Look up the defenition. Look at that big smile on her face and how she grabbed MJ's hand at the 1984 Grammy Awards. No way does she look at MJ as only a friend at that partricular time. She accepted it cause as i said, he wasn't in to her like tjat which is why she called him asexual. MJ proposed to her to keep there friendship. Why did Brooke turn him down? Maybe cause she loves sex and wants a husband who loves it back.

Karen71 said:

MOL is trying to counter your emotional outbursts with some sense of logic and counter arguments.I copied and pasted her post also cause im reading it.

As MOL said let's stick to the facts.

1. MJ slept in the same bed with kids not related for 20 + years
2. MJ took Jordie Chandler and his attractive mother outside the USA
3. MJ slept in same bed as Jordie on that trip outside the USA
4. MJ does not sleep with Jordie's mother on that trip who was very attractive

I kept it short and simple. There is so much more. Name a 35 year old man in the USA who has slept with kids not related in the same bed for 20 years? Name a man in the USA who has a very attractive lady on his hand, but chooses to spend more time with her son? Jordie's mom was attractive but MJ is with her son. Name a 35 year old man who takes a 13 year old kid not related outside the country and sleeps in the same bed as him multiple times?

You can't cause you have to search and search. When you have to search that long for a man like this there is a problem.


Im done with the topic. The ppl who really break down the small things will get my point. It's not just the big things like testimony in court or GQ article or selling stories to tabloids. It's the little things.

Funny how Lisa Marie comes in the picture right after the 1993 allegations. So stop with the MJ keeps his women private. MJ had her all over the place to prove he liked women which he didn't. The argument of well MJ keeps his women descret don't work. He had Lisa Marie wide open for everyone so why should any other women MJ has dated never be seen or noticed by the media? Once he thought he had proved he was straight Lisa Marie was dismissed.

Oh who has MJ been with since 1997? He was done with the fake cover up and back to his pre 1993 self.

Now watch ppl say he kept ladies in the quiet. LOL
[Edited 9/12/09 3:49am]

MOL said:

This is dishonest in two ways. Firstly, pretending not to know about Pellicano's criminal nature. This was known at the time when Michael hired him in 1993, and eventually resulted in him being sentenced to 15 years. I shouldn't need to post proof because a Jackson obsessive like yourself should already know it, but since you insist on playing dumb, here it is.....

http://defamer.gawker.com...-in-prison

Also, here's his Wikipedia entry.....

http://en.wikipedia.org/w..._Pellicano

The second way your post is dishonest is that you are saying this is irrelevant. It is VERY relevant to the discussion because you are posting the word of Pellicano (a career criminal being paid by Jackson to smear the Chandlers) as if his word has an ounce of credibility. It has none! Michael's song "Money" could actually have been written FOR Pellicano since he embodies the line "You'd do anything for money".


Back that up. Show me EXACTLY where the court transcripts say Chandler's description didn't match.


Again, this is highly dishonest. Sneddon couldn't pursue the trial because Jordan refused to testify after Jackson paid the family $20 million hush money. You know this full well. If there had been no match Michael wouldn't have had to pay them shit. And again, I repeat the point you are ignoring. Why would the prosecution try to have the photos submitted as evidence in 2005 if the picture hadn't matched? Their whole argument was that it proved Chandler's description matched exactly.

MOL said:

If it looks like a duck, talks like a duck, the chances are it's probably a duck.



Please show me one credible source that says Michael ever slept one-on-one with a little GIRL! I'm not talking about group get-togethers. I'm talking about one-on-one sleepovers. I made that clear in my post, but you CHOSE to misunderstand.


Yet another example of bare, blatant dishonesty. Jordan Chadler is Latino, not black. He was the same race as the two other boys who accused Michael. The fact that you can't even admit such a known fact is yet another example of how disinterested you are in truth. You will lie and deceive without a hint of conscience. Utterly shameless! If you were an honest person you would just simply admit that Michael never had any black boys in his bed (Emanuel Lewis didn't share his bed). All those boys who slept with him and not a single one is black. This fact is obviously so inconvenient that rather than face up to it, you simply bury your head in the sand and hope it won't still be there when you eventually come up for air.

Midnightmover: almost all of the things you said are wrong and I have answered them in my posts. Read all my posts again, including one in which I talk about Mark Torbiner. Read everything I posted. I defy you.
Go to this site: http://mjthekingofpop.wordpress.com/
Read court transcripts and you will see that MJ was innocent.

I don't have time to discuss this matter: I have anatomy exam tomorrow. When I have time, I'll discuss things properly.

midnightmover said:[quote]

MOL said:

"Back that up. Show me EXACTLY where the court transcripts say Chandler's description didn't match"- Go to the site. I actually read it in Halperin's book. Besides, poplices did conclude that it didn't match.
" Sneddon couldn't pursue the trial because Jordan refused to testify after Jackson paid the family $20 million hush money. You know this full well. "- No, I don't. Read what I posted about policemen trying to make kids say they had been raped. Sneddon wanted to pursue a criminal trial, since he could have used the testimony given by Jordan to Stan Katz.
" If there had been no match Michael wouldn't have had to pay them shit."- It was MJ's insurance company who paid against MJ's wishes. It's on the settlement document available online.
"Why would the prosecution try to have the photos submitted as evidence in 2005 if the picture hadn't matched?"- First: if the description matched, Mj would never have accepted to enter a strip-search. Second: evidence from the '93 accusations were accepted. I've answered your doubt in a previous post, midnight. Besides, the story is wrong since Sneddon just said that he would put MJ genital's photo online to embarrass him.
" Their whole argument was that it proved Chandler's description matched exactly.": NO, IT DIDN'T. According to police officers documents, it didn't. again, go to the website.

PS: Why did you ignore my other posts? anyway, i wont be posting anymore since i have 3 anatomy exams (2 orals and a theoric one) n i dont have time.
PS2: YOU, MIDNIGHT, ARE THE ONE WHO IS BEING DISHONEST: you even use gutierrez as evidence. LOl

@ unique

check page 20 on this thread
[Edited 9/13/09 8:29am]
[Edited 9/13/09 8:38am]

MOL said:

How incredibly convenient. I ask you specific questions and you refuse to give me specific answers. Your refusal to do so is a sign of what shaky ground you are on. You CAN'T answer the questions because it would mean admitting to your own dishonesty. Let the record show, I called your bluff and you ran away.

MOL said:

Notice how you are unable to actually give a specific answer to the questions. Instead referring me to other sources. YOU are the one who claims that Jordan's description didn't match so YOU should easily be able to show me EXACTLY where the transcripts show that. Your failure to do so simply shows that you have been bluffing and are now running away because you know you've been busted. You have lost this argument.

the makes me wonder about the courts/child protective services also.
basically these pedafiles are getting away with alot. cuz it when all comes down to it even with people i talk to in my private life im on the phone asking questions about my situation and what not it's kinda clear to me in a way that how much money one has, your lifestyle is judged and this type of behavior is not taking seriously. espcially when a child is scared to say anything and is living in fear because of the treats of the person they are living with. so its just easy to brush those things aside just my opinion. i know alot of men that have issues. for example i was dated a guy, and the reason why i called it quits was because i was scared. the first conversation we had he said "im going to make you love me" when i asked about his past relationships something wasn't right. he was a black man by the way.


No this isn't a joke. and yes there are women out there that are abusers themselves just in a different form i bet.

Hell no I don't discredit these stories cuz as a child myself i grew up i seen what my sister has gone through with her husband. and the stories were always coming to light years later also. I believe my sister's husband ex or whatever was a pedifile and maybe did stuff to his own kid's. however, the courts have to make a choice which parent the children should be with. its always the person thats stable cuz my sister never was. lol
Hense growing up around men who were abusive myself it amazes me.
i remember as a child testifying a few times against my abuser so i think i have some history. one thing about abusers is they will always lie and deny any of their actions.

the law is the law though, lol when you have a child with someone thats your flesh and blood. and same thing goes with marriage.


Was jackson's case any differen't even though he was star?
what are the courts supposed to do? throw their own father in jail to teach him a lesson and hope things get better? Jails would be full because of all the drug dealers. Michael was the exception to the rule cuz he was famous. if that was the case all drug dealers would be in jail. and it would be full. the government doesn't want to deal with that. I'm not sure how convictions go however makes sense to me.




i've had a conversation with a security gaurd in my area and when i told him about my situation cuz he asked me. and they will justify anything to let them off the hook. "oh well he loves you" "everyone has problems" even married people. "but we must work through them"


its all bullshit. Let me tell ya a story that happened to me one night.

my dad called the cops on me cuz i didn't come home before dark. I took off for a while knowing he would be upset so me being a rebel i new what would happen. the cops were all standing outside and were happy that was came back home. I had a conversation with a cop after and he asked me about my situation he thought it was strange. he asked me why the cops were called me because im over the age of 18 im considered an adult and not breaking any laws.
Anyhoo, so cops in my opinion will justify anything but they are out to protect.
im friends with the cops and so i respect what they do. It doesn't mean I have to agree with the things they say about my sitatuion.

Michael jackson was molesting his children. No big deal we will throw this out of court cuz we have real criminals to chase out there. Same thing with OJ, why was that guy let off is my question? he just repeated history. i took psychology and its easy to tell where a person is headed in life based of their behavior. once a criminal always a criminal. does anyone feel me?
[Edited 9/13/09 10:19am]

booty said:

Cuz unlike OJ there was no forensic evidence. People need to stop comparing the too.
[Edited 9/13/09 10:18am]

unique said:

exactly! and coming to court wearing pajama bottoms and dancing around on top of a car at a court appearance is normal? Go figure

[Edited 9/13/09 18:02pm]

Excuse me but what the hell are you all talking about???? I wish some people will leave MJ alone he is gone now, let it go just bring up stuff is not helping.

Plus his kids are taken care of, and he seem to be a good person, just in my opinion had the wrong people in his life and might have sometime made things hard for himself.

Any parent who let there kids sleep with an adult is really an ass them self, and than they might have taught the child to lie anyway, especially because of who MJ was, about having sex with MJ than went for the kill (they wanted money).

That what all the people in my opinion wanted anyway, it does not matter how you look at it, they all wanted MONEY from him. He seem to love helping people and enjoyed what he did.

To me people seem in my mind jealous because he was a black man who was adorned by Billion not million of fans around the world, plus he was a billionaire before I guess the age of 50, he been doing what he loved since age 5. Now he Pay the parent for the first child sex case, now think of this why did the parents wanted MONEY anyway, when they should have said no, and let the trial continue???

So see right there it was about MONEY, never did they found evidence of him touching the boy anyway, and than the 2nd time he went to trial for the same thing, he was found NOT GUILTY, and the parents of this child LIE, So you see if there where so many problems, and you or some of you say his own kids should have been taken away, if there where any problems than, the kids would have been gone along time ago (his kids I mean).

So instead of everyone talking about shit they don't know, they should really look at the facts, or really think, or not judge and see where everyone is coming from because there are 2 or 3 stories in this life, which mean there a lot of different versions people make up stuff, and you can't really believe what you hear on news or paper.

P.S. that guy who interview MJ back in 2003 should have not interview MJ, because MJ let this man into his home and seem to be speaking from his heart, but that guys was rude and did not deserve to ever set foot in the man house in the first place. BECAUSE he already in my opinion had misconceptions of MJ.

-Moon

Another slimy aspect of MJ's character was of course his notorious backstabbing. MJ fans were incensed when Quincy slammed Michael after his death. Some of them may want to pause to ask themselves what Michael had done to anger Quincy in the first place. Ditching him couldn't be enough by itself. Producers are used to that. Perhaps finding out from CBS boss Walter Yetnikoff how Michael had plotted against him in 1984 might have had something to do with it. When Michael and Quincy were nominated together for the Producer of the Year award, Michael called Yetnikoff trying to get Quincy's name removed, saying that he didn't want people thinking Quincy had done all the work. Yetnikoff told him he didn't have control over what the Grammy organizers did.

I remember seeing a clip of the two of them onstage together at the Grammys that year and being bemused by how unhappy Michael looked next to Quincy. When Quincy turned to him with a broad smile, Mike responded with the most half-hearted fake smile I ever saw. Yetnikoff's revelation shed a new light on his lack of enthusiasm. He didn't want Quincy sharing the glory. Quincy must have been pissed when he found out about Michael's attempt to stab him in the back.

The list of people Michael stabbed in the back could fill up an entire thread by itself. He was sued by scores of these people. He was a great entertainer, but a despicable human being. By far the slimiest in the modern pop era..