Here's the story on what the guard says he witnessed. His excuse for saying nothing happen at 1st makes sense because he figured nobody would believe him.

http://www.mtv.com/news/a...hael.jhtml

One of the Dentists, Mark Torbiner who worked with Evan Chandler is one of the Doctors/Dentists that the police who is being investigated regarding Michael's death. How ironic is that!!

BabyBeMine said:

they could have tried to put mj in jail AND still got paid in a civil suit, oj was aguitted on murder charges but nicole's family won the civil case, which is not as hard to prove as a criminal case, maybe the chandlers had a reason why they didnt wanna go through a criminal case?

Timmy84 said:

Yeah, that's what I thought too, Timmy. And from what I understand, the gag order stands even after MJ's passing.

Which brings up the question for both sides. Why the need for a gag order anyway? One side is lying, so who benefits most from the order?

ehuffnsd said:

if the way he described his penis matched the photos i think the police would have had a better chance of building a criminal case, i dont think there was any concrete evidence to prove molestation,as a parent i just find it impossible to believe that this family made a deal instead of trying to put this guy under the jail. also it baffled me when the father contacted a lawyer and then some kinda doctor before he notified the police, in fact did he ever report this 'crime' or did he let the doctor report it?

StillDirrty said:

is jordan chandler adopted, because i read the father is jewish and the mother irish, how can that combination create this kid?

lowkey said:

his momma was creepin'

lowkey said:

The same way people think Mark Lester and Debbie Rowe made Paris I guess

all Chandlers are bunch of lairs and con artists.

The prosecution in act of desperation brought the allegations of the past Bad acts of (1993) during the 2005 trial to boost their weak case, bringing bunch of witnesses to testify against MJ, and guess what? all the people who testified against proved to be thieves, they stole money from MJ, all of them filed bankruptcy because MJ wanted a hell a lot of money from them so they filed for bankruptcy , they stole some of his property, a painting of Elvis Presley ,money....etc...Their witnesses were shady as hell.

Jordan refused to testify against MJ during the 2005 trial, because he knows that Thomas Mesereau would have ripped him to shreds on cross-examination…

That’s why for the million time I say, that if anyone wants to know why Mj proved to be innocent , get the court transcripts, they don’t lie, other than that the sources are pure speculation and lies.
[Edited 8/12/09 16:07pm]

if jordie really stopped talking to his dad after the case (???)

then i think that says a lot

red flag red flag

lowkey said:

Jordan's mama half-Asian, part-Irish and part-black. Evan is his or was his stepfather.

dearmother said:

jordan has a restraining order against his dad.

seeingvoices12 said:

Thomas Mesereau ripping him to shreds doesn't prove he's lying. A great high profile lawyer can catch even a person telling the truth in inconsistencies. Ppl think because u were molested u have to remamber every exact detail when cross examined when thats not the case.

I dont see where the employees from 1993 are automatically lying. Just because they sold there stories doesn't make it a lie. Your latino barely speak any english and you are a maid at neverland or security guard. Thats not enough income to AVOID selling the story.

http://www.foxnews.com/st...70,00.html

here's the link to the story of Jordan placing a restraining order against his father.

BabyBeMine said:

goggle floacist and mj is innocent...a non fans perspective....that should give u some info.

I have read the 93 affidavit and it sounds like someone else wrote that not the boy...that's all i have to say about it.
[Edited 8/12/09 21:01pm]

BabyBeMine said:

I think his ex-employees are liars b/c who the f*** would work for so with long with Michael Jackson if they suspected something was going on. Don't you think one of them would have called the cops by now if they actually "saw" something going on.
[Edited 8/12/09 21:03pm]

BoOTyLiCioUs said:

thanks!

lowkey said:

like in domestic violence cases if the victim refuses to testify there isn't a case.

suga10 said:

money talks.

BoOTyLiCioUs said:

What are these two books mentioned in the article, has anyone read them? If so, what did you think, was there anything enlightening?

"In what has now been a much-reported story, Jordy Chandler, then 12 years old, alleged that Jackson molested him on numerous occasions between 1991 and 1994. His uncle, Ray Chandler, published a book about the case in 2005, as did Jackson’s longtime PR man, Bob Jones. Both books detailed Jackson’s inappropriate relationship with the boy; Ray Chandler’s book also recounted the negotiations with Jackson’s attorney, Bert Fields, and his investigator, Anthony Pellicano, by which his brother and nephew got the $20 million."

suga10 said:

This defense to me doesn't prove innocents because some of the employees were maids that barely spoke english and some ppl will keep things quiet in order to keep there job. Also how do you know MJ probably didnt make a threat to one of them? There was a report that MJ told the maid if you tell a anyone i will have someone take care of you. This lady making probably minimum wage going up against a power man like MJ. Im sure that would have intiidated her and kept her hush hush.

.

BabyBeMine, your trying to play head games. To prove in this case and in many cases of child molestation. It is impossible to prove someone is innocent as well as it is impossible to prove someone is guilty. It's simple a case of he said she said. So in this case you must determine who has seems the most like to be the one lying. Now in this case you have the accuser's who all have gained a large sum of money or have a questionable past's with such matters. And you have Michael Jackson who all though has an unusual relationship with children. Yet shows no signs of being a child molester. No child porn, no revolving door of accusers (meaning of 10-20 people) no 3rd party eye witness. No evidence of past sexual abuse. There's just nothing.

BabyBeMine said:

Someone once said be careful what you do because a lie becomes the truth.

It's very hard to prove something didn't happen - that is disprove a negative.

What you have to admit is that there was a vested interest by the media to run the story in a way that sold more papers.

Many of the examples of ex employees were exposed over time as people who would change their story based on how much they were getting paid, the higher the money paid the more salacious the story got, often conflicting what was earlier said.

Also the settlement was in fact instigated (and some say forced) by Michael's insurance company who felt it better to settle the case, than be awarded charges of a higher amount in a civil court if Michael was deemed to have acted inappropriately.

If you are interested in reading about the accusations from an objective point of view, then I might recommend reading the Ian Halperin bio "The Final Years of Michael Jackson". In it the author actually set out to "nail Michael to the wall" after being found not guilty in the 2005 trial. But as the story unfolds, the more he investigated the more he became convinced that Michael was indeed set up and extorted in the first round of allegations, and the family (and Tom Sneddon) in the second round exploited this held belief that Michael was guilty.

There are a lot of interesting tidbits in the bio that are too detailed to go into. But I do suggest you read it if you do want to know more, and then make up your own mind.

Swa

Swa said:

Swa, did you read it?

BabyBeMine said:

GODDDDD.....


Please Stop this , If I saw someone molesting someone I will report them to the police, plain and simple, if they saw something and they kept Quiet to keep their job then you deserve to be in jail because they were hiding a crime ..Pathetic.

and what report you are talking about? I have followed the trial extensively and i don't remember reading a report about MJ making a threat to a woman, post that report (reliable source) other than that its a pure lie.

I will not participate In this mockery of a subject anymore, because its really pointless , the man is dead, he went to trial and defended himself and he was acquitted, mj wasn't acquitted for nothing, there were reasons , since you all guys have the time to prove to other orgers that Mj is guilty why don't you go and ready court transcripts, court transcariots DO NOT LIE, its no science rocket....all what are saying based on speculation and personal opinion, you don't know nothing about what went into the court room...MOCKERY.
[Edited 8/13/09 2:13am]
[Edited 8/13/09 2:13am]

http://www.aphroditejones..._Trial.htm

From Aphrodite Jones's research files of the Michael Jackson Trial, used to support her new book, Michael Jackson Conspiracy, here are excerpts from a transcript of a recorded conversation between Anthony Pellicano, a private investigator for Michael Jackson, and Jim Mitteager, a Globe reporter.




Note: Attorney Barry Rothman (representing the Chandler clan) was later accused by Michael Jackson’s attorneys of unethical conduct regarding Jackson. Barry Rothman was not charged with anything.

Bombshell: In the 2005 case against Michael Jackson, when June Chandler was cross examined on the witness stand in Santa Maria, June admitted that she’d met with Anthony Pellicano “three or four times” but had no recollection of what went on during those meetings. Tom Mesereau asked Mrs. Chandler if she recalled telling Pellicano that “Evan wanted money.” Mesereau also asked Mrs. Chandler if she’d ever told Pellicano that “Evan’s concerns could only be about money.” Of course, June Chandler didn’t recall making either statement.

bboy87 said:

Yes I have. It is a very interesting read.

Swa

Swa said:

I saw it at the store the other day, Halperin gives me the creeps. I was thinking of buying the updated edition of The Magic and The Madness, though....

^^ bought that too. Had read it before but interested to see JRT's take on it.

I would recommend reading the Halperin book - interested to see your point of view on it.

Swa