dearmother said:

i got the transscripts part now just not the phone calls if they r full version

oooh where did u get them?

dearmother said:

not phone calls in full. just scripts from court

Why did BabyBeMine stop posting?

MOL

The fact that MJ drank wine with Frank Tyson shows that that particular part is in fact true. The only excuse you can make is Frank Tyson was lying but there is no evidence that he would lie because he was MJ's friend and he actually defended MJ saying he has seen MJ with women. Point is the story of MJ drinking alcohol out of soda cans and sharing it with a 13 year old is TRUE because MJ gave Frank alcohol when he was 13. Frank also said he and MJ talked graphically about sex with women. Keep in mind Frank is only 13. Not 21 and over so this ALONE is a problem.

You will probably say well MJ didn't molest Frank. Here are some key points

1. Maybe because Frank is black and brotha's talk.
2. How do you know how MJ is when he's drunk in bed with a 13 year old?
3. Sleeping in same bed as teenage boy and your drinking together..WOW
4. The 2005 accusers family said at 1st MJ did nothing wrong. Who was doing the video taping? MJ's security. Use your common sense do you actually think MJ is this sweet, nice guy all the time. Thats a front. He had his security make them say nice things about him on tape to make him look good. Maybe not physically, but verbal talk kis enough to intimidate her. The a accusers mother and family weren't exactly powerful. There at Neverland and MJ's security wants them to make a video a and say nice things about there boss.

MJ's friend defended him but in my opinion hurt him also because he said MJ drank alcohol, talked sex and slept in the same bed as him.

BabyBeMine said:

Seriously, Have you read the closing arguments I have posted? or you pressed the Ignore button? because if you did you wouldn't say all of this

Seing Voices?

Im going by what Frank Tyson said who was MJ's friend. What is your opinion on this? Is Frank Lying? My point to this is MJ MJ gave him wine in soda cans then its not to far fetched to believe MJ gave it to others also.

How do u know how MJ is when he is buzz or drunk or his sexual urges? You dont know at all. What we do know is he has been accused multiple times.

When you are a die hard fan of a celebrity and they allegedly committ a crime, unless its caught on tape a die hard fan will have a excuse for any and everything.

Was the jury full of die hard fans?

BabyBeMine said:

Did you even read what I posted?

I'm starting to think that you have a low IQ.
About the Arvizos:
I'm giving you a single shred of evidence.

No evidence from the prosecution side was produced (and the prosecution spent millions and millions), and according to court documents, the kids couldn't keep their story straight. They would contradict themselves on court. The kid even admitted he was lying.
Moreover, the mother, Janet Arvizo, had a history of trying to work the system to her benefit (she even robbed a charity institution...). I was fortunate enought to read courtroom transcripts and all I can say is not once did he ever have anything to worry about.
The majority of his 'accusers' (including MacCauly Culkin) found the allegations laughable and the only teen who cried abuse gave testimony that was RIDDICULED with innacuracies (even the jurors started giggling one time, during Jason Francia's testimony).

Many people will admit that they never even researched about the 2005 Child Molestation Case and still say that Michael Jackson is guilty. However, if they knew the facts, their opinion would be quite different. It was known that the accuser, Gavin Arvizo, was a thief and a very unbehaved young man. He had previously had many suspensions and detentions because of his behavior in school. George Lopez, the well know comedian, testified in court that young Gavin Arvizo had stole 40 dollars from his wallet in the previous months. He would give money to the family (who kept asking for more) and was accused of having stolen 300 dollars from the family by Janet.
Gavin Arvizo's mother, Janet Arvizo, was pending a fine for assaulting a security guard at a JCPenney's and stealing over $1,000,000 worth of merchandise from that store. As you can see, the accuser and the accuser's family were well known scammers.
So, how could you believe the story of the molestation, when Gavin Arvizo himself admitted, before the trial, to his teacher, that Michael Jackson never molested him?
The DA, Tom Sneddon, was really desperate to get Jackson. He flew to Australia ,at one point, in the mid-90s, to try and find an alleged victim. And the person said, "take a a hike, get out
of here."
The media's coverage of this case was awful. They never showed to the public the defence side and that's why everyone got surprised when Jackson was acquitted.
Without a shadow of a doubt Michael Jackson was innocent in this case and the accusers were just out for cash. They had conned celebrities, charities and police departments before, but their target in this case was not about to roll over as they expected. Now, seriously, you should read court transcripts!!! You will die laughing; Davelin Arvizo, sister of the accuser, "forgot" to mention Michael Jackson had given her alcohol back when she talked to the cops, but of course remembered MJ given her alcohol on the stand. The Who "would believe me?" excuse given by 4 prosecution witnesses as to why they never called the cops is laughable. Jason cries over his balls being tickled (perhaps he just cries because he would lose the 2.5 millions of dollars he got from "National Enquirer" to lie against Jackson?).

As I said, Janet Arvizo had previously sued JC Penney's for alleged assault and molestation. In which her sons Star and Gavin testified and were later proven to have lied on the stand. During Star Arvizo's testimony, he explained the molestation act that Michael had supposedly performed on Gavin Arvizo. While I will not go into details, I can tell you that it was a completely different story than Gavin told. Read court transcripts. One big flaw in the prosecutions case is the time line of events. Tom Sneddon claimed that the molestation occurred AFTER the airing of the Martin Bashir "Living With Michael Jackson" documentary. Sneddon claimed that after the airing of the documentary, Jackson's people did everything in their power, including forcing the Arvizo's to make a rebuttal video in which the Arvizo's claim that everything stated was coached by Jackson's team, however (here's where it gets interesting), according to Sneddon and Gavin Arvizo, the molestation occurred AFTER this series of events. If Michael Jackson was already being questioned by almost every news media outlet about his involvment in Gavin Arvizo's life after the Bashir airing, WHY would he molest the child during that time? Why would he put himself in that position when people are already questioning his actions? The time line makes no sense.

Lastly, not only did Gavin Arvizo's testimony greatly vary from his brother's, but it also varied from his own previous grand jury testimony in which he claimed that the molestation happened before he saw officials who were investigating Michael due to the Bashir documentary, while during the criminal trial Gavin claimed the molestation happened AFTER the officals investigated.



About the '93 accusations;


usnewslink.com/framedjackson.htm


About Frank Tyson:
He said that MJ never drank wine/alcohol in front of kids. He also defended him multiple times saying that he thought MJ was asexual.

I'm going to tell you something: Two MJ friends- ages 13 and 14- were with him at their house. They were watching pornplex when Mj appeared in the room. One of them told him the following: "Look at these women!". Mj started crying while saying: "This is not necessary. Stop this. Change the channel." Does that tell you something?

BabyBeMine said:

"What we do know is he has been accused multiple times."- Both me and seeingvoices have given you evidence. Both me and him proved that the parents of the accusers wanted money. What YOU know is that he has been accused TWO times. What I know is that he has been UNFAIRLY accused TWO times.

"How do u know how MJ is when he is buzz or drunk or his sexual urges?"- That's not even a valid argument.

"Im going by what Frank Tyson said who was MJ's friend. What is your opinion on this? Is Frank Lying? My point to this is MJ MJ gave him wine in soda cans then its not to far fetched to believe MJ gave it to others also."- I've answered you many times.

"When you are a die hard fan of a celebrity and they allegedly committ a crime, unless its caught on tape a die hard fan will have a excuse for any and everything."- NO! WRONG! WRONG! WRONG! Stop saying what you don't know. What we have given you are not excuses: we have given you valid evidence. In fact, we have given you THE FACTS! THE FACTS! You, even when presented with the facts, choose to ignore them. Instead, you say that MJ "has been accused, that's all we know". That's all YOU know. All I know is that he has been a victim of money hungry parents. Ohh...and there is one difference between us: I said he had been the victim of money-hungry parents and, to support what I said, I've given you facts, evidence. Valid evidence. Valid facts. Anyone normal, would agree that MJ was innocent after reading the facts, the evidence.

You say MJ was guilty because he had been accused. You say he molested kids JUST BECAUSE HE WAS ACCUSED! You don't have facts to support his guilt, you don't even know the evidence....but you still say he raped children! You insist on saying that he was guilty and that us, the fans, will blindly defend him. But that doesn't make sense since us, the fans, give valid evidence to support what we say. The evidence I've given you is factual. I've given you FACTS! And it's easy to conclude that the man was innocent.

BabyBeMine said:

Frank Tyson?

That dude ain't nowhere near black

Oh and BTW, BabyBeMine...don't you think MJ was the perfect target? Haven't you thought about that? Uh?

He had billions.
He was not your average Joe.
He was always surrounded by children.
He was incredibly naive.
He never developed emotionally.



Don't you think- after reading the evidence and what I've just said- that the accusers' parents wanted MONEY?

No? Yes? Think.

MOL...LOL

Here is the link to Frank Tyson MJ's friend. Frank said he and MJ drank wine when he was 13 years old from soda cans.

http://www.contactmusic.c...r-as-a-kid


So what, Frank is lying also.

BabyBeMine said:

Contactmusic's news usually come from tabloids.
Frank stated in a televised interview that he never saw MJ drink alcohol in front of kids and that he thought that Michael was asexual.He added that Michael seemed to have no interest in sex.
[Edited 8/18/09 3:39am]

And don't forget Vincent Amen. The DA, Tom Sneddon, offered him money to shut up. However, Amen told the judge, during the trial, that he had been with the family Arvizo almost 24/7 and that the alcohol and conspiracy accusations were tottaly laughable.

Amen told the jury: "Michael Jackson had a room where he kept some bottles of wine. He would never let kids enter or come near that room. Gavin and Star Arvizo used to ask employees to put alcohol in their drinks. They were unbehaved."


Michael Jackson's current employees testified that the accuser, Gavin Arvizo, and his family, caused a great deal of trouble at Neverland, left a huge mess at Neverland, damaged and defaced property at Neverland, attacked the animals at Neverland, pulled knives on Neverland employees for not giving them alcohol, stole from Neverland employees, stole from Michael Jackson, extorted Neverland employees by lying about their financial circumstances, extorted the government by lying about their financial circumstances, extorted other celebrities by lying to them and falsely accusing them, caused trouble wherever they went, and to whoever was unlucky enough to befriend them, overall having been shown to be users, liars, thieves, troublemakers and criminals.


As of late 2004, David Jackson (former Janet Arvizo husband) insisted: "My children are routinely rehearsed by their mother Janet to do or say whatever she wishes."

i don't doubt any of that given their history with jc penny chris rock et. al

You know the 2 keys which 100% prove MJ wasn't all the way there sexually. The 1979 Terry George phone sex was before the Pepsi head burn. There isn't a excuse of pain killers for his behavior.Now add that he had graphic sexual talk with Frank Tyson in 1995. So we had Terry George phone sex & Frank Tyson wine, in bed with & talking about sex.

Two seperate times but both have some of the same digusting behavior.

StillDirrty said:

No.

MOL said:

Thanks for proving my point. I said last week that MJ had no interest in sex with women that's why he and Brooke Shields never hooked up. He wasn't interested and that's why Tatiana got kicked off the Bad tour. No matter what Frank Dileo says if MJ wants her to stay she will stay. MJ was turned off from that kiss on stage but pretended to like it cause he was on stage.

Naturally he's not going to tell Frank he likes kids BUT interesting that Frank picked up on MJ's lack of interest in sex with women.

Combine he lack of interest in women to the accusations and the whole picture doesnt look to good for MJ

BabyBeMine said:

Your posts intrigue me. Do you want to explore other possibilities or have you already made up your mind. If you think MJ was guilty then fine - that's your point of view. But don't hide it in a guise of wanting to know the truth if you are only going to filter things through your own bias.

Many of the links you posted have been all hearsay and innuendo and not based on what was actually said or disproved in a court of law.

There will never be any proof to convince people "convinced" of his guilt because you cannot disprove something didn't happen.

Swa

BabyBeMine said:

I said several times look up the phone transcripts. I don't feel like uploading the audio but he's been with women. One of them he had to keep it quiet because she had an arranged marriage. & during Bad Era he was seeing at the very least 2 girls at the same time but he wasn't serious about either of them. & on the tapes Tatiana wasn't mentioned in terms of who he was into so he wasn't interested in her. & he knew that Tatum was cheating on him so I guess that is another reason why he rejected her.
[Edited 8/18/09 21:52pm]

I get your point but when MJ was supposebedly dating Tatum he was like 19 and she was 13, 14 years old. Remember he's 5 to 6 years older and she was born in 1963. Realistically i think that was more of a friendship. As for the 2 ladies he dated on the bad tour. Where is the proof?

My point is Brooke Shields and Tatiana are both very attractive and im not a women who likes ladies but they are attractive ladies and MJ was not sexually attracted to either and thats weird.

Honestly i think Brooke Shields in the 80s just accepted they would only be friends cause MJ had no sexual interest in her at all. Look at her body language at the 1984 Grammy Awards. She was very much interested.

But MJ WASN'T.....It doesn't matter how nervous or shy a very attractive lady makes a man because if he's interested she will see that.MJ wasn't interested and Brooke saw that so she was like we were just friends.

Buddie OLE PAL
[Edited 8/19/09 0:41am]

Tatum was older but anyways he was with her and Brooke early on in his adulthood. If you listen to the tapes he explains that he used to be very devout with his religion but I guess when he gave that up his behavior changed which coincides with the timeline of when he dated those other girls. The proof is that he said it to a friend while their phone call was being recorded without either of their knowledge. Look it up.
& to the best of my knowledge he was into Brooke. I believe he once said that he was in love with her but I think it was Brooke that wasn't interested. Plenty think that she only used him for fame. Both Brooke and Tatum denied the level of their relationship. Brooke claims that they were just friends but I'm not entirely sure of that because he would tell her that he wanted to adopt kids with her and who does that with their friend?
& Tatum lied and said that she barely knew Michael and that they had a brief run in when they were both 12. She was much older and it was sometime during OTW so she's lying.
& if you think about it they were probably embarrassed by him and didn't want people to know that they had once had a romantic relationship with him. Even girls who he hooked up with if they told people who would believe them? So many people think that he's gay. But I don't think that he was. He just kept his relationships with women on the low. I guess to keep up his mysterious image.

& in regards to Tatiana, I agree I didn't get why he didn't like her because I think she's the prettiest girl he's been linked to but I always thought (not everyone agrees with me) that he prefers white girls. I've seen videos of him hitting on white girls who ARE NOT CUTE! Lisa Marie isn't all that. Katie Couric said he asked her out on a date, (wtf!) Black men who fetishize white women do things like that. They don't care if the girl is cute or not if she's white.
[Edited 8/19/09 1:15am]

BabyBeMine said:

Why do you say that? In those private phone conversations that leaked he said something like he did not have sex with Tatum and he does not regret it because he knew for a fact she was just playing with him, using him. And that he walked around with a "wide nose" or something like that meaning "horny". *lol* Based on those convos it seems to me that it´s not that he wasn´t interested, his religion forbid it. And looking at his life later on, I believe he changed his attitudes towards relegion and stopped taking certain things that seriously, because when they asked Lisa if he satisfied her and she said "well, do you think I would marry someone he didn´t", reveals that they had sex before they got married.
But anyway, speaking of Lisa, wasn´t Elvis a "virgin" till his wedding night? According to Priscilla, they would experiment but Elvis did not want to have sex before he got married and he also had tons of beautiful women throwing at him. Does anyone call HIM asexual, gay, not interested in women?
[Edited 8/19/09 1:19am]