Official April 29 2005 Thread

whisperAdmin

Administrator
Staff member
DO NOT post articles anywhere on this forum without a url linking to where you got the article. If one more person does that, I will delete your post.

I just have to keep this hard rule in place because often times people who are archiving this information have no source and no url for reference of where the info came from.
 
DO NOT post articles anywhere on this forum without a url linking to where you got the article. If one more person does that, I will delete your post.

Sorry, thats my fault whisper.. I'll amend my post immediately and insert the url directing you to the website where I got this article from.
 
I feel sorry for what i heard friday about the books!! I thought the judge rule before that the da could not use them!! WTF?? I guess that how his case will end with the jury thinking naked you know what!!.
 

whisperAdmin

Administrator
Staff member
(Posting here too)

APRIL 29 2005 (5:00 PM) -- Prosecutors are scrambling today to put as much distance between Debbie Rowe's testimony and the end of their "case" as possible.

Another setback for the prosecution today. Us Weekly "nut" Ian Drew has been disqualified as a witness because of the vagueness of his testimony. Prosecutors claimed he would say that Ron Konitzer told him that the family "escaped from Neverland in the middle of the night."

Going back to Drew's words, he never really said Konitzer told him they "escaped". He says he was trying to make a deadline and he couldn't really recollect what he said.

We know Drew got pinched by the prosecution to be called as a witness in the first place because of statements he made in an interview with tabloid reporter Diane Dimond recently. By the way, her fingerprints seems to be all over this "case", both in 1993 and 2003.

But long story short, Drew got up before the judge, the judge asked him what he recalled, the judge then struck him as a witness in this trial.

The prosecution has also introduced 2 art books seized from Neverland in 1993....yeah, we're back to 1993...again. They hope that the jury will overlook the fact that these books are legal, available for purchase, and really have nothing to do with either the 1993 allegation or the 2003 allegation.

One of the books is called "The Boy" and consists of photographs taken on the set of the movie Lord of the Flies. Another is called "Boys will be Boys" published in the 1960s….yeah, the 1960s.

None of this is child pornography, to be clear. But the prosecution wants the jury to believe otherwise.

According to Savannah Guthrie, the "Boys will be boys" book is inscribed by Michael Jackson saying: "Look at the true spirit of joy on these boys' faces. This is the life I never had. This is the life I want for my children."

Is that supposed to be evidence of pedophilia?? If anything, that inscription alone knocks out any argument that prosecutors want to make.

What's more, neither one of these books were shown to any kid. There's never been an allegation that any of the people were shown these art books for any nefarious purposes.

Oh, but it gets worse for the prosecution.

The other book called "The Boy: A Photographic Essay", which includes pictures of the actors taken on the set of the classic movie Lord of the Flies, was a gift to Jackson by a fan named "Rhonda". Ouch.

That book, too, is inscribed by Rhonda with the following: "To Michael Jackson, from your fan Rhonda xoxoxo".

[url="http://site.mjeol.com/TheBoy_LCNumber.jpg>Lordoftheflies.org.

It is not pornography nor does it have anything to do with pornography. But Sneddon allegedly seized upon this book in an effort to convince what he must hope will be a stupid jury panel that this book is somehow evidence in this current “case”.

If you remember, tabloid reporter Diane Dimond ran around to various news outlets waving this book around as if it was the holy grail in the prosecution's "case".

What prosecutors and their “media whores”, as some have harshly characterized them, fail to keep in mind is the sheer lack of what was NOT found at Jackson’s ranch. And the fact that they now have to take a legally obtained art book and turn it into something sinister smacks of a non-existent “case”.

Further, this book wasn’t found in a vacuum. What the public has known since the 1993 interview with Oprah Winfrey is that Jackson has a library of books and collections of material in his home. Jackson has thousands of books and other gifts fans, authors of certain books, and celebrity pals have sent him.

More information from the preface of that book reveals just why it may have been of some import to Jackson. From the preface of the book "The Boy: A Photographic Essay":
[url="http://site.mjeol.com/BA003A.jpg>The Boy: A Photographic Essay)

Ooo that bastard! How dare he have legal art books like this in his house filled with such sentiment! Good grief.

In MJEOL Bullet #241, this info was discussed. In that bullet, it was reported that cautious "case" observers offered advice to prosecutors warning them that they better make sure that this book wasn't a copy of the book given to Jackson as a gift by someone who knew he liked the movie Lord of the Flies. And now we find out that it really was a gift to Jackson by a fan.
 
Well i would advice the Jackson team to find these people who gave these books to Michael Jackson. Maybe there alive or maybe there dead, but the point here is to look for the fans who gave these books as gifts and put them on the stand! Amen.
 

HeavenSent

New member
*Applaud* great bullet.

by the way, if those art books are considered "erotica", then I guess I'll have to toss my VC Andrews books packed away in my attic. :cryptic Art books they are not!
 

HeavenSent

New member
Originally posted by koprulestheworld
Well i would advice the Jackson team to find these people who gave these books to Michael Jackson. Maybe there alive or maybe there dead, but the point here is to look for the fans who gave these books as gifts and put them on the stand! Amen.
Excuse me, by WHY????! There's absolutely, positively no need for them to waste their time testifying when there's nothing at all criminal about owning these art books.
 

whisperAdmin

Administrator
Staff member
Originally posted by HeavenSent
*Applaud* great bullet.

by the way, if those art books are considered "erotica", then I guess I'll have to toss my VC Andrews books packed away in my attic. :cryptic Art books they are not!
Actually that's not a bullet. :bleh: I'll probably expand it and make it a bullet later. That's from the news I posted April 29 2005 on the main page.
 

Tiger Lilly

New member
Originally posted by HeavenSent
Excuse me, by WHY????! There's absolutely, positively no need for them to waste their time testifying when there's nothing at all criminal about owning these art books.
^^^ What she said. There's nothing wrong with the book. Get over it.
 
Originally posted by HeavenSent
Excuse me, by WHY????! There's absolutely, positively no need for them to waste their time testifying when there's nothing at all criminal about owning these art books.


Well why put them on the stand?? Well to show the jury that these books Michael did not buy these books !! They were giving to him by fans in the past. Anyways i think that the da is trying to tell the jury that: You see Michael like boys!! These books are the only thing that could be close as a smoking gun i think.
 

Tiger Lilly

New member
It's not a smoking gun though. It's a pathetic, desperate attempt for Sneddon to try and cram as much in as he can now. It's a LEGAL book. If Michael liked to look at naked boys in that way (and he doesn't) where the hell is all the child porn, like regular peadophiles have? A jury's going to laugh at this. The defnese know they don't need to waste their time on silly stuff like this. If there's an inscription from a fan then it's obvious the book was a gift. And even if he did buy it, so what?
 
Originally posted by Tiger Lilly
It's not a smoking gun though. It's a pathetic, desperate attempt for Sneddon to try and cram as much in as he can now. It's a LEGAL book. If Michael liked to look at naked boys in that way (and he doesn't) where the hell is all the child porn, like regular peadophiles have? A jury's going to laugh at this. The defnese know they don't need to waste their time on silly stuff like this. If there's an inscription from a fan then it's obvious the book was a gift. And even if he did, so what?


You have a point. But the media is making it seem worse the it is that all. Its hard being a Michael Jackson fan but its not our fault about what happen in Michael life. We love the man because of his great work in the past and many who grew up with his wonderful music.
 

HeavenSent

New member
Originally posted by koprulestheworld
Well why put them on the stand?? Well to show the jury that these books Michael did not buy them him ownself, these books were giving to him by fans in the past.
You need to read what whisper just posted.

That book, too, is inscribed by Rhonda with the following: "To Michael Jackson, from your fan Rhonda xoxoxo".

Why the hell would they need Rhonda's verbal testimony, when it's written in the book that it was a gift? The defense would look awfully desperate trying to track down his fans that gave him the book back in 1983. The DA had possession these book for 12 yrs. Why bring it back up now? Desperation!

For anybody to testify about these books is a total waste of time. Leave it up for Mesereau to knock it out the water just like everything else that the prosecution doles out.
 

HeavenSent

New member
Originally posted by koprulestheworld
You have a point. But the media is making it seem worse the it is that all. Its hard being a Michael Jackson fan but its not our fault about what happen in Michael life. We love the man because of his great work in the past and many who grew up with his wonderful music.
A part of being a Michael jackson fan is to not give the media so much credit. They have spent decades trying to smear Michael, but he's resiliant and there a reason why he has people like Meseareau in his corner.

This will backfire on the prosecution, just like the Arvisos, just like the parade of other witnesses, just like Debbie Rowe. This will pass.

Don't fret about what the media says. The truth will come out.
 

Tiger Lilly

New member
Originally posted by koprulestheworld
You have a point. But the media is making it seem worse the it is that all. Its hard being a Michael Jackson fan but its not our fault about what happen in Michael life. We love the man because of his great work in the past and many who grew up with his wonderful music.
I really don't care what the media say to be honest. They have no power over what happens in that court room so take it with a pinch of salt and don't worry. As an MJ fan I've learnt to ignore the $hit and don't get worked up about every little thing (and God knows the part of those books in this case is tiny). Yeh it's hard to ignore sometimes, and it's not easy being a fan right now, but I love it and wouldn't abandon Michael for the world! :heart2:
 
:D Well your right!! Anyways you know who would be a great witness to the Jackson team??? That woman who wrote that book on the Michael Jackson case Geraldine Hughes!! Think about it she is the only one in the media that does not get air time. All other people who write books on Michael Jackson get air time WTF is that!!
 

HotMJ!

New member
Originally posted by koprulestheworld

:D Well your right!! Anyways you know who would be a great witness to the Jackson team??? That woman who wrote that book on the Michael Jackson case Geraldine Hughes!! Think about it she is the only one in the media that does not get air time. All other people who write books on Michael Jackson get air time WTF is that!!
Yes! Please let Geraldine Hughes be on the defense witness list! :thumbsup


Regarding the books, it looks like the jury never saw the contents of the 2 books, just the covers and inscriptions!


Sneddon is a fool. This one inscription (see below) by Michael on the one book will not only negate any negative impressions, but fixate the jury's mind on what a wonderful parent Michael is, and how he was thinking of his children even before they were born! :rollingba




The book contained an inscription written by Jackson: "Look at the true spirit of happiness and joy in these boys' faces, this is the spirit of boyhood, a life I've never had and will always dream of. This is the life I want for my children." :rollingba

:sneddoncr SnedDUMB Shamed :exorcistDA:
 

Cristine87

New member
Well, I like art nudes of women. They're beautiful! Would that make me lesbian? This is ridiculous, they're taking fine art books & trying to pass them off as something sexual. If Michael were attracted to young boys, he could get his hands on alot worse, being the rich & powerful man he is & that's exactly what these jurors are gonna say when they deliberate.
 
Top