Chandler and Schwartz convo (Redemption) - TRANSCRIPT

Important Statements from the Jackson camp and pertinent transcripts from various TV shows about Michael.

Moderator: Global Moderator

oldschoolfan
Hero Member
Hero Member
Posts: 1609
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 2:19 pm

Chandler and Schwartz convo (Redemption) - TRANSCRIPT

Post by oldschoolfan » Sun Feb 21, 2010 6:32 am

Are these guaranteed fake?
the member formerly known as MJslave...

annelise
Full Member
Full Member
Posts: 123
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 2:53 pm

Chandler and Schwartz convo (Redemption) - TRANSCRIPT

Post by annelise » Sun Feb 21, 2010 6:42 am

[QUOTE=shelly;234928]There was one fake document made by Ernie Rizzo which said there was a settlement for molestation in 1992.[/QUOTE]

are we sure he is the one that made it? or he found a fake one?? did he do it in 1992 or in 1993 but dated it 1992?? do you know more?:)

annelise
Full Member
Full Member
Posts: 123
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 2:53 pm

Chandler and Schwartz convo (Redemption) - TRANSCRIPT

Post by annelise » Sun Feb 21, 2010 6:44 am

[QUOTE=oldschoolfan;234929]Are these guaranteed fake?[/QUOTE]

probably i mean the only ever settlement there is out there is the one with jordan and journalists talk about it every chances they get, if there were another one they would definately hint at it or show it.

shelly
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 313
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 6:18 pm

Chandler and Schwartz convo (Redemption) - TRANSCRIPT

Post by shelly » Sun Feb 21, 2010 7:04 am

[QUOTE=oldschoolfan;234929]Are these guaranteed fake?[/QUOTE]

Yes I found that story in The King of Pop darkest hour by Lisa Campbell. It's on google book.

http://www.variety.com/article/VR110285 ... id=22&cs=1

Teva
Hero Member
Hero Member
Posts: 657
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2010 12:37 am
Contact:

Chandler and Schwartz convo (Redemption) - TRANSCRIPT

Post by Teva » Sun Feb 21, 2010 12:26 pm

Hi,

I have read this entire thread and follow all the links, and I am still not sure what went on between Michael & Jordan. I would love to think that Michael is completely innocent, but having read everything here I am starting to think that Evan really did believe that Michael molested Jordan, and so did Jordan. I mean it makes sense when you read the entire conversation instead of pulling snippets. Put that together with June taking the witness stand for the prosecution, and things start to look differently. I agree with all posters that said this case should never have been settled. One thing that still bothers me is the sodium amytal claim. The pro-prosecution side says no such drug was used, but Mary Fischer writes as though she strongly believes this is the case. Does anyone have anything more concrete on whether, or not the father and Torbiner used this drug? Personally the use, or not use of the drug is the lynchpin to this case.
I will remember you.

Image

shelly
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 313
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 6:18 pm

Chandler and Schwartz convo (Redemption) - TRANSCRIPT

Post by shelly » Sun Feb 21, 2010 1:32 pm

[QUOTE=Teva;234939]Hi,

I have read this entire thread and follow all the links, and I am still not sure what went on between Michael & Jordan. I would love to think that Michael is completely innocent, but having read everything here I am starting to think that Evan really did believe that Michael molested Jordan, and so did Jordan. I mean it makes sense when you read the entire conversation instead of pulling snippets. Put that together with June taking the witness stand for the prosecution, and things start to look differently. I agree with all posters that said this case should never have been settled. One thing that still bothers me is the sodium amytal claim. The pro-prosecution side says no such drug was used, but Mary Fischer writes as though she strongly believes this is the case. Does anyone have anything more concrete on whether, or not the father and Torbiner used this drug? Personally the use, or not use of the drug is the lynchpin to this case.[/QUOTE]

I agree with you but for June Chandler, you should remember she was not a willing witness. For the drug story, Mark Tobiner, the anesthetist, was on the defense list in 2005.
We should consider the fact, the description didn't match the pictures, at least not one hundred percent. It's now official.

Teva
Hero Member
Hero Member
Posts: 657
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2010 12:37 am
Contact:

Chandler and Schwartz convo (Redemption) - TRANSCRIPT

Post by Teva » Sun Feb 21, 2010 3:40 pm

Thank you for your reply Shelly, but can you verify the things that you have said? How do you know June was an unwilling witness for the prosecution she seemed very willing to me. Also I do not recall Torbiner testifying for the defensive in 2005, or being on the defense list. Where can I find this information. I know the photographs did not match Jordan's description 100% because the autopsy results said he was uncircumcized, but Taraborelli, and others have said the remainder of the descriptions were accurate. If I sound doubtful it is because I am. I love MJ, and I need to know as much of the truth as possible.
I will remember you.

Image

annelise
Full Member
Full Member
Posts: 123
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 2:53 pm

Chandler and Schwartz convo (Redemption) - TRANSCRIPT

Post by annelise » Sun Feb 21, 2010 4:40 pm

[QUOTE=Teva;234956]Thank you for your reply Shelly, but can you verify the things that you have said? How do you know June was an unwilling witness for the prosecution she seemed very willing to me. Also I do not recall Torbiner testifying for the defensive in 2005, or being on the defense list. Where can I find this information. I know the photographs did not match Jordan's description 100% because the autopsy results said he was uncircumcized, but Taraborelli, and others have said the remainder of the descriptions were accurate. If I sound doubtful it is because I am. I love MJ, and I need to know as much of the truth as possible.[/QUOTE]

The thing is people who believe that Michael is guilty would say that it did match, people who believe Michael is innoncent say it doesn't. One thing we know is that Michael is not circomstized and Jordan said he was. But he did describe spots on his penis and between his cheek butt (can be argued that you just open a book about vitiligo and you can know that) and also he said that Michael had few pubic hair (can be argued that it is known that black people have few pubic hair (an afro american said it on a forum once, i am just repeating)).
Michael's behaviour is different in 1993 than 2003, that is why i think so many people believe something could have happened with Jordan but not Gavin. For example Michael didn't want to come to the US, not even for 1 day to be interviewed, he settled in the beginning of January and the pictures were taken in mid-december, was he scared of the pictures?. With Gavin he went to court and surrendered right away.
Sometimes, even tho I love Michael, I wonder if it wasn't the type of situation that got out of hands with Jordan not pedophilia I never believed that but out of hands (affair). Where will all the details come from? all thoses details that could match Michael's temper/personality (sweet, crying when refuse to kiss, no forcing, respect of Jordan' s decision when he didn't want to have his ear licked...)
It is very easy to dismiss things by saying it was extortion (and that was proven but that doesn't mean that nothing happened), racism or anything but whether fans want to admit or not some things are blur unfortunately if you express it and want to have a reasonable discussion you are labelled a hater. Just my two cents

shelly
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 313
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 6:18 pm

Chandler and Schwartz convo (Redemption) - TRANSCRIPT

Post by shelly » Sun Feb 21, 2010 4:57 pm

[QUOTE=Teva;234956]Thank you for your reply Shelly, but can you verify the things that you have said? How do you know June was an unwilling witness for the prosecution she seemed very willing to me. Also I do not recall Torbiner testifying for the defensive in 2005, or being on the defense list. Where can I find this information. I know the photographs did not match Jordan's description 100% because the autopsy results said he was uncircumcized, but Taraborelli, and others have said the remainder of the descriptions were accurate. If I sound doubtful it is because I am. I love MJ, and I need to know as much of the truth as possible.[/QUOTE]

June said in her testimony she has been subpoenaed. It means she had no choice. She said Sneddon called and tell her she has been subpoaned.
To be honest, when I read her testimony I can't help but wonder what kind of relationship she had with him. She told him lots of private things about the trouble she had with her husband Schwartz and about the fact she doesn't know if she can trust him because she had been disappointed by the previous men in her life. There is also the Joy Robson's testimony where she said June Chandler wanted to be the "mistress of Neverland".
For Torbiner, I read that in that article:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,149391,00.html

I don't know for the photos but I don't think the prosecution were very sure about the value of the pictures in 2005. They tryed to use them at the end of the trial, if they were so sure about it why not at the beginning? In one of the defense' answer, it's written the law doesn't allow you to use that kind of evidence at the end of a trial. The prosecution team knew that.

shelly
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 313
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 6:18 pm

Chandler and Schwartz convo (Redemption) - TRANSCRIPT

Post by shelly » Sun Feb 21, 2010 5:09 pm

[QUOTE=annelise;234959]The thing is people who believe that Michael is guilty would say that it did match, people who believe Michael is innoncent say it doesn't. One thing we know is that Michael is not circomstized and Jordan said he was. But he did describe spots on his penis and between his cheek butt (can be argued that you just open a book about vitiligo and you can know that) and also he said that Michael had few pubic hair (can be argued that it is known that black people have few pubic hair (an afro american said it on a forum once, i am just repeating)).
Michael's behaviour is different in 1993 than 2003, that is why i think so many people believe something could have happened with Jordan but not Gavin. For example Michael didn't want to come to the US, not even for 1 day to be interviewed, he settled in the beginning of January and the pictures were taken in mid-december, was he scared of the pictures?. With Gavin he went to court and surrendered right away.
Sometimes, even tho I love Michael, I wonder if it wasn't the type of situation that got out of hands with Jordan not pedophilia I never believed that but out of hands (affair). Where will all the details come from? all thoses details that could match Michael's temper/personality (sweet, crying when refuse to kiss, no forcing, respect of Jordan' s decision when he didn't want to have his ear licked...)
It is very easy to dismiss things by saying it was extortion (and that was proven but that doesn't mean that nothing happened), racism or anything but whether fans want to admit or not some things are blur unfortunately if you express it and want to have a reasonable discussion you are labelled a hater. Just my two cents[/QUOTE]

I think the situation was very different in 1993 and in 2003. In 1993, he was on tour and he didn't need to come back to the US to be interviewed, nobody asked him to do it. He went to rehab in Europe. He could have stayed in a rehab clinic in the US but it would have been more difficult for him to recover from the addiction because of the media circus. He went back to the US at the beginning of December.

For the pictures, if they matched why wasn't he arrested. It didn't take one month to know the results but only a few days and it was for the criminal investigation not the civil one. The settlement was not at the beginning of January but at the end around the 25. It was only a civil trial. In 2003, it was a criminal trial. You can't settle a criminal case and he had no choice but to surrender. Nobody asked him to surrender in 1993. The prosecution team never asked for an indictment in 1993.

I don't think you are labelled a hater if you want to have a reasonnable discussion. The problem with people we call hater is they use tabloids and not court documents, insult people and make jokes about molestation. I will never understand people who make molestation jokes, there is nothing funny about it, a kid's life is destroyed.

shelly
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 313
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 6:18 pm

Chandler and Schwartz convo (Redemption) - TRANSCRIPT

Post by shelly » Sun Feb 21, 2010 5:29 pm

By the way, I think the kid from Moonwalker was Brandon Adams.

shelly
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 313
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 6:18 pm

Chandler and Schwartz convo (Redemption) - TRANSCRIPT

Post by shelly » Sun Feb 21, 2010 5:42 pm

I think that poster from imdb has a point.

"You people? I love that. Let me tell you something I never in any way have put Michael on a pedastal that makes him perfect. I also have followed the world of entertainment and Hollywood all my life. More than Politics, more than National News, and more than even the local news and weather.

And coming from someone who keeps up with Hollywood and all the events therein, I can easily tell you the reason why celebrities settle out of court.

First off let me inform you of something I don't think you know.
And I've heard this argument from my redneck ignorant hillbilly neighbors all the time. "If he's so innocent why'd he pay um off theeeen!?"

Well, Otis I'll tell you.

Number one. Celebrities are accused of things all the time and settle out of court every day. Every damn day. Do you understand that? These are some celebs that have been accused of things in recent years.

Will Smith
Bruce Willis
Bill Cosby
Anna Nicole Smith
Rob Lowe
Lisa Marie Presley
Eddie Murphy and countless others. Countless.

Celebrities are accused of things all the time by mostly people like Personal Assistants, House Keepers and house staff, Security detail, nannies, and bodyguards. Mostly people who work in the smaller positions around celebs. Many of which though this has nothing directly to do with it, just saying...are foreigners.
And most of the time what celebrities are often accused of is usually something sexual. It's usually something like sexual harrassment or soemthing of that nature. And you know why? Because it's something that directly effects the IMAGE. It's not something that you need real evidence to prove. Just to have one person willing to say they did this to me. It's almost always something sleazy or embarrassing. Now, what happens when someone makes something up like that? In a perfect world. The one you and I grew up in. You'd take it to court and say F U! Prove it. I didn't do S**T! And the matter would go to court and our something like 25 or 30 friends and co workers who would know all about it would all be behind us until vindication occurs then we all go out and celebrate.

Ok, well, there isn't 25 or 30 friends or co-workers that hear about it if it's said about a celebrity. It's a few MILLION.

And when we are accused of something that we didn't do...it doesn't end up on Entertainment Tonight, People Magazine, The National Enquirer, CNN, L.A. Times, and everywhere in between. And take into consideration that each one of those shows and or publications tells a slightly different story. What if the story you are being accused of is laced with sexual details you cannot comment on because you are already in lidigation over it. Now what if it involves a minor. Where you can't sit up there on TV and tell everyone anything about the case. Not even if it's going to help you. The only news about the accusations surrounding you that is being fed to the MILLIONS of people that WANNA KNOW is whatever the National Enquirer, Star Magazine, People Magazine, Entertainment Tonight, and everyone else (who by the way is in business to make as much MONEY$$ they can off every story) decides to tell them.

Now, your career (not yours, because you may be a fry cook at Mcdonalds) But if you're a celebrity, your career is all about your IMAGE. You sell records or movie tickets if people like you. You are in the business of having people love you. People love you, they buy your product. Your product is your image. If people think you are a child molester they're not going to like you anymore. Every single day, you are having the media every day putting your face on the cover of their magazines and newspapers right alongside the words CHILD MOLESTER. Every time you turn on the television they are talking about you and talking about the things you're being accused of. Now factor in they are also paying people who are not involved, who have nothing to do with your case money to say they saw you doing things you didn't do. (And in case you think this is some fan BS, that DID happen. A tabloid paid an elderly couple who worked for Michael to say they saw him engaging in sexual behavior with a child and then told the Police when they were questioned on what the papers said they saw, that they were just paid to say that by the tabloids and they said it because they wanted the money but never REALLY saw Michael do anything with any kids) So now you've got the media dedicating a spot on all their shows to updates on your case, all the papers putting some mention of you and what you're accused of on the cover somewhere for weeks on end. Turning it into a daily soap opra.

Your money making meter is dipping every day. Lower and Lower. The money that was once rolling on is now slowing up. People are being convinced by what they're reading and seeing on TV that you're a child molester. You can't speak out. You can't defend yourself. And now, you're accuser refuses to even testify against you. The police have no evidence against you to even charge you with anything. You're just being accused civally. For money. The media is now offering big money to ANYONE who's got the guts and is willing to say "I saw him do this" or "I saw him do that". Whether it's a lie or not. The press is now paying any spineless snake in the grass willing to lie hundreds of thousands of dollars. And who comes forward? More foreigners you hired to mop your floors who could care less whether they ever work for another celeb again. The longer the media keeps making crap up and adding to the fire, the more the press is paying people and bribing more people to come forward and say something against you, the more damage it's doing to your image. The thing that you rely on to make money. Your livlyhood.

So now you've got anyone looking to make a buck off you being paid by the media to lie even more about you. And if you think they're going to get in trouble for that guess again. They aren't in court. They haven't broken any law or crossed a judge. They lied to the press. Big deal. Noone will ever know. Because the press isn't gonna rat each other out. If I hadn't told you about the elderly couple that told the police they really didn't witness Michael molesting children after telling the tabloids they did would you have known? No. Because you don't pay attention to anything that isn't in the check out of your grocery store. I do. And how many people do you think would bother to filter through the nonsence to find out the truth about YOU if you were in Michael's position? If you were a celerbtiy I can answer that. About as many as there were reading all about Michael's case.

This is the type of thing that you and I don't have to go through when we're accused of something. But a celebrity has to go through this because it's on a wide scale. Now, after a few months of this crap being played out over the air waves ruining your image and hurting your money making abilities. What are you gonna do. I know what you'd like to run your mouth saying you'd do. But that's not what you'd do either. Because you've got a few more months to go before you even get to court. By the time you get to court the only thing that the entire world would be hearing about you is what the endless media had been saying. The lies they bribed people to come forward and say about you. The crap they themselves make up to "keep the story alive" because they do have to do that. They're in the business of making money off a story. There's only so many ways you can tell it before it gets old and boring. Well, they've got to keep it exciting in order to get money from folks like you.

So now you go to trial. The only evidence against you is the accuser's story given to police by a third party. That's it. The trial will not be on TV because it involves a minor. The only whitnesses don't give a damn whether they lie about you or not because they've been promised a mint for a book deal after this whole thing's over. You sit there and have to answer the most disgusting questions. You do that and once it's all over you get a verdict of Not Liable. Which by the time that comes down the media has already force fed it to the public that Not Liable just means you probably did it but they just can't prove it. Not Liable doesn't mean not guilty. It doesn't mean innocent. It just means you got away with it. And by the time it's all over the world is already convinced you did it because of all the crap they've been told from day one that in all truth had nothing to do with your case in the first place. The public has already charged, tried, and executed you in the court of public opinion and you're through. You will never work in this town again.


Now, take all of that into consideration. When you're a celebrity and you've got some **** that worked for you once whom you had to fire for screwing up on the job, suddenly tells you or your PR rep that you did "something" to them and are gonna sue you unless you pay them such and such an amount of money...... Your image consultants, your lawyers, managers, and advisors will tell you to settle. And that's what celebrities do. They do it all the time. They are doing it today and they will do it tomorrow. Because a celebrity knows what a case like that involves. Everything I just told you above can and will happen. A celebrity knows what an accusation like that can ultimately do to their careers... and that's when they WIN the case in the end. Someone falsely accuses you of something and you win in a civil case. What are you gonna do? Countersue??? They're some broke nobody to begin with. They have NOTHING. So you can't even get them back for lying about you. For ruining your career. For damaging your image. You can't take anything from them for what they've taken from you. Celebrities know what's involved. In the long run winning can cost you your career. Because time is what's against you. Time and real evidence. It's one person's word against another. That's it. And people are PAID to talk to the press. When a celebrity is accused by some nobody they go to their lawyers and say, I'm being accused of so and so by some former house keeper. They attorney's say let me talk to them. The attorney's and advisors contact the person making up the crap and they negotiate behind closed doors. They tell them. OK. Look. You wont get anything if this goes to court. so let's talk. They make a settlemtn and even though the celebrity has just been taken for whatever amount of money. A few hundred grand or a few million. They get in writing that this never happened and the "theif" gets the money. The celebrity gets to make a potentially career ending scandal stop before it even starts. Noone went to court and no papers were even filed. It's blackmail. It's extortion and it happenes every damn day in Hollywood.

That's part of the business. It's not fair but guess what. A celebrity gets paid millions of dollars and get to live in mansions. We don't. It's the price to pay. A celebrity says well, some jerk that watched my kid just threatened me and I paid them off. It really burns me up that they took me like that, but hey, I'll tell all my buddies, chances are noone will ever hire them again. It cost me a little bit of money but hey, It could have been a LOT worse. A lie like this could have cost me everything. It was worth it to just pay this jerk off and get rid of them. Even if I was in the right and didn't do anything wrong. Had I fought it, they would've went to the press with this lie. The press would've covered it to death. I would just been left saying "I didn't do it.. I didn't do it" and more people who are just as dishonest as this jerk would've come out against me for a piece of the pie too. This would have cost me fans and money because there are always people out there that will believe whatever they read over what I say in a press release, so hey, I dodged a bullet this time.


Celebrities settle out of court every single day. And if you were famous you would be doing the same damn thing. Because your advisors, your legal team, your managers, and everyone else would make sure you did. And you wouldn't cross those people because this is what you do when you're in this business. It's part of the business. There's principle, and then there's the business. You can cry all you want injustice. But you'll be doing it flat broke.

If you're worth millions, and you've got morgages and investments, and are living in a world where your means, is bringing in millions of dollars every year. You have got more on the line than your damn pride. You pay them to end the story and make it go away. That is what you would do if you were in this business. Because if you don't, you wont be in this business for long.

Michael at the instruction of his legal team and his advisors settled out of court when the news came down that the police were NOT going to be filing any criminal charges against him. He wasn't going to get a Not Guilty verdict so why bother dragging the whole case out.

And to reply to the last remark that he was afraid of what evidence would come out had he gone to trial. What evidence. Michael did not refuse a strip search. He allowed photographs to be taken of his genitals. If you're a damn child molester and a child had clear knowledge of your privates the last thing you do is let the police photograph your penis. If Michael had refused to allow the strip search to take place they would have arrested him, and charged him, THEN he would have had a criminal trial and aquitted. Which would have been better anyway. But he didn't refuse the strip search and the reason is because he had nothing to hide. After the strip search the police announced they were not filing any criminal charges against MIchael. It wouldn't make any difference how damn scared Michael could have been of what the police had or would be used against him If they had it, they'd have used it. Regardless. You can't settle a case and keep the police from arresting you and charging you anyway. He didn't settle with the boy to keep his ass out of jail. The police charging him didn't hinge on any civil trial. Criminal charges would be a totally separate thing, and there weren't any. This was about money. Michael waited and waited. The police kept threatening to charge him. Michael waited on the police to charge him, and when they said "well, we're not charging him with anything"... Then Michael settled the civil case.

End of Story.

The next time you bluntly say, well I wouldn't have paid. Think past your box. If you had what celebrities have on the line.. Oh yes you would.

Teva
Hero Member
Hero Member
Posts: 657
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2010 12:37 am
Contact:

Chandler and Schwartz convo (Redemption) - TRANSCRIPT

Post by Teva » Sun Feb 21, 2010 5:47 pm

[QUOTE=annelise;234959]The thing is people who believe that Michael is guilty would say that it did match, people who believe Michael is innoncent say it doesn't. One thing we know is that Michael is not circomstized and Jordan said he was. But he did describe spots on his penis and between his cheek butt (can be argued that you just open a book about vitiligo and you can know that) and also he said that Michael had few pubic hair (can be argued that it is known that black people have few pubic hair (an afro american said it on a forum once, i am just repeating)).
Michael's behaviour is different in 1993 than 2003, that is why i think so many people believe something could have happened with Jordan but not Gavin. For example Michael didn't want to come to the US, not even for 1 day to be interviewed, he settled in the beginning of January and the pictures were taken in mid-december, was he scared of the pictures?. With Gavin he went to court and surrendered right away.
Sometimes, even tho I love Michael, I wonder if it wasn't the type of situation that got out of hands with Jordan not pedophilia I never believed that but out of hands (affair). Where will all the details come from? all thoses details that could match Michael's temper/personality (sweet, crying when refuse to kiss, no forcing, respect of Jordan' s decision when he didn't want to have his ear licked...)
It is very easy to dismiss things by saying it was extortion (and that was proven but that doesn't mean that nothing happened), racism or anything but whether fans want to admit or not some things are blur unfortunately if you express it and want to have a reasonable discussion you are labelled a hater. Just my two cents[/QUOTE]

Thank you Annelise for not making me feel like I was crazy or hating, when I am neither. I too read Jordan's report, and if true it was a revelation. Sad, but nevertheless a revelation. It kinda explains what I could never understand which is the unrelenting witch hunt of Sneddon and Diane Dimond.

I know fans don't like to have these kinds of discussions, but honestly we must. If we should ever cross swords with a hater online we should be armed with all the facts, and know what they know; otherwise, we look like what they think we are ....foolish. I started off thinking Michael could never have done these things, but I don't know him, and how can I refute the claims of this child.:(. Charles Thompson said it was Evan that accused Michael of molesting his boy, but actually it was Jordan that did the accusing.

I know some of the profiling that they used to make MJ out to be a pedophile is ridiculous, like having exotic animals and an amusment park, but the Chandlers had him by the b@lls in 1993. I don't know if things got out of hand with Jordan, and they had an affair, it is plausible. I know people settle cases out of court when they are innocent just to get on with their lives, but 20 million? That's alot of lives. Why not 2 million to make it end. Something is not right about this case. I will say something that sounds crazy and sick, but even if Michael did molest Jordan I cannot bring myself to hate him (cried a river).

Another thing I don't understand is Mesereau. He must have read Jordan's Psychiatric report, but yet he insists that Michael could never have done these things to a child. What does he know that we don't. Do you think he was only talking about Gavin and not Jordan?
I will remember you.

Image

shelly
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 313
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 6:18 pm

Chandler and Schwartz convo (Redemption) - TRANSCRIPT

Post by shelly » Sun Feb 21, 2010 6:37 pm

[QUOTE=Teva;234967]Thank you Annelise for not making me feel like I was crazy or hating, when I am neither. I too read Jordan's report, and if true it was a revelation. Sad, but nevertheless a revelation. It kinda explains what I could never understand which is the unrelenting witch hunt of Sneddon and Diane Dimond.

I know fans don't like to have these kinds of discussions, but honestly we must. If we should ever cross swords with a hater online we should be armed with all the facts, and know what they know; otherwise, we look like what they think we are ....foolish. I started off thinking Michael could never have done these things, but I don't know him, and how can I refute the claims of this child.:(. Charles Thompson said it was Evan that accused Michael of molesting his boy, but actually it was Jordan that did the accusing.

I know some of the profiling that they used to make MJ out to be a pedophile is ridiculous, like having exotic animals and an amusment park, but the Chandlers had him by the b@lls in 1993. I don't know if things got out of hand with Jordan, and they had an affair, it is plausible. I know people settle cases out of court when they are innocent just to get on with their lives, but 20 million? That's alot of lives. Why not 2 million to make it end. Something is not right about this case. I will say something that sounds crazy and sick, but even if Michael did molest Jordan I cannot bring myself to hate him (cried a river).

Another thing I don't understand is Mesereau. He must have read Jordan's Psychiatric report, but yet he insists that Michael could never have done these things to a child. What does he know that we don't. Do you think he was only talking about Gavin and not Jordan?[/QUOTE]

20 millions is a lot of money but just one question: in the bashir interview he went to an antic shop and spend million of dollars in one evening. I think it was around 6 millions so 20 millions is only 3 times what he spend on nothing that night.

For the report, it proves nothing because there was no cross examination. I don't think a kid can lie about that by himself but he could have been coached by his parent. We should not forget that the first psychiatrist Jordan saw said in 2005 he never had time to even try to find if there was coaching or not.
Jordan did the accusing but only after Evan did. Before sending his son to Abrams he called him and asked him a few question and obtained a letter of what the psychiatrist thought about the hypothetical situation. He went to a meeting with the letter and this is when the allegations started.
When you read the affidavit, you should remember it's a one sided information. I am not saying it didn't happen, I don't know but we never had Jackson's side of the story.

For Mesereau, he obviously knows more than we do about the 1993 allegations. If you read the June Chandler's testimony he heavily implied there was a lawyer hired months before the allegations started, I think (I am not sure) it was in May 1993.

We don't know what kind of pressure MJ was under. Mesereau said it was a business deal. Lots of people find that strange but according to a lots of article at the time, he was recording the History album in May 1994 and he started working on it in January. According to the 2nd lawsuit, Sony expected 500 millions dollars from that album. I am not sure but there were probably lots of people who were telling him to settle. I don't know but I think it's very possible he decided to settle the case because there was probably too much pressure on him.

Let's not forget, the agreement didn't end the criminal investigation and Jordan and his parents could still testify against him. Evan was more than willing to do it for the 2nd lawsuit.

shelly
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 313
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 6:18 pm

Chandler and Schwartz convo (Redemption) - TRANSCRIPT

Post by shelly » Sun Feb 21, 2010 6:56 pm

[QUOTE=Teva;234967] I too read Jordan's report, and if true it was a revelation. Sad, but nevertheless a revelation. It kinda explains what I could never understand which is the unrelenting witch hunt of Sneddon and Diane Dimond.

thing I don't understand is Mesereau. He must have read Jordan's Psychiatric report, but yet he insists that Michael could never have done these things to a child. What does he know that we don't. Do you think he was only talking about Gavin and not Jordan?[/QUOTE]

A psychiatric report is never a proof. According to wikipedia, this psychiatrist, Richard Gardner, was crititcized by lots of people:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_A. ... #Criticism

I am not saying it didn't happen but we don't know the whole story.
I think the affidavits from the Mc Martin preschool kids and the one from the Outreau kid (it's a very unfamous case in France) must have been very hard to read.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outreau_trial

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest