Mjvibe.com, MJJRepository and Andjustice4some have published several posts about Jennifer Keller, one of the Estate’s lawyers who has filed a motion for order to enforce John Carpenter, Robson & Safechuck’s main lawyer, to comply with the California Rules of Professional Conduct.
The Estate and their lawyers are now going after Robson/Safechuch’s main lawyer, John Carpenter.
Jennifer Keller, part of the Estate Attorney team, has filed a motion for order to enforce Carpenter to comply with the California Rules of Professional Conduct.
Keller stated that John Carpenter has gone in a recent media blitz and numerous improper and unethical statements and interviews to the press including TMZ, The Daily Beast, The Daily Mail, The Rolling Stones and Variety in the goal of poison the jury pool.
Keller pointed out few of those lies to the press: 1. Accused the Estate to concealing evidence 2. Michael Jackson possessed child Pornography 3. The upcoming biopic would be used as a model for pedophiles 4. Comparing Michael Jackson to the Catholic Church and Donald Trump
It is against the law for a lawyer to make extrajudicial statements. If proven by the Estate’s team, Carpenter could be removed from the case.
To be continued…
BREAKING: Jennifer Keller, part of the MJ Estate attorney group who are defending MJ's companies has filed a Motion for Order to enforce John Carpenter, Robson/Safechuck attorney to comply with California Rules of Professional Conduct. pic.twitter.com/7q3lmVBBUv
— andjustice4some – Michael Jackson FAN account (@andjustice4some) May 9, 2024
Keller's claims are that Carpenter is trying the case in the press, giving improper interviews to Rolling Stone, Variety, TMZ, The Daily Beast and The Daily Mail. Court date is requested for July 1, 2024. pic.twitter.com/1k3su0mTW0
— andjustice4some – Michael Jackson FAN account (@andjustice4some) May 9, 2024
Keller's opening in motion:
"Plaintiffs’ new counsel, John Carpenter, has a problem: no matter which way one cuts it, his clients are inveterate liars… Carpenter has taken to a new tack, to poison the jury pool by making numerous false and misleading statements to the press." https://t.co/p8qfozuafNpic.twitter.com/5GBox6oYhA
— TSCM – MJ Case Facts and Commentary (@MJJRepository) May 10, 2024
From Carpenter's TMZ interview, he suggested that the defense had access to "incriminating evidence" that they were not handing over.
Keller notes: "No such evidence was provided to Mr. Mesereau. No such evidence existed, and all responsive documents were already produced." pic.twitter.com/NrwEBMmRE2
— TSCM – MJ Case Facts and Commentary (@MJJRepository) May 10, 2024
Keller's request that Carpenter act professionally and without media tainting is summarized:
"Left unchecked, the toxic nature of Mr. Carpenter's comments make it plain that his trial-by-press strategy will have a substantial likelihood of materially prejudicing this case…" pic.twitter.com/jUr8hSVLV7
— TSCM – MJ Case Facts and Commentary (@MJJRepository) May 10, 2024
The Estate to use the Hague Convention against Reed
In the court case Robson/Safechuck, the representatives of the Estate have been asking “Leaving Neverland” producer Dan Reed and his production company Amos Pictures Ltd, for the unseen footage, interview footage with Robson and Safechuck.
Reed has stated that he couldn’t find those footage but The Estate is to take the case to The Hague Convention to obtain them and subpoena the people and companies involved in the making of the mockumentary.
As Reed and his company are based in the UK, US court has no enforcement on them and the only way to get those footage is going to the International law organisation which both the UK and the US are part of.
This is taking the whole case to an international matter and it might be difficult for Reed to not oblige to give the unseen footage. Poor Danny might be shitting his pants now!
Good morning MJFam. Just wanted to explain what could or could not be decided today in court for the Robson/Safechuck hearing today at 8:30 am. 1. R/S attorney has requested that their cases be merged into one case. Their last attorney requested that and was denied, but now this is a different judge and we are now in pre-trial motions. 2. Estate attorneys requested that the cases be transferred from the Beverly Hills courthouse to Stanley Mosk in Los Angeles. 3. Most recently, the Estate attorneys have now requested that the cases be transferred to the Spring Street courthouse in Los Angeles, to the Complex Litigation Program. All 3 of these issues could be decided today. There is a low likelihood that a trial date could be set. Friends will be in the courtroom so we will update you as soon as possible.
Please remember, this judge has denied cameras in the courtroom. We rely on our advocates, who take their time to travel and sit in the courtroom, taking dubious notes, to give us the information. We THANK THEM, from the bottom of our hearts, for their hard work and loyalty to truth, justice and Michael Jackson.
Tom Mesereau has arrived in court. As of 1 minute ago, Mesereau and others are waiting to be let into the courtroom. No other attorneys are there yet. Jon Steinsapir has arrived at the courthouse.
Court is over. No trial date set. Trial readiness hearing is June 5, 2024. Judge wants their reports by May 22, 2024. All other info I have to wait for.
Jennifer Keller did most of the speaking for the defense today in the courtroom. All 4 of the estate attorneys were in court. Jon Steinsapir, Tom Mesereau, Susan Yu and Jennifer Keller.
It does not appear that the judge ruled on consolidating the cases, nor whether the cases should be sent to Complex Litigation Program. Estate attorneys spent time arguing why it is a complex case. Ruling will probably come June 5, 2024. “The judge asked (R/S attorney), did you read the motions? He said no and then asked the estate, they said yes. So that showed the judge how prepared they were.”
Probably the single most important issue that comes from the pre-trial hearing that happened on Feb. 28. R/S attorney: open to ADR, (possible pre-trial settlement.) MJ Estate attorneys: ARE NOT OPEN TO ADR. NO settlement.
Just want to put it out there, that the court process here in the US is VERY slow. A lot of us know this because we have followed the cases for a long time. The two very best people who understand these cases are @MJJRepository and @JuliaBerkowitz1. Please follow them.
***
Please read this thread by MJJRepository
THREAD: Robson/Safechuck Case Status as of February 2024.
As part of the case management hearing this week, the plaintiffs (Wade/James) and defendants (MJJ Productions/MJJ Ventures) submitted written narratives outlining the current state of their cases and anticipated plans.
— TSCM – MJ Case Facts and Commentary (@MJJRepository) March 1, 2024
Reminder just how readily the two men have evolved their claims using whatever means necessary to continue pursuing millions in damages.
This included James suddenly claiming employment "during all relevant times [88-92]" in amended suit, without one record of evidence produced. pic.twitter.com/kWWMxNzzB4
— TSCM – MJ Case Facts and Commentary (@MJJRepository) November 15, 2023
Wade, meanwhile, borrowed lines and tabloid tidbits from James' lawsuit to include in his own amendments, even after Joy confirmed "none of that is true."
Joy disproved their own stance that Norma was involved as alleged in suit but Wade and James both included the claim anyway. pic.twitter.com/o1ngvGBnoP
— TSCM – MJ Case Facts and Commentary (@MJJRepository) November 15, 2023
Just as in 2020, the reversals send these cases back for continued litigation at trial court.
We will get a joint status update from both sides to indicate how far along they are in discovery and casework, and what their next anticipated actions are.
— MJJJusticeProject Inc- #MJ Fan Acct (@MJJJusticePrjct) November 20, 2023
HEY. HEY .. pay attention!! Michael Jackson Global Family !! You can sign up for Paramount Plus !! 7 day free trial .. to watch #Thriller40 documentary !!! https://t.co/uoIuxC7463
— MJJJusticeProject Inc- #MJ Fan Acct (@MJJJusticePrjct) November 20, 2023
Episode 12 – UNCF and the Michael Jackson Scholarship – with Kenya Gray
Yesterday, fans raised over $800 for the upcoming docuseries #TrialByMediaMJ. Jin only needs $35k to finish. If everyone donated like they did yesterday, he would be fully funded in 2 months. Please donate! https://t.co/ywbWRHyHL4
— andjustice4some – Michael Jackson FAN account (@andjustice4some) September 27, 2023
We are just a few days away from Michael's month! Please try to remember to be try to here for our #ThrillerPledge, when we tag three friends or celebs, and ask them to do the same with the flyer attached. Saturday 9/30 9 am PST, 12 pm EST, 5 pm London time. pic.twitter.com/e66bOlS3Ug
— andjustice4some – Michael Jackson FAN account (@andjustice4some) September 28, 2023
This is going to be the most amazing and well researched Michael Jackson site! I'm so excited for this. https://t.co/B4t2SnSGTV
— andjustice4some – Michael Jackson FAN account (@andjustice4some) September 27, 2023
Seriously not surprised of how quick this was considering how biased they were which proves it even more now. These judges shouldn’t even be judges considering how unprofessional they were & their no different than the karens on this app.
It is disconcerting to know what power a panel of 3 judges can possess when they also demonstrate absolute ignorance in their published opinions. Statements that are at odds with the submitted material they were supposed to carefully review, even when taking claims at face value.
“Skin head, dead head Everybody gone bad Situation, speculation Everybody litigation Beat me, bash me You can never trash me Hit me, kick me You can never get me
All I wanna say is that They don’t really care about us All I wanna say is that They don’t really care about us
Some things in life they just don’t wanna see But if Martin Luther was living He wouldn’t let this be, no, no
Skin head, dead head Everybody’s gone bad Situation, segregation Everybody allegation In the suite, on the news Everybody dog food Kick me, kike me Don’t you wrong or right me
All I wanna say is that They don’t really care about us”
Earth Song
“What about sunrise? What about rain? What about all the things That you said we were to gain?
What about killing fields? Is there a time? What about all the things That you said was yours and mine?
Did you ever stop to notice All the blood we’ve shed before? Did you ever stop to notice This crying Earth, this weeping shore?
What have we done to the world? Look what we’ve done What about all the peace That you pledge your only son?
I used to dream I used to glance beyond the stars Now I don’t know where we are Although I know we’ve drifted far
What about the crying man? (What about us?) What about Abraham? (What about us?) What about death again? (Ooh, ooh) Do we give a damn!”
5 pages (24-28) from Joe Vogel’s book, Earth Song:
D.S.
“Ah, they wanna get my ass dead or alive, ah You know he really tried to take me down by surprise I bet he missioned with the CIA, dah He don’t do half what he say”
“He out shock in every single way, dah He’ll stop at nothing just to get his political say He think he hot ’cause he’s BSTA, dah I bet he never had a social life anyway You think he brother with the KKK? Ah, dah I bet his mother never taught him right anyway He want your vote just to remain TA, ah He don’t do half what he say”
“Does he send letters to the FBI? Did he say to either do it or die?
Dom S. Sheldon is a cold man, gone boy”
Speechless
“Your love is magical, that’s how I feel But I have not the words here to explain Gone is the grace for expressions of passion But there are worlds and worlds of ways to explain To tell you how I feel
But I am speechless, speechless, that’s how you make me feel Though I’m with you I am far away and nothing is for real
When I’m with you I am lost for words, I don’t know what to say My head’s spinning like a carousel, so silently I pray Helpless and hopeless, that’s how I feel inside Nothing’s real, but all is possible if God is on my side When I’m with you I’m in the light where I cannot be found It’s as though I am standing in the place called Hallowed Ground”
Do You Know Where Your Children Are
“Father comes home from work And he’s scared to death Mother cries for the kid, and the note she read Father runs to the table, he said, “What’s goin’ on?” Mother cries desperately, “Our little baby’s gone””
“She wrote that she is tired of step dad using her Sayin’ that he’ll buy her things, while sexually abusing her Just think that she’s all alone, somewhere out on the street How will this girl survive? She ain’t got nothin’ to eat”
“Now she’s on the move, she’s off to Hollywood She says she wanna be a star, she heard the money’s good She gets off from the train station, the man is waitin’ there “I’ll show you where the money is, girl, just let down your hair” He’s taking her on the streets of Sunset Boulevard She’s selling her body hot, girl, that will take you far The police come ’round the corner, somebody there, they told He’s arresting this little girl Who’s only twelve years old
Do you know where your children are? Because it’s now twelve o’clock If they’re somewhere out on the street Just imagine how scared they are”
We’ve Had Enough
jolanta-czajerek
“We’re innocently standing by Watching people lose their lives It seems as if we have no voice It’s time for us to make a choice
Only God could decide Who will live and who will die There’s nothing that can’t be done If we raise our voice as one
They’ve gotta hear it from me They’ve gotta hear it from you They’ve gotta hear it from us We can’t take it We’ve already had enough
They’ve gotta hear it from me They’ve gotta hear it from you They’ve gotta hear it from us
We can’t take it We’ve already had enough”
Best Of Joy
“I am your joy, your best of joy I am the moonlight, you are the spring Our life’s a sacred thing You know I always will love you, I am forever
I am the one who came when you fell down I was the only one around (The only one) When things would hurt you, I am forever Wasn’t it I who said that you are free? When living seemed so hard to be When things would hurt you
I am forever (I am forever) We are forever (We are forever)
I am your friend through thick and thin We need each other, we’ll never part Our love is from the heart We never say, “I don’t need you”, we are forever
I am the one who said that you are free When living seemed so hard to be (The only one) And nothing would cheer you I am forever Wasn’t it I who carried you around? When all the walls came tumblin’ down When things would hurt you
I am forever (I am forever) We are forever (We are forever)”
“A revelation, fulfill the truth The final message, we’ll bring to you There is no danger, fulfill the truth So come together, we need you
We’re sendin’ out, a major love And this is our, message to you (Message to you) The planets are linin’ up, we’re bringin’ brighter days They’re all in line, waitin’ for you, so know the truth You’re just another part of me”
Dirty Diana
“You’ll never make me stay So take your weight off of me I know your every move So won’t you just let me be?
I’ve been here times before But I was too blind to see That you seduce every man This time you won’t seduce me
She’s saying, “That’s OK Hey, baby, do what you please I have the stuff that you want I am the thing that you need.”
She looked me deep in the eyes She’s touchin’ me so to start She says, “There’s no turnin’ back.” She trapped me in her heart
Dirty Diana, no Dirty Diana, no Dirty Diana, no Dirty Diana, let me be!”
Smooth Criminal
“Annie, are you OK? Will you tell us that you’re OK There’s a sound at the window Then he struck you a crescendo, Annie He came into your apartment Left the bloodstains on the carpet And then you ran into the bedroom You were struck down It was your doom
Annie, are you OK? So, Annie, are you OK?”
Leave Me Alone
“I don’t care what you talkin’ ’bout, baby I don’t care what you say Don’t you come walkin’ beggin’ back, mama I don’t care, anyway Time after time, I gave you all of my money No excuses to make Ain’t no mountain that I can’t climb, baby All is goin’ my way
(‘Cause there’s a time when you’re right And you know you must fight) Who’s laughin’, baby? Don’t you know (And there’s the choice that we make And this choice you will take) Who’s laughin’, baby?
So just leave me alone, girl (Leave me alone, leave me alone) Leave me alone”
Fly Away
“Alone at last I can give you my heart (give you my heart) There’s no place too far for us We don’t need it
Baby, don’t make me Baby, don’t make me Baby, don’t make me Fly away Gonna stay Love today”
Heal The World
“And the dream we were conceived in Will reveal a joyful face And the world we once believed in Will shine again in grace
Then why do we keep strangling life Wound this Earth, crucify its soul? Though it’s plain to see This world is heavenly Be God’s glow
We could fly so high Let our spirits never die In my heart I feel you are all my brothers
Create a world with no fear Together we’ll cry happy tears See the nations turn their swords into plowshares
We could really get there If you cared enough for the living Make a little space To make a better place
Heal the world Make it a better place For you and for me And the entire human race There are people dying If you care enough for the living Make a better place For you and for me”
Black Or White
“They print my message in the Saturday Sun I had to tell them I ain’t second to none And I told about equality And it’s true Either you’re wrong or you’re right Ooh But if you’re thinkin’ about my baby It don’t matter if you’re black or white Ooh Don’t look at that I am tired of this devil I am tired of this stuff I am tired of this business So when the going gets rough I ain’t scared of your brother I ain’t scared of no sheets I ain’t scared of nobody”
Will You Be There
“But they told me A man should be faithful And walk when not able And fight ’til the end But I’m only human
Everyone’s taking control of me Seems that the world’s got a role for me I’m so confused, will you show it to me? That you’ll be there for me and care enough to bear me”
Scream
“I’m tired of injustice, I’m tired of the schemes Your lies are disgusting So what does it mean, damn it Kickin’ me down, I got to get up As jacked as it sounds The whole system sucks, damn it
Peek in the shadow, come into the light You tell me I’m wrong Then you better prove you’re right You’re selling out souls, but I, I care about mine I’ve got to get stronger And I won’t give up the fight
With such confusion Don’t it make you wanna scream? (Make you wanna scream) Your bash abusin’ victimize within the scheme”
Let’s celebrate Michael Jackson through his music, short excerpts from the lyrics of some of his songs that he wrote and a few pictures and videos. The lyrics are from one or two sources on the Internet. Hoping they are faultless.
“Don’t Stop ‘Til You Get Enough”
“Heartbreak enemy despise Eternal (Oh, eternal) Love shines in my eyes (Ooh) So let love take us through the hours (Oh, let love) I won’t be complainin’ (No, no) (Hoo!) ‘Cause your love is alright, alright (Ooh)
Keep on with the force, don’t stop Don’t stop ’til you get enough Keep on with the force, don’t stop Don’t stop ’til you get enough Keep on with the force, don’t stop Don’t stop ’til you get enough Keep on with the force, don’t stop Don’t stop ’til you get enough”
Working Day And Night
“You say that workin’ Is what a man’s supposed to do And I say it ain’t right If I can’t give sweet love to you (Yeah) I’m tired of thinkin’ Of what my life’s supposed to be (well) Soon enough darlin’ This love will be reality (ah ah)
How can you live girl ‘Cause love for us was meant to be (well) Then you must be seein’ Some other guy instead of me (ooh) You got me workin’ day and night And I’ll be workin’ From sun up to midnight”
Wanna Be Startin’ Somethin
“Billie Jean is always talkin’ when nobody else is talkin’ Tellin’ lies and rubbin’ shoulders So they called her mouth a motor Someone’s always tryin’ To start my baby cryin’ Talkin’, squealin’, spyin’ Sayin’ you just wanna be startin’ somethin’
I said you wanna be startin’ somethin’ You got to be startin’ somethin’ I said you wanna be startin’ somethin’ You got to be startin’ somethin’ It’s too high to get over (Yeah, yeah) You’re too low to get under (Yeah, yeah) You’re stuck in the middle (Yeah, yeah) And the pain is thunder (Yeah, yeah)”
Beat It
“They’re out to get you, better leave while you can Don’t wanna be a boy, you wanna be a man You wanna stay alive, better do what you can So beat it, just beat it (Ooh!) You have to show them that you’re really not scared (Ooh!) You’re playin’ with your life, this ain’t no truth or dare (Ooh!) They’ll kick you, then they’ll beat you, then they’ll tell you it’s fair So beat it, but you wanna be bad
Just beat it, beat it, beat it, beat it No one wants to be defeated Showin’ how funky and strong is your fight It doesn’t matter who’s wrong or right Just beat it, beat it, beat it, beat it No one wants to be defeated Showin’ how funky and strong is your fight It doesn’t matter who’s wrong or right Just beat it (Beat it, beat it, beat it) Beat it (Beat it, beat it, ha, ha, ha, ha)”
Billie Jean
“People always told me, “Be careful of what you do. And don’t go around breaking young girls’ hearts.” And mother always told me, “A-be careful of who you love, And be careful of what you do ‘Cause the lie becomes the truth.”
Billie Jean is not my lover She’s just a girl who claims that I am the one But the kid is not my son She says I am the one But the kid is not my son
For forty days and for forty nights Law was on her side But who can stand When she’s in demand Her schemes and plans ‘Cause we danced on the floor in the round So take my strong advice Just remember to always think twice”
Liberian Girl
“Liberian girl You know that you came and you changed my world, Just like in the movies, With two lovers in a scene And she says, “Do you love me?” And he says, “So endlessly.”, I love you, Liberian girl.
Liberian girl You know that you came and you changed my world, I wait for the day, When you have to say “I do,” And I’ll smile and say it too, And forever we’ll be true I love you, Liberian girl, All the time”
Thank you @MJInnocentUK. The Estate has confirmed that they will take the case to the Supreme Court. Fingers crossed that they will choose to hear it. Only 5% of cases submitted are heard by the SC. https://t.co/nPOue4zoj7
— andjustice4some – Michael Jackson FAN account (@andjustice4some) August 19, 2023
APPEALS UPDATE: Court Publishes Final Opinion – Unchanged from Tentative
The court has reversed both dismissals of Wade/James back to trial court. Based on the tentative and judge demeanor in oral arguments, this is no surprise.
— TSCM – MJ Case Facts and Commentary (@MJJRepository) August 18, 2023
It's going to be a few months before we know if the Supreme Court will hear the case. Even longer if they do, and if goes to trial, probably a year or longer. Next week, please, let's #CelebrateMichaelJackson.
— andjustice4some – Michael Jackson FAN account (@andjustice4some) August 20, 2023
Notice that most of the media is posting about the latest court ruling, with an image of Michael from the Santa Barbara courthouse in 2005. Persuasive advertising is the goal, in an attempt to plant the seeds of "guilt" to a potential jury pool. #MJInnocentpic.twitter.com/hSTdeUqv9a
— andjustice4some – Michael Jackson FAN account (@andjustice4some) August 20, 2023
— Justice for The Falsely Accused (@JuliaBerkowitz1) August 19, 2023
Don't think people aren't on here watching us. They are. The biggest slap in the face to those who lie about Michael is to see him PROSPER. That means trending, #CelebrateMichaelJackson, and breaking historical records for him in October. Michael will STAY WINNING with our… https://t.co/P76Qmsz3vk
— andjustice4some – Michael Jackson FAN account (@andjustice4some) August 19, 2023
June 25, 2009 was a horrible day! The terrible news of Michael Jackson’s death; family, friends and hundreds and hundreds of fans around the world crying and weeping; an unbearable pain like a knife in the heart; a deep sadness and an immense feeling of injustice that has never faded.
Now, fourteen years later, among the good things that I always remember is this picture: Michael standing on a scene in front of a huge crowd with his arms and his beautiful hands stretched out and his face turned to the sky, embracing the entire universe and receiving terawatts of celestial energy!
Later, we got this picture: Michael carrying the planet Earth on his stretched arms and embracing it with the Universe!
And I remember the words he sang or said:
“I love youuuuuu!”, “I love youuuuuu!”, “I love you more!”
“They don’t care about us”, “Hold my hand”,
“I said if you’re thinkin’ of being my brother it don’t matter if you’re black or white”, “Hold my hand”, “So keep the faith Don’t let nobody turn you ’round”, “Hold my hand”,
“Lift your head up high and scream out to the world “I know I am someone,” and let the truth unfurl (Hee-ha) No one can hurt you now because you know what’s true Yes, I believe in me, so do believe in you”, “Hold my hand”,
“What have we done to the world? Look what we’ve done What about all the peace That you pledge your only son?”, “Hold my hand”,
“She lies there so tenderly Fashioned so slenderly Lift her with care So young and so fair”, “Hold my hand”,
“Deep in my soul baby We’ve already had enough”, “Do you know where your children are? Because it’s now twelve o’clock”, “Hold my hand”,
“There must be more to life than this There must be more to life than this How do we cope in a world without love”, “Hold my hand”,
“We’re on a mission in the everlastin’ light that shines A revelation of the truth in chapters of our minds”, “Hold my hand”,
“We are here to support and help the people of Africa to find a solution in the fight against the swear of HIV AIDS … and malaria … through education and awareness, we aim at conviction but we help with cure”,
“Sadly, sadly, we live in a state of fear. Everyday we hear of war on the news, on the radio and television and the newspapers, always of war. We hear of nations hurting each other, of neighbours hurting each other, of families hurting each other and the children killing each other. We must learn to live and love each other before it’s too late. We have to stop! We have to stop the prejudice, we have to stop the hating, we have to stop living in fear of our own neighbours”,
“I would like all of you now to take the hand of the person to the left and to the right. Go ahead! Right now! I mean it! Don’t be shy! Do it! It starts now! To the person next to you. To the left and the right. I mean it. Right now! Go ahead! Don’t be shy. Do it! Do it! Now, tell the person … tell the person next to you that you care for them. Tell them that you care for them. Tell them that you love them. Tell them that you love them. This is what makes the difference”,
“Together … together we can make a change of the world. Together we can help to stop racism. Together we can help to stop prejudice. We can help the world live without fear. It’s our only hope, without hope we are lost”,
On Saturday, June 24th, from 7 pm to Midnight, come reminisce, jam, and vibe with fellow MJ Fam as we celebrate the legendary King of Pop, Michael Jackson! We'll be spinning all grooves MJ—from early J5 Jams to MJ Deep cuts, fan favorites, and previously unreleased gems. #MJFAMpic.twitter.com/QvopPerzyP
— Close2Midnight | Fan Account (@Close_2Midnight) June 21, 2023
Tomorrow at 7pm, it's a thriller as we celebrate the King of Pop with one hour of the best songs of Michael Jackson.
On June 13th, we celebrate the Victory Day, the day that Michael Jackson was exonerated of all charges in the Arvizo case but also in the Chandler case. Despite all the lies, the members of the jury discovered the truth during the cross-examinations and understood that the case was bogus. They delivered the only possible and right verdict: 14 times NOT GUILTY!
A few excerpts from Mr. Mesereau’s closing argument on June 2 and 3, 2005 (source here)
As James Baldwin said, Michael Jackson had “turned so many tables”.
The African-American child prodigy with his angelic voice and smooth dance moves mesmerized all audiences, young and old, of all colors and nationalities. Sooner than later, the young man became an idol. White people especially white kids and all other people with other colors imitated him. His clothes, his glove and shoes, his dance moves, his songs, etc.
After Walter Yetnikoff’s warning who told to MTV: It’s MJ and Billie Jean or nothing, MTV had to pull back and obey. Jackson opened so many doors not only to himself but also to his followers.
And he climbed and climbed to the top of the world! Soon, he owned not only the copyrights of his own songs but also the others as well: The Beatles, Bob Dylan and many, many, many others. He would have owned the whole industry, if they did not put an end to his smart plans. Who were “they”? All the people who did not like him to turn” so many tables”!
A while later, he met Lisa Marie Presley, they fell in love and got married. So he married a white woman and not any white woman! He married Elvis’s daughter! They (Sneddon among them) did try to use the Mann Act to prosecute him.
And there was Thomas Sneddon and his obsession to convict Michael Jackson. Since he was not successful in 1993-94, he and his office did everything possible in 2003-05 to put MJ behind the bars. They wrongly accused him and also they diverted the eyes from the real predators to an innocent man.
In his motion for Recusal of Santa County district attorney’s office, Steve Cochran gave us a detailed account of how Sneddon and his office handled this case (the document here ): a few excerpts from the file:
In 1910, the civil rights activist and NAACP co-founder W.E.B. Du Bois wrote:” it was the rule of most white papers never to publish a picture of a colored person except as a criminal …”. That was among others, the reason why NAACP published the magazine The Crisis to be “a record of the darker races.” See here . More than a century has gone since Du Bois wrote this sentence. Some positive changes have been made but sadly not enough!
When it comes to Michael Jackson, the media has almost never treated him fairly especially after 1993 until now. As soon as the Chandlers’ case blew up in 93 and later Arvisos’ in 2003, the media – the tabloids and the mainstream together – knew that they hit the jackpot! Their jobs were saved, their retirement was rescued! “Money Money Lie for it Spy for it Kill for it Die for it”!(Money, Michael Jackson).
***
After MJ’s passing, Jackson’s music was selling more than ever; his estate that was sabotaged when he was alive by his foes, was again blooming and prosperous; his lawyers resolved lawsuit after lawsuit; he topped Forbes’s highest-paid dead celebrities year after year (8 years in a row), Cirque du Soleil Mandalay bay, The Immortal World Tour, recently: MJ The Musical and Tour of MJ The Musical, in a near future: Michael, the Michael Jackson biopic, etc. etc.
The haters’ camp was tired to hear the news of his posthumouslysuccess as mentioned above. It was certainly tedious to hear and to read all the time that he was innocent, that he was exonerated on June 13th 2005, that he was a great humanitarian and helped the poor and the hungry, he wanted to save the planet, he was against war, racism and … and …
So to put a stop to Jackson’s posthumouslysuccesses, they have to do something! Perhaps something like the following brainstormed conversation that might have happened more than a decade ago somewhere in our planet:
“What if we get a rerun of Chandler-Arvizo charades with new people of course?” said a person.
“Jolly good! But the chaps, where to find them?” said another person.
“Easy peasy! Find losers who were around him to suck him up!”
“Wait a minute! What if we get this Robson boy? Mesereau used to say that he was so clever, so adamant, his best witness!”
“Yea! I’ve heard he’s in a sh** hole now. Needs cash. He’ll do it!”
“Yea! What a jaw-dropping mockery!”
“We’re lucky considering all the CSA victims’ stories and lawsuits coming up. And with a little push, we’ll take over !”
“Course! Course!”
Robson filed his civil complaint on May 2013 followed by Safechuck on July 2014. Since then, their cases have been dismissed and rejected several times. To give them a hand, the British Channel 4, Don Reed and HBO that joined them a few months later produced Leaving Neverland in 2017-2018.
In a private session by the end of January 2019, LN was showed by David Geffen to Oprah Winfrey and Gayle King on Winfrey’s birthday and on Geffen’s yacht. After that, LN was premiered on January 25, 2019 at the Sundance Film festival.
Despite the entire media’s support and a vast smear campaign against Michael Jackson in 2019, LN failed massively, thanks to Jackson’s supporters who exposed LN lies after extensive researches and MJ’s Estate that sued HBO in a 100 million dollars lawsuit!
***
WHEREAS, Michael Joseph Jackson was born in Gary, Indiana, August 29, 1958 and passed away on June 25, 2009; and [][][]
WHEREAS, Michael Jackson (aka ―King of Pop‖) broke racial barriers in the entertainment industry with his dramatic, flamboyant style by appearing as the first Black entertainer to appear on MTV; and
WHEREAS, his career and success opened numerous doors for subsequent black and minority entertainers to showcase their talents on this originally exclusive entertainment medium; and
WHEREAS, Michael Jackson has visited Africa and underdeveloped communities to extend moral and charitable support, he has equally donated generously to charitable causes, earning him recognition in the Guinness Book of World Records for philanthropy; and
WHEREAS, the NAACP Beverly Hills/Hollywood Branch and the Los Angeles Branch honored Michael Jackson at a reception held during the 1984 NAACP National Convention in Kansas City to kick of ―Jackson’s Victory Tour‖; and
WHEREAS, Michael Jackson received the NAACP Image Award for Life Time Achievement.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the 100th Annual Convention of the NAACP recognize and honor Michael Jackson’s legacy across America by leaving catalogues, collections and memories of his phenomenal legacy that will live forever; and
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that the NAACP go on record to acknowledge Michael Jackson’s creativity and personal contribution to the entertainment industry and humanity. (Source here )
Thanks to TSCM, the response of the Estate, a 97 pages document is out now. You can read it by following MJJRepository on Twitter or find it here:
ROBSON CASE UPDATE: Response
Estate filed 97-page brief—same length as Wade's.
"We must address each of those arguments, including alternative potential bases for affirmance on several of them. That task includes describing the extensive factual record [11,044 page appendix]." pic.twitter.com/PfdFgaP382
— TSCM – MJ Case Facts and Commentary (@MJJRepository) December 9, 2022
— andjustice4some – Michael Jackson FAN account (@andjustice4some) January 7, 2023
R.I.P. Lisa Marie Presley
Brad Sundberg’s post about Lisa Marie Presley. Real stories from those who were there. It gives peace to know that for a moment in time, they found love, happiness and safety in each other. pic.twitter.com/MaqvDPsuj5
— The Michael Jackson Case for Innocence Podcast (@Case4Innocence) October 4, 2022
Jin Chohan Documentary
*Trial by Media: The Michael Jackson Story*
I'm currently 50% into production. I'm onto phase 2 of this 3 part docu-series – working on attaining funding for the rest of the film. Raising an initial 5k to get the next stage started is crucial for me atm. pic.twitter.com/sy4vnZGRJG
It’s time to promote Michael Jackson’s #Thriller40 with MORE streaming parties on Stationhead –
Will YOU be there?
Last month, the Michael Jackson Global Family attempted to garner a number one spot on Billboard100 for the Thriller single, using streaming parties on Station Head. The campaign was called the #ThrillerChallenge.
Although our goalwas not accomplished, our gathering together in a cause for MJ created an extremely wonderful experience in a loving environment. New relationships between MJFam were formed and old relationships were strengthened by this bonding experience.
Michael formed his world-wide community through his deep love of humanity and his desire to see peace among all people, and it was gratifying to see his vision alive and thrivingin the streaming party chat.
Fans joined in from Brazil, Greece, Japan, UK.Australiato mention a few. They joined the US fans in this US focused charting campaign for Michael out of a deep…
He had lived in the desert all his life, but for me it was all new.
“See that footprint in the sand?” he asked, pointing to a spot by the cliff. I looked as close as I could. “No, I don’t see anything.” “That’s just the point.” He laughed. “Where you can’t see a print, that’s where the Ancient Ones walked.”
We went on a little farther, and he pointed to an opening, high up on the sandstone wall. “See that house up there?” he asked. I squinted hard. “There’s nothing to see.” “You’re a good student.” He smiled. “Where there’s no roof or chimney, that’s where the Ancient Ones are most likely to have lived.”
We rounded a bend, and before us was spread a fabulous sight — thousands upon thousands of desert flowers in bloom. “Can you see any missing?” he asked me. I shook my head. “It’s just wave after wave of loveliness.” “Yes,” he said in a low voice. “Where nothing is missing, that’s where the Ancient Ones harvested the most.”
I thought about all this, about how generations had once lived in harmony with the earth, leaving no marks to scar the places they inhabited. At camp that night I said, “You left out one thing.” “What’s that?” he asked. “Where are the Ancient Ones buried?” Without reply, he poked his stick into the fire. A bright flame shot up, licked the air, and disappeared. My teacher gave me a glance to ask if I understood this lesson. I sat very still, and my silence told him I did.
Dancing The Dream, Michael Jackson
Last year's trend was number ONE worldwide. We're going to blow that number out of the water this year. pic.twitter.com/3BVUFmuQSt
— andjustice4some – Michael Jackson FAN account (@andjustice4some) August 26, 2022
You’ll get to see a Q&A with Greg Phillinganes and a special one-off performance by the MJ ONE cast. The livestream will begin at 3:30 pm PT and will be shared on Michael’s Facebook page and his YouTube channel: https://t.co/G3tIxkAW7Wpic.twitter.com/X7YnQ3UCop
The court will be consolidating both cases for oral arguments (as they did in 2019) and has proposed consolidating both cases for a single final opinion as well.
Estate now has until October 3 to reply to Wade's brief, but may request more time.
— TSCM – MJ Case Facts and Commentary (@MJJRepository) July 14, 2022
Wade and James Appeals Update:
Some have asked about the consolidation of oral arguments.
This was a joint request by both sides to expedite the largely similar appellate arguments.
The court's eventual opinion relating to duty of care & other causes applies across both cases. pic.twitter.com/2uiEiA2Dou
— TSCM – MJ Case Facts and Commentary (@MJJRepository) July 18, 2022
As part of Wade's latest appeal, Finaldi argues that neither estate nor trial court ever conducted Rowland analysis to determine duty of care matter.
But in Judge Young's 2020 dismissal of Safechuck's case, he notes it was Finaldi's side that failed to factor Rowland analysis. pic.twitter.com/QL3wtZdLUS
— TSCM – MJ Case Facts and Commentary (@MJJRepository) July 19, 2022
And no one told her why Her direction has a dimelight From one more violent crime
She innocently questioned why Why her father had to die She asked the men in blue How is it that you get to choose Who will live and who will die Did God say that you could decide? You saw he didn’t run And that my daddy had no gun
In the middle of a village Way in a distant land Lies a poor boy with his broken toy Too young to understand
He’s awaken, ground is shakin His father grabs his hand Screaming, crying, his wife’s dying Now he’s left to explain
He innocently questioned why Why his mother had to die What did these soldiers come here for? If they’re for peace, why is there war?
Did God say that they could decide Who will live and who will die? All my mama ever did Was try to take care of her kids
We’re innocently standing by Watching people lose their lives It seems as if we have no voice It’s time for us to make a choice
Only God could decide Who will live and who will die There’s nothing that can’t be done If we raise our voice as one
They’ve gotta hear it from me They’ve gotta hear it from you They’ve gotta hear it from us We can’t take it We’ve already had enough
They’ve gotta hear it from me They’ve gotta hear it from you They’ve gotta hear it from us
We can’t take it We’ve already had enough
They’ve gotta hear it from me They’ve gotta hear it from you They’ve gotta hear it from you baby
We can’t take it We’ve already had enough
Deep in my soul baby Deep in your soul and let God decide Deep in my soul
It’s up to me and I’m still alive They’ve gotta hear it from us
We can’t take it We’ve already had enough
It’s going down baby Just let God decide,
It’s going on baby Just let God decide Deep in my soul baby We’ve already had enough
They’ve gotta hear it from me They’ve gotta hear it from you They’ve gotta hear it from us
We can’t, we can’t We’ve already had enough
We’ve Had Enough, Michael Jackson
***
Look Again, Baby Seal
One of the most touching nature photographs is of a baby fur seal lying on the ice alone. I’m sure you have seen it — the picture seems to be all eyes, the trusting dark eyes of a small animal gazing up at the camera and into your heart. When I first looked at them, the eyes asked, “Are you going to hurt me?” I knew the answer was yes, because thousands of baby seals were being killed every year.
Many people were touched by one baby seal’s helplessness. They gave money to save the seals, and public awareness started to shift. As I returned to the picture, those two wide eyes began to say something different. Now they asked, “Do you know me?” This time I didn’t feel so much heartache as when I felt the violence man inflicts upon animals. But I realized that there was still a big gap. How much did I really know about life on earth? What responsibility did I feel for creatures outside my little space? How could I lead my life so that every cell of living matter was also benefited?
Everyone who began to wonder about these things found, I think, that their feelings were shifting away from fear toward more closeness with life as a whole. The beauty and wonder of life began to seem very personal; the possibility of making the planet a garden for all of us to grow in began to dawn. I looked into the eyes of the baby seal, and for the first time they smiled. “Thank you,” they said. “You have given me hope.”
Is that enough? Hope is such a beautiful word, but it often seems very fragile. Life is still being needlessly hurt and destroyed. The image of one baby seal alone on the ice or one baby girl orphaned in war is still frightening in its helplessness. I realized that nothing would finally save life on earth but trust in life itself, in its power to heal, in its ability to survive our mistakes and welcome us back when we learn to correct those mistakes.
With these thoughts in my heart, I looked at the picture again. The seal’s eyes seemed much deeper now, and I saw something in them that I had missed before: unconquerable strength. “You have not hurt me,” they said. “I am not one baby alone. I am life, and life can never be killed. It is the power that brought me forth from the emptiness of space; it cared for me and nourished my existence against all dangers. I am safe because I am that power. And so are you. Be with me, and let us feel the power of life together, as one creature here on earth.” Baby seal, forgive us.
Look at us again and again to see how we are doing. Those men who raise their clubs over you are also fathers and brothers and sons. They have loved and cared for others. One day they will extend that love to you. Be sure of it and trust.
Look Again, Baby Seal, Dancing The Dream, Michael Jackson
I will defend Michael Jackson to my last breath. I know he was innocent, I know he was targeted because he was wealthy and famous and perceived as very vulnerable and that made him a target for all kinds of people, Tom Mesereau
On June 13th, we celebrate the Victory Day, the day that Michael Jackson was exonerated of all charges in the Arvizo case but also in the Chandler case. Despite all the lies, the members of the jury discovered the truth during the cross-examinations and understood that the case was bogus. They delivered the only possible and right verdict: 14 times NOT GUILTY!
We have a very good news this year! If you think that reading the court documents is a tedious job, you don’t have to do it anymore! There is a channel on YouTube where you can listen to the documents:
— The MJCast – A Michael Jackson Podcast (@TheMJCast) June 11, 2022
***
Also #ApologizeToMichaelJackson on June 13 until 4 pm PST. Brazilian trend VICTORY DAY from 4 pm PST on. And my bet is that #MJInnocent will trend as well. Get your facts out about Michael's innocence on Vindication Day! https://t.co/wQIf7X9zvF
— andjustice4some – Michael Jackson FAN account (@andjustice4some) June 11, 2022
***
As part of raising funding for 'Trial by Media: The Michael Jackson Story'. I decided to set up an Official Merchandise store of the documentary to help. All proceeds from the store go straight into production 💪🏼🙏🏼👀 #TrialByMediaMJhttps://t.co/EFPhEbDKIdpic.twitter.com/UbfqLkPkiz
Thanks to MJJRepository, we have the document that Michael Jackson’s Estate has filled as a response to Safechuck’s lawyers appeal.
Before sharing this document, it is good to add some information written by MJJRepository. First, a notice about the document: “Remember, this is an appellate matter so their arguments are purely procedural as matter of law (taking allegations at face value), to explain why court was correct to dismiss.”
And some tweets about the timeline on these appeals:
Safechuck & Robson are appealing their final dismissals.
If the courts do not reverse their losses, they may try to appeal "en banc" to all appellate judges, but that is very rare to be granted.
They can then try to petition to the supreme court but very unlikely to be heard.
— TSCM – MJ Case Facts and Commentary (@MJJRepository) February 9, 2022
In an interview with The Associated Press, John Branca, one of the executors of Michael Jackson’s Estate, has shared several good news:
Yahoo.com has also published this interview with several adds. A few excerpts from this article:
” With a series of court victories that bring the end to serious legal crises, with a Broadway show beginning and a Cirque du Soleil show returning after a long pandemic pause, the Jackson business is on the upswing 12 years after the pop superstar’s death. []
“I was always optimistic,” John Branca, the entertainment attorney who worked with Jackson through many of his biggest triumphs and now serves as co-executor of his estate, told The Associated Press in an interview at his Beverly Hills home. “Michael inspired the planet and his music still does. There was never any doubt about that.”
The optimism was warranted. A succession of court decisions came. One accusers’ lawsuit was dismissed in October. The other was tossed out in April. In May, a ruling in the tax case slashed the bill dramatically. The estate suddenly stands nearly clear of a dozen years of disputes. That means Branca expects that in the next 18 months it can finally be taken out of probate court and turned into a trust for Jackson’s three children, who are all now adults.
And the focus of the estate can now shift back to presenting Jackson to the world. []
Successes aside, Branca feels lingering bitterness about director Dan Reed’s “Leaving Neverland” and what he felt were American media outlets that “don’t have the time or the wherewithal to do the research to figure out what’s true and what’s not true.”
Hence, the estate’s last lingering lawsuit, now in private arbitration, is one that it brought itself, and one Branca very much wanted filed, against HBO over the documentary.
“I was very angry at HBO and Dan Reed and I still am because here’s the thing: You can say anything you want about somebody who’s dead. They’re not here to protect themselves,” Branca said.[]
Please notice that the Estate has not announced that they are “in private arbitration” with HBO. Even though an arbitration occurs usually in private, the Estate of Michael Jackson has asked for a public one. We should wait to hear the Estate’s official announcement about this matter.
Concerning the IRS case, if you have not followed the case or if you find it too technical, there is a short article that could help:
Michael Jackson’s Estate And The Challenge Of Valuing Intangible Assets
July 30, 2021 • Stephanie Vara, Amanda Kruse
The estate of Michael Jackson recently won a major victory against the Internal Revenue Service in a valuation dispute where the Estate and the IRS’s valuations of three intangible assets, including Jackson’s image and likeness, differed by over $950 million dollars. The case is an important reminder that, although valuing most assets is relatively straightforward and such wildly different valuations are not the norm, certain unique assets, including an individual’s image and likeness, are difficult to value. Taxpayers and the IRS often do not see eye to eye on the value of these assets. Moreover, with the rise of social media platforms such as Instagram and TikTok, more and more taxpayers do own these kinds of assets, and we should expect to see similar valuation disputes more frequently. []
How Michael Jackson Got His Master Recordings Back
Thanks to a feisty lawyer, a reluctant label boss and a fictional alien.
“You know what John? I think I fucked up.”
“I think you did, Walter.”
That’s how the conversation began when Walter Yetnikoff, then chief of CBS Records, called John Branca, lawyer for Michael Jackson, shortly after the 1982 release of Thriller. Weeks earlier, the swaggering music executive had threatened to sue rival label MCA unless the company withdrew the E.T. storybook album, which heavily featured Jackson. But Yetnikoff didn’t realize how much the latter meant to his top artist—or how massive Thriller would be.
“Yeah, you guys told me this was going to be a big album, and Michael took it seriously,” Yetnikoff continued. “But I didn’t really understand how big it was going to be. Is he pissed?”
“Wouldn’t you be,” Branca replied, “if you were him?”
On August 28th and 29th, fans and friends will celebrate Michael Jackson’s birthday around the world. If you wish, you can join them on Twitter!
Pls RT – Keep watching and SHARE THE LINK -> https://t.co/fEdBQtiKgl. . We will get They Don't Care About Us to ONE BILLION sooner than you think if we work together
—
— MJJJusticeProject Inc- #MJ Fan Acct (@MJJJusticePrjct) August 2, 2021
They saw the poor living in cardboard shacks, so they knocked the shacks down and built projects. Huge blocks of cement and glass towered over asphalt parking lots. Somehow it wasn’t much like home, even home in a shack. “What do you expect?” they asked impatiently. “You’re too poor to live like us. Until you can do better for yourselves, you should be grateful, shouldn’t you?”
The head said yes, but the heart said no.
They needed more electricity in the city, so they found a mountain stream to dam. As the waters rose, dead rabbits and deer floated by; baby birds too young to fly drowned in the nest while mother birds cried helplessly. “It’s not a pretty sight,” they said, “but now a million people can run their air conditioners all summer. That’s more important than one mountain stream, isn’t it?”
The head said yes, but the heart said no.
They saw oppression and terrorism in a far-off land, so they made war against it. Bombs reduced the country to rubble. Its population cowered in fear, and every day more villagers were buried in rough wooden coffins. “You have to be prepared to make sacrifices,” they said. “If some innocent bystanders get hurt, isn’t that just the price one must pay for peace?”
The head said yes, but the heart said no.
The years rolled by and they got old. Sitting in their comfortable houses, they took stock. “We’ve had a good life,” they said, “and we did the right thing.” Their children looked down and asked why poverty, pollution, and war were still unsolved. “You’ll find out soon enough,” they replied. “Human beings are weak and selfish. Despite our best efforts, these problems will never really end.”
The head said yes, but the children looked into their hearts and whispered, “No!”
But The Heart Said No, Dancing the Dream, Michael Jackson
AMOR INDESCRITÍVEL! Homenagens de vários países estão chegando nesse momento em Forest Lawn, os maiores e melhores fãs do mundo… É pra você e por você Michael!#12YearsWithoutMichaelJackson 🤍🕊
all of your love has reached michael on this 12th anniversary. thank you all so so much for participating, this is truly the most beautiful undertaking i’ve had the pleasure of being a part of. sending so much love to all of you! 💛 pic.twitter.com/UJAY7SWOTT
I will defend Michael Jackson to my last breath. I know he was innocent, I know he was targeted because he was wealthy and famous and perceived as very vulnerable and that made him a target for all kinds of people, Tom Mesereau
On June 13th, we celebrate the Victory Day, the day that Michael Jackson was exonerated of all charges in the Arvizo case but also in the Chandler case. Despite all the lies, the members of the jury discovered the truth during the cross-examinations and understood that the case was bogus. They delivered the only possible and right verdict: 14 times NOT GUILTY!
Last year and the year before that, we discussed Mr. Mesereau’s opening statement and his closing argument during this trial. This year because of the incidents around Martin Bashir and the fact that his true nature has been at last revealed, we will walk through his testimony in the 2005.
Martin Bashir was the witness for the prosecution. He was the first witness in this trial. The trial began on February 28, 2005 and Bashir testified on March 1st (the court transcripts). Bashir’s lawyer, Theodore J. Boutrous, Jr. – the same lawyer who defends HBO against the Estate of MJ in their current legal dispute – was present at the court and advised very closely Bashir. By hiding behind the California Constitution’s journalist shield law, Bashir refused to answer to almost all the questions asked by Mr. Mesereau during the cross-examination.
Why was Martin Bashir the first witness to testify? Because of Bashir’s “documentary”, Living With Michael Jackson (LWMJ) that was deceitfully edited by Bashir in a way that MJ appeared to be a sexual predator. While editing his movie, Bashir knowingly deleted parts of MJ’s speeches to make him look as a criminal. Specially, in a scene in LWMJ when Gavin Arvizo was sitting next to MJ holding his hand and leaning on him, all of these were orchestrated and staged by Martin Bashir. The Arvizos had left Neverland long before that day. They came in only on this day because Bashir wanted it.
LWMJ gave enough ammunition to Thomas Sneddon, the Santa Barbara County’s DA who was already after Jackson in the 90’s, to investigate and eventually arrest and prosecute Jackson. Obviously, Bashir was a important witness for Sneddon!
In this video, Take Two: The Footage You Were Never Meant To See you can watch the entire film that was recorded by Jackson’s photographer.
Bashir’s cross-examination on March 1st, 2005
As I wrote before, referring to the journalist shield law, Theodore Boutrous objected to almost all the questions asked by Mr. Mesereau during the cross-examination. It was like a loop: First, a question from Mr. Mesereau; then an objection from Mr. Boutrous referring to the shield law; after that an okay from the judge who used to ask Bashir if he wanted to answer and Bashir used to say “No, Your Honor”; and then Mr. Mesereau’s objection. He had a running objection!
The interesting part in the cross is the questions asked by Mr. Mesereau which revealed Bashir’s lies for the jury. Also, the jury watched the non edited version of LWMJ and understood how Bashir manipulated MJ’s speeches. Here you are several excerpts from this cross:
1- [] Q. Mr. Bashir, you communicated with Mr. Jackson’s assistant by letter before you began filming this show, correct. MR. BOUTROUS: Again, Your Honor, I object. It’s unpublished information created and prepared in the course of news gathering and covered by the shield law and the First Amendment. THE COURT: Do you wish to answer. THE WITNESS: No, Your Honor. []
2- Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Mr. Bashir, you wrote to Mr. Jackson’s assistant and said you would very much like to feature Michael with a large group of children, around 50, welcoming them and sharing with them his extraordinary home so that, for one day, their lives can be enriched, correct. MR. BOUTROUS: Same objection, Your Honor. []
3- Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Mr. Bashir, you interviewed Mr. Jackson and repeatedly asked him questions about his desire for an international children’s holiday, correct. MR. BOUTROUS: Same objection, Your Honor,
4- Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Mr. Bashir, you had Michael Jackson sign an agreement without a lawyer present, true. MR. BOUTROUS: Again, Your Honor, beyond the scope of the direct and covered by the shield law. THE COURT: I’d overrule that objection. Will you answer that question. THE WITNESS: Mr. Jackson signed two agreements in which he asked for no conditions whatsoever and agreed that I was free to make the film with him. And the first of those agreements was signed in November 2002, and the second agreement was signed in January 2003, just about two weeks prior to broadcast of the British version of the film that you’ve just seen. MR. MESEREAU: Your Honor, I would move to strike the answer and request that the Court order the witness to answer the question. THE COURT: All right. It’s stricken. And I’ll ask the court reporter to read back the question so that you understand the question. (Record read.) MR. BOUTROUS: I renew my objection, Your Honor. That goes to news gathering and relates to information prepared in connection with news gathering. THE COURT: The objection is overruled. Do you wish to answer that. THE WITNESS: I think I agree with my attorney that I have protections under the shield law, Your Honor.
Q. Mr. Bashir, you have been accused in England of forging signatures, correct. A. Incorrect. Q. No one has ever made that accusation, sir? MR. BOUTROUS: I’m going to object, Your Honor. [].
5- Q. You are currently a paid legal analyst for ABC, correct. A. Incorrect, sir. Q. Are you a paid employee by ABC in any capacity? A. I am, sir. Q. Could you please tell the jury what that is? A. I’m employed as a correspondent for ABC News, which is owned by Disney. Q. How long have you been paid as a correspondent for ABC? A. My contract began on the 1st of September, last year. Q. Are you covering this case as a correspondent who is paid? MR. BOUTROUS: Objection, Your Honor, []
6- Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Mr. Bashir, if you look at the two documents you referred to that you say Mr. Jackson signed, his signature appears to be different from document to document, correct. MR. BOUTROUS: Same objection, Your Honor. [] Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Mr. Bashir, did you request that Michael Jackson bring Macauley Culkin so you could film him at Neverland. MR. BOUTROUS: Same objection []. Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: In the process of putting this film together, Mr. Bashir, did you write to Michael Jackson’s assistant and say you wanted to film the beautiful landscape encouraging all of us to become as little children again.
7- Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Mr. Bashir, did you, in the process of getting — making contact with Mr. Jackson so you could make this film, misrepresent that you were putting together a trip to Africa for Mr. Jackson to visit sick children. MR. BOUTROUS: Same objection, Your Honor. []
Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Mr. Bashir, did you allow Mr. Jackson any editorial control over this film. MR. BOUTROUS: Same objections, Your Honor. []
Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Mr. Bashir, before this film was shown – and I’m talking about the actual film itself, not generally speaking. I’m talking about what the prosecution has used in this courtroom today, all right. – did you watch that actual reel. MR. BOUTROUS: Same objections. Beyond the scope; shield law; First Amendment. MR. MESEREAU: I think we’re discussing authentication, Your Honor. THE COURT: The objection is overruled. Do you want the question read back. THE WITNESS: Yes, please, Your Honor. (Record read.) THE WITNESS: I don’t wish to answer the question. The question is — is protected under the shield law.
8- Q. Mr. Bashir, I’d like to ask you some questions about some statements of Michael Jackson that Judge Melville has deemed to be legal admissions. They are statements that were contained in your show. To obtain those statements, you told Michael Jackson he was underappreciated, true. MR. BOUTROUS: Objection, Your Honor. []
9- Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Mr. Bashir, to obtain an interview with Mr. Jackson, you told him you were a friend of Princess Diana, correct. MR. BOUTROUS: Same objections, Your Honor. Q. Mr. Bashir, in the show you prepared, which we’ve just seen, Mr. Jackson made statements to the effect that nothing sexual was going on in his bed, correct. A. Correct. Q. To obtain the interview you had with Mr. Jackson when he made that statement, you told him that he was underappreciated, true. MR. BOUTROUS: Objection, Your Honor [].
Q. Mr. Bashir, in the show about Michael Jackson, Mr. Jackson says that nothing sexual went on in his bedroom. To obtain that statement, you told Mr. Jackson that your romantic development was partially shaped by his records, true. MR. BOUTROUS: Objection, Your Honor. Same grounds. First Amendment; shield law. []
Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Mr. Bashir, on the show we just saw in this courtroom, Mr. Jackson says that nothing sexual goes on in his bedroom. To obtain that statement from Mr. Jackson, you told him that when you looked at his relationship with children, it almost made you weep, correct. MR. BOUTROUS: Same objections, Your Honor. []
10- Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Mr. Bashir, on your show, Mr. Jackson says that nothing sexual ever went on in his bedroom. To obtain that statement from him, you told him that you believe in his vision of an international children’s holiday, correct. MR. BOUTROUS: Same objections, Your Honor. []
11- Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Mr. Bashir, in this interview you did of Michael Jackson, he says that nothing sexual went on in his bedroom. To obtain that statement, you told him, “Neverland is an extraordinary, a breathtaking, a stupendous, an exhilarating and amazing place. I can’t put together words to describe Neverland.” True. MR. BOUTROUS: Same objections, Your Honor. []
Q. Mr. Bashir, to prepare the show you’ve just shown the jury where Michael Jackson says nothing sexual went on in his bedroom, you told him that you had an abiding sense that he is selfless and a most generous person, correct. MR. BOUTROUS: Same objections, Your Honor. []
Q. Mr. Bashir, to obtain the statement from Mr. Jackson that nothing sexual goes on in his bedroom, you described Neverland as a beautiful landscape encouraging all of us to become as little children again, true. MR. BOUTROUS: Objection, Your Honor, [].
12- Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Mr. Bashir, to obtain Michael Jackson’s statement that nothing sexual goes on in his bedroom with children, you complimented him for what he does for disadvantaged children from the ghetto, true. MR. BOUTROUS: Same objections, Your Honor. THE COURT: Do you wish to answer. THE WITNESS: I don’t, Your Honor.
Q. Mr. Bashir, to obtain the statement from Mr. Jackson that nothing sexual went on in his bedroom with children, you told him that you were going to arrange a meeting with Kofi Annan, the Secretary General of the United Nations, and would plan a trip to Africa with Mr. Jackson and Kofi Annan to help African children with AIDS, true. MR. BOUTROUS: Same objections, Your Honor. []
Q. Mr. Bashir, to obtain Mr. Jackson’s statement that nothing sexual ever went on in his bedroom with children, you told him that you had great admiration for his visiting sick children in hospitals in England, true. MR. BOUTROUS: Same objections, Your Honor. []
13- Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Mr. Bashir, in the process of attempting to obtain statements from Mr. Jackson, you called him “the boss,” didn’t you. MR. BOUTROUS: Same objections.
14- Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Mr. Bashir, in how many locations did the filming take place that appears in your show. MR. BOUTROUS: Objection, Your Honor.[]
15-Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Did you fly to these locations with Mr. Jackson? MR. BOUTROUS: Same objection, Your Honor. []
16- Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Did you travel by car to any of the locations where you filmed any footage that appears in this documentary with Mr. Jackson. MR. BOUTROUS: Same objections, Your Honor. []
17- Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Mr. Bashir, after this show appeared, you were sued by Mr. Jackson in England, correct. MR. BOUTROUS: Again, Your Honor, [].
In the excerpts number 4 and 6, Mr. Mesereau talks about Bashir forging signatures; he also adds that MJ’s signatures on documents are different: “Mr. Bashir, you have been accused in England of forging signatures, correct.”, “… if you look at the two documents you referred to that you say Mr. Jackson signed, his signature appears to be different from document to document …”.The picture of this document was shared on Twitter. Since Mr. Mesereau is collaborating with the Estate re HBO’s lawsuit, it could be crucial if they look at this document and see if it is possible to go further, to investigate Bashir and eventually sue him.
Also, a fan has launched a petition asking ITV to investigate Bashir and Taj Jackson has asked anyone who is interested to sign it.
In the Coulisse
When we hear and read about the accusations and the allegations against Michael Jackson and the people behind it (from 1993 until today), it seems that they are solitary incidents, made by isolated individuals.
In truth, they are very much related. There were and still are a few people who have worked together to put up these shameful lies, this malicious farce and charade about MJ. Here you are the key names: The infamous NAMBLA supporter, Victor Gutierrez whose occupation was to produce “accusers” (Neverland 5, Blanca Francia, …), to bring forth “victims” (he coached the Chandlers) and to deliver them to Thomas “Mad dog” Sneddon – Santa Barbara County’s district attorney – (and his office) whose obsession was to convict Jackson no matter what; also, Diane Dimond, Martin Bashir (in collaboration with Gutierrez and Sneddon they set up the 2003-05 case) and a bunch of “reporters” and “journalists” and the latest filth Dan Reed ; Let’s add a few lawyers Larry Feldman (Chandlers’ lawyer) and Vince Finaldi (of Manly, Stewart, Finaldi firm, Robsons and Safechucks’ lawyer), and we are done!
January 1994: After an out of court settlement that was signed between the Chandlers and Jackson, the family got the money and they refused to continue to the criminal proceeding. They walked away and that angered Sneddon and Gutierrez very much. According to Jackson’s haters the reason the Chandlers walked away, was because MJ bought their silence which is of course not true. In fact, according to Gil Garcetti LA’s district attorney, the criminal investigation of MJ was ongoing after the settlement:
“The criminal investigation of singer Michael Jackson is ongoing and will not be affected by the announcement of the civil case settlement,” Garcetti said. “The district attorney’s office is taking Mr. [Larry] Feldman [the Chandlers’ attorney] at his word that the alleged victim will be allowed to testify and that there has been no agreement in the civil matter that will affect cooperation in the criminal investigation.” (Source ).
At that time, in a lawsuit, the civil part could go before the criminal proceeding. MJ’s lawyers tried to postpone the civil proceeding after the criminal one but Judge David Rothman dismissed their attempts. In fact, in September 93, the Chandlers fired their lawyer Gloria Allred – she wanted to proceed to the criminal part – and hired the civil attorney Larry Feldman. “On November 16, 1993, Feldman filed a so called Motion for Trial Preference which was a special request to have the civil trial heard within 120 days after the motion was granted. This request is usually given to children under the age of 14. In other words, the accuser’s side was working hard on getting the civil trial ahead of the criminal proceedings “. (source).
In fact, in an interview with Associated Press on January 21, 2004, William Dickerman one of Janet Arvizo’s lawyers who sent Gavin and Janet to Feldman said: “Since he’d (Feldman) essentially written the book on civil action with Michel Jackson he would be the one to give more thorough counsel on Michael Jackson,” Dickerman said.”
Since, the Chandlers’ accusations were bogus and they wanted only the money, they refused to continue and did not proceed to the criminal court. That is why, Thomas Sneddon changed the law:
November 22 and December 15, 1993: In connection with Victor Gutierrez and under his coaching and supervising, at least two more accusations were made against Jackson:
“On November 22, 1993, five former bodyguards of the Jackson family (Leroy Thomas, Morris Williams, Donald Starks, Fred Hammond, Aaron White), sometimes dubbed in the media as “The Hayvenhurst 5″, file a civil lawsuit against Michael Jackson claiming they were fired because they “knew too much” about Michael Jackson’s relationship with young boys. The bodyguards, who asked for $10 million in their lawsuit, did not work for Michael Jackson, but for his family in Hayvenhurst. The bodyguards appeared on the tabloid TV show Hard Copy with their story. Later documents revealed negotiations for $100,000 between the show and the bodyguards. The bodyguards never reported to authorities that they saw any inappropriate behavior by Jackson towards children. In fact, in depositions given to the police they admitted they never saw anything inappropriate. The bodyguards’ lawsuit was thrown out of court in July, 1995. These people then were used by the Prosecution, Sneddon, as witnesses against Jackson during his 2005 trial.” In the cross-examinations in 2005, they emphasized that they did not see any inappropriate behavior by Jackson towards children.
“On December 15, 1993 – Blanca Francia, who worked for Jackson as a maid between 1986 and 1991 appeared on the tabloid TV show Hard Copy claiming she witnessed improprieties toward young boys by Jackson during her employment. Before the Chandlers allegations, she never mentioned these alleged improprieties to anyone, nor did she report them to authorities. At Jackson’s 2005 trial Francia admitted that she had been paid $20,000 by Hard Copy for the interview, which was her then yearly salary. On the same day as her interview with Hard Copy aired, Blanca Francia was deposed for the Chandler civil case. A day before, on December 14, Francia also spoke to the Los Angeles Times. The article mentions her upcoming Hard Copy interview so it was recorded before December 14. During her testimony at Jackson’s 2005 trial she admitted that she also contemplated selling her story to the National Enquirer. This did not come to be, apparently because the police put her under wraps after her Hard Copy interview”. (source)
To know more about the 93 case, please watch the documentary Square One
1994-2002: During these years, Sneddon and his office wereactively searching around the world to find some “victims”. Jackson’s file at the DA’s office was never closed until LWMJ and the Arvizos came along and Sneddon could investigate and convict Jackson.
1995-1998:Since the Chandlers walked away, the angry and revengeful Gutierrez who knew that Sneddon was after Jackson, came up with a new lie. In December 1994 and through a tabloid reporter, Gutierrez sent a message to Sneddon claiming that there was a videotape convicting Michael. He did not forget Diane Dimond. Soon Dimond, Gutierrez and Sneddon were involved. But there was of course no videotape! Jackson sued all of them:
“The Complaint
Appellant brought suit against Diane Dimond, Stephen Doran, KABC-AM Radio, Inc., Paramount Pictures Corporation, Roger Barkley, Ken Minyard, and Victor Gutierrez for slander.
The first cause of action alleged that on the morning of January 9, 1995, Dimond appeared as a guest on “The Ken and Barkley Show” broadcast by KABC and falsely stated that there was a “renewed” and “ ‘red hot’ ” police investigation in Los Angeles County into new allegations of child molestation by appellant. As set forth in the complaint, “․ Dimond stated that her most reliable source had seen a 27-minute black-and-white videotape of [appellant] molesting a young boy recorded by his security cameras. Dimond reported that the tape was ‘x-rated,’ that she believed her source, and that she was ‘as sure as [she could] possibly be’ that the tape existed. Dimond further stated that ‘the top investigators within the District Attorney’s office’ are looking for the tape, which she stated was taken just before Christmas 1994, and that the tape had a date and time electronically imprinted on it.”
The second cause of action alleged that “on January 9, 1995, Hard Copy, aired a piece in which Dimond stated that there was a ‘renewed police investigation into [appellant’s] relationship with young boys.’ Dimond further stated that investigators from the L.A. District Attorney’s office were working ‘around the clock’ looking for an ‘x-rated video’ of [appellant] allegedly showing him ‘naked and fondling a young boy.’ ” ” [] []
“Sneddon handled the investigation of allegations against appellant on behalf of the Santa Barbara District Attorney’s Office. In December of 1994, he “received information that a video tape existed depicting [appellant] engaged in sexual contact with a minor child.” According to the reports received by Sneddon, Gutierrez had seen the videotape. At around the same time, Dimond contacted Sneddon to inquire about reports that his office was looking for such videotape or investigating new allegations of molestation against appellant. Sneddon informed her that he “was not at liberty to comment upon such reports” but stated that the investigation was “still open․” Although Sneddon did not discuss this with Dimond, at the time of their conversation, a decision had already been made to send Gonterman to look into the existence of the tape and procure it if possible. Gonterman’s investigation led to the conclusion that no such videotape could be located or proven to exist. According to Sneddon’s “recollection and belief” this conclusion was reached sometime after the “Hard Copy” broadcast on January 9.(source)
Michael Jackson sued Paramount Pictures Corporation, Diane Dimond, Stephen Doran and Victor Gutierrez. MJ won the defamation lawsuit in April 1998 but only against Gutierrez because the others were protected by the journalist shield law. Gutierrez fled California and went back to Chili owing 2.7 million dollars to Jackson.
1998- 2003: Far from beloved Los Angeles, “wounded” and without his “crest” as Gutierrez described himself in 1998 after losing the legal battle to MJ – “It was a very big wound for me, this whole case, because they took my crest” – he wondered how he could take revenge on Jackson. One of his options was probably the British media and tabloids. In an interview with El Mercurio on February 28, 1999, Gutierrez said:
– What’s been your most interesting journey in your, uh, profession?
-One for England. When I wrote about Jackson, I was on the front page of the papers for four days in a row, even at the Daily Mirror. I was invited to be a guest star on BBC Channel 4 and I was very struck by a studio full of people applauding me for my journalistic achievement. I was also applauded at Oxford University, where I gave a speech to journalism students. It bothers me that in Chile they say “this guy is crazy” or “this is not journalism”, because the truth is that I have my limits.
Right, the Oxford University!!! And yes, of course, people in Chile are right to question Gutierrez! But what is important to keep from this part is that Gutierrez was in touch with the English tabloids also the mainstream media such as BBC Channel 4.
It has been said by a fan who had done research about Gutierrez and Bashir that these two knew each other in the 80’s when the former was a sport photographer and the latter a sport reporter. Since I do not have a proof to turn this suggestion to a fact, I just say that: during 1993-96, Gutierrez and Bashir could not fail to discover each other after the Princess Diana’s interview and the 93 case against Jackson. Probably in Gutierrez eyes, Bashir was the best person to set up a trap and to lure Jackson into it. But they need to connect to someone close to MJ. This person was Uri Geller.
According to Mr. Mesereau, Bashir approached Geller and could convince him to arrange a meeting with Jackson. In fact, on June 11, 2002 at a dinner in London, Uri Geller introduced Martin Bashir to MJ. And the rest is history. Just a few dates:
From May 2002 to January 2003: Martin Bashir stayed with MJ and interviewed and filmed him during eight months.
February 3, 2003: LWMJ was shown first in the United Kingdom on ITV (as a Tonight special), and in the United States 3 days later on ABC, introduced by Barbara Walters.
Two days after LWMJ was broadcasted in the UK, on February 5, 2003, Gutierrez said in elmercurio.com:
The one who breathes with relief is Victor Gutierrez. “It was a very big wound for me, this whole case, because they took my crest” (Jackson sued him for US $ 2.7 million). “But I am happy for my credibility and that of the children who spoke for my book”, he says, satisfied by the late recognition he will receive now. [] In addition, the Chilean is willing to cooperate if the US justice resumes the investigations against Jackson. Tom Sneddon, the District Attorney after the case denounced by the boy Jordan Chandler in 1993 (and registered by Gutierrez), declared that he would watch the documentary with great interest. Living with Michael Jackson will be broadcast this Friday in the US and Sneddon hopes that after this, new allegations will occur.
The day that LWMJ was broadcasted in the US, on February 6, 2003, Gutierrez said to elsalvador.com:
The journalist commented that the making of the documentary plays in his favor, since it increases his credibility -because it was a “serious work” – and that of the children who spoke for his book.
Again on November 20, 2003 to elmercurio.com:
In Chile, the journalist Víctor Gutiérrez, who lost litigation with the singer for the book Michael Jackson was my lover, says: I’ve been trying to explain this story for 10 years, which among journalists, police and prosecutors (in the US) is something that is known. It is time for the truth to be known. Andit is also a vindication to my work. The publication, which is discontinued, yesterday was transacted on the Amazon.com site to US $ 2,475. Beyond the data, Gutiérrez believes that justice is finally done. (Gutierrez was not sued for his filthy book but for the non-existent videotape as we saw above).
November 18, 2003: An arrest warrant is issued for Michael Jackson based on Gavin Arvizo’s allegations.
On November 20, 2003, Gutierrez said to elmercurio.com:
In Chile, journalist Víctor Gutierrez says that a Latino childwould be the victim of the singer… The journalist from Chilevisión and Plan B, the first to link politicians with the Spiniak network in Chile, said: the minor who denounced the singer is a Latino boy who appears in the documentary Living with Michael Jackson, who caused a commotion in February.
March-April, 2004: A Grand Jury hears the prosecution’s side of the story (without the defense being present and without the prosecution’s witnesses being cross-examined) and indicts Jackson on April 21, 2004.
February 26, 2004: Martin Bashir was approached by a US broadcaster in a deal worth $1m (£530,000) a year. Bashir and James Goldston his co-worker in LWMJ joined ABC news in summer of 2004.
In 2004, Victor Gutierrez was hired by NBC to work on Arvizo case with a monthly salary $ 25 000. In December 2004, ABC asked him to work with Martin Bashir as his advisor.
In elmercurio.com on March 31, 2005:
A month ago Chilean journalist Victor Gutierrez began his mornings attending the court where Michael Jackson is sitting in the dock. Go to the star every day. Presence the case lives and direct in Santa Maria, California. The musician’s lawyer knows him: he has it between his eyes. Also the prosecutor who has been told that much of his research is based on Chilean publications.
We have discussed the collaboration between Bashir and Gutierrez during the 2005 trial in the 3 parts of the blog called Words, facts and thoughts. In part 3, we also talked how Gutierrez was probably coaching indirectly the Arvizos. An excerpt from this blog:
“Biography – thoughts – part 2
Victor Gutierrez knew for sure that in hour of need he could always rely on his friends in the Latin-American community. That was “his community” and he knew that it would not fail him. Far from LA as he lived in Chile at that time, he wanted to find a new “victim”. We said in the part 1 of this biography – scenario, the new “victim” had to be able to get close to MJ.
Did Gutierrez’ friends in El Monte saw the ad in the newspaper Mid Valley News About Gavin and his family in October 2000 and sent a word to Victor? Did Gutierrez find the family being a perfect candidate? Their history with J.C. Penney, the fact that they were celebrity stalkers and the child was very sick, all these “qualifications” were probably enough for Gutierrez. Also, Gavin had already asked to meet MJ in July 19, 2000. The family met Jackson in August 27, 2000.
The hitch was that Gutierrez lived far from LA and could not “advise” the Arvizos like he did with Evan Chandler in 92-93. He had to depend on Tom Sneddon and his office and his friends and allies.[] []
In an interview, Aphrodite Jones talks about how Martin Bashir suggested that a kid should come to Neverland while he would shoot him and MJ together. Jackson wanted to choose between David, a child who was burn by his father and Gavin Arvizo. Martin Bashir chose Gavin! And we know how he choreographed the scene.
Why did Martin Bashir choose Gavin Arvizo? Probably, for the same reason that he chose Victor Gutierrez as his assistant in 2004 when he covered the trial for ABC!”
Surely, when ABC hired Bashir to cover the 2005 trial, they gave him a free hand to hire himself his assistants. And who was better than his pal Gutierrez! In fact, together they made a filthy “documentary” about MJ (Michael Jackson’s Secret World) – which was inspired heavily from Gutierrez’s NAMBLA book and could be seen as one of the sources of Leaving Neverland – that was broadcasted during the jury deliberation. Also, Bashir did a nasty interview with Corey Feldman exactly at that time. Obviously, they wanted to influence the jury.
In fact, “Leaving Neverland” wants to echo “Living with Michael Jackson”! It wants to be LWMJ’s complementary part, a second act! We know that after the broadcast of LN, Dan Reed contacted Martin Bashir. A while ago, Bashir was among Reed’s follower on Twitter!
To tell the truth, the Media love Michael Jackson and his “cases”. These are their livelihood and more, their rent-money, the house, the car … they will buy, their career,…! And they want to keep it that way forever.
Reed who had already “saved” the world from “the terrorists” and “the pedophiles” (see this blog) he was neither famous nor rich despite all these “efforts”. After a conversation with his Channel 4-buddies, he realized that he could take from where Gutierrez and Bashir had left in June 2005, put his name on Google and show to the high-ranking Jackson-haters that he is as good as Gutierrez, Bashir, etc. Having already a scenario – Gutierrez’s book – and Bashir’s “documentary” and liars and perjurers like the Safechucks & the Robsons, the task looked easy especially in the MeToo era! But the facts have shown otherwise: LN is a big failure. Like Robson and Safechuck’s lawsuits, LN belongs to dustbin of history.
At last, after 25 years, Martin Bashir’s deceitful and unethical methods towards Princess Diana were revealed in a report conducted by Lord Dyson (here is the link to the report http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/reports/reports/dyson-report-20-may-21.pdf). BBC and his director-general Tim Davie – who still thinks that BBC has “high standards of integrity and transparency” (REALLY!) – have written “full and unconditional” apologies to Diana’s sons Prince William and Prince Harry, Prince Charles and Diana’s brother Earl Spencer.
Prince William’s statement:
Prince William has heavily criticised the BBC, saying its failures contributed to Princess Diana's "fear, paranoia and isolation" in her final yearshttps://t.co/3AnmbpJnhGpic.twitter.com/tLlNKdex65
Martin Bashir has left his job only a few days ago! The BBC said that Bashir left his position due to health issues! REALLY! What a coincidence! Bashir is proven liar and then suddenly he gets sick and disappears!
Martin Bashir did the same treachery towards Michael Jackson. He has ruined the life of two beloved celebrities and that has undoubtedly contributed to their untimely deaths. When will Bashir, ITV and other mainstream media apologize to Michael Jackson and his children?
In fact, it is about 20 years that MJ fans have revealed Martin Bashir’s unethical methods towards Princess Diana and Michael Jackson (see our coming blog on June 13th).
Michael Jackson on Martin Bashir after the release of Living with Michael Jackson treachery:
“Today I feel more betrayed than perhaps ever before; that someone who had got to know my children, my staff and me, whom I let into my heart and told the truth, could then sacrifice the trust I placed in him and produce this terrible and unfair programme.”
"I think now the world is seeing how unethical Martin Bashir can be"
Michael Jackson's nephew @tajjackson3 talks about his call for an investigation into his uncle's notorious documentary with disgraced reporter Martin Bashir. pic.twitter.com/lyTjXQD1iO
"Bashir refused to answer the question of how MJ signed the interview agreement w/ him or if an attorney was present. The fact is MB forged MJ's signature to obtain the interview—claiming it was MJ's signature in order to obtain what would become a fraudulently edited interview." pic.twitter.com/oS00osIrLn
— TSCM – MJ Case Facts and Commentary (@MJJRepository) May 24, 2021
In an online chat Bashir held in 2003, he defended all two hours of LWMJ as a "factual documentary" and how "in our audience ratings, barely no-one left the programme."
Fro Bashir/ITV/ABC it all came down to sensational ratings. Like a certain other filmmaker in recent years. pic.twitter.com/woxjDdqi0v
— TSCM – MJ Case Facts and Commentary (@MJJRepository) May 24, 2021
EVVY: Bashir was not going to let MJ have the tapes, a proper opportunity to view the film or exercise of final approval.
Bashir was only to offer a preview 1 day before it aired.
Bashir told Evvy he spoke to MJ on a daily basis. In fact Evvy & MJ were unable to ever reach him. pic.twitter.com/ZDuvQ5xMNR
— TSCM – MJ Case Facts and Commentary (@MJJRepository) May 24, 2021
While Martin Bashir publicly brags about the contracts MJ allegedly signed, in private he pretended they weren't important.
EVVY: Bashir told me he wasn't going to pay any attention to the documents & would allow MJ to edit the film.
— TSCM – MJ Case Facts and Commentary (@MJJRepository) May 24, 2021
“#MartinBashir's manipulated footage & unethical journalism is one of the main reasons my uncle is not here today—shame on those who rewarded him." -Taj
"He used MJ’s trust & friendship w/ Diana to get the interview, manipulated MJ throughout…" -Titohttps://t.co/5bL8KUPuHx
— TSCM – MJ Case Facts and Commentary (@MJJRepository) May 24, 2021
Prince Jackson is joining the Michael Jackson Estate
From the MJ Estate’s executors asking the Court which supervises the Estate:
[] “The managers believe it would be in the best interest of the Estate and the MJJ Business for Michael Jackson’s son, Prince, to be employed by the Estate and/or one of its entities as a consultant on certain designated projects.” []
“Therefore, Petitioners seek this Court’s order authorizing them to employ Prince as a consultant on such terms and for such purposes as shall be agreed upon by the Managers and Prince.”
Congratulations Prince Jackson!
Mr. Tom Mesereau has joined the MJ Estate Legal Team
Mr. Mesereau will help the MJ Estate in their lawsuit against HBO.
“Adding Mesereau is a sensational idea because he put Wade Robson, one of the main subjects of the Dan Reed film, on the stand as a defense witness to support Jackson in the 2005 trial. If Robson testifies in the arbitration, which seems likely, he would be facing Mesereau in a much different way this time. []
At the heart of the Jackson estate’s suit against HBO is an agreement between the cabler and Jackson dating back to 1992 in which HBO promised never to besmirch the singer. It was part of a deal for a concert film. HBO tried to get away with breaking the agreement but the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the Jackson estate.
The court said: “The contract contained a broad arbitration clause that covers claims that HBO disparaged Jackson in violation of ongoing confidentiality obligations. We may only identify whether the parties agreed to arbitrate such claims; it is for the arbitrator to decide whether those claims are meritorious.”
The arbitrators are being chosen now, and the actual process should begin within the next month []
Michael Jackson Estate wins against the IRS
After several years of legal battle, on Monday May 5, 2021, Judge Mark Holmes ruled for the MJ Estate:
“A U.S. tax court has handed a major victory to the estate of Michael Jackson in a years-long battle, finding that the IRS wildly inflated the value at the time of his death of Jackson’s assets and image, leading to an estate tax bill for his heirs that was far too high.
The IRS had put the value of three disputed aspects of Jackson’s worth at the time of his 2009 death at about $482 million. In his decision issued Monday, Judge Mark Holmes put that figure at $111 million, far closer to the estate’s own estimates.
The estate’s executors said it was a huge and unambiguous victory for Jackson’s children.
“We’re pleased,” co-executor John Branca told The Associated Press on Tuesday. “We always try to do the right thing. We tried from the beginning to follow the IRS rules and regulations, and relied on the best experts possible. It’s unfortunate that we were forced to litigate to protect ourselves.” []
The tax fight had led to a bill of about $700 million after an audit of the 2013 taxes on the estate, whose heirs are Jackson’s mother and three children, about $200 million of it a penalty for underpaying.
A new tax bill will now be calculated using Holmes’ figures, and it will include no penalties.[]
“We’re at an absolute turning point,” Branca said. “I think people have come to realize that Michael was innocent of any charges and unable to protect himself. We’ve got a wonderful Broadway play coming, we’ll be reopening our Cirque du Soleil show soon and we’ve got some surprises coming.”[] Source
***
Tweets from KarmousaG and MJJRepository about Robson and Safechuck cases
Court on Monday was interesting.We are happy with the outcome .Dan Reed was in court filming. So both sides go their chance to film. This was a very short hearing lasting about 6 minutes.
The judge makes a tentative ruling but gives the other side a chance to explain why the court made a mistake. If the arguments are valid then the court could change their ruling .The Judge asked if everyone had read the tentative.
The estate said they agreed with the tentative. Finaldi then says that everything we have to say regarding motion for summary judgement has been briefed. The morning papers contain the facts and evidence needed to make a forest decision and read the tentative.
Finaldi continues the decision sets a dangerous precedent leaving 1000s of children vulnerable to sexual abuse by people in power within corporations in the state of California. The courts ignores evidence and misinterprets legal precedent and is wrong across the board.
Finialldi continues by saying that judge Beckloff adapted the same suffered analysis and is incorrect. He continues to say it will become an issue for the court of appeals and the Supreme Court.The judge asks Finaldi if he would like to go over specifics or mistakes he believes the court made. Finaldi says that they have been comprehensive and with 100s of pages of documents everything we have to say we have already said.
Jonathan Steinsapir the estate lawyer tells the Judge they had a causation for all 6 causes of action and the way the tentative is set up only notes it with respect to negligence claims. He wanted to confirm the judge recognized the issue raised.and the Judge says I do.Jon says they submit on the tentative and the Judge then says to Finaldi that the courts decision doesn’t open the door to endangering 1000”s of children. Since Micheal Jackson passed away their only recourse is to go after and sue the entities. Judge continues the court has concluded that despite what you submitted the ruling is a matter of law and the companies structure and control. Or lack of control over Micheal Jackson. Makes it impossible to have this go to trial.Ju
dge continues that there’s a difference in what your saying Mr. Finaldi and how the court ruled. He says I’m not opening the door to thousands of children being abused it’s about factual limitations and lack of control over entities..Judge continues your trying to hold companies liable for conduct of someone who passed away. Finaldi says he understands the issue but that he’s been doing this his whole career and disagrees. The Ja judge then says the tentative will be the final ruling.
On Monday April 26th, the Los Angeles Superior Court presided by Judge Mark A. Young dismissed again Wade Robson claims against corporations owned by Michael Jackson and the Estate of Michael Jackson.
Mr. Steinsapir, the Estate’s lawyer said:
“As of today, a summary judgment AGAINST Wade Robson has been granted three different times by two different judges of the Superior Court.
Wade Robson has spent the last 8 years pursuing frivolous claims in different lawsuits against Michael Jackson’s estate and companies associated with it. Robson has taken nearly three dozen depositions and inspected and presented hundreds of thousands of documents trying to prove his claims, yet a Judge has once again ruled that Robson’s claims have no merit whatsoever, that no trial is necessary and that his latest case is dismissed.”
WADE ROBSON CASE UPDATE: THE FINAL ORDER
"After hearing argument from counsel, the Court adopted its tentative ruling as its final ruling & therefore GRANTED the motion for summary judgment in favor of Defendants and AGAINST Plaintiff."https://t.co/VcSXH7ZHri
This is an excellent thread published by MJJRepository on Twitter demonstrating one more time how the media have manipulated the truth and spread willingly lies about Michael Jackson. We have not ask MJJR for permission to post the thread. We hope this is okay. The source is here
THREAD:
Just as Dan spliced and edited recordings of the Hawaii tape and Geragos' press conference to remove context and create an alternate reality, similar deceit occurred in 2005 with media broadcasts of "voicemail" by two men seeking millions from MJ, with a shared attorney.
GMA Hype: "MJ like you've never heard before!"
First off, a clip implying MJ would guilt-beg associates for his demands: "please, please, please never let me down. I really like you, I love you."
They omitted 80% of the call—MJ was discussing charity & business collaborations.
Next up, a no-context clip in which MJ appears to demand Schaffel give him 7 million dollars ASAP.
They omitted 80% of the message—MJ spoke of a big multi-million dollar project & saw something he wanted to get. The money he speaks of was part of MJ's own associated accounts.
Then GMA runs a clip of MJ asking Marc for cash ("fries"): "It's big money overseas." No context, suggests an offshore scheme.
They omitted 83% of the call—MJ was speaking of enhancing a tape and getting the film to Europe to make it global. Schaffel managed the funds for WMCIG.
Grand finale, enter Dieter's clip heard round the world: "The Jews do it on purpose!"
Wait a minute! The extended clip quietly released by Dieter many years later is entirely different: "SO MANY PEOPLE when they see talent…THEY suck them like leeches…THEY do it on purpose."
The altered GMA clip was mass-promoted to condemn MJ as anti-Semite for more than 15 years. A 2019 headline reads: "MJ was a vile anti-Semite who branded Jews leeches."
In Dieter's 300-page book, this call is described very endearingly and presented totally differently than GMA.
The impact of that altered GMA clip was severe. Advocacy groups & ADL were outraged. He lost fans, too.
The edits weren't incidental:
"They suck…they're like leeches."
"The Jews do it on purpose."
VS.
"So many people…They suck them like leeches."
"They do it on purpose."
These same manipulation tactics were used with the faxes and recordings in LN. Correspondence was chopped off, rearranged and omitted to eliminate context and invent a new narrative that paints innocuous exchanges as sinister.
Like making MJ seem fixated on James in Hawaii tape.
"How do we know the extended Dieter clip isn't the fake one?!" -Guilters, probably.
The fact that the same supposed audio has been released in 2 strikingly different arrangements by the same person is the real story.
(The 2005 version was in promotion of a $64,000,000 lawsuit.)
This type of manipulated content—used as an emotional or financial ploy—is inexcusable, whether done by an editor or the owner.
Marc & Dieter knew what GMA aired, and did nothing to correct the record.
Wade & James knew what LN presented, and did nothing to correct the record.
Marc & Dieter had more than 30 recorded voicemails of MJ.
GMA was only interested using the most sensational bits of them all, which they happily obliged. To create controversy more than 80% of each clip was removed and spliced as needed.
Nobody batted an eye—no accountability.
"But what about the media airing edited clips of Evan Chandler?!" -Guilters, probably.
We have a complete transcript of the call. The aired portions are highlighted. The surrounding context is in line with the depiction. The transcript actually paints Evan in much worse light.
This has always been the guilter dilemma. Every "explosive claim" crumbles under any amount of scrutiny.
Fabricated materials, witnesses who collected $20k-$100k per story and/or sought millions from MJ, hoax documents and media manipulation to construct their fictional reality.
When I was little, I used to lie on my back in the grass at night. I began to tell one star from another and wished that one of them could be mine, like an imaginary friend.
First I picked the Pole Star, because it is the easiest for a child to find, once you know that the Big Dipper is about to catch it. But I wanted my star to be a moving star, and not such a constant one. Besides, the sailors at sea would be lost without the Pole Star to guide them.
Next I picked out two special stars in the heart of the Swan. All the other stars looked white but these were bright blue and gold. They reminded me of twin jewels, but before I could choose, I stopped. They belonged to each other, and it wouldn’t be fair to take just one.
Orion’s belt caught my eye for a moment, but I’m not a hunter. I had better leave the Dog Star alone, too, with its nose pressed to the celestial trail and its tail thumping the sky.
Last of all I turned to my favorites, the Seven Sisters. To me they were like elegant ladies getting ready for a ball, wrapped in a gossamer blue cloud. But who has the heart to tear seven sisters apart?
My game taught me a lot about the night sky, but I was growing up. The whole idea of having my own star faded, and it was hard to remember if I had ever chosen one in the end.
People began to tell me that the word “star” meant something quite different. I half believed them, then one night I was tossing in bed, hurt and worried. My heart felt heavy with troubles. Stumbling to my feet, I looked out the window. Thick clouds masked the midnight sky. No stars!
I trembled to think of a world without stars. No guide for the sailor to trust at sea, no jewels to dazzle our sense of beauty, no hunter pointing to the next horizon, no lovely ladies trailing perfume to heaven’s ballroom. But all around the globe, the air is so dirty and the lights from the cities are so bright that for some people few stars can be seen anymore.
A generation of children may grow up seeing a blank sky and asking, “Did there used to be stars there?”
Let’s give them back the sky and let’s do it now before it’s too late.
I’m going to search for my star until I find it. It’s hidden in the drawer of innocence, wrapped in a scarf of wonder. I’ll need a map to tell me which hole it should fill, and that will be a small one. But there are nearly five billion of us on earth, and we all need the sky.
Find your star and throw it up to heaven. You still have it, don’t you?
Dancing the Dream, Michael Jackson
Magic
My idea of magic doesn’t have much to do with stage tricks and illusions. The whole world abounds in magic.
When a whale plunges out of the sea like a newborn mountain, you gasp in unexpected delight. What magic!
But a toddler who sees his first tadpole flashing in a mud puddle feels the same thrill. Wonder fills his heart, because he has glimpsed for an instant the playfulness of life.
When I see the clouds whisked away from a snow-capped peak, I feel like shouting, “Bravo!”
Nature, the best of all magicians, has delivered another thrill. She has exposed the real illusion, our inability to be amazed by her wonders.
Every time the sun rises, Nature is repeating one command: “Behold!” Her magic is infinitely lavish, and in return all we have to do is appreciate it. What delight!
Nature must feel when she makes stars out of swirling gas and empty space. She flings them like spangles from a velvet cape, a billion reasons for us to awaken in pure joy.
When we open our hearts and appreciate all she has given us, Nature finds her reward. The sound of applause rolls across the universe, and she bows.
BREAKING: HBO has LOST their appeal with the Michael Jackson Estate. The case will now go back to LA Superior Court for an arbitrator to decide whether the case should move forward. A HUGE victory for Michael Jackson and his Estate. https://t.co/GMwaCnyzWP
— andjustice4some – Michael Jackson FAN account (@andjustice4some) December 14, 2020
Steinsapir's expression to HBO's attorney claiming "as to the presumption, the presumption [of requiring arbitration] here faded like a dying comet over 28 years…" is priceless.
A puzzled expression he uses a few times throughout the arguments from HBO.
— TSCM – MJ Case Facts and Commentary (@MJJRepository) November 19, 2020
A great moment of oral arguments came when Steinsapir used many pointed examples to illustrate the absurdity of arguing that non-disparagement clauses shouldn't matter if the connection of the disparagement and original agreement aren't materially related topics.
— TSCM – MJ Case Facts and Commentary (@MJJRepository) November 19, 2020
via @LeslieKMercer1 If you missed the #MJEstatevHBO final hearing before it goes to an appeal decision, here is the new link. Big thanks to Leslie for her help. https://t.co/mThydX3Wam
— andjustice4some – Michael Jackson FAN account (@andjustice4some) November 20, 2020
Reading some tweets and just want to clarify that the decision on the #MJEstatevHBO case will not be made tomorrow. Final oral arguments (15 minutes for each side) and then judges will make decision most likely in early 2021.
BREAKING: The demurrer in Safechuck’s case has been SUSTAINED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND on ALL CAUSES OF ACTION. MJ’s side has won in their court pleadings.
The judge also moved Finaldi’s “motion for reconsideration” re: Spence/Fox/Chandler/Marks to Dec. 4. Finaldi had reserved Mar-Apr for these motions. Pending the resolution, he still owes Spence/Fox $6,270—not to be confused with the $9,200 awarded for his other failed motion.
***
James Safechuck’s demurrer ruling on Friday October 16th
So court was interesting on Friday. As James and his wife were there. Larry Nimmer was also filming. Dan Reed was also present in the court filming.
Judge asked everyone if they have read his tentative. Estate goes first and agrees with the judges tentative. They talk about special relationships and fiduciary duty. he sites some cases.
Judge asks John S. If he feels these issues have been combined when should be looked at separate. John S says Yes . Judge asks there’s an allegation that the companies were created for mentoring youth does the court take it as truth?
Jonathon Steainsapir says no. Cause there are no facts to allege that MJ could and should have fired himself. Judge asks if they should take the allegation that companies were thee to mentor youth in entertainment as true.
John S says no because no facts support it. The idea that Mj could retain himself and supervise himself is not negligence law. We are only here cause Mj is dead. They would be going after him and if they win a judgment then will go after him and his companies.
Finaldi adds nothing new to argument saying Companies should have protected kids and MJ can fire himself. Judge says but MJ Ventures wasn’t created till 93 and plaintiff (James )alleged abuse ended in 92 so even if I side with you would t the companies have had to be created?
Finaldi says No because as long as the abuse occurred during that time of engaging in activities involving kids that is our position. Judge says he won’t rule today. And the court will take it under submission.
Next up Wade Ve Doe Finaldi rehashes the same claims he argued last time. He is mad that the court has ordered him to pay. Talks again about McIsaac and how he felt she was coaching Leroy and how he called him a docubbag and an ambulance chaser. I want court to see my evidence.
Judge tell him he understands Finaldi”s position but he calls it like he sees it and has an obligation to bring it up to holding lawyers accountable for their actions and when he sees unprofessional conduct.and says make no apology even if you are mad. You didn’t meet andconfer properly and brought an unsuccessful motion and that’s why the court imposed a fine. Judge continued your party conduct will not be tolerated and that doesn’t violate your right for due process.
Finaldi says it’s important cause the daily journal wrote about me and it’s affecting my business. I suspended the deposition but he called me a Douchebag. Judge says you were off the record. Finaldi then says well if I was wrong why would they allow Branca to sit for adeposition. Judge says I’m gonna Impose you pay 9200 dollars and you have 30 days to pay it.
Sitting in that court room seeing James there and thinking how lucky he was that he got to hang out with Mj yet here we are 11 years after his death and your suing him for money. Disgusting. When he noticed the cameras rolled he looked like a sad puppy.
We need to see whathappens next and how the judge will rule.When court ended Dan Reed ran out of the court room so fast. Him and his assistant hightailed it out of there. Maybe something to do with their subpoena last time. Which I witnessed and had no idea and thought he was getting Transcripts early and thought to myself hey No fair I want them to why does he get them. Only after this week did I realize what a historical moment t I witnessed that saw Dan Reed getting a subpoena.
Again from here it’s a waiting game. I did get to chat with Larry and tell him how much I enjoyed his film and how that inspired me to look further into the MJ case. I’ll try and answer any questions you have about that day.
Q-Thank you for the information. So bottom line is, Finaldi made no new argument.
A-No new argument. The judge gave him a few opportunities to give him new information he kept saying how their facts are all there and that Micheal could fire himself.
Q- Does that means James lost?
A-No it’s still a long road. We need to see how the judge will rule this week in regards to the demurrer.
¨ ¨ ¨
In short, James Safechuck has 6 causes of action. Out of these 6 causes, 2 of them were sustained on demurrer. These 2 were considered by the judge to either be irrelevant or invalid. Then there are 4 left. In the tentative (not final) ruling, the judge said that the other 4 cases were not strong enough to go ahead. Judge said that Finaldi could argue why they should go ahead. But Finaldi added nothing new. This week, the judge will definitely rule.
Here you are the court document, thanks to mjjr.net.
In karmousaG ‘s notes, sanctions against Vince Finaldi were mentioned. Here you are more information about this matter.
Hearing on October 16, 2020 Re sanctions against Vince Finaldi
Because of his abusive and wildly inappropriate conduct during the depositions especially during Leroy Wahly deposition that you find here, Vince Finaldi the lawyer of Robson and Safechuck was sanctioned with $9200 payable to MJ Estate within 30 days. Please, read the ruling below. Thanks to mjjr.net
As we read above, in karmousaG ‘s notes, Larry Nimmer was at the court and filmed the session. In fact, Larry Nimmer, the producer of The Untold Story of Neverland, has applied for and received permission to film the court proceedings in the same manner that Dan Reed has. If you do not know who Larry Nimmer is, watch this video.
***
Again, as we read in karmousaG ‘s notes, Dan Reed got a subpoena!
MJ Estate Brief re Dan Reed and the recording in the courtroom
On Sept. 21, 2020, Michael Jackson Estate served subpoenas on Dan Reed and Amos Pictures to “personally appear for deposition and produce documents related to ‘Leaving Neverland’ and to the follow-up film currently in production.”
The MJ Estate has requested through subpoena: 1- All raw footage of Wade, Joy, Chantal, Amanda, Shane, Lorraine (inc. outtakes) 2- All contracts and releases signed by parties – All documents evidencing payments to any parties directly or indirectly including to attorneys) 3- All communications (or documents evidencing communications) with Wade or his family or any others and/or their representatives. 4- All communications between Dan Reed and anyone he ever requested or sought interviews for.5- All communications explaining “photos, audio clips, video clips, letters, faxes, gifts, mementos, memorabilia” supplied. 6- All communications that “relate to the need to re-shoot, re-create, re-stage” any interview.
The MJ Estate is simultaneously filing international subpoenas that make similar requests via Hague Convention procedures.
On the other hand, Dan Reed’s lawyer, Jeffery Holmes, has filled a motion to quash the subpoenas (you find it here). He argues that Dan Reed is not a resident of the USA and therefore these US-based subpoena requests should be quashed. Also, Reed himself did a declaration in support of his lawyer’s motion to quash MJ Estate two subpoenas. You find the document here.
After two meetings between the Estate’s lawyer and Dan Reed’s lawyer , the Estate offered to (at least with respect to the US-based subpoenas) limit the subpoenas to all of the UNPUBLISHED footage of the plaintiffs and to depose Reed and Amos Pictures only about that footage. We will know more soon.
Here you are several excerpts from the Estate’s brief, thanks to mjjr.net:
The oral arguments for the case will be heard on 11/19/20 in Pasadena. This is the final step before a decision will be made about HBO’s appeal. Decision should be made by early 2021. (source)
The transcripts from the hearing between the MJ Estate and HBO on September 19, 2019 here.
***
Estate’s Renewed Demurrer Motion in Safechuck’s Case (Source)
THREAD: Estate’s Renewed Demurrer Motion in Safechuck’s Case
This week, MJ’s team has filed the anticipated demurrer motion in Safechuck’s case, refreshing claims that the prior judge & appellate never ruled on.
A tentative in-person hearing on this demurer will be Oct 16 2020.
The estate argues JS’ claims are fatally defective—”No amendment can cure these defects.”
1. Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress 2. Negligence 3. Negligent Supervision 4. Negligent Retention/Hiring 5. Negligent Failure to Train, Warn, Educate 6. Breach of Fiduciary Duty
The estate summarizes how James never bothered appealing the original dismissal against the estate.
Instead, James (like Wade) shifted their financially motivated claims by “artfully attempting to recharacterize the alleged misconduct as ‘negligence’ of the two corporations.”
The estate contends that James’ allegations are “rife with easily proven falsehoods” and refers to the claims as “legal fiction” but acknowledges that the Court, in deciding the demurrer, has to treat the pleadings as if undisputed to determine the legal substance of the causes.
The estate rightfully points out how the companies cannot be directly liable for any alleged molestation.
Therefore, Wade/James (after Finaldi took over) withdrew the molestation claims in favor of “failure to protect” as a way to shoe-in a hopeful payout from the companies.
The estate explains that the negligence causes all fail because no facts establish the corporations had duty to protect, given existing legal precedent, why they befriended MJ, and especially when the alleged conduct had nothing to do with the corporations (solely owned by MJ).
Another argument from Safechuck (and one attempted by Finaldi in almost every failed depo) is that the companies were supposed to be “mandatory reporters.”
Safechuck provided no supporting facts that the corporations or staff were child care custodians or directly supervised MJ.
Continuing, the estate argues that the “negligent supervision & negligent hiring” is also without merit.
The corporations obviously “did not hire, retain, or supervise MJ—their owner, president, sole shareholder, and sole reason for existence.”
Another preposterous claim by JS.
Regarding “Negligent Failure to Train, Warn, or Educate,” the estate again explains that it lacks any legal basis or foundation, even using Finaldi’s own filings to sell the point.
The companies were established to conduct MJ’s music business, not to train or educate families.
Another claim is for “Intentional Infliction of emotional distress.” (Finaldi originally hinted at removing this when he removed the molestation claims.)
James fails to support any of this, especially how the companies supposedly conducted “extreme & outrageous conduct.”
Finally, the estate contends that Safechuck has no grounds to allege that the corporations now being sued were his fiduciaries.
Even stretching it to an “employer” relationship would fall flat, since James has no evidence of any employment in 1988-1992 with MJ or his companies.
In the footnotes the estate includes:
– Reference to James’ 2nd amended complaint where negligent supervision was dismissed. JS admits in 3rd complaint the corporations were “incapable of supervising” him.
– Why Pamela L. v. Farmer is misplaced—very different circumstances.
both these incredible advocates provide us with information without them I wouldn’t know where to go to hear the cases.
As you guys know Thursday was about the pending motions to be talked about I have to say that this was the best hearing I’ve attended. If it was a film it would have you on an emotional roller coaster Intrigue, law drama, comedic moments, sadness, suffering, empathy and justice.
Most of all your heart breaks for the kind human being who is being accused of the most heinous crime known to man and he is not here to defend himself, who in his lifetime was vindicated and cleared.
Words that came up a lot meet and confer, deposition and objections to compound questions and matters of privacy for non party witnesses who want nothing to do with plaintiffs Wade and James.
I learned that when Lawyers end depositions where the witness is hostile there is a procedure and if not followed the law determines it is concluded or another one can be rescheduled. I will break this down in three threads just cause there is so much.
First to be talked about was the Complaint Finaldi had about the deposition of Leroy Whaley and his attorney Mc Isaac. The court had presented tentatives that all parties read before. Finaldi starts talking about the meet and confer that attorneys usually do with depositions.
Finaldi spoke first giving his side and then Mc Isaac will defend her side and Jonathon Steinsapir will also speak Finaldi now speaks and complains about how the meet and confer didn’t go well and that she took long time to-get back to him.
He claims she failed to meet in good faith and that failure to meet and confer in good faith is an abuse of the discovery process. So the court should impose sanctions on her. If you haven’t read Whaley’s deposition I highly recommend it.
Finaldi talks about rules of deposition and that parties are protected from from annoyance and embarrassment and if oppression occurs it’s oppressive to his clients and himself. Judge tell him he’s lumping McIsaac and witness together and needs to distinguish that it’s separate.
He says he took a deposition on Saturday to accommodate Leroy paying for a hotel room and conference room. Says he’s taking many depositions but that behavior is in excusable and the judge agrees. With Finaldi here. Finaldi talking now he says Leroy called him a douche bag and Mc Isaac said try not to swear. Mr Whaley continued and called me an ambulance chaser.He said can we continue on the record and say he’s a douchebag.
Judge says will he may have thought you left the room. ( That made me laugh}. Finaldi said it was in front of me he said that and I find McIsaac served to encorage his behavior and I have examples. Finaldi gives examples and the judge tell him don’t take things out of context.
I would say that if Mr. Whaley called you a douxhebag earlier and not after the hearing was terminated then and If Mc Isaac hadn’t said anything then yes that’s cause to be reprimanded.
So he thought you left the room and he wasn’t sure you were there. {Again I laughed here too} Finaldi She was smiling this is abusive behavior and she was encouraging him. He read an La civility law about depositions. Judge says I’m gonna assume u two have history together and may have bled over to this one. After reading the whole transcript I find her transgressions minor. Your speaking objections aren’t proportional and your taking it out of context.
The judge repeated this point a few times throughout the exchange and you to have lived together and been on numerous cases Finaldi tells the judge we didn’t live together. Judge let’s out a laugh and says I didn’t mean that literally. His face had an expression where it was like don’t you understand sarcasm. Finaldi said that McIsaac behavior was harassing to to him and his clients as he complains more to the Judge who keot saying don’t take it out of context when he called you a douchebag he thought you left the room. Finaldi says she was enflaming him, affecting his Whaley’s, testimony trying to get a rise out of me.
Again judge says your reaction is not in proportion to it Finaldi says I need to talk to him about the nude photo it’s a salient piece of evidence. She kept objecting and Whaley said the police lied to him Finaldi said I tried to deescalate the situation and judge says doesn’t sound like you were deescalating. Judge then agrees with Mc Isaac about her objections to some of his questions did you speak to him on the phone, were you in a car with Micheal Jackson again back and forth. He continues she was coaching him, she cut me off, she was giving him clues.
Judge then says cutting you off is not Indicative of anything, how was she coaching him and what clues did she give him? Finaldi says well if it alters his testimony I have a right to speak to him.
Finaldi wanted to give more examples taking long pauses to find his examples. judge we don’t need to read that. Finaldi said I gave her a warning to sanction her. Judge reads the law to him and tells Finaldi he didn’t follow the proper procedure and Finaldi says I don’t think I had to do that that that his moving to Sanction that his moving to Sanction would be sufficient.
Judge tells Finaldi that he finds lack of civility and gender bias with his behavior. He told him you belittled her experience and her appearance and I would not be doing my job if I don’t warn you if I see this kind of behavior. Finaldi says he takes offense to this cause he works with many women and takes on many women’s abuse cases. Judge said I’m not accusing you but there are signs of behavior and the way you treated opposing council is wrong.
McIsaac now speaks I wasn’t smiling I apologize if i overstepped but I did try and calm things down. I can protect myself against Finaldi I’ve done this for 20 years but my client cnt. He has never been deposed and I’m protecting him so yes I will object to his questions that are designed to get a witness who doesn’t know better to make statements that weren’t established. He and his mother are accused of procuring children for MJ and her little boy. She mentions Manly Finaldi partner at Blanca Francia deposition. Part 2 in next thread.
She mentions Manly Finaldi partner at Blanca Francia deposition. He called her red in the face and that she only said that to him cause he began to belittle her too. I didn’t want to go off the record because he works and has 4 kids but Finaldi clearly wanted to leave.
Jonathon Steinsapir: talks about the meet and confer and explains their side. It’s one thing to want to terminate a deposition but attacks on opposing counsel are another. In the excerpt he accuses our Law firm to the tune of serial child rapists. You don’t get anything done.
if you accuse people like that. At the Francia deposition yes I called him sexist and I stand by that 100 percent. It’s one thing to accuse MJ of this he is deceased and can’t defend himself he was a public figure and dealt with this in life but for plaintiffs Wade and James
nd Finaldi to accuse Jodi Levine of being a child procurer and accused her publicly by name of being the worst human with intent to turn them over to Mj and her own son explains why they are angry and explains Whaley’s deposition but it doesn’t excuse it. She has lupus
they don’t have money they aren’t white collar. If your comfortable accusing a woman of the worst crime then I find it rich that you dish it out but can’t take it . Finaldi I didn’t say their firm were child rapists judge says will you essentially did say that and we don’t need to go point by point. Jonathon Steinsapir: We want to litigate this case on merit and we want the request to be awarded our cost in legal fees. Finaldi took a jab at Weitzman and also claimed Jodi Levine called Mj a chicken hawk which she denies.
it has been a complete misrepresentation of the facts talking about Finaldi. Judge: Court rules that deposition of Whaley’ is complete. Opposing counsel failed to follow procedure for a protective order and court doesn’t find McIsaacs conduct is warranted for a suspension.
Motion for protective order denied and sanctions will be imposed on plaintiff counsel. Next thread Jonathon Spence and Marion Fox to come stay tuned.
An ultimatum and he threatened me and my clients in contempt. He held a sham deposition where he knew they weren’t available. Not a good meet and confer same with Marion Fox Hardy said he was threatened again with another attack and basically mocked him and asked if he was wearing a robe and that he must have missed his judicial swearing in ceremony. This is not his case and he was upset about this.
He said he finds it ironic that he says I’m setting a trap for him when he threatened to hold me in contempt. He continued said it’s harsh subjecting a mom and her son to this during a pandemic.
He said I Don’t want to trap my clients where they are asked things that invade their privacy from 30 tea ago.Judge asks if they can narrow grey areas and come to an agreement. Finaldi I need this deposition and everyone wants to pile on me that I’m the bad guy.
Finaldi and plaintiffs owe them money for legal fees incurred I think 3135 don’t quote me on that. Stay tuned for Morion of Lilly Chandler and Tabitha Marks.
Judge we are moving on to Lilly Chandler and Tabitha Marks. Finaldi says this motion similar to JjS and MF we have information we need from them. We need to locate. Jordan Chandler he is nowhere to be found he is Invisible he is a ghost. We need to know where he last was when he was last heard from where he vacationed if he bought any properties. We need an electronic footprint. Both these women have information we need to know about his parents. Where they are ( I can tell you where one parent is hopefully in hell) their contact and who his friends are. Who does he associate with. Especially since he is a prior sexual abuse victim. Who came forward publicly and media was all over it. There was a criminal case involved . He testified under oath and received a settlement
This is public info so that no longer protects him from Privacy laws. Judge. We are talking about his sister and fiancée not Jordan. Finaldi: I offered then Jane Doe statuses protecting their identity but they filed motions publicly with their names on it. For Marks I want to ask her if Jordan told her anything I’d she knows about his location and interactions with Mj. Judge JC testimony might be relevant but not Lilly’s or Tabitha. Privacy rights apply here. You have not told us what u have done to find Mr Chandler.
Finaldi I wasn’t to ask her about his location Judge don’t you it’s overcome by privacy rights. Finaldi I need Lilly to tell me about her Europe trip and she was there when here brother was groomed by Mj. (He mentions that June and how Mj wanted to stay with Jordan and how Mj said he kicked the lamp and was practicing karate really substantiated claims) Her brother gave statements to police. Finaldi said in her statements Lilly has moved on and was 5 years old. judge says what she said was her memories were conflated by news media and doesn’t know what’s true and not.
Finaldi I want these depositions Tabitha would be a couple of hours .Seiger the attorney for Tabitha and Lilly speaks now and says. Finaldi is ignoring that LC and TM want nothing to do with plaintiffs and there information is not relevant to their case. Lilly was very young and never witnessed anything and knows nothing about plaintiffs and the Mj entities. Tabitha also knows nothing of Jordan’s interactions with Mj and that subjecting his clients to this invades their privacy. Dragging them into this will cause them public backlash, scrutiny and media attention as is the case with anything involving MJ. The plaintiffs would just exposer them to unwanted aggression and why should they have to go through that. Lilly said she has nothing to do with plaintiffs and then going after the companies. Plaintiffs have the burden.
Seiger reads a statement from Jordan’s attorney Contacted them and told them JC wants nothing to do with this. He wants to be left alone and remain private and Wants to maintain and obide by his confidentiality Doesn’t want his family to go through this. The confidentiality agreement is there to protect him should he choose to go public.his lawyer said just because Robson and Safechuck made an HBO special doesn’t mean he want to be part of it. Plaintiffs are using this as a sword Against him. There’s nothing proving plaintiffs allegations are true. The court should maintain ruling. Finaldi says that Seiger admits he’s in hiding well WE NEED TO FIND HIM CAUSE MY CLIENTS ABUSE CAME AFTER. Me in my head saying that Someone needs to read to Finaldi
The dates and timelines of his clients . Finaldi says Jordan waives his rights when he went to police and filed a civil suit against Mj. Thinking in my head Hey Douchebag don’t you realize he was a minor? Judge The order for protective order is granted and pariies must meet And confer and plaintiffs must pay 3,135 for legal fees. So 6,135 total.
Jonathon Steinsapir : We will be one court Oct 16 for the Demurrer for James also we have an issue others have provided us with Info that the filmmaker filming and we weren’t given access to those and We have concerns having any filmmaker in the courtroom especially one so closely Associated with the plaintiffs and who have been paid for the documentary. We want to file something. This will be heard on Oct. 16 also. The filming issue.
Judge said that he got an application from Dan R who asked to film said its iin the public’s interest and that Dan R has been respectful to the rules but this will be addressed on Oct 16. I’ll be there. Please don’t worry about the filming the estate seem to have a plan and let’s respect that.
In a world stricken by a pandemic disease, the powerful and just Black Lives Matter movement that was relaunched worldwide after George Floyd’s death on May 25 in Minneapolis reminds us that we cannot tolerate racism anymore.
George Floyd, Jamar Clark, Philando Castile, Dreasjon “Sean” Reed, Breonna Taylor, Ahmaud Arbery, Botham Jean, Trayvon Martin, Ezell Ford, Michael Brown, Michelle Shirley, Redel Jones, Kenney Watkins, Stephon Clark, Laquan McDonald, Tamir Rice, Eric Garner, … – and the list is sadly very long – these African-Americans who made the national / international news, were killed mostly by the police (or armed people playing police) between 2012 and May 2020 in different places in the US.
If these people are now recognized as victims of racism in the US, the ruination of Michael Jackson by his haters should also be recognized as a racist act. Indeed, if Jackson was a white celebrity, his enemies would not dare to treat him like they did and still do! In fact, Jackson’s downfall has had several uses for his haters. One of them was and still is to divert people’s attention from the real predators to Jackson and all the lies and nonsense about him.
As we know, Neverland a home that MJ built for his children and himself and allowed unpriviledged and critically ill kids and their families – several African-Americans among them – enjoy themselves there, was turned to a “crime house” by Sneddon and Co., the media and the rest of the haters. Actually, Robson & Safechuk, their families and Dan Reed needed also this made up “crime house” to tell their lies and false narratives.
But Jeffrey Epstein did easily build a pedophile paradise in the island Little St. James that he bought in 1998 and brought young girls from all of the places to his clients and no one said anything against it until it was impossible to be ignored – see the differences on how the police and the lawmen treated en innocent black man but did nothing against a real predator:
Locals say Epstein was flying in underage girls long after his conviction for sex crimes—and authorities did nothing to stop him. “It was like he was flaunting it,” says an employee at the airstrip on St. Thomas. “But it was said that he always tipped really well, so everyone overlooked it.”[]
[] According to Fox News, Epstein had a dedicated team of workers on the island who trafficked girls as young as 12 to his clients. To get there, Epstein would fly the underage girls into St. Thomas, and then he would ferry them over to his private island via a boat named Lady Ghislaine, one former employee told Bloomberg.[]
According to permit records obtained by NBC News, while Epstein’s legal team was busy negotiating a notoriously lenient plea deal for their client in the fall of 2007, Epstein was preoccupied with orchestrating major renovations on the island. (He would eventually plead guilty to two counts of soliciting prostitution from a minor, thus dodging federal sex-trafficking charges, and serve just 13 months in jail.) During this time, Epstein reportedly ordered the construction of a spa, a living room that would connect to a ground theater, a new kitchen, and two new guest rooms. Altogether, he sought to expand his residence by nearly 20,000 square feet — a transformation that turned his main house into a mansion. []
[] According to New York Magazine, Epstein planned to build a compound on Great St. James but was issued a stop-work order in December for not obeying environmental regulations.
On August 12, 2019, just days after Epstein died by suicide in a Manhattan jail cell – where he was being held on charges of sex trafficking and conspiracy to commit sex trafficking – the FBI raided Little St. James to search for evidence pertaining to the case against him.
Then, on January 15, 2020, Virgin Islands Attorney General Denise George filed a lawsuit alleging that Epstein and his associates lured girls and young women to the island, where they were forced into sexual servitude and prevented from leaving. []
If you haven’t read this article about how Epstein lived in prison, please do!
For ‘client’ Jeffrey Epstein, an unlocked cell in a Florida jail
By Lori Rozsa
July 20, 2019 at 12:23 a.m. GMT+2
PALM BEACH, Fla. — In 2008, a supervisor at the county jail here alerted staff members to the needs of an inmate serving an 18-month sentence for sex crimes involving a minor. Jeffrey Epstein, he wrote in a memo, was a first-time offender “poorly versed in jail routine,” and “his adjustment to incarceration will most likely be atypical.”
“For the time being, I am authorizing that his cell door be left unlocked and he be given liberal access to the attorney room where a TV will be installed,” Capt. Mark Chamberlain wrote in August of that year.
The memo does not indicate how long the cell door was to be left unlocked, but it and other documents obtained through public-records requests shed new light on the apparent deference granted to the wealthy financier while in the custody of Palm Beach County, as well as on the conditions of his confinement. []
Epstein’s time in jail has come under scrutiny in recent months amid criticism that his sentence did not match his alleged crimes: He was suspected of molesting dozens of girls, some as young as 14. A fresh wave of scrutiny followed his arrest this month by federal authorities in New York on charges similar to those he faced in Florida more than a decade ago.
In Florida, Epstein and his attorneys struck a deal with federal prosecutors that allowed him to plead guilty in state court to two felony offenses, including procuring a person under 18 for prostitution. Under an arrangement with state prosecutors, Epstein served his sentence in the custody of county authorities rather than in a state prison.
Epstein was soon transferred to the lower-security Palm Beach County Stockade, records show. At the request of his attorneys, he was housed in the “T-dorm,” an area reserved for inmates who must be separated from other inmates. In February of the following year, he was moved again. “It has been agreed upon by his legal staff that Inmate Epstein will pay for the security staff to supervise him in this previously unstaffed housing unit, the infirmary at the Stockade,” an official from the sheriff’s office wrote in an email.
The case was brought back to public attention by a Miami Herald investigation last year. Epstein, 66, was arrested July 6 in New York. Federal prosecutors called him a “serial sexual predator” and alleged that he sexually abused dozens of children there and in Florida from 2002 to 2005.
Epstein has pleaded not guilty. His attorneys have argued in court that the new charges are an unwarranted “redo” of a case he settled years ago. []
Gauger told the documentary crew that Epstein’s sentence was ultimately shortened by five months. He “was given gain time because of his good behavior, just like any other inmate,” he said.
Epstein was placed on house arrest, at his Palm Beach waterfront estate. He reported to a parole officer for the next year, records show.
After his sentence was completed in July 2010 — 18 months, with the time in the stockade, on work release and on parole — Epstein left Florida. He did not return until January.
He checked in regularly as a sex offender with the Palm Beach sheriff’s office, as he was required to do, and his attorneys notified the office when Epstein was shopping for a helicopter.
Epstein had friendly email exchanges with sheriff’s officers. At one point, he emailed to let them know he was coming to town. He asked a captain, Lawrence Wood, how he was doing.
“I’m good,” Wood replied in January 2011. “I hope you had a good holiday, if you need something when you fly in you can always call. Have a good day.”
Wood was not available for comment, Barbera said, citing the internal investigation.
On July 3, 2020, Ghislaine Maxwell was charged in the US. Prosecutors allege that between 1994 and 1997 Ms Maxwell helped Epstein groom girls as young as 14. very interesting dates in her case: 1994-1997 and in Epstein case 2002 -2005. We will of course follow theses cases.
***
We know now for fact that Martin Bashir never intended to do a fair and truthful documentary (Living With Michael Jackson, LWMJ) about MJ in 2002. We know for fact that the scene in LWMJ when Gavin Arvizo was sitting next to MJ holding his hand and leaning on him was orchestrated and staged by Martin Bashir. The Arvizos had left Neverland long before that day and that scene. They came in because Bashir wanted it. The source of this information is Aphrodite Jones.
She revealed that Martin Bashir instructed Gavin Arvizo to place his head on MJ’s shoulder, and hold his hand, just before shooting what would be the most controversial scene of the entire documentary.
Mr. Thomas Mesereau has described how this deceitful documentary was born (sourceshereandhere):
“A journalist, British journalist, named Bashir, Martin Bashir, wanted to do a documentary on Michael Jackson. He wanted it to be scandalous, and he wanted to get rich. And that’s what he did. But he knew that getting close to Michael Jackson may not be easy. After all, so many people around the world want to get near him. They want opportunities they believe he carries with him. [] So Martin Bashir decided the best way to get to Michael Jackson is a form of flattery. “I will misrepresent to him my true intentions, and I will find that little point of vulnerability that will get him to me so I can work with him and get this project that’s going to make me wealthy.” Bashir had interviewed Princess Diana of England sometime previously. He knew Michael Jackson was a great fan and friend of Princess Diana. [] She and Mr. Jackson had a friendship and a camaraderie, because he saw that he had pursued a similar life. Bashir concluded that, “I’ll get to him through his love and affection for Princess Diana.” Bashir knew that a psychic in England named Uri Geller, who’s been on T.V. doing things, he thought Uri Geller could get to Michael Jackson. And it turns out he could. He called up Uri Geller and he was gushing with flattery. He said he admired what Michael had done for children around the world. He specifically referred to Michael’s visits to sick children in hospitals around the world. He said, “I so admire this. We need to promote it better. We need to do a documentary that will show the world what kind of a person Michael is, and we will focus on children.”
And he had some specific ideas. He told Uri Geller that Michael Jackson has always wanted an International Children’s Day, much like Mother’s Day or Father’s Day. And he told Uri Geller that he wanted to bring Michael Jackson to meet Kofi Annan, the Secretary General of the United Nations, and he was hoping by doing so, that Michael would visit Africa and help children with AIDS. He told Uri Geller, “I can accomplish that,” and Geller was very interested.
Geller arranged a meeting between Michael Jackson and Martin Bashir in London. And Bashir gave the same routine that I just described: “You are misunderstood. What you’ve done is so phenomenal. The world needs to know. I’m the one best positioned to do this project so the world really will understand who you are and what you’ve accomplished.” And he showed him a letter, somewhat crumbled up letter, from Princess Diana commending him for the way he had conducted her interview. Everything was sugar and spice and everything nice. Unfortunately, it was false. It was deception par excellance. The meeting was arranged. Michael met with Mr. Bashir. He agreed to do the documentary because he believed what I just told you. []
Michael asked him if he could see the footage before it was broadcast, because Michael has been in this business his whole life. He has seen what the media can do to anybody. They can take footage and remove it. They can take footage and connect it. They can take words and replace them. They can do whatever they want and make you look terrible if they want, and it had been done to him often throughout his career. He didn’t want that to happen in this documentary. Martin Bashir assured him he would have full editorial control, and that was a falsehood. Michael wanted any money he received to go to charity. Bashir assured him it would. Uri Geller also wanted money to go to charity, but he also wanted a personal service fee. He wanted a percentage of the net proceeds, and he worked that out with Bashir, not with Michael. []
Just showing some events in time and space:
June 11, 2002 at a dinner in London, Uri Geller introduced Martin Bashir to MJ.
From May 2002 to January 2003: Martin Bashir stayed with MJ and interviewed and filmed him during eight months.
LWMJ was shown first in the United Kingdom on ITV (as a Tonight special) on February 3, 2003, and in the United States 3 days later on ABC, introduced by Barbara Walters.
February 26, 2004 Martin Bashir was approached by a US broadcaster in a deal worth $1m (£530,000) a year. Bashir and James Goldston his co-worker in LWMJ joined ABC news in 2004 (in summer) in effort to remake
In 2004, Victor Gutierrez was hired by NBC to work on Arvizo case with a monthly salary $ 25 000. In December 2004, ABC asked him to work with Martin Bashir as his advisor.
We have now gathered several articles about Martin Bashir in a page in the blog. You find them here.
Martin Bashir is a false and manipulative person who before meeting Michael Jackson, had already planned to destroy him; he lived several months with Jackson and lied to him every single day, he and his LWMJ helped Tom Sneddon, the DA, to re-open the investigation against MJ. Why such a “competent” and “capable” person would need Victor Gutierrez’ help to cover the Arvizos’ case? Why Gutierrez? I guess that ABC gave free hands to Bashir to choose his assistants and it was him who chose Gutierrez. Could the reason of this choice was that they were in this together since at least 1998-99?
In part 2 of this blog, I suggested that Gutierrez and Bashir knew each other in the 80’s when the former was a sport photographer and the latter a sport reporter – I referred to a fan who had done research about these two. Since I do not have a proof to turn my suggestion to a fact, I just say that: during 1993-96, Gutierrez and Bashir could not fail to discover each other because of Princess D’s interview and the Chandlers’ case and the pair of Dimond and Gutierrez.
I will now share some excerpts from several interviews that Victor Gutierrez have done. Please, do not forget that Victor Gutierrez is a big liar and he has said and written a lot of disgusting lies about Michael Jackson. When we read his interviews or writings, we have to separate the lies from the course of events.
In an interview with El Mercurio (February 28, 1999), Gutierrez said this:
– What’s been your most interesting journey in your, uh, profession?
-One for England. When I wrote about Jackson, I was on the front page of the papers for four days in a row, even at the Daily Mirror. I was invited to be a guest star on BBC Channel 4 and I was very struck by a studio full of people applauding me for my journalistic achievement. I was also applauded at Oxford University, where I gave a speech to journalism students. It bothers me that in Chile they say “this guy is crazy” or “this is not journalism”, because the truth is that I have my limits.
Right, the Oxford University!!! And yes, of course, people in Chile are right to question Gutierrez! But what is important to keep from this part is that after Chandlers’ case in 93, Gutierrez was in touch with the English tabloids also the English mainstream media such as BBC Channel 4. He was very pleased with his “journey” in England.
In the same interview we see also a picture of Gutierrez who has spread many dollar bills around himself. He also said that National Enquirer gave him 50 000 dollars to help them with the Chandlers’ case. Hard Copy offered him 10 000 dollars. He said that he cashed $ 300 000 by lying about MJ. Later, in the interview he said that he lost most of the money because MJ sued him and that he had to pay a lawyer.
In another newspaper – we don’t see the name of the paper or the date but it is in late 1997- beginning of 98 because Gutierrez had fled to Chile and was waiting for the jury’s verdict in MJ’s lawsuit against him. In this short piece, we discover another aspect of Gutierrez life, something that was totally unknown: Gutierrez a magician!
VG will reveal famous tricks: I don’t care about Chilean magicians at all
The journalist, who is currently facing a lawsuit filed by Michael Jackson for assault / insults for a book he wrote, will appear this Sunday on Julio Videla’s program Juntémonos.
Controversial and fast-paced, the journalist Victor Gutierrez is in the country to reveal some of the secrets behind the tricks of the great magicians, such as the levitation of people.
Victor Gutierrez achieved fame a couple of years ago thanks to his book with an unauthorized biography of Michael Jackson, where he revealed the intimate details of a minor who was allegedly sexually abused by the black / colored singer. The controversy led him in the United States to a scandal that has him on trial, which began last March 23, and for which he could have to pay $110 million.
But now he’s off to other work: a book about the sexuality of the first lady of the United States, Hilary Clinton, and what brought him to our country: unmasking magic tricks, which he will narrate this Sunday on Megavision’s Juntémonos program. “I’m not here to spoil the children’s enthusiasm, because they are in another country, more concerned about more violent things.
Wouldn’t you like to demonstrate some great trick in Chile?
What we want to do is to make the Virgin of St. Christopher disappear here, invite people, charge admission and then against how we made her disappear.
What motivated you to investigate magic tricks?
What I want is for these magicians to renew themselves and do something different. I’m tired of the levitation, the boxes and the explosions.
And you’re not afraid that Chilean magicians will be angry with you for revealing their secrets?
I don’t care about Chilean magicians at all because they are not important magicians, nobody knows them. No Chilean magician has ever been to Las Vegas, and when they go there, they play their little games and admire and copy things there. All Chilean magicians are experts at comparing tricks there and here they resell them to the channels for ten times more.
One of the tricks VG will be showing this Sunday is the effect of levitation
Gutierrez referring to LWMJ and how it saved his “credibility” and how it was a ”vindication”: In elmercurio.com on February 5, 2003 (two days after the broadcast of LWMJ in the UK):
The one who breathes with relief is Víctor Gutierrez. “It was a very big wound for me, this whole case, because they took my crest” (Jackson sued him for US $ 2.7 million). “But I am happy for my credibility and that of the children who spoke for my book”, he says, satisfied by the late recognition he will receive now.
In elsalvador.com on February 6, 2003 (the day that LWMJ was broadcasted in the US):
The journalist commented that the making of the documentary plays in his favor, since it increases his credibility -because it was a “serious work” – and that of the children who spoke for his book.
In elmercurio.com on November 20, 2003:
In Chile, the journalist Víctor Gutiérrez, who lost a litigation with the singer for the book Michael Jackson was my lover, says: I’ve been trying to explain this story for 10 years, which among journalists, police and prosecutors (in the US) is something that is known. It is time for the truth to be known. And it is also a vindication to my work. The publication, which is discontinued, yesterday was transacted on the Amazon.com site to US $ 2,475. Beyond the data, Gutiérrez believes that justice is finally done.
Gutierrez about the 2005 trial and the Arvizos: In elmercurio.com on February 5, 2003:
In addition, the Chilean is willing to cooperate if the US justice resumes the investigations against Jackson. Tom Sneddon, the District Attorney after the case denounced by the boy Jordan Chandler in 1993 (and registered by Gutierrez), declared that he would watch the documentary with great interest. Living with Michael Jackson will be broadcast this Friday in the US and Sneddon hopes that after him, new allegations will occur.
In elmercurio.com on March 31, 2005:
A month ago Chilean journalist Víctor Gutierrez began his mornings attending the court where Michael Jackson is sitting in the dock. Go to the star every day. Presence the case lives and direct in Santa María, California. The musician’s lawyer knows him: he has it between his eyes. Also the prosecutor, who has been told that much of his research is based on Chilean publications.
In elmercurio.com on November 20, 2003:
In Chile, journalist Víctor Gutierrez says that a Latino child would be the victim of the singer… The journalist from Chilevisión and Plan B, the first to link politicians with the Spiniak network in Chile, said: the minor who denounced the singer is a Latino boy who appears in the documentary Living with Michael Jackson, who caused a commotion in February.
In lacuarta.cl on April 12, 2005:
– How is the Arvizo case currently?
– There were private investigators who persecuted Arvizos in the school. All these children are intimidated, even parents are scared; they are reminded that they have been paid money to not speak, they have also been threatened.
NBC produced two salacious Dateline NBC specials about the Jackson case. The most recent one featured interviews with Jim Thomas and Ray Chandler and was heavily slanted in favour of the prosecution’s version of events.
The special was produced by none other than Victor Gutierrez, who was hired by NBC to cover the Jackson case even though he still owes Jackson $2.7 million dollars from a defamation of character lawsuit that Jackson filed and won against him. Conflict of interest anyone?
Biography – thoughts – part 1
The young Victor Gutierrez with a penchant for man-boy love life dreamed of living in the US where pedophiles had an organization (NAMBLA founded in December 1978) and they had also the right of marching in the streets. In a 1986 gay pride march in Los Angeles, Harry Hay, gay rights activist, wore a sign proclaiming “NAMBLA walks with me”. At that time, NAMBLA and pedophiles proclaimed to be a part of the gay and lesbian community in the US. However, several gay and lesbian organizations demanded their exclusion. There were a few lawsuits and several internal and external fights. Finally, in 1994 they were excluded. In next part of Words, facts and thoughts, we will explore more this matter.
In 1984, Gutierrez worked as photographer for the newspaper “La Tercera”. He went to Los Angeles to report the Olympics games. After the games, he went back to Santiago to collect his salary and to move to LA.
After a short and intensive course at a school, he became “journalist”. He found a job at a Hispanic tabloid in LA. In 1987, he did an interview with a future teller that predicted that on October 12 at 13.30 another earthquake would happen in Los Angeles. On October first, a powerful earthquake had already shaken the city. The “news” appeared on the front page of the Spanish tabloid. On October 12, many Latin Americans left the city to save their lives but no earthquake happened. People who believed him, were angry but the tabloid hired Gutierrez because 150 000 copies of the paper were sold.
Sooner than later, Gutierrez was in touch with NAMBLA. In several occasions, he has told that in 1986 he participated in a NAMBLA conference in LA. Since the organized pedophilia had already targeted Michael Jackson, Gutierrez realized that this was a golden opportunity to get rich and famous.
Gutierrez worked hard to intrude inside Jackson’s entourage and to find accomplices. He talked among others to Blanca Francia, Adrian MacManus, Kassim Abdul, Melanie Bagnall, Ralph Chacon, Estela Rodriguez, Jonathan Spence, Wayne Safechuck, Joy Robson, Wade Robson, Evan and Ray Chandler, June and Dave Schwartz, Margaret Maldonado.
Some of these people collaborated closely with Gutierrez like Blanca Francia and the Chandlers. As to the Robsons and the Safechucks – as we know – this collaboration has materialized years later.
Gutierrez has always implied that the Latin Americans – “Latinos” as he called them – were his “natural allies”. In fact, he has had a strong connection with the Latin American community in the US.
Besides all the people mentioned above, Gutierrez also approached several tabloids and mainstream media – not only in the US but also in other countries – above all Diane Dimond with whom he collaborated closely. Together, they faked a “videotape story” in 1995. Jackson sued them all, Paramount Pictures, Diane Dimond, the radio station KABC-AM and his employees and Victor Gutierrez. You will finds several documents hereand here at Turning the table on the chandler allegations , especially this one and this one.
Meanwhile, Gutierrez wrote his pro NAMBLA book Michael Jackson Was My Lover in 1996 and published it in both English and Spanish. Finally, only Gutierrez was convicted by the jury and the judge in April 1998 and was ordered to pay 2.7 million to Jackson. Gutierrez who had declared himself bankrupt in 97, fled to Mexico and then to Chile. In 1998 in Chile, he was pondering if he should go back to LA before the verdict. It is not clear if he had done that.
Far from beloved LA, “wounded” and without his “crest” as Gutierrez described himself in 1998 after losing the battle to MJ – “It was a very big wound for me, this whole case, because they took my crest” – he wondered how he could take revenge on MJ. As he had to leave the US, he turned his face to the British tabloid allies and above all to Martin Bashir.
Their unison seemed perfect as they were one evil soul but into two bodies. They had the chance to be one! Their first issue was to find a link to Jackson. Who could be this link? Soon they found the answer: Uri Geller.
According to Mr. Mesereau, Bashir approached Geller and could convince him to arrange a meeting with Jackson. Had Bashir failed with Geller, my guess is that Gutierrez – the magician, expert in levitation and so on – would have jumped in to establish a connection with Geller.
But there was another issue: they needed a “victim” too. Who would play this part? The answer was tricky. Since 93 and the Chandler case, Jackson who wanted to protect himself, would not let in easily. The only way to get close to him was through the charities that helped sick and destitute children and their families. In fact, MJ helped and supported several of these charity organizations. Who would use a sick child to hurt and to strike another person?!
***
The “victim”: “I need money, I want money”
We know that Janet Arvizo lived with her parents in El Monte (in LA) in a majority Hispanic community until she married David Arvizo. She moved with him but she never forgot her community. In fact, in 2000, Janet Arvizo approached the Mid Valley News, an El Monte newspaper. She said she couldn’t pay her son’s medical bills. She told them it was $12,000 per chemo treatment. That was a lie because Gavin’s treatments were being paid by the insurance company. David Arvizo was Teamster at Von and he and his family had all the medical benefits. She asked them to help her raise money. She wanted an ad in the newspaper Mid Valley News. They did put an ad in the newspaper. That was sometimes in October 2000.
Arvizos timeline (source Mr. Mesereau opening statement and closing argument)
In the 1990s
Gavin Arvizo, at a very young age, made a false claim of abuse against his mother in the 1990s to the Department of Children & Family Services. He then withdrew the claim. He was very young. He was very street smart. He’d been schooled by his parents, David and Janet.
1999:
In July 1999, Janet Arvizo sued J.C. Penney in West Covina in Los Angeles County. .. She claimed that she was the victim and her children were the victim of battery, false imprisonment and infliction of emotional distress. Almost a year later, she amended that complaint to add sexual assault by a security officer. What did she say the security officer had done in the J.C. Penney public parking lot. She said her breasts were fondled, her nipple was squeezed 10 to 20 times, she was punched with a closed fist by a J.C. Penney security guard, she was molested in her vaginal area, and she was called racial slurs. That is the case where she was testifying under oath. That is the case where the prosecutor says she lied. She has admitted lying in that case. Her son was ill. The lawsuit was settled. The family got a total of $152,500.
2000:
On July 19th, 2000, Gavin requested to meet Michael Jackson. MJ learned about this child’s illness and was very upset and very concerned. He arranged for a gift basket, toys, to be sent to the hospital.
On August 27th, 2000, the Arvizo family first came to Neverland and met MJ for the first time.
On September 21st, 2000, the Arvizos visited Neverland. They enjoyed the rides. They stayed over. It was the whole family.
In October of 2000, Janet, through Gavin, approached Michael Jackson, and said, “We have no means of transportation. We’re poor. We can’t do it.” And Michael gave them an SUV.
In mid 2000, Fritz Coleman, a newscaster, was approached by Janet and Gavin Arvizo. Janet told him her son was seriously ill with cancer. He arranged a fund-raiser at The Laugh Factor around the end of the year. When questioned about where the money went, Mr. Masada first said, “Well, we delivered it to the hospital.” But the hospital has no record of cash being paid, because you didn’t need to pay anything. The Teamsters insurance policy paid every medical expense. Fritz Coleman doesn’t know where the money went either. It has disappeared in thin air.
On December 18th, in the year 2000, the deposition in the J.C. Penney case.
December 22nd, 2000, the Arvizos obtained $2,000 from actor and comedian Chris Tucker, claiming they were destitute and needed the money for medical bills.
2001:
In May 2001, Gavin’s father, David and mother, Janet Arvizo separated – according to Janet Arvizo’s 2005 testimony – because David physically abused her and the children.
On September 24th, 2001, the Arvizo family reached an out of court settlement with the J. C. Penney department store.
On October 1st, 2001, Janet Arvizo reported her husband to the police claiming assault, terrorist threats, et cetera. She told the police in Los Angeles that Michael Jackson, Kobe Bryant and Fritz Coleman will help her in her suit against her ex-husband.
On October 4th, 2001, Janet Arvizo brought a video and photos of celebrities she knew to show the police. The police then tried to raise money for her and her family.
On October 31st, 2001, Chris Tucker took the Arvizos to Knott’s Berry Farm. They had asked him for help because of Gavin and their being destitute.
On October 31st, 2001, Janet Arvizo went on disability so she could receive $104 per week, didn’t disclose the money she had raised, didn’t disclose the J.C. Penney settlement.
November 9th, 2001, Janet Arvizo buys a new car for $23,000.
November 15th, 2001, Janet Arvizo applies for welfare and food stamps. She reports no assets. She omits her disability income. She never mentioned her Washington Mutual Bank account, her City National Bank account or the $152,000 J.C. Penney settlement.
On November 20th, 2001, five days after she applied for welfare and food stamps, she filed her arrest report on her husband with L.A. welfare to help her get expedited public assistance.
In December 2001, the LAPD, the Los Angeles Police Department, had a drive to get Christmas presents for the Arvizos because they were destitute and can’t pay their medical bills.
2002
From January until September, Janet Arvizo received a monthly welfare check.
In October of 2002, Janet Arvizo reapplies for welfare, falsely claimed she has not received any assistance in the prior three years and has no assets.
On December 2nd, 2002, the Arvizos moved into a new home on St. Andrews Place in Los Angeles with Mrs. Arvizo’s fiance, who she has since married. His name is Jay Jackson. He is in the Army. He has paid her rent, she has not disclosed the rent, and she was taking her welfare checks and depositing them into his account to hide them.
On December 22nd, 2002,moving along that year, Janet Arvizo signed an income and expense statement under penalty of perjury in her divorce action, and she omitted any assistance her boyfriend/fiancé was giving her from that declaration, which was under penalty of perjury.
In spring 2002, the Arvizos spent a few days at Neverland with the actor Chris Tucker to celebrate the birthday of latter’s infant son. Michael Jackson was not present.
In autumn2002, the Arvizos were called back for the Bashir documentary. They were allowed to go to Neverland and they did at least 7-10 times during that period.
2003
On January 3rd, Janet’s boyfriend paid her back rent at the Soto Street address, which is the studio apartment she brought people to show them how poor they were living. She kept it for that purpose. The family wasn’t living there at all.
On January 10th, 2003, she signed a welfare eligibility report under penalty of perjury. She falsely claimed she had not received cash or other benefits.
On February 3th, 2003, LWMJ was shown first in the United Kingdom on ITV (as a Tonight special) and on February 6th, 2003, in the United States on ABC. The prosecutor Tom Sneddon began an investigation. There was media frenzy.
The Arvizos were trying to get away from the media and trying to find Michael Jackson. They called the actor Chris Tucker who was just planning to visit his brother in Miami, and he offered the Arvizo family to charter an airplane and take them with him to Miami to meet Jackson. MJ and the Arvizos returned to Neverland together on February 7-8 by Jackson’s chartered airplane.
Janet Arvizo’s main complaint was she didn’t profit from the Bashir documentary that became world famous. She had joined Michael Jackson in a suit in England with Michael Jackson paying the fees and it was done through MJ’s attorney David LeGrand, who had obtained legal counsel in England.
A broadcaster approached the Arvizos at their home, and Jay Jackson wanted $15,000 for a photo and article (on February 4, 2003). Jay Jackson made this statement, “Michael Jackson can give us a house. Michael Jackson can pay for college. Michael Jackson can pay for benefits. That’s not enough. We want big money.”
Rebuttal video as an aswer to Bashir’s video: on February 8th, 2003, Ed Bradley at 60 Minutes arrived at Neverland with his film crew. Janet and her children want to be in the rebuttal video. She is happy. She wants a piece of this production.
On February 13th, 2003, Janet Arvizo has a phone conversation with Frank Cascio that is recorded, without her knowledge. She said in that phone conversation that She didn’t like those German people, she was referring to Dieter and Konitzer. She said to Frank Cascio, “I love you so much. You don’t know how much I love you, your little sister and your little brother.”
On February 16th, 2003, Janet Arvizo and her family were taped by Investigator Brad Miller saying, “Michael’s wonderful. He never did anything improper.”
On February 20th, 2003, Janet Arvizo and her kids did a video, freely, voluntarily (the rebuttal); they wanted it. The kids wanted to be on camera. They wanted to be actors. The mother wanted to be on camera. The hitch was they wanted lots of money. They arrived at the home of the videographer in Los Angeles. Janet seemed happy as a lark, excited, and interested; but delayed it so she could talk to someone whom she thought was an attorney. She didn’t want to sign a document releasing rights. She wanted rights. She wanted money if they were going to be filmed. So they went through a lot of discussion like that.
On February 21th, 2003, Janet Arvizo interview with the Los Angeles Department of Children & Family Services. She meets Bill Dickerman for the first time.
In March 2003, Janet Arvizo meets her lawyer Dickerman who wants that she talks to lawyer Larry Feldman, Chandlers’ lawyer in 1993.
In April of 2003, Janet Arvizo goes to Lawyer Larry Feldman. She hires him.
On April 16th of 2003, the Santa Barbara Sheriff’s Department closes their case investigating Michael Jackson. They conclude no criminal activity has gone on.
In May 15th of 2003, Larry Feldman gets Janet and the children to talk to a psychologist that he uses as an expert witness in other cases. In other words, lawyers often will have experts they want to use and the experts get paid, and they’re kind of in bed together.
Not until May 29th, 2003, does this psychologist suddenly claim he has a reasonable suspicion there was molestation. It’s not till the very end of May that they come up with these false claims.
On June 5th, 2003, the psychologist meets with Lawyer Feldman and Lawyer Dickerman. They’re all collaborating. Nobody goes to the police. Janet doesn’t go to the police. The kids don’t go to the police. Psychologist Katz and Lawyer Feldman go to the Los Angeles Department of Children & Family Services on June 13th to report this.
After the broadcast of LWMJ in the US on February 2003, Tom Sneddon began again his investigations against Michael Jackson but he could not charge him of any crime because there was not an accuser. Sneddon and his men in the district attorney office depended desperately on Janet Arvizo and her decisions.
On the other hand, Janet Arvizo would like check all her options. She would choose an alternative that would give her a lot of money. She still hoped on MJ until March 2003 but she lost her hopes when the rebuttal video did not give her a dime. Also, the “Germans”, Dieter and Konitzer, who had taken the management of MJ’s businesses, did not want to include the Arvizos. At that moment, Janet Arvizo met Larry Feldman who showed her what to do. Janet wanted money and the Chandlers case outcome were ideal but the civil case could not go before the criminal one since Tom Sneddon had changed the law after 1993.
The Arvizos claimed that the alleged molestation happened between February 7th and March 12th of 2003 but the Arvizos and the DA Sneddon had to change these dates to after February 20th because Michael Jackson was not even at Neverland and had alibi for the period of February 7th and March 12th. Changing the dates did not help the DA and Arvizos since at that time almost the whole world watched Jackson, the Arvizos and Neverland.
The Arvizos claimed that they were « imprisoned » from February 14th, 2003 to March 10th in Neverland but the evidence showed the contrary. In fact, Janet Arvizo visited many shops and boutiques and spent hundreds of dollars at MJ’s cost.
An excerpt from Mr. Mesereau’s opening statement:
“… when she allegedly learned of these molestation claims, she didn’t go to the police, she went to a lawyer. And I just mentioned to you that she was in touch with various members of the Los Angeles Police Department during this period of so-called false imprisonment, this period of a so-called conspiracy by Michael Jackson and his associates. One of those police officers will testify that Janet said to him, “Something big is happening, and I got a lawyer.” That’s number one. Number two, as I said to you yesterday, she realized at some point that going to a lawyer first doesn’t look too good. And that’s when she began to claim that she learned about it from the police, not the lawyers. The problem is, that the lawyers are the ones who eventually went to the police. So you’ll have to figure that one out. Janet Arvizo told the Santa Barbara Sheriffs in one of her interviews, “You know, my kids have till the age of 18 to file civil suits.” And she was correct, because someone underage who has a claim is not held to what is called a statute of limitations the way adults are….And she told that to the police, just as she told the police that she had hired lawyers. Why did she tell that to the police. And why in her police interviews, as we will prove, did she repeatedly say, “I need money, I want money,” or words to that effect…. Ladies and gentlemen, we will prove that Janet and her children are using this case to win a civil case… We will also prove that her lawyer, Larry Feldman, who the prosecutor acknowledged had sued Mr. Jackson a long time ago, a lawyer very well known in Beverly Hills, California, we will prove to you that this lawyer was having lunch with CNN talk show host Larry King and told him, “She wants money.””
Janet Arvizo and lawyers:
Michael Manning in Janet Arvizo’s civil divorce action and criminal proceedings with David Arvizo.
Lawyers represent her in the J.C. Penney case against J.C. Penney and Tower Records.
Bill Dickerman had a first meeting with Janet Arvizo on the 21st of February, 2003. He introduced her to Larry Feldman.
Larry Feldman
“There’s going to be great celebration in Los Angeles among this group if he is convicted of one single count in this case. You heard Mr. Feldman testify. He spent an enormous amount of money in the early ’90s litigating and getting a settlement against Mr. Jackson. He didn’t want to do it again. He told the grand jury in Santa Barbara he didn’t want to spend that money again. He grudgingly admitted that if Mr. Jackson is convicted in this courtroom, he will not have to spend huge sums of money establishing liability in a civil courtroom. It will be established.” (Mr. Mesereau – opening statement)
***
Biography – thoughts – part 2
Victor Gutierrez knew for sure that in hour of need he could always rely on his friends in the Latin-American community. That was “his community” and he knew that it would not fail him. Far from LA as he lived in Chile at that time, he wanted to find a new “victim”. We said in the part 1 of this biography – scenario, the new “victim” had to be able to get close to MJ.
Did Gutierrez’ friends in El Monte saw the ad in the newspaper Mid Valley News About Gavin and his family in October 2000 and sent a word to Victor? Did Gutierrez find the family being a perfect candidate? Their history with J.C. Penney, the fact that they were celebrity stalkers and the child was very sick, all these “qualifications” were probably enough for Gutierrez. Also, Gavin had already asked to meet MJ in July 19, 2000. The family met Jackson in August 27, 2000.
The hitch was that Gutierrez lived far from LA and could not “advise” the Arvizos like he did with Evan Chandler in 92-93. He had to depend on Tom Sneddon and his office and his friends and allies.
The other issue was that the criminal case had to go first because Sneddon himself had changed the law. The Arvizos who first and foremost wanted money, had to understand this procedure. They had to be patient and help the DA to convict Jackson. Once the criminal case was over, the Arvizos could have a civil one and certainly a settlement with several millions of dollars! To convince Janet Arvizo and her kids was probably difficult since we know that in her police interviews, she repeatedly said, “I need money, I want money,” or words similar to these. We also know that after LWMJ broadcast in UK and US, Sneddon could not prosecute MJ because the Arvizos did not accuse Jackson. Sneddon had to wait until the Arvizos made up their mind. In fact, Janet Arvizo discussed her options with regard to a civil settlement with his lawyer Bill Dickerman. Since Dickerman had not enough experience, he sent her to Larry Feldman.
In an interview, Aphrodite Jones talks about how Martin Bashir suggested that a kid should come to Neverland while he would shoot him and MJ together. Jackson wanted to choose between David, a child who was burn by his father and Gavin Arvizo. Martin Bashir chose Gavin! And we know how he choreographed the scene.
Why did Martin Bashir choose Gavin Arvizo? Probably, for the same reason that he chose Victor Gutierrez as his assistant in 2004 when he covered the trial for ABC!
Please watch the video and listen to Mrs. Jones:
***
Did Janet Arvizo and her children get their big money? Probably not; they got a home, education and job perhaps. But their fate and future will be banded to that DA and his men until their last breath. As to Jordan Chandler, he emancipated from his parents, took his money, shaded and joined the world of shadows. In the end, it was all about money and nothing else.
Tired of injustice Tired of the schemes The lies are disgusting So what does it mean? Damn it
Kicking me down I got to get up As jacked as it sounds The whole system sucks Damn it
Peek in the shadow Come into the light You tell me I’m wrong Then you better prove you’re right You’re sellin’ out souls, But I care about mine I’ve got to get stronger And I won’t give up the fight
With such confusions don’t it make you wanna scream?
Make you wanna scream []
(Scream, Michael and Janet, HIStory, 95)
~
[] Tell me what has become of my life I have a wife and two children who love me I am the victim of police brutality, no I’m tired of being the victim of hate You’re raping me of my pride Oh, for God’s sake I look to heaven to fulfill its prophecy… Set me free
Skin head, dead head Everybody gone bad Trepidation, speculation Everybody allegation In the suite, on the news Everybody dog food Black man, blackmail Throw the brother in jail
All I wanna say is that They don’t really care about us All I wanna say is that They don’t really care about us []
(They Don’t Care About Us, HIStory, 95)
~
This time around I’ll never get bit Though you really wanna fix me This time around you’re making me sick Though you really wanna get me
Somebody’s out, somebody’s out to get me You really wanna fix me, hit me But this time around I’m taking no shit Though you really wanna get me You really wanna get me
He really thought he really had Had a hold of me He really thought he really had They thought they really had control of me []
Somebody’s out, somebody’s out to use me You really want to use me And then falsely accuse me This time around don’t treat me like spit Though you really can’t control me You really can’t control me []
This time around I changed up my flow Got rid of the rotts Got pits by the door A real set of peoples to watch my back Stay away from strangers So I won’t slack And I know my nigga Mike like that, baby
This time around yeah
He really thought he really had Had a hold of me He really thought he really had They thought they really had control of me []
(This Time Around, HIStory, 95)
~
[] Don’t let no one get you down Keep movin’ on higher ground Keep flying until You are the king of the hill No force of nature can break Your will to self motivate She say this face that you see Is destined for history
How many people have to cry The song of pain and grief across the land And how many children have to die Before we stand to lend a healing hand Everybody sing…
Every day create your history Every path you take you’re leaving your legacy Every soldier dies in his glory Every legend tells of conquest and liberty Every day create your history Every page you turn you’re writing your legacy Every hero dreams of chivalry Every child should sing together in harmony
All nations sing Let’s harmonize all around the world []
(HIStory, HIStory, 95)
~
What about sunrise? What about rain? What about all the things That you said we were to gain?
What about killing fields? Is there a time? What about all the things That you said was yours and mine?
Did you ever stop to notice All the blood we’ve shed before? Did you ever stop to notice This crying Earth, this weeping shore?
What have we done to the world? Look what we’ve done What about all the peace That you pledge your only son?
What about flowering fields? Is there a time? What about all the dreams That you said was yours and mine?
Did you ever stop to notice All the children dead from war? Did you ever stop to notice This crying Earth, this weeping shore?
I used to dream I used to glance beyond the stars Now I don’t know where we are Although I know we’ve drifted far []
I will defend Michael Jackson to my last breath. I know he was innocent, I know he was targeted because he was wealthy and famous and perceived as very vulnerable and that made him a target for all kinds of people, Tom Mesereau
What a year, this year! This indelible year! Besides the Corona pandemic that has devastated the whole planet and caused all sorts of suffering, torment and misery, we have now almost the entire planet against the police brutality and racism that killed George Floyd on May 25 in Minneapolis.
Michael Jackson music was and is a remedy during the pandemic crisis also a social and political banner through which people express their anger against the police brutality and racism.
Every year, on June 13th, we celebrate the Vindication Day, the day that Michael Jackson was exonerated of all charges in the Arvizo case but also in the Chandler case.
Last year, we gave you Mr. Mesereau’s closing argument at the court, this year, let me share with you his opening statement. A mine of information about the bogus case in 2003-2005. You find the court transcripts at this blog here and here (February 28, 2005 and March 1, 2005). Please, take your time and read the following excerpts:
MR. MESEREAU: [] Ladies and gentlemen, as you know, my name is Tom Mesereau. And it is my honor and privilege to speak to you on behalf of Mr. Jackson. The prosecutor has outlined some very serious charges and made some very serious allegations, as you well know. If he is to be believed, Mr. Jackson conspired to imprison a family, abduct children and extort. If he is to be believed, Mr. Jackson molested children, and gave a cancer-patient child alcohol to reduce his inhibitions and molest him. And I’m here to tell you that these charges are fictitious, they’re bogus, and they never happened. [] I want to take it a step further, and I want to let all of you know that I think an opening statement is a contract. You make promises in an opening statement, you better fulfill them. Because at the end of the trial, the jury’s going to know whether you did or didn’t. And I say to you right now, I am going to make some promises in this case, I am going to fulfill them, and I want you to judge me accordingly at the end. These charges are fake, 10 silly, ridiculous — [] MR. MESEREAU: Ladies and gentlemen, I have an organized opening statement for you. I’m going to take you through various topics. [] First of all, the Arvizo family is from Los Angeles. We are going to bring in witnesses to tell you about their behavior. For example, Janet and Gavin called Comedian Jay Leno and tried to get money from Mr. Leno. Mr. Leno has told the Santa Barbara police, “Something was wrong. They were looking for a mark. It sounded scripted. The mother was in the background, and I terminated the conversation.” Comedian George Lopez was approached by Gavin and Janet. He was asked for money. He didn’t want to give money, and then they accused him of stealing $300 from Gavin’s wallet.
[] MR. MESEREAU: An actress named Vernee Watson, who has appeared on Fresh Prince of Bel Air and the movie Antoine Fisher, met this family at a dance school. As soon as she met Janet and Gavin, they wanted to move into her house and wanted money. She refused. A comedian named Louise Palanker was approached by Janet, told they needed money for medical bills and living expenses. She was not told that insurance was covering all the medical bills. She gave them $20,000, two $10,000 checks. She then went to the home to check out the room she thought she was contributing to, to redo for Gavin when he came home to heal. She knew of a builder who had gone to the home and redid the room. She found out the builder had been stiffed, not paid, and the money had been used for a huge T.V. and DVD player. And she was upset. This kind of behavior, we will prove to you, went on and on and on. Michael Tyson was approached. Efforts were made to reach Adam Sandler. Jim Carey. A number of celebrities. And we will prove to you that the best-known celebrity and the most vulnerable celebrity became the mark: Michael Jackson. []
The prosecutor presented a picture of Neverland being some haven for crime, some lure for despicable conduct. It is not. Neverland was created by Michael Jackson for a number of reasons. [] And as I think you already know, children come there all the time. Most of them inner city children from poverty, drugs, violence, problems. They go there for recreation. It is an invitation for them. []
Michael Jackson met the Arvizo family because he was contacted and told a young boy had cancer and wanted to meet him and needed his help. And unlike others who spelled the ruse, he didn’t. He contacted the child. They talked on the phone. He sent toys and favors to the family. The mother was extremely eager to meet Michael Jackson. Because we will prove to you, the mother, with her children as tools, was trying to find a celebrity to latch on to. They were trying to find a celebrity to create their life and give them advantages they didn’t have. And they were looking far and wide for that celebrity. And unfortunately, for Michael Jackson, he fell for it.[] And Neverland, we will prove to you, is not a haven for criminal activity, a lure for molestation, a magnet for crime. It is none of the things the prosecutor tried to tell you it is. We will prove that in this case. []
First of all, ladies and gentlemen, I am going to prove to you in this case that there is a pattern by Janet and her children of ensnaring people for money. First of all, the prosecutor alluded to a deposition where he said she admittedly lied. He didn’t tell you the details. Let me tell you some of them.
Janet Arvizo sued J.C. Penney in West Covina in Los Angeles County. She was living in Los Angeles with her family at various locations, which will become important, and I will tell you why. She claimed that she was the victim and her children were the victim of battery, false imprisonment and infliction of emotional distress. This was in July of 1999. Almost a year later, she amended that complaint to add sexual assault by a security officer. What did she say the security officer had done in the J.C. Penney public parking lot. She said her breasts were fondled, her nipple was squeezed 10 to 20 times, she was punched with a closed fist by a J.C. Penney security guard, she was molested in her vaginal area, and she was called racial slurs. That is the case where she was testifying under oath. That is the case where the prosecutor says she lied. She has admitted lying in that case.
Her son was ill. The lawsuit was settled. The family got a total of $152,500. That’s the Arvizo family. Janet Arvizo’s ex-husband, David, says Janet coached her children in that case what to say. A witness named Mary Holzer, an employee for a law firm that represented Janet Arvizo, Gavin Arvizo, Star Arvizo, and David Arvizo in the J.C. Penney case, has come forward to testify that Janet admitted she lied.
Let me take this a step further: Miss Holzer says that Janet said her husband had a cousin in the Mexican mafia and this woman says she never came forward because she feared harm. This is the first pattern I want to identify for you with respect to this family. Let’s go to the second example of this pattern. On December 18th, in the year 2000, in the deposition in the J.C. Penney case, Janet Arvizo said her husband David never assaulted her. She now says she was assaulted for 17 years, every year of their marriage. On September 29th, 2001, Janet Arvizo told the Los Angeles Police Department she was assaulted by David Arvizo, her husband. Less than a month later, she filed for divorce. Exactly a month after she filed for divorce, she filed a welfare application that said her husband had assaulted her. And incidentally, we will prove the 152,000 I just talked about never appeared on her welfare application, and that application was under penalty of perjury.
On November 26th, 2001, Janet Arvizo told the LAPD, the Los Angeles Police Department, for the first time that David Arvizo, her soon-to-be ex-husband, molested her daughter 12 years earlier. She had never raised that allegation before. Again, she claimed false imprisonment. She said she was the victim of terrorist threats. And she claimed that her ex-husband had willfully harmed her children. The allegations against Michael Jackson are the third claim of false imprisonment she has made. They are, by our count, approximately the fourth claim for sexual assault she has made.
On November 26th, 2001, Davallin Arvizo, parroting her mother, claims her father physically abused her brothers and threatened to kill her mother. Ladies and gentlemen, we will call witnesses who will tell you that Mrs. Arvizo in the past often says people are trying to kill her. On November 26th, 2001, Janet Arvizo filed a copy of an arrest report on her husband with the Social Services agency in Los Angeles to expedite the aid, the public assistance she wanted. That’s the public assistance that she applied for without disclosing assets, bank accounts, the J.C. Penney settlement, and other things she had, and other things she was required to disclose. And I repeat, those forms are under penalty of perjury. In the current case, she claims that her former husband, David, struck her and the children for many, many years.
As the prosecutor suggested to you, she’s claiming that she’s the victim of a whole lifetime of abuse. What he didn’t tell you was that she also claims other relatives are in the drug business and abused she and her kids as well. Let me tell you a little bit about the evidence that we’re going to present to you about her efforts to get money from celebrities by claiming she’s destitute, when she’s not. You have heard a description from the prosecutor about that little apartment in East Los Angeles, where that furniture allegedly came from, that he says Michael Jackson somehow wanted to arrange to steal through others. I guess the implication is that Michael Jackson needed her furniture.
That was a studio apartment in East Los Angeles where her family had lived from time to time, but generally not often. That was a studio apartment which had a few furnishings, was sparsely decorated, looked like it really hadn’t been used because, for the most part, it wasn’t. For the most part, she lived with her parents in El Monte. And when she became engaged to her current husband, she moved in with him and the family. But when she wanted celebrities to contribute money to her, after she told them her son had cancer, and they were destitute, and they needed money for medical bills, guess where she took them. The studio apartment in East Los Angeles. She kept it even when she was living in other locations. Her husband worked at Von’s. He was a Teamster. And he had all the medical benefits the Teamsters provide, including full medical coverage. Gavin was treated at Kaiser Hospital on Sunset in Los Angeles. There were no co-payments. There were no deductibles. His medical expenses were paid in full. But Janet Arvizo put into effect a program to take her son and try and use him to obtain money.
She approached the Mid Valley News, an El Monte newspaper. She said she couldn’t pay her son’s medical bills. She told them it was $12,000 per chemo treatment. Those treatments were being paid by the insurance company. She asked them to help her raise money. She wanted an ad in the newspaper. They did put an ad in the newspaper. But she was kind of squirrelly about the account, because the people at the newspaper said, “If it’s for your son, and we are raising money for your son, you have to have an account in your son’s name.” And she said Number We will prove that she went to one woman to help her set up the account. This woman’s sister was an attorney and offered to help. This woman wanted Gavin’s Social Security number. Janet said Number she wanted an account with her name on it, and we will prove to you eventually she found a clever mechanism for doing this. She set up an account in her name, with she being the signatory, and she said it was for Gavin’s benefit, and she put money in the account and she withdrew money from the account.
The people at the newspaper will tell you that they were so moved by the story of Janet and Gavin, that they brought her a turkey on Thanksgiving day, thinking they were engaging in an act of goodwill, good fortune. They knocked on the door. Janet answered, and was upset. She didn’t want a turkey; she wanted money.
On June 15th, the year 2000, Janet received $10,000 from Mrs. Louise Palanker. I mentioned her. She’s a comedian and an actress who used to hang out at a place called The Laugh Factory in Los Angeles. Janet Arvizo wanted her children to be actors. She made no secret about that. And she took them to acting school in Los Angeles. They performed at The Laugh Factory. The check that they — that Mrs. Arvizo received from Louise Palanker was then deposited into Janet’s mother’s account, so she didn’t have to disclose it to welfare authorities and didn’t have a paper trail that they actually had money as she made and pursued her efforts to con people out of funds.
On June 10th, 2000, David Arvizo, her husband, received $10,000 from Mrs. Palanker again. Mrs. Palanker will testify that she was told they were destitute. They needed it for medical bills and living expenses On July 19th, 2000, almost a week after she hid this money, Gavin requested to meet Michael Jackson. Now, there’s a bit of a dispute over exactly who contacted Michael Jackson first, because a hairdresser friend of his, Carol Lamir, has indicated that she arranged the contact through Mr. Jackson’s assistant when she heard about Gavin. And she learned about Gavin because her son was at the same dancing school that Gavin was at, a dancing school at Olympic and Fairfax in Los Angeles. That is the dancing school where Janet approached Actress Vernee Watson and asked for money and wanted to move in. []
Now, keep in mind Ms. Arvizo and her children are claiming that they were falsely imprisoned, that Mr. Jackson masterminded a conspiracy to falsely imprison the entire family at Neverland, where he lives and where he has approximately 40 or 50 employees, many of them ex-police officers, others licensed in day care and things of that sort. She says she was falsely imprisoned on a flight to Florida with Chris Tucker, not with Michael Jackson. She says she was falsely imprisoned at the Turnberry Resort in Florida, a luxury hotel where Michael Jackson was staying. She says she was falsely imprisoned at the Calabasas Inn, a very nice hotel in Calabasas, and she says that she was falsely imprisoned three times at Neverland and went back every time. She has said that under penalty of perjury.
Let’s go through what she was buying and 147 what was ultimately billed to Michael Jackson during this terrible period of false imprisonment: February 14th, 2003: Full leg wax at Bare Skin Salon for $50; a lip wax; a bikini wax. Has her face done at Aromatherapy Day Spa. The total is $140. February 21st, Lisa’s Beauty, hair products for Janet Arvizo are purchased for $28.91. The same day, she buys bras and Jockey bikinis at Robinson-May, a total of $92.24, all billed to Michael. On February 25th at Anchor Blue, she buys clothing for $448.04 for she and her children. She also goes to Robinson’s-May, buys bras, thongs and bikinis for $115.83 in care of Michael Jackson. She buys cosmetics at Lisa’s Beauty for $34.29.
On February 26th, during this period of alleged false imprisonment, she buys clothing at Pacific Sunwear for $26.80. She buys socks, bras, and underwear at the Jockey store for $454.64. At Banana Republic, she buys shirts and boxers for a total of $416.18. She spends $64.32 on clothing at Gap. She spends $436.77 at the Levi’s outlet, same day, during this period of alleged false imprisonment. She spends $74.69 at Abercrombie & Fitch; $88.06 at Robinson’s-May for junior clothes; $160.58 at Robinson’s-May, again for bras and shorts; and 148 she goes to Foot Locker and spends $91.44 for shoes for her son Star. The next day, February 27th, another day of alleged false imprisonment by this grand conspirator called Michael Jackson, Robinson’s-May cosmetics, day-wear treatment, $129.36; cosmetics, facial soap and lotion for Janet, $30.85; slippers, $28.12. Spends over $63, care of Michael Jackson. She goes to Rite-Aid during this period of false imprisonment. She buys a mechanical pencil, body spray, feminine hygiene products, Chap Stick and gum for $62.09. She goes to Anchor Blue and spends $92.01. Gavin gets a haircut the next day at Hsong’s Barber Shop for $20. She gets a manicure and a pedicure for $51. March 3rd, Anchor Blue, more clothing for Janet, $29.23. Then we go to Robinson’s-May, cosmetics for Janet, $71.86. And finally on March 10th, Lovely Nails, a manicure and pedicure for Janet Arvizo, $115. The total of what I just read to you is $3,312.05 for Janet Arvizo while she’s falsely imprisoned at luxury hotels and Neverland.
Ladies and gentlemen, I’d like to address the issue of the Bashir documentary, which the prosecutor has dramatically suggested to you led to incredibly bizarre criminal and frantic behavior by Michael Jackson and others. Before I do that, however, I’d like to put this in perspective a little bit. You heard the prosecutor tell you that when the Bashir documentary aired, there was panic, a frantic reaction. The media was everywhere. And they were.
The Department of Children & Family Services in Los Angeles was investigating what happened. I will represent to you that we’ll prove the District Attorney’s Office in Santa Barbara was investigating what went on, and Michael Jackson knew about it. It all starts really getting going in February, January and February 2003. You have, from all sides, the following: Media everywhere; the D.A’s Office looking into what all this means; the Department of Children & Family Services looking at what all this means; the people around Michael Jackson allegedly panicked and concerned. And there was concern, but I’ll tell you what it was all about.
The networks start negotiating to have a responsive show to the Bashir documentary, which ultimately happens. So they’re converging on Neverland. They’re converging on Michael’s people and his advisors and himself to try and do something to respond to the Bashir documentary. And guess what happens, they say, in the middle of all of this. That’s when they say the child molestation begins. I submit to you we will prove it never, ever happened. Can you imagine a more absurd time for it to ever happen. Because what the prosecutor said to you about the media was true. They were everywhere. They were following the Arvizos to their home. They were trying to get interviews. And the Arvizos were asking for money from the media, just like they wanted money to do a production with Michael Jackson.
We will bring in witnesses who will tell you Janet Arvizo wanted distribution rights. She was on the phone with attorneys trying to get distribution rights. Her fiance wanted millions of dollars. He said, “A house, a son’s education, none of this is enough. We want a piece of this action.” And when they weren’t going to get it, the molestation allegations started to form, just like the pattern I outlined to you before at J.C. Penney and with the ex-husband David. They don’t start right away. They end up developing over a period of time, just when they think they’re not going to live at Neverland forever, Michael’s not going to be a father as she always referred to him everywhere, just as they realized they’re probably not going to get rich off a production involving Michael Jackson, just as they realized documents were not going to be executed because Gavin had been in the Bashir documentary that would give them some piece of the net or gross profits. Just as they realize all of this free ride, this party was ending, did they go to the police with the molestation allegation. Number they went to a lawyer. And then they went to another lawyer, never to the police, until they had worked out all their legal rights and opportunities.
And I will get into that a little more deeply in my opening statement. And by the way, we will prove to you that down the line, when Janet Arvizo realized it didn’t look too good, if there really was a molestation that went on, that you would go to a lawyer and not the police, guess what she started to say. “I learned it from the police.” This was after her lawyer went to the police to report the alleged molestation. We will prove this to you.
Let me tell you how the Bashir documentary happened. It didn’t happen exactly as the prosecutor told you. A journalist, British journalist, named Bashir, Martin Bashir, wanted to do a documentary on Michael Jackson. He wanted it to be scandalous, and he wanted to get rich. And that’s what he did. But he knew that getting close to Michael Jackson may not be easy. After all, so many people around the world want to get near him. They want opportunities they believe he carries with him.
This has been an ongoing issue with Michael Jackson his whole life. Because he’s a musical genius, because he’s so well known, because he’s perceived as being so successful, people are always buzzing around him trying to get a hook into his business, trying to just grab something that will give them fame and fortune. It’s an ongoing reality. It’s an ongoing problem. And as Michael Jackson has said many times, “I am very lonely because of it.” He has written that in his autobiography and he has said it; “Everybody wants a piece of me.” Martin Bashir was no exception, just like the Arvizos were no exception.
So Martin Bashir decided the best way to get to Michael Jackson is a form of flattery. “I will misrepresent to him my true intentions, and I will find that little point of vulnerability that will get him to me so I can work with him and get this project that’s going to make me wealthy.” Bashir had interviewed Princess Diana of England sometime previously. He knew Michael Jackson was a great fan and friend of Princess Diana. To any of you who know anything about Princess Diana, you can understand why. She had the opportunity to simply live in wealth, pomposity, a rigidity in the social structure in England, and she didn’t want it, she wasn’t happy with it, and she branched out on her own and offended people. And she went to Africa and she worked with children with AIDS, and she made a crusade out of trying to stop land mines around the world which explode and hurt children, mines for civil war. And she decided she was going to live her life the way she chose. She and Mr. Jackson had a friendship and a camaraderie, because he saw that he had pursued a similar life.
Bashir concluded that, “I’ll get to him through his love and affection for Princess Diana.” Bashir knew that a psychic in England named Uri Geller, who’s been on T.V. doing things, he thought Uri Geller could get to Michael Jackson. And it turns out he could. He called up Uri Geller and he was gushing with flattery. He said he admired what Michael had done for children around the world. He specifically referred to Michael’s visits to sick children in hospitals around the world. He said, “I so admire this. We need to promote it better. We need to do a documentary that will show the world what kind of a person Michael is, and we will focus on children.”
And he had some specific ideas. He told Uri Geller that Michael Jackson has always wanted an International Children’s Day, much like Mother’s Day or Father’s Day. And he told Uri Geller that he wanted to bring Michael Jackson to meet Kofi Annan, the Secretary General of the United Nations, and he was hoping by doing so, that Michael would visit Africa and help children with AIDS. He told Uri Geller, “I can accomplish that,” and Geller was very interested.
Geller arranged a meeting between Michael Jackson and Martin Bashir in London. And Bashir gave the same routine that I just described: “You are misunderstood. What you’ve done is so phenomenal. The world needs to know. I’m the one best positioned to do this project so the world really will understand who you are and what you’ve accomplished.” And he showed him a letter, somewhat crumbled up letter, from Princess Diana commending him for the way he had conducted her interview. Everything was sugar and spice and everything nice. Unfortunately, it was false. It was deception par excellance. The meeting was arranged. Michael met with Mr. Bashir. He agreed to do the documentary because he believed what I just told you. Michael had some conditions. He didn’t want his children’s faces to appear on the documentary. Michael loves his children. They’re beautiful little kids. They live with him at Neverland, and they were living there throughout these alleged events, these so-called crimes that didn’t happen. But nevertheless, Bashir wanted to follow him around, and he did follow him to various cities, Berlin, et cetera. Michael was terrified that his children’s faces would be on that documentary. He is perpetually terrified that something will happen to his children. They’ll be kidnapped; there will be extortion; there will be a ransom request; they’ll be injured, or worse. Bashir agreed. “Their faces will never appear. They will not be recognizable on that documentary.” And that was false.
Michael asked him if he could see the footage before it was broadcast, because Michael has been in this business his whole life. He has seen what the media can do to anybody. They can take footage and remove it. They can take footage and connect it. They can take words and replace them. They can do whatever they want and make you look terrible if they want, and it had been done to him often throughout his career. He didn’t want that to happen in this documentary. Martin Bashir assured him he would have full editorial control, and that was a falsehood. Michael wanted any money he received to go to charity. Bashir assured him it would. Uri Geller also wanted money to go to charity, but he also wanted a personal service fee. He wanted a percentage of the net proceeds, and he worked that out with Bashir, not with Michael.
Let me give you a flavor for what Bashir said to Michael Jackson to induce him to do this project: On July 23rd, 2002, he sent a letter to Michael’s assistant. He had a plan of action for filming at Neverland. He said on July 29th, they wanted to feature Michael with a large group of children, around 50, welcoming them and sharing with them his extraordinary home so that, for one day, their lives can be enriched seeing Michael with the children on the rides and then taking them into his movie theater to watch a film.
The next day, Tuesday, July 30th, “I was hoping that Mac Culkin will be available to visit.” He is an extremely close friend of Michael’s and has provided support throughout the years. That’s Macauley Culkin, the actor. Wednesday, July 31st, this would be a day spent working with Michael, the musical genius, listening to the song he has written for the international children’s holiday, and also viewing some tapes from his extraordinary career, reflecting upon 30 years of success.
Thursday, August 1st, a walk around Neverland, the zoo and all the other attractions that have been built both for Michael and the benefit of others. The beautiful landscape encouraging all of us to become “as little children again,” quote, unquote. Friday, August 2nd, late-night drive through L.A, how Michael still connects with the inner city, and how he has drawn inspiration for his dance scenes from the ghetto kids.
“I shall give you a call tomorrow to check through this, but hope that it will be possible Obviously, the trip to Africa, plus the U.N. visit are in the early stages of planning, but I shall certainly give you full details as soon as matters are confirmed.” You will learn, ladies and gentlemen, what Bashir said to Michael face to face, as he did this project, a project designed to humiliate, degrade and deceive, he said to him at one point with respect to Michael and children, “I saw yesterday, just to explain, a very special interaction between you, and it was a privilege to see it. I’ve got three children, and to be honest, it was a bit of an education to watch,” referring to Michael and children. He said to Michael, “You know, nobody ever asks you these questions about how you approach children, how you love children, what you do for children, and how you raise your own.” He said, “Nobody ever asks Michael any of these questions.
They all ask these ignorant things,” and he called those people “scum.” He told Michael, “Neverland is an extraordinary, a breath-taking, a stupendous, an exhilarating, an amazing place. I can’t put together words to describe Neverland,” flattering Michael, trying to lead him to his destruction. He said, “One of the things that puzzles me, that I find difficult to understand, is why an artist like yourself, who has brought such beautiful music to the world, who has written the melody of most of our lives, my life – my romantic development was partially shaped by your records – why I find it so difficult to understand is why is it that, having brought this to the world, people are quick to criticize.”
He said being with Michael and children was like a beautiful journey. He said to Michael Jackson, “One of the things I noticed about you over the last year is your relationship with your children. Your relationship with your — and I have to say to you that I didn’t know you before, but your relationship with your children is spectacular. It almost makes me weep when I see you with them, because your interaction is so natural, loving, so caring, and everyone who comes in contact with you knows that.”As the prosecutor has told you, he will show you that documentary. Keep in mind, if you will, what I just told you when you see it.
Ladies and gentlemen, Mr. Bashir traveled with Michael through Europe and the United States, spent time at Neverland. Took about eight months to put it together. And on that documentary, Michael Jackson makes very clear, “I don’t do anything sexual with children. I don’t commit crimes.”
Gavin Arvizo is on that documentary. But ladies and gentlemen, Janet wanted her children in films. She always said that. We have witnesses who will confirm that, and the children all went to acting schools. They wanted to be actors. In fact, while they were visiting Neverland, Michael tried to assist them. He let Star do his own video, called it “The Neverland Channel.” They were trying to get him to help them break in. And he did help them. She knew exactly what was happening when her children went to Neverland and when Gavin was in that documentary.
But she had one problem: She wanted money, and she didn’t see it coming. We will prove to you, throughout this trial, that her reaction to this film was primarily, “How do I profit. How do I get distribution rights. What documents should I sign. How do I negotiate the documents.” In fact, one witness will tell you that before the family filmed what has been called the rebuttal show that the prosecutor talked to you about, she not only appeared happy as can be about filming it, but she delayed it because she was on the phone with a lawyer trying to figure out what her rights were. And when presented with what is called a model document to deal with distribution rights, she complained, didn’t want to sign it, wanted to get advice. Her main complaint was she didn’t profit from the Bashir documentary that became world famous. She did have media following her around. There is no question about that. They did follow her to her house. They followed her everywhere. There also is no question that we will prove she wanted security with her because she said the media were hounding them so badly. And this stuff about security from Michael Jackson somehow being there to imprison her we will prove is false. She wanted security. She didn’t want the media just hounding them, but she did want money from the media. That we will prove also.
Her fiance, now her husband, has testified that they didn’t want money, but we have a witness who will tell you that he approached them at their 161 home, and Jay Jackson wanted $15,000 for a photo and article. We will also prove to you that he made the statement, “Michael Jackson can give us a house. Michael Jackson can pay for college. Michael Jackson can pay for benefits. That’s not enough. We want big money.”
Davallin told a friend of Michael Jackson, “We’re getting a home in the Hollywood Hills.” The statements designed to get something of a financial benefit are endless, and we will prove them in this trial. July of 2000 was the first contact between Gavin Arvizo and Michael Jackson, as I said before. And in August, the Arvizos visited Neverland for the first time. They then came with their father David, they stayed a number of nights, and in October Michael gave them an SUV. In June — in the year 2000 — excuse me, the year 2001, there was very little contact.
Now, I’ve told you about some of the financial stuff that was going on during the year 2001, but Michael Jackson didn’t really see these people in the year 2001. They surfaced again in 2002, but I have already explained to you all the efforts to latch on to other celebrities that they tried, and it didn’t completely work.Michael Jackson, as I said before, did everything he could to help this family overcome cancer, and they repeatedly commended him for doing so. They repeatedly make public statements that Michael had helped save Gavin’s life; that the friendship, the warmth, the encouragement, what went on at Neverland helped save him from cancer. I will read from transcripts to you words to that effect.
The accolades were endless until they realized he wasn’t going to support them forever, and that’s when everything changed and this nightmare of false allegations started. Bashir arrived at Neverland and he did film Michael Jackson and he filmed Gavin, and he took statements from both. Nobody expected any of this to be secret or quiet. Everyone knew it was for worldwide distribution. What Michael said on that documentary he expected to be publicized throughout the world. It wasn’t meant to be a private thing. It was meant to be a public thing, and that needs to be understood as you watch it and hear his words. And I repeat, he repeatedly says, “Nothing sexual happens with me and children, ever.”He does display some idealism on the film. He talks about children coming to school with guns and why they need love, why they need caring, that there’s got to be a way to change this. He talks about children who need attention and affection, and something must be wrong with all the violence in the world. Yes, that’s Michael Jackson’s idealism, some might say, to some extent, naivete. Certainly naivete when it comes to making yourself vulnerable to false claims.
At this point, I would like to go through some of what was said in Bashir. Much of what was said did not appear on Bashir. Fortunately, Mr. Jackson had his own videographer filming while Bashir filmed, and as you can imagine, and this is not unusual with eight months of work, it had to be condensed down into a show. Much of what Michael said about his view of the world, his view of the need for peace and love, his desire to see more creativity in the world and his great belief in children as a cause was left out, and in its place what you will see is commentary by Bashir designed to create a scandal, and he did. In September of 2002, ladies and gentlemen, the Arvizo family made numerous visits to Neverland, one of them with Actor Chris Tucker. As Gavin says on the Bashir documentary, on one occasion he slept on Michael’s bed and Michael slept on the floor. Nowhere in that documentary does he say, “I had sex with Michael Jackson.” In fact, months afterward, he was saying in various recorded statements, “He saved my family. He saved me from cancer. He’s never done anything wrong.” Now Janet’s spin was, “That was because we were falsely imprisoned.” I’m going to go through those statements also.
[] []
The next — two days later, February 8th, 2003, Ed Bradley of the T.V. show 60 Minutes arrived with a film crew to Neverland. Also present were Jack Sussman, the president of CBS Entertainment, and attorneys David LeGrand and Mark Geragos. Various networks were trying to compete for the right to do the rebuttal show, the show that was supposed to be a response to Bashir’s scandal show. And there was a lot of activity going on at Neverland and among people associated with Mr. Jackson because, yes, there was great dislike for what Bashir had done and the way he tried to hurt Michael’s reputation. But there also were, to a lot of people around Michael, a great business opportunity, because they saw the opportunity to make millions of dollars in a production that never could have happened if Bashir hadn’t aired. It was called by everybody a rebuttal piece. So, yes, there was concern, and, yes, there was elation by certain people around Michael because they thought they could make money. And networks were approaching Michael and people around him to try and benefit from that opportunity.
And ladies and gentlemen, millions were made by certain people on the rebuttal film. On February 16th, 2003, Janet Arvizo and her family were taped by Investigator Brad Miller saying, “Michael’s wonderful. He never did anything improper.” Now, that’s supposed to be part of this, I guess, false imprisonment thing, that apparently they’re being forced to do that. They’re living at Jay Jackson’s apartment. Jay Jackson is in the United States Army. Excuse me. Nobody calls the police, calls the United States Army, complains that, “We’re falsely imprisoned. They’ve got — they’re forcing us to make statements. They’re forcing us to testify. They’re forcing us to say certain things complimentary to Michael Jackson.” Nobody does because there was no reason to. And the security people were requested by Janet because of all the media frenzy. This may be a good place to end, Your Honor. Thank you [] []
Please Support the #MichaelJackson Global family endeavor to gift Michael ONE BILLION Views on Billie Jean Youtube by Aug 29th 2020, his Birthday !
“We were recently approached on Twitter by a Michael Jackson fanTudo Pelo Michael a Brazilian fan, who had a great idea for a World-Wide campaign to celebrate Michael’s birthday this year with a wonderful gift to our beloved [].
Square One is available on Amazon prime video. Please watch it here.
***
MJ Estate vs Quincy Jones
This week, an appellate court ruled that the Estate of Michael Jackson does not have to pay 7 million dollars in royalties and fees to music producer Quincy Jones. The three-judge panel of the 2nd Appellate District overturned the majority of the original 2017 jury verdict, stating that the trial judge had allowed the jury to misinterpret Jones’ contract.
The lawyers for Jones had argued that the producer was entitled to about $30 million in royalties and other income derived from the This Is It concert film, two Cirque du Soleil shows, and other revenue streams that took place after the death of Jackson back in 2009. After a two-week trial, the jurors awarded Jones $9.4 million.
The appeals court took the majority of the original award back saying that Judge Michael L. Stern had erred by not interpreting the contract himself, and instead leaving it up to the jurors. “The only compensation Jones was entitled to receive was royalties from record sales on remixes, and the evidence indicates he received them,” Justice Judith Ashmann-Gerst wrote. “If he wanted remixing fees, he had to negotiate them in separate agreements.”
Howard Weitzman, who represented the Jackson estate, issued a written statement:
“Quincy Jones was the last person we thought would try to take advantage of Michael Jackson by filing a lawsuit three years after he died asking for tens of millions of dollars he wasn’t entitled to,” Weitzman said. “We knew the verdict was wrong when we heard it, and the court of appeal has completely vindicated us. From the beginning, this was an attempt to take advantage of Michael knowing he wasn’t here to defend himself.”
John Branca, co-executor of the estate, also commented: “So many people have tried to take advantage of Michael and mischaracterize him since his death. It’s gratifying that in this case the court in an overwhelmingly favorable and just decision, recognizes that Michael Jackson was both an enormous talent and an extremely fair business executive.”
***
MJ Estate vs Robson & Safechuck
Due to COVID-19 and governor’s state of emergency, the status conference originally scheduled for June 11 has been postponed until June 25 at 9:30 a.m. PDT.
***
Kew Media and Dan Reed
Kew Media Distribution’s collapse has left more than 250 of its clients £10.8M ($13.4M) out of pocket, according to a report that lays bare the financial damage of the TV and film sales house’s demise.
Kew Media Distribution’s parent company Kew Media Group went bust in February, but warning lights were flashing well before the crash, as the distribution arm’s clients complained about being owed royalties.
Now, a report by Kew Media Distribution’s administrator FTI Consulting has revealed that the company owed nearly £11M to producers and other clients all over the world, including Netflix and CNN.
The figure is a combination of claims made by partners and Kew Media Distribution records, but FTI said the final total is likely to be higher, given the distributor did not share complete sales reports with all clients.
FTI added that it does not expect producers to recover this money in any meaningful way — even after it has completed a sale of Kew Media Distribution’s library.
The report reveals that Leaving Neverland producer Amos Pictures is among Kew Media Distribution’s biggest creditors. The company is owed nearly £523,000 in royalties after Kew Media Distribution sold its HBO/Channel 4 film on Michael Jackson internationally.
Amos founder Dan Reed terminated his Leaving Neverland distribution deal with Kew Media Distribution, but FTI is not acknowledging the termination and is including the title in its sale of the library. Reed told Deadline he is prepared to take legal action to protect his rights. []
“A little Message from Morriston Emergency dept, please stay home unless you need us, we’ll be there xx” How beautiful that #MichaelJackson and the @Jacksons music is still comforting people through these troubled times pic.twitter.com/1ZvoUWq6tE
Hoje o Jornal Nacional foi encerrado com a música Heal The World, tocada pela Orquestra Sinfônica de Brasília. “Uma mensagem de conforto nesses tempos de isolamento social”. Há pessoas morrendo. Se você se importa o suficiente com a vida faça um lugar melhor p/ você e p/ mim. pic.twitter.com/Qd4dS8kYNv
Prince Jackson and The Heal Los Angeles Foundation will be handing out fresh meals on April 1.
This slideshow requires JavaScript.
The Michael Jackson Estate donates $300,000 to coronavirus relief efforts
“This virus strikes at the heart of the communities we are close to,” said John Branca and John McClain, co-executors of the Estate of Michael Jackson. “We learned today that the legendary Manu Dibango [a key influence on Jackson’s hit ‘Wanna Be Startin’ Somethin’) passed away from the virus. Other performers and support staff in music and on Broadway are sick or have been left without work and are facing an uncertain future. And in Las Vegas, which has been so welcoming to Michael Jackson, the entire city has been shut down leaving thousands of workers and their families devastated and without an income.
“Michael’s spirit of generosity and helping others during his lifetime is legendary. These donations are inspired by him,” they concluded.
In New York, the Estate is answering the challenge made by more than 20 Broadway producers who are matching up to $1 million in donations, doubling the impact of contributions to Broadway Cares/Equity Fights AIDS’ COVID-19 Emergency Assistance Fund. Jackson loved attending Broadway performances and the Estate and its partner, Lia Vollack Productions, continue to look forward to welcoming audiences to MJ the Musical later this year.
“With every passing day that theaters remain dark, entertainment and performing arts professionals face unprecedented and immediate challenges,” said Tom Viola, executive director Broadway Cares/Equity Fights AIDS. “This incredibly generous donation from the Michael Jackson Estate will help ensure those onstage, backstage and behind the scenes get lifesaving health care, emergency financial assistance and counseling during and after this crisis.”
In Las Vegas, the Estate’s donation will provide 300,000 meals to the needy, and help to maintain Three Square Food Bank’s supplies, the largest foodbank in Southern Nevada. Since opening in February 2013, Michael Jackson ONE, produced by Cirque du Soleil and the Estate of Michael Jackson, has been one of the most popular shows in Vegas. “Before the pandemic, 1 in 8 Southern Nevadans lived in a food-insecure household and that number will increase exponentially with the displacement of thousands of workers in our community. Thank you to the Estate of Michael Jackson for stepping up to help children, families, veterans and senior citizens who may need help now more than ever,” Michelle Beck, Chief Development Officer.
The Recording Academy and MusiCares will support the music makers who Michael Jackson worked with and loved in a time where the industry is being challenged at every level from the virus. (source)
***
Where are the billionaires and the moguls who can help the planet and the people suffering from the pandemic disease? Apparently, they are hiding, like David Geffen:
David Geffen Takes Instagram Private After Tone-Deaf Post About Self-Isolating on His Yacht
“Isolated in the Grenadines avoiding the virus. I’m hoping everybody is staying safe,” Geffen captions alongside a photo of his reported $590 million yacht
J. Clara Chan | March 28, 2020 @ 11:14 AM Last Updated: March 28, 2020 @ 12:21 PM
David Geffen shared with his 87,000 Instagram followers his escape to the Grenadines on his reported $590 million yacht to avoid the coronavirus pandemic — posts that created enough backlash among shocked onlookers that he has made his account private.
Though the philanthropist and entertainment mogul regularly shares photos of his yacht, Rising Sun, on his social media accounts, many found Saturday’s posts particularly tone-deaf, as Americans are struggling with unemployment, healthcare workers are begging for support and small businesses are faced with the possibility of shutting down as they may face months of no customers and revenue.
One of the captions included, “Sunset last night…isolated in the Grenadines avoiding the virus. I’m hoping everybody is staying safe.”
Shortly after, several Twitter users expressed their discontent with the magnate’s photos, with some questioning why he wouldn’t offer to use his 138-meter yacht to help house patients []
Do you remember that David Geffen showed Leaving Neverland before its release to Oprah Winfrey and Gayle King in a private session on his yacht on Oprah’s birthday (by the end of January 2019)? Was LN a kind of birthday present from Geffen to his loyal friend Oprah?
We know that filmmakers, movie producers, artists and alike who produce or play in a movie have the privilege to show their creation to whom they wish before the public release.
For example we have read in Joy Robson’s deposition that Michael Jackson showed Smooth Criminal to her and her children before the movie was released.
This slideshow requires JavaScript.
Well, we know that Smooth Criminal video belonged to MJ but we cannot say the same thing about LN and Mr. Geffen because we do not know if he owns it or he has sponsored it. The only thing that we can say is that he entertained his guests by showing this movie. But why did he choose this movie? It was a birthday party after all, why not choosing an unreleased comedy for example? Does Mr. Geffen believe – like Oprah and King – in Robson and Safechuck? Does he believe that their lies and false accusations are true? If so then we must ask why? We know that Jackson and Geffen were friends back in the 80’s. What did happen to their friendship? Let’s explore this matter in the part 4 of this series.
***
More on Victor Gutierrez
In thefirst partof this series, we talked about Victor Gutierrez, how he was sued by Michael Jackson for defamation in 1995, how he lost the case and had to run back to Chile in 1998. We added that in 2004, Gutierrez was hired by ABC as Martin Bashir’s assistant. In 2005, they made together a slanderous movie about MJ that was broadcasted during the jury’s deliberations’ days, before the verdict on June 13, 2005.
I also mentioned that the pair of Gutierrez-Bashir might have known each other before 2004. About the Arvizos, I suggested that Gutierrez have probably played a crucial part on the backstage of this case.
A while ago, MJ Repository shared on Twitter three pictures from Gutierrez’s homepage where he sold his book on the Internet:
This slideshow requires JavaScript.
Amusing excerpt from Roger Friedman on one of the pictures!
What’s really interesting is that every boy [district attorney Tom] Sneddon would like to paint as a victim of Michael Jackson comes from the book written by Victor Gutierrez.
I would like to share an article in Spanish published in La Tercera on April 11, 1998- You find it in Spanishhere. This is a paragraph translated in English that tells us about Gutierrez plans to make a movie based on his book MJ WML with HBO Olé and to write Hillary Clinton’s biography. Even none of these “plans” happened, it is an interesting read:
The reporter: Could it create work complications?(The reporter wonders if Gutierrez could have issues in the US after Jackson winning his defamations lawsuit.)
Gutierrez: No, because I’m a legal resident.
Victor Gutierrez plans are to continue selling the book in England and to make a film for HBO Olé, to be released later this year. He’s also working on the biography of the first lady of the U.S., Hillary Clinton “which I think will also cause me problems”. While continuing his work producing magic numbers for Julio Videla’s program Juntémonos on Megavision, he analyzes Hard Copy’s offerings. “But I’ve got to see the silver.” “I’m going to keep writing and the only way for me to stop doing it, is to be shot in the head []
HBO Latin America (originally known as HBO OLÉ) originated in 1991 as a partnership between Venezuelan broadcaster Omnivisión and HBO. The channel was initially available to cable and satellite providers across Central and South America, and the Caribbean. HBO OLÉ reached a break-even profit by 1993, and had about 500,000 subscribers by 1994; that year, a secondary channel was launched, along with a Portuguese feed for Brazil.[1] Sony, The Walt Disney Company and Universal Pictures later joined the partnership. Omnivisión eventually sold its share in the channel to Time Warner.
HBO Latin America is a company which owns several pay television networks in the region of Latin America. It is a joint venture between WarnerMedia and Ole Communications.
In Latin America, the channels owned by WarnerMedia Entertainment who broadcasts TNT, CNN International, CNN en Español, truTV, Cartoon Network, Chilevisión and other sister channels and HBO Latin America Group, which broadcasts other related channels.
In October 2019, WarnerMedia announced an agreement with Ole to acquire the latter’s minority interest in the Spanish-language HBO, Max, and Cinemax channels in Latin America, in order to facilitate the future launch of the HBO Max streaming service in the region. HBO Brasil, and the companies’ distribution partnership for Warner Channel and channels owned by other companies, are not affected at this time.
Going back to the Arvizos case and the 2005 trial, apart from Bashir, Sneddon and his crow fed off of Gutierrez sick person and fantasy book. The times that “lions and monkeys and some other animals entered the court room” during the trial in 2005 were a few examples of that; also “faeces “, “diarrhea” “Vaseline”, … were also other examples.
More on Arvizos and Gutierrez in the next part!
A last addition, a letter has been shared on Twitter by Megyn Kelly telling us that James Goldston the president of ABS News has covered up crimes of Epstein but he produced Bashir’s “Living with Michael Jackson”.
This slideshow requires JavaScript.
***
In 2014, Wade Robson and James Safechuck advised by their lawyers filed their lawsuits against Michael Jackson and his estate because they believed that the conditions for their success had been met.
In fact, Jackson being dead, no one could sue them; also the social movement #MeToo that has no rules or boundaries tolerates both true and false accusers and provides them a forum to share their stories true or false. A unique opportunity for money hungry people like Safechuck and Robson!
Actually, both Wade and James and their families have struggled years after years with poor economy, debts and lawsuits. See MJJ Repository tweetshere:
In 2003, Joy and Wade collaboratively borrowed a $440,000 30-year mortgage at 5% adjustable interest to purchase a home together. Joy secured a second mortgage against the property in 2004 for $145,000. Wade eventually moved on and was removed as co-borrower, leaving Joy alone.
In ’07, Joy took out a $595k 30 yr. loan to consolidate prior loans & moved again in 2009 (to apartments). In the same vein, Wade wound up selling his home in 2013 and downsizing with Amanda back to Hawaii, after years of repeated financial failures and self-imposed job refusal.
This year, Joy was pursued by bill collectors after repeatedly failing to pay minimum balances on credit card debt. This culminated in a lawsuit in August, with American Express seeking more than $4,250 in unpaid dues. Note that Joy still uses Wade’s business as her own on card.
In contrast to other people like Brett Barnes, Macaulay Culkin, Omar Bathi … who have achieved success in life, Wade and James and their family were more like losers; they decided to jump to the other side and to rob the estate of Jackson. And of course they were very welcomed by Jackson haters who have supervised every single person around Michael since the 90’s in hopes that one day he or she would turn side and accuse falsely MJ.
We also know that Michael Jackson has been used as a shield to protect real predators. Robson and Safechuck were a solace for these people and their protectors who by attacking MJ covered the real wrongdoers; the kind of Oprah Winfrey who have covered for people like Harvey Weinstein (see here for example); but also others, like this one,Jude Aptow. Seehere for more details.
[] Collecting a monthly retainer, Mr. Benza said, he reported items on Roger Clemens, Michael Jackson and others and sent them to Mr. Weinstein’s communications team, though he didn’t know whether they were used to trade away stories about the producer. Mr. Weinstein’s spokeswoman said the payments to Mr. Benza were for public relations work during Miramax’s dispute with Disney []
American Media has acknowledged that it sometimes worked to gather information to help Mr. Weinstein because of mutual business interests. “To the extent AMI provided ‘off the record’ information to Mr. Weinstein about his accusers,” the company said in a statement, it did so “at a time when Mr. Weinstein was denying any harassment.” The statement said Mr. Howard would not have allowed the information to be published[]
By fall last year, Mr. Weinstein was trying to stop what he feared would be a story about the allegations against him by New York magazine. Once again, he called on Mr. Benza, meeting him at the Peninsula Beverly Hills that October. Saying the magazine was “doing a Bill Cosby on me,” Mr. Weinstein asked for help, Mr. Benza recalled []
Having said all these facets in this matter, there is another angle that has not been discussed much. The only person, as far as I know, who has noticed it, is Mr. Zack O’Malley Greenburg in his article What ‘Leaving Neverland’ Means For Michael Jackson’s Business Empire.
Here is an excerpt:
Like Sony itself, Sony/ATV recently signed a long-term deal with Jackson. The idea of the company disentangling itself from the singer—who paid $47.5 million for the original ATV catalog, which included some of the Beatles’ biggest hits, in the 1980s before merging it with Sony’s a decade later—seems complicated at best. Any theoretical unwinding of Jackson’s publishing would likely drag along other music contained within his Mijac publishing entity, including the catalog of Sly and the Family Stone, as well as hits popularized by Aretha Franklin and Jackson’s late father-in-law, Elvis Presley.
As we know it, Sony bought Jackson’s part in ATV catalog in 2016 for $750 million. But Jackson’s own works and a few others mentioned in the excerpt above are still in possession of the MJ estate.
This is a common knowledge in the music industry that artists who own their works and even others, belong to an especial part in this industry. They are their own masters; but they can also drag up or down the music of the artists they own.
On the other hand, Mr. Branca has already explained in this video how Sony bought MJ’s part in ATV catalog:
1:19:50 to 1:20:20 : … the best example is Sony/ATV so after we bought the Beatles, Sony sent us a notice without telling us that they were going to exercise a buy/sell. Michael’ lawyers had installed because I wasn’t representing him. Michael had instructed me under no circumstances can I ever be forced to sell this company that’s what I had in the contract but in 2006 / 2007 some other lawyer changed that and Sony exercises this buy / sell
The question is what the intention of Sony Corporation was in 2016 when without warning they asked to buy Jackson’s part of ATV catalog? Who were Michael’ lawyers who changed the original contract between MJ and Sony in 2006-2007 and in favor of the latter? Who did represent Sony in 2006-2007 when the buy-cell clause was added to the original contract? How was the original contract drafted in the matter of buy and sell between the two owners?
We also know that Sony Corporation that had bought 30% of EMI catalog in 2012 bought the rest of EMI in 2018; 10% from the estate of Jackson ($287 million) and 60% from a consortium of investors including Abu Dhabi-based Mubadala Development, Jynwel Capital, Blackstone Group’s GSO Capital Partners and David Geffen.
As you see, Sony Music Entertainment (SME, as a part of Sony Corporation), Universal Music Group (UMG) and Warner Music Group (WMG, owned by AT&T, HBO is included in the Warner Media Group) own the global music industry for now.
There is no doubt that the streaming medias have changed the music and the film industries drastically. Having a strong foot in both of these industries, Sony goes head-to-head with the biggest like Disney, Google, Apple, etc.
There is still a question left! What was actually at the bottom of the Sony Pictures hacking story in 2014-2015, the North Korea involvement, the movie The Interview and at the time American President?
After the change of the law in California (see here), the appellate court decided yesterday (1/3/2020) to remand back Robson and Safechuck’s cases to the trial court for continuation.
The good news is that Mr. Tom Mesereau is back and helps the estate of MJ as special counsel.
Litigation Counsel of America (LCA) is pleased to announce that Thomas A. Mesereau, Jr. will serve as President of the LCA in 2020.
Tom Mesereau is well known in legal circles for representing both celebrities and the indigent. Each year the LCA awards the Thomas A. Mesereau Cup to a deserving lawyer, judge, or scholar practicing in the area of criminal law.
Mr. Mesereau has represented Michael Jackson, Bill Cosby, Mike Tyson, Robert Blake, and others in high profile celebrity cases. He currently serves as Special Counsel to John Branca, Trustee of the Estate of Michael Jackson. []
***
Please remember that all Robson’ and Safechuck’ claims against the Estate were dismissed for good! Only their civil lawsuits against MJJ Productions and MJJ Ventures will be re-examined.
Here you are a few excerpts from the declaration of the appellate court published yesterday. You will also find the document as well:
Here’s a disgusting look at the relentless, systematic approach Billboard Magazine took across multiple issues to attempt dismantling of MJ’s legacy while serving as a massive promotional tool for Dan & LN.
This is separate from their online vendetta against MJ in similar style.
Billboard started their sleazy coverage from the first new issue (Feb 9) following LN’s Sundance debut.
They ask “Will LN affect MJ’s legacy?” then quote only the anti-MJ rhetoric including Gayle King “a game changer,” THR “devastating effect” & “Dan has received death threats.”
One month later (March 9), Billboard runs a cover story on this topic with the front-cover headline: “INNOCENCE LOST: Can Michael Jackson’s Legacy Survive ‘Neverland’?”
This headline appears atop Juice WRLD’s cover shot, which given JW’s sudden death has became a historic cover.
In this same March 9 issue, Billboard runs the “TOPLINE” story claiming LN “split fans of MJ and had a disruptive effect on plans made by the estate.”
The only “disruptive effect on plans” they cite was the Chicago musical trial run being skipped, instead heading direct to NYC.
The same issue then runs a 2 page spread w/ creepy-filtered NL photo. “100s of millions at stake.”
They include a quote in the teaser from an “estate lawyer” saying “it’s got to hurt,” before revealing this estate lawyer is Howard King (Tupac Shakur), not related to MJ’s at all.
The article quotes Weitzman’s “just another rehash of dated and discredited allegations” but immediately attempts to downplay that remark as if the estate couldn’t had been well-versed on the claims when they just heard about film in January.
They also rely on anonymous sources.
The article then rehashes the synopsis of Leaving Neverland, complete with all the PR talking points and buzz words.
Such a hit piece wouldn’t be complete w/out quoting celebs in bold: Oprah “this moment transcends MJ,” Ehrlich “you may never listen to MJ again.” and so on…
Then, still in this same issue of the print edition, Billboard has the audacity to run a graphic detailing the “timeline of allegations.”
They botch the facts even in their dumb graphic, such as claiming James “declined to testify” in 05, when he was court-barred & never-asked.
But wait, there’s more. Further down this same issue of Billboard (the 2nd within a month that promotes LN), they have a full page spread of the trio on Oprah.
Complete with this headline: “After LN aired Dan Reed was accused of telling a one-sided story. That was the point.” 🤷♂️
Billboard uses the second separate story in the same issue to double-rehash the allegations of LN while also promoting Oprah’s “emotional” special.
Again they splash more blue tick quotes including Apatow: “5 min. in you’ll think to yourself…every word they’re saying is true.”
All of the scandalous coverage by Billboard in the first two issues that described LN was just the appetizer.
Their next issue (Mar 23) marks an unprecedentedly desperate attempt to become some “final nail” to MJ’s legacy. The cover is MJ cut up into 50 pieces, “BREAKING POINT.”
Right from the cover itself, Billboard attempts to steer the fake and manufactured narrative. “executives, creators and fans are confronting complacency & grappling anew…”
And from the get-go they again depict MJ as a monster, raising the BS “separating art from the artist.”
As if that wasn’t cringe-worthy enough, Billboard uses a full page spread of the boy-band photo depicting Dan, Wade & James in costume #1 from the photoshoot.
Their feature spread is captioned: “The Reckoning in Dan Reed’s culture shaking documentary.”
It gets worse from here.
Before reaching the cover story, Billboard can’t help but put another grudge-riddled story ahead of it.
They drudge up the old MJ v. Eagles & go on to explain how Eagles overtook Thriller after a supposed discovery of 9M added Eagles sales from 06-18. Even here they mention LN.
Still pages away from the cover story, Billboard slips in a single half-page piece that haphazardly summarizes a couple of points from the “24 page PowerPoint” the estate provided to them.
It is a thinly veiled attempt to claim neutrality; they also add Zonen & Finaldi quotes.
Then we reach the two-page photo cover spread to begin their main heart of adoration toward Leaving Neverland and the actors behind it.
This time using their costume #2 appearance from their photoshoot.
Again calling it “THE RECKONING” and running w/ contrived quote by Wade.
Billboard devotes a solid 13 PAGES for this cover story and interview of Wade, James and Dan, while spreading wall-of-text vitriol of LN through constant headline-grabbing quotes and excerpts from blue ticks, MeToo heroes & critics who were wined & dined. They again quote Oprah.
The imagery used throughout their stories on MJ all have sinister spins to them. From the chopped-up pieces of a disfigured MJ on the cover to other distorted graphics elsewhere.
In the mix of the MJ story is another devoted to the onslaught of MeToo allegations in the industry.
Much like the bogus report Billboard rushed out to suggest MJ’s streams dwindled after LN (forcing them to later issue a multi-part correction proving the opposite), it seems the content from these 3 issues was written far in advance—believing LN was an earth-shattering movement.
Billboard’s obsessive smear campaign against a deceased celebrity repeatedly refers to LN as “The Reckoning.”
In fact, a 2018 film about Weinstein uses that as its actual title. Billboard posted a blurb to site & that was the extent of any promo.
Dear reader, we have selected some articles and a video that we have found pertinent and interesting. You see below the links also the excerpts (in dark green). The first one is the whole article. If you do not have time to read all of them at the same time, please come back and continue your reading! Thank you!
Untouchable – How Oprah and Hollywood Enabled Harvey Weinstein
ByBanner Staffon•( Leave a comment )
The Hypocrisy of Oprah and Hollywood Elites
By: Ubong Ekpo
Oprah Winfrey has championed herself as the mother figure archetype of Hollywood. From struggling with childhood sexual abuse, to working odd news jobs, Oprah’s story has been one we’re made to appreciate.
From being a black woman on daytime television, rising through struggling ratings, to becoming a household name, it is definitely an impressive rise to say the least.
Winfrey is championed as a role model, but especially in the black community she holds a special place. Too many members of the black community feel the pain and reality of racism.
However, lauded as she once was, there are some questionable actions that Winfrey needs to answer.
The ‘Me Too’ movement was kicked off by sexual abuse allegations towards Harvey Weinstein, the famed movie executive.
Several movie actresses, including Angelina Jolie and Lupita Nyong’o, have claimed Weinstein acted inappropriately with them.
In the time since the allegations, Weinstein has received several delayings of his court procedures. His latest delay moved his trial date from September 2019 to January 2020.
Weinstein was formally charged in May 2018 with several counts of rape, sex abuse and sexual misconduct. He was given an ankle bracelet and can only travel to New York City and Connecticut.
In early 2019, a documentary titled Untouchable premiered at the Sundance Movie Festival.
However, little to no attention was given to the Weinstein documentary, which went into detail about how Weinstein preyed on women using his power and influence as a Hollywood movie executive.
Instead, Winfrey and her associates decided to promote another documentary, Leaving Neverland. The film follows two men that say they were sexually abused by late pop star Michael Jackson as boys.
It seems like once again in American society, black men are scapegoated for the problems that affect society at large.
That is why it is so perplexing why someone of Winfrey’s stature, a black woman, would decide to attach herself to Leaving Neverland.
An even bigger question is why hasn’t she addressed Weinstein’s sexual abuse allegations?
When it came to Leaving Neverland, Winfrey went on full force to endorse the documentary.
The ultimate act that has left a permanent scar in the legacy of Winfrey is when she decided to hold a special show after airing Leaving Neverland.
She invites the alleged Jackson victims along with director Dan Reed. Winfrey expresses her support to the alleged victims.
Yet as of this writing, it appears Winfrey has no plans to invite any of Weinstein’s alleged victims for a sit-down.
Despite concerns with the validity of the film, such as James Safechuck’s claim he was abused in a train station that was not built until years after he claimed it occured, Winfrey has not wavered her support.
Many have noticed since the coming developments that she has removed all content on her YouTube channel relating to the film.
The allegations against Weinstein are what jump-started the ‘Me Too’ movement. Yet media coverage would tell you different.
With simple google searches on Jackson and Weinstein, one can see a difference.
Jackson has passed away ten years ago, with no ability to defend himself, yet is branded an abuser over a film.
Weinstein has had hundreds of women make claims against him, yet we’ve seen little reaction. Maybe an article and a short news story.
There has been no calls to boycott Weinstein or any of the movies his production company produced, yet several radio stations worldwide have banned Jackson’s music.
Through her silence and connections, Winfrey has made it evident where she stands and it’s a shame.
***
Please listen to Mr. Branca interview:
Especially these parts:
at 29:30 to 33:56,
37:10 to 40:23,
50:19 to 53:22: … if Oprah Winfrey is better adjudication of the fact than the American court system then we get rid of all the judges and all the courts and the future adjudication can be made by HBO and Oprah Winfrey and we’ll save a lot of money and the other thing is they only need to hear from the prosecution they don’t need to hear from the defense …
1:19:50 to 1:20:20 : … the best example is Sony/ATV so after we bought the Beatles, Sony sent us a notice without telling us that they were going to exercise a buy/sell. Michael’s lawyers had installed because I wasn’t representing him. Michael had instructed me under no circumstances can I ever be forced to sell this company that’s what I had in the contract but in 2006 / 2007 some other lawyer changed that and Sony exercises this buy / sell so I was like okay we’re gonna take on Sony World. I read that Malcolm Gladwell book David and Goliath. We’re kind of David as big as Michael is we’re taking on Sony and they’ve got more resources and the buy/sell was all structured in their favor I mean thank you to whoever did that …
***
Two cuts from MJ estate lawyers answer to Wade Robson’s “Discovery”:
***
According toBillboraditself (on 10/11/2019), the banning of MJ’s music had an opposite effect!
Stuck In Neverland: Streams of Michael Jackson’s Music Have Actually Increased Since HBO Doc []
While radio fell 32 percent in the 31 weeks after Finding Neverland, on-demand streaming consumption of MJ’s music has outpaced the rest of the industry []
Yet people kept listening to Jackson’s music. During the same 31-week period, Billboard found that streaming consumption of Jackson’s catalog never saw a decline — on-demand streams of Jackson’s catalog actually increased by 22.1%, outpacing the industry’s 21.8% growth []
Hahaha: Finding Neverland!!! Hahaha!!
***
Do you remember Richard Plepler, the HBO ex-chief , the one who resigned a few days after the broadcast of LN?
Apple TV+ in Talks to Add Ex-HBO Boss Richard Plepler to Producer Lineup
Deal would be exclusive, could be finalized in coming weeks
By
Joe Flint
Former HBO Chairman and Chief Executive Richard Plepler is in advanced talks to sign an exclusive production deal with Apple Inc. ’s new TV+ streaming service, according to a person familiar with the matter.
Under the terms of the agreement being discussed, Mr. Plepler’s new company, RLP & Co., would create original content for Apple TV+. A deal could be finalized within the next few weeks, the person with knowledge of the talks said. It is still possible a deal may not materialize.
If Apple lands Mr. Plepler, it would be getting one of the most well-regarded entertainment executives of the last decade. Under his watch as chief executive of HBO, the pay channel prospered, developing such hits as “Game of Thrones” and “Veep.”
Apple’s pursuit of Mr. Plepler is indicative of the battle for creative talent among Hollywood giants and the Silicon Valley disrupters such as Netflix Inc. and Amazon.com Inc. All have been spending heavily to woo producers and creators in anticipation of the so-called streaming wars, aimed at wooing viewers when many are tuning out of traditional broadcast and cable television.
Mr. Plepler left HBO last February after new owner AT&T Inc. took control of the company. He had been with HBO for nearly three decades, the last six years as its chief executive. Mr. Plepler left HBO when it was clear that under AT&T he would have less autonomy than he had enjoyed under prior owner Time Warner Inc.
Mr. Plepler declined to comment on the Apple talks []
Apple TV+ chiefs Zack Van Amburg and Jamie Erlicht had been wooing Mr. Plepler for the past few weeks as the company looks to bring in more talent to make shows there, the person involved in the talks said. Producers Steven Spielberg and J.J. Abrams and former talk show queen Oprah Winfrey are already involved in making shows for Apple []
In the war for talent, Apple has just scored a major victory.
The tech giant and eventual streamer has inked a multiyear content partnership with Oprah Winfrey. Under the pact, terms of which were not immediately available, Winfrey and Apple will create original content that will be released as part of the latter’s lineup of content.
Sources say the pact includes everything from film, TV, applications, books and other content that could easily be distributed on Apple’s all-encompassing platform. (The deal does not include podcasts, as Winfrey has her own platform for that.) Sources note that Winfrey landed at Apple in a competitive situation with other tech giants, likely including Netflix and Amazon, all pursuing similar deals. Apple is said to have aggressively pursued Winfrey as part of a larger push to reach a broad audience []
***
And the last one! From nytimes.com
Apple Enters Show Business With a Black-Carpet Premiere
By John Koblin
After all that — the billions spent, the deals with Big Bird, Oprah and Spielberg, the firing of a key producer, the secrecy, the breathless speculation — the moment is here. Apple is ready to take on Netflix, Amazon and Disney in the increasingly crowded entertainment industry.
The tech giant made its formal entry into show business on Monday with a spare-no-expense premiere at Lincoln Center for “The Morning Show,” a program set in the world of morning television starring Reese Witherspoon and Jennifer Aniston.
At the fountain plaza, the carpet was black, not red. A glowing sign beamed the minimalist logo for Apple TV Plus. Ms. Witherspoon and Ms. Aniston roamed the grounds, along with the Apple chief executive Tim Cook. Invited guests and fans along the rope line captured the scene with their iPhones.
From the stage of David Geffen Hall, Ms. Witherspoon and Ms. Aniston spoke to an audience of 1,500 before the screening []
Robson/Safechuck Case: Here's what wasn't mentioned by the duo during their TMZ celebration nor by the media last month.
The panel of judges made clear the non-statute related merit issues in JS' case would also carry back to trial court, so will get their own renewed hearings. pic.twitter.com/PE70306sOq
— TSCM – MJ Case Facts and Commentary (@MJJRepository) December 18, 2019
This refers to other causes of action the estate raised alongside the statute of limitations in James’ case and demurrer. Such causes include determining the validity of negligent supervision, negligent hiring/retention, negligent failure to warn and breach of fiduciary duty.
Since Finaldi can’t produce any evidence that Safechuck was employed by MJ nor the two companies being sued during the abuse timeline (in fact MJJ Ventures didn’t even exist through much of it), this and other remaining issues help ensure it’ll be dismissed on summary judgment.
With Wade, the motion for summary judgment related strictly to statute of limitations. MJ’s team did not originally raise any issues beyond that. That too will now change. The estate indicated the reversal will “put the merit of Robson’s causes of action at issue on remand.”
To summarize: Wade & James’ cases will head back to the original trial court (whose judge sat through more than half a decade of litigation already). From there, motions will be made on other grounds for dismissal. The appellate court only considered statutes, not other merits.
<><><><><><><><><><>
11/23/2019
As you perhaps remember, Judge Beckloff, the judge that supervised the estate of Michael Jackson since Michael’s tragic death, dismissed the case of Wade Robson on December 19th 2017 and the case of James Safechuck on June 28th 2017.
Guided by their lawyer, Vince Finaldi, the two liars and perjurers, Robson and Safechuck proceeded to the appeals court. On Monday 11/18/2019, their hearing was scheduled on the 2nd District Court of Appeal.
Meanwhile, a new state law signed last month by Governor Gavin Newsom in California, has changed some circumstances. According to this law those who say they were sexually abused can file lawsuits until the age of 40 (it was until age 26 before the change). We will soon look closely to this new law.
As usual, the tabloids – The Sun, TMZ, …, some main stream media and Vince Finaldi – manipulated the facts. Here you are what Mr. Howard Weitzman, the estate’s lawyer said. Please notice that the emphasizes are mine:
“The appellate court’s tentative ruling is not on the merits of Robson and Safechuck’s allegations and the court in no way said that these cases will go to trial. Neither does it reverse the 2015 rulings dismissing Robson and Safechuck’s claims against the estate, which are final and no longer subject to any appeals. We are confident that the claims against Michael Jackson’s corporate entities will, once again, be dismissed as has happened before.”
Notice that the claims against the estate are dismissed and that will not change. Only “the third part” meaning the claims against MJJ Productions Inc, and MJJ Ventures, Inc.would be reexamined by the appeals court. These claims have been dismissed once in 2017, Estate’s lawyers estimate that they will be again dismissed by the Appeal Court. I am confident that they will be!
Now, let’s see what the new law is. We do not have go far! We have our Julia who has explained it:Source
So let me explain what exactly changed in the California Code of Civil Procedure that enabled Wade Robson and James Safechuck to save their cases from being dismissed and what this means for the future.
The relevant part of the law is CCP 340.1. Here is how it looked so far. Because both Robson and Safechuck filed their lawsuits when they were past their 26th birthday that meant that so far the (b)(2) section of the law – the last paragraph – applied to them.
(a)(1) section does not apply because here the accused is dead. You can’t sue a dead natural person. Which makes sense because since Roman law it is a basic human right of anyone accused to be able to face their accuser and defend themselves.
To circumvent that Robson and Safechuck are suing MJ’s companies, MJJ Productions and MJJ Ventures . This is why they have to make up all those contrived tales about MJ’s companies being this sophisticated CSA mafia and his secretary being a “madame”.
It’s misleading to claim that victims of CSA did not have a chance so far to sue if they were above 26. They could directly sue their abuser, if they were alive, even if the accuser was above 26.
The only obstacle they had was that they had some limits to suing third parties that were allegedly responsible for their abuse.
They could still sue them, only they had to prove that those third parties (typically schools or churches) knew or had a reason to know of their abuse and that they had control over the abuser. I think that is pretty reasonable.
But since we are in the MeToo era politicians are now bending over backwards to create an environment which IMO is not really fair to both parties, but is heavily in favor of accusers. So let’s see how the law changed now.
This is the new text of the law. So what changed? First of all the term “sexual abuse” changed to “sexual assault”. More importantly for us “the plaintiff’s 26th birthday” changed to “the plaintiff’s 40 birthday”.
With the old law our focus was this part. All legal arguments revolved around whether the companies knew or had a reason to know and whether they had control over MJ.
Since MJ was the 100% owner of his companies he had control over them, they didn’t have control over him, so the lawsuits were thrown out based on the basis that the companies could not control MJ, therefore Robson and Safechuck can’t fulfill the requirements of (b)(2).
Now all of those arguments go out the window. We start it all over, with a focus on a different part of the law, namely what I posted above, but here it is again:
Mind you in case someone takes Robson and Safechuck’s allegations at face value, the (a)(2) is tailor made for their mothers! They definitely had a duty of care for their sons and if their sons’ allegations are true then they were negligent which was the legal cause of the CSA.
***
If you have not followed the Estate vs R&S cases or if you want to review it, the best place is the site Daily Michael. Here you are a few links:
HBO has asked for an extension for the due date for their opening brief against the Michael Jackson Estate. New date is 2/28/20 for HBO, response by Estate due 3/30/20.
It is likely that HBO requests for 1 or 2 more extensions. That would delay the case between one or two years.
***
UPDATE 19/11/2019
There is no settlement in the case MJ Estate vs HBO.
There are several updates in the dispute of MJ Estate against HBO.
As you perhaps remember, on September 20, 2019 Judge Wu ruled against HBO’s anti SLAPP case and for the MJ Estate’s motion to compel arbitration (see here).
However, on October 24, 2019, HBO lawyers filed a motion of appeal and stay. You find this document here.
John Branca, the co-executor of the Estate called HBO’s move a “cover-up” and added:
“If HBO truly believed that their desperate attempt to grab ratings was true, accurate, and fair, they would not be so strenuously avoiding a public reckoning of this junk programming which has become known as the Lies of Leaving Neverland [] “The agenda is set at the top. Stockholders are questioning HBO’s leadership.”
Howard Weitzman, an attorney for the estate said: “HBO’s frivolous appeal to stall the court’s Order to arbitrate this dispute is yet another attempt to avoid the inevitable [] “Soon there will be a hearing, as the Court ordered, and damages will be awarded for HBO’s intentional and unlawful conduct [] “The real questions are what is HBO afraid of and how much will they end up paying the Estate of Michael Jackson.”
Bryan Freedman, another attorney for the estate, said in a statement: “This bogus appeal is nothing more than HBO’s latest desperate attempt to cover up the truth about its shoddy journalism [] “For seven months HBO has tried and failed to avoid a public arbitration [] “This appeal, which is its latest Hail Mary attempt, is even more pathetic than all of its other attempts to avoid public scrutiny. If HBO truly wanted to avoid a judgment, it should have thought about that before it aided and abetted a one-sided documentary without any journalistic integrity and in which the subjects have a huge motivation to lie – namely the millions of dollars for which they are suing the Estate. Our client will never stop until justice is served.”
On November 7, 2019, the MJ Estate filled an opposition to HBO request for stay:
Jackson Estate is suing HBO over Leaving Neverland. Inadequate defamation laws typically leave the deceased & their reps with no recourse against unproven allegations, but the Estate says in this case HBO breached a non-disparagement clause in a contract over an old concert film.
HBO says the documentary is journalism and thus protected speech. Jackson Estate says it is not journalism and is in fact a deliberately deceptive piece of non-journalism. Jackson Estate is fighting for public arbitration over the integrity of the show in order to prove this.
Judge George H Wu has dismissed HBO’s claims that the contract is old and void, and has ruled in favour of the Estate’s request for arbitration. HBO is appealing that ruling and requested a stay, pending that appeal. Today’s hearing was for a ruling on the stay.
This morning Wu handed down a tentative judgement granting HBO a stay, pending their appeal. The judgement suggested failure to do so posed a reasonable threat of ‘irreparable harm’ to HBO’s first amendment right to freedom of speech. Both sides then argued their positions.
Howard Weitzman, for the Estate, said: “In my opinion, you’ve taken a typical breach of contract case… [and] you’re turning it into something it’s not.” He questioned how HBO could reasonably claim ‘irreparable harm’ when it has continued airing the show after the ruling.
Judge Wu said he had already ruled on ‘the merits’ of the case when he agreed to send it for arbitration. Today, he said, “the question is whether I stay, pending an appeal… Your party sued to compel arbitration. I’m staying the arbitration that you have won.”
Wu: “This case is, to my mind, quite unique. I’ve never seen anything quite like it before and of course, that makes for bad law.” Weitzman: “Well don’t make any more bad law!” Wu: “I like to create a trail of interesting bon mots for the Court of Appeal to consider.”
He continued: “They gave you no law that says arbitration will be irreparable injury. Once you find a valid arbitration clause, the only job of a federal court is to send it to arbitration… Where is the evidence? It’s their burden.”
But Steinsapir argued the age of the contract was irrelevant, as Wu had already ruled. He said: “They used footage from that concert in the documentary… The idea that this does not relate to the contract is prejudging the merits of the arbitration.”
Wu to Steinsapir: “I’ve made my ruling and the ruling is in your favour. But I have doubts about whether I was correct in making that ruling. I would kind of like the circuit to get involved.”
Steinsapir told Wu he should not acquiesce to HBO’s ‘hand-waving’ about the first amendment: “You’ve not seen a single piece of evidence that anybody has been chilled in their speech.”
He continued: “Where is the evidence of this irreparable harm? Attorney argument is not evidence. They gave you no evidence. Not a single declaration. Nothing. You can’t get an injunction or a stay without evidence.”
He said the stay would significantly extend the litigation, arguing: “Their own cases make clear that speedy resolution is necessary. If their first amendment defences have any merit, they should want them resolved.”
Bryan Freedman – who previously defended Eddie Cascio & James Porte in Vera Serova’s class action lawsuit over allegedly fake songs on a posthumous Michael Jackson album – also appeared today on behalf of the Jackson Estate.
He said: “I understand you’re unsure about the underlying issue & would like the 9th Circuit to give you some direction, but you can’t disregard the standards for irreparable harm & that’s what’s been done here. You provide no reason at all why HBO would suffer irreparable harm.”
Wu said he didn’t apply typical standards because it was ‘not a typical arbitration situation’. Freedman replied: “But how it arises and the substance of whether a 27yo contract is enforceable or not is not for Your Honour to decide.”
Freedman: “We think it is a typical situation… [HBO] are big boys. They know what they are doing. They agree to terms. It’s a simple breach of contract case. For the court to say it’s untypical doesn’t make any sense.”
Freedman argued there was no legal reason why the non-disparagement clause should hold more or less weight than any other clause, saying that if HBO today breached the copyright terms of the same document, it would be an open and shut matter.
Freedman suggested Wu was aiding the defence and delaying the case. He said: “It’s only unusual because you’ve made suggestions for them to take. They did not file a SLAPP motion. Your Honour suggested they file a SLAPP. Now they want to take it to the Court of Appeal.”
He continued: “What’s irreparable harm is the harm to us in not being able to put forth our case to an arbitrator. You’re going to make us delay over 30 months before we even get a selection of an arbitrator. Arbitration is supposed to be a process that’s speedy.”
Wu replied: “But ultimately, you are looking for money, which is not irreparable harm when it has been delayed.” Wu then invited Daniel Petrocelli to speak for HBO. He argued the ‘irreparable harm’ was that ‘first amendment interests are threatened in multiple ways’.
Petrocelli said the appeal was unusually significant as in most similar cases, ‘the ultimate question to be decided by the 9th Circuit [is] whether it proceeds in arbitration or in court’. But in this case, a successful appeal would end the whole lawsuit.
He said: “Pending the outcome of this appeal, the case may be over once and for all.” He then argued the contract was void: “When a contract is over and it’s been over for 27 years, you can’t invoke the arbitration provision in that contract.”
Freedman replied: “The contract is not over. It exists. Because a contract is dated 27 years ago, does not terminate the contract. The contract continues to this day.” Wu said although he’d let Petrocelli voice that argument, he was ‘not concerned with the merits’ at this stage.
Wu: “I’m just considering whether or not there’s a basis to grant the motion for a stay… A serious first amendment issue puts it into a potential irreparable harm situation.”
Wu concluded: “I’m not here to enforce contracts. I’m here to do justice and follow the law as I see it. In terms of whether or not to grant the motion for a stay, I’m following the law as I see it… I will make my tentative judgement my final judgement.”
<><><><><><><>
As you see, Judge Wu had a U-turn! He said: “This case is to my mind quite unique. I’ve never seen anything like it”. He allowed HBO to proceed with its appeal and to take the case to the Ninth Circuit appeals court. Judge Wu’s Order:
There is a schedule for HBO’s Appeal that begins already in December 2019. However, fans who are lawyers or familiar with legal procedures say that there will be delays. The appeal procedure will probably take a year.
The King of Pop’s streaming surged []: 2.1 billion U.S. spins, up from 1.8 billion a year ago. With proceeds flowing from his Mijac Music catalog, a Las Vegas show and a long-term deal with Sony, he retains his postmortem cash crown for the seventh consecutive year.
And this one:
The Real Reason Behind Michael Jackson’s Earnings Drop
There aren’t many living entertainers capable of clocking nine figures in a single year, but Michael Jackson has done it eight times since his 2009 death. Most recently, he tallied an estimated $400 million pretax in 2018, bringing his postmortem total to $2.4 billion []
Square One is a documentary that investigates the first ever 1993 allegations against Michael Jackson. It strategically uncovers new evidence and information through interviews with people closest to the case. These interviews showcase never-before-heard public statements from witnesses, Michael Jackson’s nephew, and legal assistant to the prosecutor in ‘93.
I did not expect the incredible and overwhelming attention this documentary has created. I funded this project as much as possible by myself, and it would be amazing to get some help covering some recent traveling, hosting costs and further advertising the documentary! Thank you, and if you can’t donate, absolutely don’t worry!
A federal judge is leaning towards granting the Michael Jackson estate’s move to take HBO to arbitration in its dispute over the documentary “Leaving Neverland.”
Judge George Wu issued a tentative ruling on Thursday in which he denied HBO’s motion to dismiss the estate’s case. Wu is expected to make the ruling final by the end of September.
The four-hour documentary features allegations of two men, James Safechuck and Wade Robson, who say they were sexually abused by Jackson over the course of several years when they were young children. The Jackson estate argues that by running the documentary, HBO violated a non-disparagement agreement from a 1992 concert film from Jackson’s “Dangerous” tour.
The estate blasted HBO for not including their rebuttal to the allegations in the film, and went to court seeking to compel a public arbitration of the contract dispute. HBO has said that the 26-year-old contract no longer applies.
HBO’s attorneys, led by Theodore Boutrous, had sought to throw out the case under California’s anti-SLAPP statute, which discourages frivolous litigation intended to chill speech on issues of public interest.
Wu had earlier suggested that HBO file the anti-SLAPP motion, but in his tentative ruling he concluded that the statute does not apply to requests for arbitration.
In court on Thursday, Boutrous asked the judge to reconsider.
“It was filed to chill speech,” he argued. “It was filed to tell the world, ‘Don’t talk about child sex abuse.’… A company like HBO may be able to fight back and move forward. Others might not be able to do that.”
Wu acknowledged that the legal issues in the case are close calls, and that his ruling will likely be appealed.
“You’re a big company, they’re a wealthy estate,” he told HBO’s lawyers. “It’s a clash of the titans.”
Outside court, John Branca, a co-executor of Jackson’s estate, said that HBO has been trying to avoid a public airing of both sides of the story.
“I’ve never seen a media organization fight so hard to keep a secret,” he said. “We’re saying let’s get all the facts out there, not just two stories from two accusers with a financial interest.”
A spokesperson for HBO said, “We are waiting to see the Judge’s final decision.
Bryan J. Freedman, an attorney for the estate, issued a statement slamming HBO for its “wrongful conduct.”
“HBO has tried everything possible to avoid having a trier of fact adjudicate their wrongdoing,” Freedman said. “If HBO believes its actions were proper then there is no reason for them to try and hide behind procedural technicalities to avoid an arbitration or a trial. Whether in an arbitration, federal court, state court or the court of appeal, the Estate of Michael Jackson will force HBO to be held accountable for its wrongful conduct. The Estate will never stop until justice has been obtained.”
I have just heard from one of the fans from the courtroom in the MJ Estate v HBO. She said that HBO argued, but the Estate did not have to. The judge said he would rule on 9/30 in written form because he is going on vacation. HOWEVER, Mr. Steinsapir told the fan that the reason the Estate did not have to argue is because the Estate WON. Steinsapir told the fan to tell fans that the Estate IS going to arbitration! @KarmousaG is the fan and we THANK HER!!! Wooo hoooo #Arbitration
Directly from Howard Weitzman regarding Todays [9.19.19] hearing: “The judge indicated he was granting our request, over HBO’s objection, and sending the case to arbitration. We are waiting for the formal written Order but this is what he told the lawyers in open court.”
***
Do you remember when Richard Plepler, the HBO chairman and CEO, resigned on February 2019? Here it is the reason!
AT&T’s Paul Singer Fight Echoes Undisclosed Activist Letter (Exclusive)
9:30 AM PDT 9/18/2019 by Tatiana Siegel , Paul Bond
In a Sept. 9 letter to AT&T’s board that copied CEO Randall Stephenson, Paul Singer’s Elliott Management sent a shot across the bow by suggesting that leadership changes would be welcomed by the activist investor. The 24-page letter was particularly critical of Stephenson’s $109 billion takeover, including debt, of Time Warner.
While the move by Elliott, which also disclosed that it owns a $3.2 billion stake in the telecom-media giant, sent shock waves throughout the business world, it also echoed a recent effort from an undisclosed shareholder.
In a previously unreported letter to Stephenson and WarnerMedia CEO John Stankey dated Feb. 25, the unnamed person also criticized the wisdom of the Time Warner acquisition and took aim at managers, including then-Warner Bros. CEO Kevin Tsujihara and former HBO chief Richard Plepler.
The Hollywood Reporter obtained the nine-page document (the shareholder’s name was redacted), which was sent by Vick Law Group in L.A. and demanded inspection of AT&T corporate records. Elliott management declined to comment on the letter, as did AT&T, which says it is aware of the identity of the shareholder. A source familiar with Elliott’s strategy says the hedge fund is not the shareholder referenced.
What is curious about the February missive is that it foreshadowed the exits of Plepler and Tsujihara by just days. In the case of Tsujihara, the letter claimed without evidence that an unnamed actress negotiated a multipicture deal “to cover up possible transgressions by or involving Tsujihara” and called out Warners for “the highly questionable and rushed circumstances” behind its $290 million purchase of the RatPac-Dune film library. (Tsujihara’s relationship with aspiring actress Charlotte Kirk was first revealed 10 days later by THR, which reported on the affair and subsequent push to secure parts for her that led to the CEO’s exit.)
The shareholder also took umbrage at Plepler’s move to greenlight the Michael Jackson doc Leaving Neverland, arguing that it opened the company up to a nine-figure lawsuit. (The Jackson estate sued HBO for $100 million days before the letter, and the case is making its way through the courts.) Plepler exited HBO on Feb. 28, three days after the missive.
The letters written by Elliott and attorney Scott Vick echoed each other in their rebuke of Stephenson (the latter letter also called out Stankey for his “hands off approach” on some of the decisions it dubbed foolish and detrimental to stakeholders).
What we learned from the Harvey Weinstein documentary Untouchable
1 September 2019
Warning: Some graphic content
Some of the women who have accused Harvey Weinstein of sexual assault tell their stories in a new documentary, which sheds light on the power he held over them and the rest of Hollywood.
Untouchable: The Rise and Fall of Harvey Weinstein was screened on BBC Two on Sunday and will be stream on Hulu in the US from Monday. In it, some contributors, including accusers and former colleagues, speak on camera for the first time.
The 67-year-old former film mogul denies all allegations of non-consensual sex and criminality, and refutes claims that he retaliated against women for refusing his advances. He has pleaded not guilty to criminal charges and is due to face a trial in New York in January.
Here are six insights and allegations from the documentary.
n the fall of 2016, Harvey Weinstein set out to suppress allegations that he had sexually harassed or assaulted numerous women. He began to hire private security agencies to collect information on the women and the journalists trying to expose the allegations. According to dozens of pages of documents, and seven people directly involved in the effort, the firms that Weinstein hired included Kroll, which is one of the world’s largest corporate-intelligence companies, and Black Cube, an enterprise run largely by former officers of Mossad and other Israeli intelligence agencies. Black Cube, which has branches in Tel Aviv, London, and Paris, offers its clients the skills of operatives “highly experienced and trained in Israel’s elite military and governmental intelligence units,” according to its literature.
Two private investigators from Black Cube, using false identities, met with the actress Rose McGowan, who eventually publicly accused Weinstein of rape, to extract information from her. One of the investigators pretended to be a women’s-rights advocate and secretly recorded at least four meetings with McGowan. The same operative, using a different false identity and implying that she had an allegation against Weinstein, met twice with a journalist to find out which women were talking to the press. In other cases, journalists directed by Weinstein or the private investigators interviewed women and reported back the details.
In the opposition memorandum, the Michael Jackson Estate stresses that its petition turns exclusively “an issue of federal law under the Federal Arbitration Act” and as such, this court has no business applying California’s SLAPP law to whether or not HBO goes to arbitration. Recent Supreme Court rulings how states can’t create “procedural or substantive” obstacles to enforcement of arbitration agreements gets attention. And the Michael Jackson Estate reminds the judge of the modest chore before him.
The petition, states plaintiff, “arises out of HBO’s refusal to arbitrate. Breaching an agreement by refusing to arbitrate is not constitutionally protected activity. And even if it were, the Jackson Estate has shown a probability of success on that claim, as the Court explained in detail in its tentative order (where it definitively rejected all of HBO’s arguments against arbitration). If the Jackson Estate’s claims to be arbitrated are as frivolous as HBO would have the Court believe, it should have no reason for concern.”
California’s SLAPP law provides an automatic right to an immediate appeal. Meaning, no matter what Wu decides, there’s a pretty good chance that the case goes up to the 9th Circuit and maybe eventually the Supreme Court before the two sides would actually settle in for the prospective “open” arbitration.
Hearing on September 19.
Here the Estate’s response:
‘Square One’, Danny Wu documentary
In a new independent documentary ‘Square One’, Danny Wu investigates the false accusations against Michael Jackson from 1993.
The documentary will premiere on 28th September at the Chinese Theater, L.A. and be released on 5th October on youtube.
KINGVENTION 2019
The Michael Jackson Fan Convention will return to London to celebrate our idol, Michael Jackson. With no Kingvention in 2018, the event returns during a year that has been challenging for the MJ fan community.
I caught up with organiser Pez Jax to find out what’s in store at Kingvention 2019, their plans behind a very public display of support for Michael and how the preparations are going for what is set to be the MJ event of the year! []
Michael Jackson Accuser Wade Robson’s 2016 Deposition Released In Video Exposing ‘Lies of Leaving Neverland’
Wade Robson was videotaped for a 2016 deposition as part of his lawsuit against Michael Jackson‘s companies, and pieces of it have just been released in a video pointing out all the alleged flaws and issues with Robson and James Safechuck’s accusations against the singer.
‘Lies of Leaving Neverland’ pokes holes in the stories of MJ’s accusers
An explosive new video called Lies of Leaving Neverland has been released that seemingly pokes multiple holes in the stories of Michael Jackson’s accusers, Wade Robson and James Safechuck, who claim they were sexually abused by the King of Pop.
According to The Blast,Lies of Leaving Neverland is a direct response to the Emmy-nominated documentary Leaving Neverland that horrified media members at the Sundance Film Festival in January and was subsequently released on HBO.
In the Lies of Leaving Neverland, the video accuses the original Leaving Neverland of being wrought with “provable lies, conflicting accounts, contradictions, staged reshoots, faked scenes, reconstructed memories, critical information omissions, manipulated news clips, discredited source material,” according to The Blast.
The Lies of Leaving Neverland centers around Robson’s 2016 deposition where he admits that he previously testified under oath that the “Billie Jean” singer never touched him a “sexual” or “inappropriate” way, but then said those previous statements were “mistruths.”
Not long after the 30-minute video begins, Robson admits in 2016 that he “was hurt” that he was not invited to Jackson’s memorial after Jackson died from acute propofol and benzodiazepine intoxication in 2009 in Holmby Hills, California. Robson believed that he and Jackson had “a close friendship.”
Why Robson would want to attend the funeral of his abuser at L.A.’s Staples Center has mystified and angered Jackson supporters to this day.
There were many other points of contention in The Lies of Leaving Neverland that the video points out:
Why one of MJ’s closest young friends, Macaulay Culkin of Home Alone fame, was never contacted to speak in Leaving Neverland. Culkin said he was never abused by Jackson;
Why no one from the Jackson family was ever given the opportunity to speak on the matter;
How Safechuck could tell of being abused on the train at Neverland in 1988 or 1989 when the train was reportedly not built until years later;
How Robson said he was abused when he was alone with Jackson while the family went to the Grand Canyon, but that the mother testified that the entire family was in Arizona together;
That Robson claimed he burnt most of Jackson’s stuff, but failed to mention that he had already sold most of the items that had monetary value back in 2011;
Emanuel Lewis, a close friend of MJ’s at the time when Thriller hijacked popular culture and owned the Billboard pop charts, was also never contacted. He also said he was never abused by Jackson.
Bryan Freedman, an attorney for the Jackson Estate, told The Blast that “the consideration of Leaving Neverland for an Emmy in any category other than one based on fiction is preposterous. A documentary is commonly defined as a film or video examining an event or person based on facts.”
The Michael Jackson Estate has filed a $100 million lawsuit against HBO.
Wow it’s a miracle. Thank you TVLINE for reporting the accurate number of the poll which is 91% and that the Leaving Neverland fraud is actually disputed and debunked. #MichaelJacksonVideoVanguardAward
***
Esse video dessas crianças em um vilarejo em Uganda cantando Michael Jackson me fez chorar https://t.co/YrH21yAAD6
These tweets are Charles Thomson’s (from two conversations source 1, source 2). The time passes and we forget the facts. Also, new readers come on board and do not know where to begin. It is a good way to review some aspects of the 93 lawsuit against MJ and the 2005 trial:
The law at the time meant Jackson had zero choice but to settle the civil case, because a loophole meant the criminal case was scheduled after the civil, which was a breach of the American constitution. The law was changed as a direct result of the Jackson case.
Nonlocal Univers:
The law was changed after 1993. If there was a civil trial and a criminal trial dealing with the same allegation, the civil proceedings would remain inactive until after the criminal proceedings. It was the prosecutor Ton Sneddon who wanted this change.
Here it is from his mouth:SourceLinda Deutsch article
“It is an irony. The history of the law is that the L.A. district attorney’s office carried the legislation as a direct result of the civil settlement in the first investigation,” Sneddon told The Associated Press in an interview. []
“The law in California at that time provided that a child victim could not be forced to testify in a child molest proceeding without their permission and consent and cooperation,” Sneddon had said. “As a result of the (first) Michael Jackson case, the Legislature changed that law, and that is no longer the law in California.”
No I did not. I said Francia took $2m. The Arvizos went to two civil lawyers and only went to police on advice of civil lawyers. The mother told the police they wanted a criminal conviction first, which would bolster a civil case, as the boys had til they were 18 to sue.
The fans are correct. There was no child ‘erotica’. There were completely legal art books, still available today, that contained artistic photography featuring children. There was separate adult erotica. But there was no child erotica.
Jordan was cooperating at that point. There was absolutely nothing precluding an arrest. The same fallacious argument being advanced here would have applied to raiding Jackson’s properties or compelling him to participate in a nude photoshoot. Why gather evidence you can’t use?
Well, that… and after failing to find any probable cause for arrest/charge. There was a large window after the raids, after the forced nude photoshoot, during which the case was active, the Chandlers were cooperating and, with probable cause, they could’ve arrested/questioned.
It’s not like the allegation was made on Monday and the case was settled on Tuesday. It dragged on for months. The Neverland raid was August 1993. The settlement was Jan 1994. Huge window for cops to have hauled Jackson in if they had grounds to do so.
Are you seriously asking that question? Why someone wouldn’t consent to having their genitals handled and photographed by police officers unless court-ordered to do so? You’re seriously asking that? Framing that as an activity any other person would be glad to participate in?
And you know very well why the case was settled when it was. It was settled on the eve of Jackson’s civil suit deposition, in which he was about to be forced, unconstitutionally, to give away his defence in public, allowing law enforcement to build a case that circumvented it.
The maker of the TV show you promote daily for free said: “He had a fulfilling sexual & emotional relationship at the age of 7 with a 30yo man… He enjoyed it, he loved Michael, and the sex was pleasant. I’m sorry, that’s just the reality.” People in glass houses, and all that.
***
About the 2005 trial and how the prosecutor changed the date of the alleged abuse
And how did they learn what the alibi was and what dates it covered? We’ll never know for sure. But what we do know for sure is that prior to the date change, prosecutors 1) illegally raided the defence PI’s office, and 2) illegally seized defence files from Jackson’s assistant.
And Gavin’s cross-exam revealed he had initially claimed the alleged abuse began before the rebuttal video and the DCFS interview. It was not clear when he’d changed it.
I am recently re-reading the trial transcripts as I’d forgotten a lot of details over the years. The more I read, the more convinced I am that Reed has not read them. He claimed it was shocking Jackson was acquitted. Nobody who’s read these transcripts could say such a thing.
The case absolutely fell to pieces. It was a turkey shoot for the defence. One prosecution witness after another came in and undermined the case instead of helping it. Some simply didn’t say what prosecutors assumed they would. Others did but were decimated on cross-examination.
I was reading a prosecution witness’s testimony the other day and it was almost toe-curlingly embarrassing. They came in and totally fucked up the prosecution’s case, as regards their piece of the story. The direct was so catastrophic that Mesereau barely needed to cross-examine.
Yes. It became clear prosecution witnesses were being scripted as the trial unfolded, to try to plug holes the defense was blowing in the case, ie. the way people like Palanker came in and blaming everything on David Arvizo, crowbarring his name into every answer they could.
Mesereau’s cross-exam of Palanker is hilarious. He hits her with line after line of her police interview where she calls the kids weird, Janet crazy, calls the lods liars, says Janet was coaching them, etc. Then explicitly asks if anyone’s told her to blame everything on David.
Of course, she claims nobody has – but contrasting her original interview with her complete rewrite by the time she testified, it was extremely obvious a message had come from somewhere that she needed to dump everything on David and erase all criticism of Janet and the kids.
Interestingly, she’s asked a question about whether she’s spoken with anyone about a particular topic and she replies, ‘Ron.’ Mesereau responds, ‘Prosecutor Zonen?’ Of course, we later learn Palanker and ‘Ron’ are an item. They’re now married. You couldn’t make it up.
Another extremely disturbing feature the Jackson trial was the number of prosecution witnesses who, under cross-examination by Tom Mesereau, revealed they’d been going to the prosecutors’ private homes for hours-long evening and weekend meetings, of which there was no record.
The whole premise of Sneddon’s conspiracy charge was that Jackson had no money or influence anymore & so was desperate to rescue his image & livelihood. Cut to the verdict, and Sneddon says it’s ‘celebrity justice’ and Jackson used his enormous wealth to get acquitted
About eight years ago, the fans collaborating with the blog Vindicating MJ did several researches and came to the conclusion that organized pedophilia was after MJ to use him as their mascot and frontman. When Jackson categorically turned them down, they changed their maneuvers, took revenge by slandering Jackson and spread pedophilia.
Ten years after Jackson’s death, Leaving Neverland does exactly the same job as a Victor Gutierrez or a Tom O’Caroll.Here you are several tweets byJustice for The Falsely Accusedthat explain how (Source):
When we say that the allegations against MJ are used as a part of a bigger, long term plan to normalize pedophilia we are neither delusional or conspiracy theorists. Check out this article from 2014:
Do you realize a familiar name in that article? Thomas O’Caroll (pen name Carl Toms) is a convicted pedophile who wrote a book of the MJ allegations, using them in his quest of normalizing pedophilia.
As we have shown you before, the very origin of the MJ allegations can be traced back to a man, called Victor Gutierrez, who actively advocated pedophilia. There are good reasons to believe that Evan Chandler was in contact with him when he got his son make allegations against MJ
Or how scary similar is the rethorics used by Gutierrez and Dan Reed:
THREAD: Dan Reed, Robson and Safechuck describe the alleged abuse as a love story. They push the notion that straight boys at the age of 7-13 were routinely “in love” with Jackson. This is the only way they can explain their repeated and long standing defense of MJ.
If you don’t think Leaving Neverland is used in support of the long term agenda of normalizing pedophilia, think again. Remember how absolutely obsessed Slate magazine was with Leaving Neverland? They wrote think piece after think piece about it.
At the time I didn’t even notice an article that they have published that, on the heels of Leaving Neverland, questioned the criminalization of child molestation.
The false accusers in LN are so perfect to carry this agenda, exactly because these are not people who actually experienced sexual abuse. So they can tell about alleged graphic sexual acts between a child and a man with a smirk on their face.
They can claim that at the age of 7 they anticipated having sex with an adult man. Pedophiles will surely be happy to use that to support the argument they are already making:
Dan Reed can go to the media and tell them that 7 and 10 year olds can have emotionally and sexually fulfilling relationships with adults. NAMBLA and PIE will give a standing ovation to this!
Pedophiles argue that there is no evidence that “sex” traumatizes kids, it is the stigma by society and the secrets they are forced to keep that does, so the solution is to legalize pedophilia. So they are going to be happy to see Reed to popularize that idea in the media:
I firmly believe that Leaving Neverland is going to be used as a trojan horse to normalize pedophilia. I am not saying everyone on the left is aware of this, but certain fractions definitely are and it is not really a new thing.
Of course, LN doesn’t openly say that pedophilia should be allowed. No one would be open to it if it did. But they definitely are sowing the seeds of certain discourse arising from it that will then be used in arguments for the normalization of pedophilia.
It’s going to be a subtle, gradual process, but it will come, mark my words. Like I said, Leaving Neverland is such a perfect vehicle for this, because these false accusers do not display any trauma when they talk about the alleged “sex acts”, like real victims do.
Instead they claim BS like at the age of 7 and 10 they anticipated sex with an adult man. Or one of them claimed in a media interview that MJ supposedly making a video tape of the “sex” was “fun” and other crap like that.
It’s real sinister that pedophilia advocates can 100% use the stories of these false accusers to back up their agenda and arguments. It completely aligns with everything they argue for! Think about that!
@RuPaul – Why do you associate with @Randybarbato & @fbailey when they were trying as far back as 2005 to normalize Victor Gutierrez’ defunct child porn fiction book and bring it to a mass audience? In 1998, Michael Jackson successfully won 2.7 million from Gutierrez for slander.
A Los Angeles jury said the book was a malicious lie. “We talked to jurors afterwards. They said they wanted to send a message that they were tired of the tabloids telling malicious stories about celebrities for money. They said they hope this will send a message not to do this.”
Since that’s the case, why did Randy & Fenton buy the rights to this fabricated & disgusting book in 2005? These two bottom feeders you call business partners even wrote a completed screenplay for it. They must be ecstatic their dream came to fruition with Leaving Neverland.
Fenton Bailey in British GQ 2006: “There will be no explicit scenes of sex in the film, it will be all very subtle, but controversial. Some obstacles still lie ahead. America can deal with the sanitized version of the story, but our story is based on the TABLOID version”.
Randy Barbato on the trash he sought to legitimize: “Indie movies have gone mainstream in the States. They’ve become a genre. But this project is independent in the true sense of the word…outside any of the acceptable norms.” Also outside the acceptable norms of reality Randy.
Everyone knows Hollywood is a vile & disgusting place but this @RuPaul is really the lowest of the low. I’m part of the LGBT community and I’m absolutely disgusted by who you associate with. Say it with me now. Randy Barbato and Fenton Bailey are two pedophile fantasists.
Social media should know the character & identity of the men behind @RuPaulsDragRace. Just because they’ve achieved mainstream success now via your show @RuPaul doesn’t matter. Parasites like Randy & Fenton allowed identical vermin to crawl into our lives likely with their help.
To reiterate, we are disgusted by your two friends/business partners. This is a horrifically ugly side to your show that no Vaseline lense or soft focus can ever fix. It will likely make no difference to you for financial reasons but at least there’s now a Twitter record.
BTW, the next time Randy & Fenton start ranting in front of you about all the social injustices under the Trump administration, please remind them they need to first look in the mirror since they rank far lower on the totem pole in terms of morality, integrity and basic humanity.
Nonlocal Universe 