, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

This is Part 2 of this multiple series blog.  If you missed Part 1, you can read it HERE

Have you ever wondered what really went on in the 1993 case and the 2005 case?

If you still think Michael Jackson could be, or is, guilty of the accusations that came against him, I ask that you especially read Part 2 as this will go into much depth and with lots of information to help you explore and learn what really happened in these cases.

How Jordie Chandler could have described Michael Jackson’s private parts with such accuracy? (you may be shocked to find out that he DID NOT describe them with any accuracy and his accusations/descriptions did NOT fit)

Why several jurors changed their minds about his innocence after the trial?

You will find out the TRUTH about this and much more in this 2nd part in this blog series.

In Part 2, we will cover:

  • The jurors who changed their minds after the trial and the truth behind that
  • William Wagener’s spiritual experience outside the gates of Neverland Ranch in 2005
  • Looking back at the trial and the Jackson Timeline…what happened when…when did the supposed accusations take place…how did the stories change?
  • Michael Jackson’s demeanor during his arrest and during the trial and what that says about him spiritually
  • Jordie Chandler’s description and how he got it all wrong
  • Access and links to court transcripts and other important documents so that you can learn the truth about what happened and proof that Michael Jackson was indeed, innocent

BUT….WAIT!  what about the 2 jury members who changed their stories afterwards and said they thought he was guilty?

Let’s just see about that….shall we?

Members of the jury who acquitted Michael Jackson were interviewed here in the video below, on “Good Morning America”.  You’ll note that one of the jurors, Ellie Cook, who you will see also in a separate video below, where she states that she was “bullied” into the verdict and claims she kept stating emphatically to the other jurors that she believed that Michael Jackson was guilty the entire period of the trial, stating nothing of the sort in this “Good Morning America” video, and in fact, is agreeing with her fellow jurors here.  She agreed to be interviewed for this show (Good Morning America) and is seated right next to the jury foreman who she claims was so mean to her and bullied her.  She does not appear uncomfortable at all to be seated next to him.

Diane Sawyer asks “Any second thoughts?  Any of you?  She is seen shaking her head no and saying audibly “no”.  She is even speaking up against the mother (Janet Arvizo) here.  Ellie here is agreeing with all of the other jurors and participating with them!  She doesn’t seem to be fearful of any of them at all!  There is no hostility apparent.

Note that Sawyer asks them if they felt that the son, Gavin Arvizo was lying, and she again shakes her head and emphatically says “yes!”  Ellie continues to laugh with the other jurors and agree with them.

Also, please note that Ellie is asked by Diane Sawyer about a quote she gave about her having more “understanding” because of something that happened in her own family.  She had a grandson that “flashed” and so, was charged with a felony sex offense.

Ellie is also seen here laughing along with the other jurors about if things got out of hand.  This is not a nervous laugh, not a fearful laugh, but a laugh that is in comraderie with her fellow jurors here.

Now, let’s compare and contrast:  Below, this SAME juror, now going by Eleanor Cook (Ellie) is emphatically stating that she believed Michael Jackson was guilty the entire trial and was “bullied” into acquitting him.  Fellow juror Ray Hultman goes along with this story here…yet, she acted COMPLETELY DIFFERENT in the “Good Morning America” interview above and is seen stating that she NEVER had any doubts and goes along with all of the other jurors, even sitting next to the man whom she claims in this interview, “bullied” her and threatened to have her thrown off the jury if she didn’t agree with their innocent verdict.  She is not uncomfortable with anyone at all in the “Good Morning America” television interview.  So what happened?

Let me ask you this….compare her behavior above with that below.  Why the huge change?  Who offered her money to change her story for a bigger “story” :’/

Want to know who?  Keep reading!

So, why did those 2 jurors change their story and who paid them to do so?

This from blogger David Edwards:

“The media (paid Cook and Hultman to change their stories…for MONEY)! They offered ALL of the jurors money to say MJ was guilty, but they were the only 2 who took the bait! They signed book deals, but lost it when their manuscript was plagiarized from Maureen Orth’s Vanity Fair articles! And guess who was writing their manuscript? Stacy Brown!!! The same rat who wrote “The Man Behind The Mask” with Bob Jones!  (Juror) Ray Hultman (who you see in the video above co-conspirating with Ellie Cook) SUED to get out of his book deal, and the lawsuit was settled out of court, and the book deal fell flat.  He didn’t get a dime!”

This was another sad attempt on the media’s part to falsify and sensationalize a story in order to continue to make money.

The truth is, these 2 jurors were, to put it bluntly, liars.  They changed their story, sold their soul and LIED for the same reasons so many others do…MONEY.  In fact, it has been reported that Cook had already forged a book deal BEFORE the trial even started!

It is clearly evident when you compare and contrast the 2 completely opposite stories shared above.  You can clearly see from Ms. Cook’s demeanor on the “Good Morning America” set that she is enjoying the interview and the time with her fellow jurors, and, she is stating, for the camera, without hesitation, that she had no regrets or second thoughts about Michael Jackson’s innocence.  However, if you need even more proof, please read the following well-researched articles:

David Edwards Clearly Shows the Fallacies Regarding Jurors Who Changed Their Minds

What Happened With Some of the Jurors After the 2005 Michael Jackson Trial by Helena of the Vindicate MJ blog

This piece above also includes transcript of the interview Cook and Hultman did with Rita Cosby for MSNBC and also, an interview done with Larry King…VERY interesting to hear what Cook and Hultman both said in THIS interview, before they both took offers for book deals and completely changed their stories!

Here, some excerpts from Cook and Hultman from the Larry King interview:

KING: Are you going to write a separate book?

COOK: Yes, I’m writing a book. I’m with Larry Garrison (ph) of Silver Creek Enterprises. And my granddaughter is my agent. So we — I worked yesterday.

KING: Why, Ellie? Why the need to write a book?

COOK: I don’t know that I need to write a book, as my granddaughter has said from the beginning, write a book. And I’m — what I’m really writing about is the bonding of this jury and the nice people I’m with. Because I’ve said that’s to me more important.

KING: What about the mother ticked you off so much?

COOK: Well, she was just downright rude to us as far as I’m concerned. And I think she set her son up. I think she’s probably the poorest excuse for a mother I’ve ever known.

Compare and contrast this with what Cook told Rita Cosby in an interview reported and aired by the Associated Press on August 10th, 2005 (the 2nd of the juror interviews you viewed in video form above):

Eleanor Cook: [During the deliberations] I said he was guilty and I said it in a big way. They came up after me with a vengeance. I really got attacked.

Rita Cosby: How so?

Cook: ‘I didn’t understand’, ‘I didn’t know’, ‘I was too old’…

R. Cosby: How did the foreman [Paul Rodriguez] threaten you?

Cook: If I don’t change my mind, or go with the group, or be more understanding, he’ll have to notify the bailiff, the bailiff will notify the judge, and the judge will have me removed….

R.Cosby: How angry were you at the way you were treated by other jurors?

Ray Hultman: The fact that got me the most was that people could not take those blinds off long enough to really look at all the evidence that was there.

R.Cosby: What happened that day when the verdict came down? How bad was the air?

Cook: The air reeked of hatred. People were angry and I had never been in an atmosphere like that before. I just thought that they could turn on me any minute and there wasn’t anything I could do about it.

R.Cosby: Did you tell anyone how bad it was for you?

Cook: I called my daughter and she was very comforting. She said, Mother, you’ve done right, your conscience is clear, you’re a strong lady and you can handle it, you can handle them.

R.Cosby: But you didn’t?

Cook: I didn’t. I caved in.

So, on June 23rd, 2005, Cook spoke with Larry King and mentioned she was writing a book, that her granddaughter had encouraged her to do so, and that the book was about the bonding of the jury and the nice people she was with.  Shortly after, she changed her entire story and said she felt threatened on that jury, that the hate was palpable on vindication day, that she had been “bullied” by other members of the jury.  It was a complete change of story!

“…And I’m — what I’m really writing about is the bonding of this jury and the nice people I’m with. Because I’ve said that’s to me more important.”


KING: And you were the one who got ticked off by the mother, right?

COOK: Oh, big time. Big time.

KING: I’ll get to that. But what was it like to serve?

COOK: What was it like to serve? It was an eye-opener. I really like our country and I like the fact that we do serve. And this is such a diverse group of people. It really — it was a great experience.

KING: Would you say it was a hard-working jury?

COOK: Yes, oh, definitely. Definitely. I really do.

Then, just 2 months later, she says this:

Eleanor Cook: [During the deliberations] I said he was guilty and I said it in a big way. They came up after me with a vengeance. I really got attacked.

So, right after all of this happened, that very same month when the jury was interviewed on Larry King Live, Eleanor (Ellie) states that she’s writing a book about the bonding of the jury and the nice people she’s with and how serving on the jury was a great experience, but just 2 months later she claims these people who she said she bonded with and who were so nice that she was going to write a book about the experience, had really came after her with a vengeance, and that she got attacked and was bullied and had caved into the pressure and agreed to the not guilty?  How about her demeanor on Good Morning America, joking around and being completely comfortable with the jurors she was on there with, including jury foreman Paul Rodriguez, whom she claims bullied her!  Come on now!  I wasn’t born yesterday!  As my Dad would say.  I doubt any of you were either.

Now, on to Hultman….

HULTMAN: Well, I think the prosecution did everything they could possibly do with this case. I think the problem was the family. But as the prosecutor would tell you, they don’t pick their victims is what they said. And in this case, the accuser and his family had some real credibility problems. And that was kind of the key to the whole issue.

KING: So even though you thought he may have been in the past a predator, they didn’t prove it in this case.

HULTMAN: That’s right. And the evidence from the 1993-94 incident was allowed to come into the case only for that purpose. Which was to provide either evidence that he showed a pattern for doing this kind of thing or he didn’t. And then you could use that as you would…

KING: And you didn’t see that as a pattern.

HULTMAN: I saw it as a pattern.

KING: But…

HULTMAN: But there wasn’t enough evidence to prove he had molested the accuser in this case.

One thing to note here is that Hultman is saying he saw it as a pattern (remember that this was the first case ever, to my knowledge, that prior “accusations”, not a prior conviction, prior “accusations” were allowed to be brought in as evidence.

So again, just 2 months after this interview, Hultman states that he BELIEVED the accuser, that he believed the accuser’s story of being molested…and yet, above, 2 months earlier, he states that the accuser and his family had some real credibility problems.  So I ask…if someone has credibility problems (lack of credibility means, you are not credible, not trustworthy), how can you believe someone who lacks credibility? How does someone who, during the trial and right afterwards, you felt was not trustworthy, not credible, suddenly become believable 2 months later when you are offered a book deal???

I’ve served on a jury before and I will tell you, you develop some very strong feelings about the case that are not easily swayed.  It’s one thing to feel from the get-go that you might have changed your opinion to go along with the rest of the jury, however, it’s an entirely different thing to agree and state that you had no doubts and then come out months later and suddenly state that you had doubts all along and were bullied into your decision.

Hultman also issues this statement after Michael’s passing:

Fellow Jackson juror Ray Hultman issued this statement on the pop star’s death:

“I offer my sympathies to Michael Jackson’s family and hope God will give them strength during this time. Michael Jackson was undeniably a great entertainer and it’s sad that much of his talents and energy in later life was consumed by having to defend some poor personal choices.”

He of course still kept some negative going, turning what should have been a positive, heartfelt statement to the family, into something where he mentions “poor personal choices”.

Source:  http://www.kcoy.com/story/10599421/attorney-jurors-react-to-michael-jacksons-death?redirected=true

In the interview that Hultman and Cook did with Cosby, Cook states the following:

Cook: The air reeked of hatred. People were angry and I had never been in an atmosphere like that before. I just thought that they could turn on me any minute and there wasn’t anything I could do about it.

Cook states in this interview done in August 2005 that the air reeked of hatred and that “they” could turn on me any minute and there wasn’t anything I could do about it.  Yet, she states emphatically in the above interviews on both Good Morning America and Larry King Live that serving on the jury was a great experience, she speaks of the bond they all developed and how she is writing a book about that, and how friendly the people were and, she appears VERY comfortable with her fellow jurors on the Good Morning America set….not at all fearful as one would be if they felt a group of people might turn on them and bullied them into a decision.

Here are some excerpts of interviews given by Juror Susan Drake that you might find interesting:

KING: Was there a chance you would have convicted anything guilty, Susan, on one of the minor counts?

DRAKE: Nothing. I went in there with a courage to convict a celebrity. Because I really believe in doing what is right. And witness after witness I was more convinced of the innocence, because of the motivations of financial gain and revenge, it was just amazing the way it was laid out.

And here is Drake’s quote to NY Post “columnist” Andrea Peyser, who wrote the disgusting “Freak of the Week” article earlier this year, which I won’t even link to because it’s a waste of time for you to read it! Unfortunately, I had to use Diane Dimond’s book as a source for this quote. (From David Edwards)  From page 313:

Drake would later tell New York Post columnist Andrea Peyser that she had been totally convinced that Michael Jackson was blameless. “I’m adamant,” she was quoted as saying, “I think he’s not guilty and I think he’s innocent.”

12. If you could tell Mr. Tom Stendon one thing, what would that be?

I would tell him that during the trial, it clearly came through to us that you had an agenda, to take down a man, a human being, and it didn’t work.

Source:   David Edwards’ Fact Checking the 2005 case blog

Jonna M. Spilbor of Findlaw.com takes these jury members to task in her column HERE

Below, some excerpts from this column:

“….Less than two months after clearing Michael Jackson of all charges, jurors Ray Hultman and Eleanor Cook have come forward publicly to announce they made a mistake. In their words, they feel Jackson’s jury “let a pedophile go.”

Cook has reported being “bullied” into her not-guilty verdicts – all fourteen of them.

Hultman claims his conscience has gotten the better of him. At least, so says his publisher.

The Case of the Michael Jackson Jurors: Why Did They Come Forward Now?

Looking at jurors Hultman and Cook, I asked myself this: Why come forward now? For that matter, why come forward at all? If they cannot change their verdict (and they can’t), and therefore cannot change the outcome of the case, why speak out?

The answer, sadly, requires little imagination. Obviously, something happened in between what appeared to be an unwavering “not guilty” verdict following several days of deliberation, and August 8th, when they appeared together – on a primetime cable news show – to announce their about-face.

What was it? Did these two people happen to show up at some “Jurors Anonymous” meeting, only to learn the Step Six is admitting when you’ve rendered the wrong decision? Or, were they approached with the prospect of a book and movie deal which (wink, wink) just might make them a whole lot richer if there were (hint, hint) a controversy of sorts surrounding the verdict?

I can’t truly know these jurors’ motivations, but I can hazard a guess based on the timing of events, and the statements they’ve publicly made. I’m putting my money on the book and movie deal because, simply, the revelations of jurors Hultman and Cook coincide with the announcement of their individual books deals and combined television project.

Each juror will be coming out with his or her own book, and both, not surprisingly, will be published by the same publisher. Hultman’s is to be entitled, “The Deliberator”, while the title of Cook’s tell-all is to be, “Guilty As Sin, Free As A Bird.” I imagine that books entitled “Yup, Like We Said, Still Not Guilty” would be a lot less saleable.

How The Jackson Jurors Broke the Law: They Were Supposed to Wait Ninety Days

In California, Penal Code section 1122 states, in part: “After the jury has been sworn and before the people’s opening address, the court shall instruct the jury…that prior to, and within 90 days of, discharge, they shall not request, accept, agree to accept, or discuss with any person receiving or accepting, any payment or benefit in consideration for supplying any information concerning the trial; and that they shall promptly report to the court any incident within their knowledge involving an attempt by any person to improperly influence any member of the jury.” (Emphasis added.)

This is California’s version, but most states, it turns out, have similar statutes – imposing moratoria, but not forbidding jury book and movie deals.

Looking at the calendar, it has not been 90 days since Jackson’s jury was discharged. Clearly, the pair is in violation of the statute — a statute punishable by contempt of court.

Last but not least….a press release for Aphrodite Jones’ book “MJ Conspiracy”, according to blogger David Edwards, where she mentions how other jurors were ALSO offered book deals to lie and say MJ was guilty, but they turned them down due to their integrity. They called Ray and Eleanor “traitors”:

Source:  http://www.themjifc.com/forum/innocent/12547-aphrodite-jones-thomas-mesereau-michaels-attorney.html 

In 2005 Aphrodite Jones was one of only two authors granted access to every day of the Michael Jackson trial. With seven New York Times bestsellers under her belt, her book looked set to fly off of shelves when it hit stores.

But when Jones came to write her book she hit wall after her wall. As one of the only journalists willing to admit that Jackson’s 2005 trial had proven his innocence once and for all, Jones found that publishing houses were unwilling to give her a deal.

Thomas Mesereau, Jackson’s defense lawyer, encountered the same problem. After the trial almost every major publishing house in the US approached him with lucrative book deals. When he maintained that Jackson was truly innocent and he wouldn’t write anything to the contrary, every publishing house retracted its offer.

Jurors were offered book deals too. Two jurors claimed after the trial that they really thought Jackson was guilty, but only after they had signed six figure book deals. Other jurors claimed that they had been offered identical deals by the same publishing companies – but only if they too would change their opinion from innocent to guilty, casting enormous doubt over the sincerity of both rogue jurors’ u-turns.

One juror, Ray Hultman, lost his publishing deal after it was revealed that his manuscript included portions plagiarised from an inaccurate Vanity Fair article. These included allegations that the former juror couldn’t possibly verify, such as claims that Jackson had a detachable nose.

The book was co-written by Stacy Brown, a serial Jackson detractor who also co-wrote a book about the star with Bob Jones, Jackson’s former aide. Jones was forced to admit on the stand in 2005 that portions of his book ‘The Man Behind The Mask’ had been fabricated by Brown in order to boost sales.

Hultman’s crediblity was further damaged when it was revealed that after the verdict he had commented to one reporter, “The evidence just wasn’t there. We couldn’t have gone any other way.” A strange comment from a man who would later insist that Jackson had been guilty.

The second juror, Eleanor Cook, also never published her book. Cook’s granddaughter caused controversy when she announced during jury deliberations that the juror had already signed a book deal – and had agreed to it in principle before the trial had even begun. Ghostwriter Ernie Cariwel admitted on June 7th 2005 – five days before the verdict was reached in Jackson’s trial – that he had already begun writing the book despite never having spoken to Cook.

Fellow jurors slammed the pair two months after the verdict, calling them ‘traitors’ and claiming that their allegations were ‘ridiculous’.

As the publishing industry set about convincing the world that Jackson was guilty – printing books such as ‘Be Careful Who You Love’ by Diane Dimond, an author who has claimed that her sole aim in life is to destroy Michael Jackson and who writer Ishmael Reed once described as a ‘Jackson stalker’ – Jones began conducting deep research. Obtaining a special court order from Judge Rodney Melville, who presided over Jackson’s trial, she was given access to all of the evidence and transcripts related to the case.

It took Jones days just to photocopy all of the court transcripts and a further six months to read them. The wealth of information needed for the book forced her to invest in a second computer. She used one to store all of her research and the other to store her writing. It took her a further six months to finish the manuscript

‘Michael Jackson Conspiracy’ was explosive. Not only did it reveal all of the exculpatory evidence and testimony which the media had failed to present to the public, it also exposed deliberate media bias against Jackson and explained the motives behind it. The blurb described the book as follows:

“…A scathing indictment against the media for conspiring to distort, dehumanise and destroy Michael Jackson… Jones argues convincingly that the case against Jackson amounted to nothing more than a media made, tax paid scandal, and she makes an impassioned to the public at large to think critically about, question the integrity of and demand truth in ‘the news’.”

Despite its sensational contents and in spite of her seven previous bestsellers, Jones was unable to convince any major publishing house to print the book. She was forced to self publish.

When I interviewed Aphrodite Jones shortly after the book’s release she told me that she intended to make a documentary about Jackson’s trial, describing her vision for a ‘TV version of the book.’ Yesterday she emailed to tell me that the project is moving forward.

“The one hour docu-show I did on Michael Jackson will air during my new series called ‘True Crime’,” she said. “It will begin in April 2010 on a new Discovery channel called Investigation Discovery (ID).”

The hour-long film will cover Jackson’s 2005 trial, the media falsehoods which surrounded it and why Jackson ‘died with a broken heart’ after being ‘divorced by America’. Jones insists that the 2005 trial proved Jackson’s innocence and says the documentary will show this.


I want you to think about something here.without this information….without these facts and truth, how easy would it have been to just simply believe the MSNBC interview with these 2 jurors if this is all you had seen?

Can you see how easily the media and the way they present information to you, can sway your opinion?  Would you have just taken it as fact, disgusted that Michael Jackson had “gotten away with it because he was a celebrity” and continued to spread the lies that they so convincingly pulled the wool over so many of your eyes with?  How many of you did that?  Yep, that’s what I thought.  THIS is exactly why we have to be aware and pay attention!

If you want to know more about the media’ impact on your thinking, please read this BLOG POST

The Truth remains that Michael Jackson was VINDICATED on all 14 charges (10 counts and 4 lesser counts)…by a jury of his peers, with 5 months of testimony and evidence or lack thereof, to back up their decision.

Judge Melville’s last words before he left the courtroom:

“Mr. Jackson, your bail is exonerated, and you are released.”

Michael Jackson leaves the courthouse on June 13th, also known as “Vindication Day”.  Jackson expressed little visible emotion (as we later found out he was emotionally exhausted from the trial and according to statements made by sister LaToya, Michael also had an intense fear that he would be assassinated that day).

“Justice was done.  The man’s innocent.  He always was.”

Attorney Tom Mesereau

Looking Back…

Below…the video showing the verdicts being read, Michael and his family and lawyers leaving the courtroom and Mr. Mesereau’s unforgettable words:

“Justice was done.  The man’s innocent.  He always was.”

Let it also be known, that both of his attorneys, Susan Yu and Tom Mesereau, stayed in contact with Michael Jackson even after his trial.  They truly believed in his innocence and still do.


Live verdicts read

God Has Called Many In Regards to The Truth About Michael:

PLEASE listen to the following audio…it’s a small excerpt of an  interview between TV Host William Wagener and radio show how Catherine Gross on her blogtalk radio show, “A Place In Your Heart”.

This gave me chills….as I put this on the blog today, Wednesday, July 20th, this is the first time I have ever heard it and I’m amazed….as I now am beginning to realize more and more how many people God has called into this fight for truth, including myself, and how God truly did claim Michael as his own.  This is the exact same feeling I have had all this time!  This is continued confirmation to me…I too felt God was saying to me “This is my child.  I want the truth to be known about him.  He was innocent.  He never did these things”.

This is what William claims the Holy Spirit spoke to him while he prayed in front of the gates at Neverland:

“Michael Jackson is completely innocent of all these charges.  Even though he’s not a perfect human being,  he will be found not guilty on all 10 charges, because, in fact, he IS innocent,” and God had said to me…”Michael Jackson is mine.  He belongs to me and I will take him, but first he will be found Not Guilty of all these charges and now I want you William Wagener, to go proclaim it to your church.  Not on television, but to the church you go to.”

William Wagener Michael Jackson is Completely Innocent

“It wasn’t a fair trial.  It was an inquisition.  The whole point of this trial was to financially damage Michael, to bring him to great depression, to end his career and thereby, end his influence for peace in the world.”

William Wagener speaks to Catherine Gross on her radio show, “A Place In Your Heart”.

I found it highly interesting and of special note that William felt God asked him to first proclaim this message to his own church, instead of on television (as Wagener is a television host).  Why do I believe that God asked William to do this?

The Church & Michael Jackson:

The church was, and continues to be, some of the biggest critics of Michael.  Yet, most know nothing about him.  About who he really was.  They judge, like the public, on hearsay, on what the media showed them, despite that God asks us to seek truth in all things:

“Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.” ~ 1 Thessalonians 5:21

The very people who are to welcome and minister to sinners, the lost, those in need, turned their backs on Michael Jackson because instead of seeking truth and relying on God, they rely on man’s words via the media.  We have failed as a church, as the people of God.  I believe that this is one of the biggest lessons of our time.  A lesson directly from God, for the church, for all people….a lesson about how relying on our own selfish wills and selfish desires to put others down so that we can raise ourselves up artificially, while using hatred against our brother to do so.  The very same people who emphatically state that we are to be in this world, not of it, participate in the very things of this world….by believing and spreading lies, judging and listening to hearsay.  It reminds me of the scripture of seeing the speck in your brother’s eye while ignoring the log in your own

I have many times thought that if Jesus Christ were walking this earth today, most would shun him, turn their backs on him and wouldn’t even allow him into their pristine churches.  We, as a church, are failing in this respect.  We must do better.  Don’t get me wrong.  The church is incredibly important.  God’s church. But as pillars of that church, we must all strive to do better and to listen to what God asks of us…we have become apathetic and complacent.

For those in the public and the church, my advice is to spend a few hours on the Reflections on the Dance website, after reading this blog, and then tell me your thoughts.  Learn the truth.  Seek truth out as God calls us to do.  Don’t judge a man by hearsay…we are to treat others as we ourselves want to be treated.

“So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.” ~ Matthew 7:12

Would we want others judging us by hearsay?  NO, of course not!  Then we MUST NOT do that to anyone else, and that includes…Michael Jackson!

Michael Jackson exhibited Christ-like qualities…Just as we are all asked to do:

The surrender and arrest of Michael Jackson is reminiscent of Jesus Christ’s in many ways.  Jesus too, willfully submitted to the authorities.  He knew that this was part of what he had to go through to accomplish God’s mission for him…the salvation of mankind.

Likewise, just as Michael has always stated, in that he looked to Jesus as a role model and read the Bible daily…Michael submitted to authorities peacefully, despite how anxious, fearful, outraged and completely distraught and scared he must have felt.  Michael too knew that this was something he had to go through in accordance with the mission he had been given.

“THIS WAS WRITTEN FOR ME IN THE BOOKS. I HAVE PROVEN MY PART. NOW GOD WILL BE THEIR JUDGE” Michael Jackson said on the evil do-ers who lied, cheated and betrayed him.

Taymoor Marmarchi 
Worked on humanitarian projects for Michael Jackson 

Evil basks in the glory of the evil deed.  Michael instead, conducted himself with a conduct that God asks us to…respect, humility, faith.

Guilt runs and hides.  Evil rejoices in evil.  Innocence faces the trials head on.  You’ll notice that Michael didn’t run.  He faced this head-on and with a peacefulness in his spirit and with dignity.  After the trial was over, Tom Mesereau stated that he thanked his counsel and family and thanked God.  Susan Yu, in an interview done, stated that Michael would thank his attorneys and all those involved in helping him, DAILY!  He never acted up or shouted out in court (Aphrodite Jones said that of all the trials she had covered where someone was being accused of something so serious, this was not usually the case).  When the jury would come in, Michael, would, according to Aphrodite, look at them and give them the prayer hands in a head bowing motion.

“Not only am I presumed to be innocent, I AM innocent, and I know that the truth will be my salvation. I have been strengthened to prove my innocence by my faith in God and the knowledge that I am not fighting this battle alone.”

Michael Jackson, 1994 NAACP Awards.

I will tell you that every time I watch the video of Michael’s arrest and also the subsequent trial videos, it’s with tears in my eyes as to how he was treated as a criminal, handcuffed, and he went peaceably despite the anger and fear he must have felt, despite the injustice and insulting condemnation.  He faced this with what can only be described as a Christ-like attitude.  It is VERY easy to tell what was inside of him…it was not a nephilim spirit…if that were the case, you would not have seen this…you would have seen a very different picture of an out-of-control person pitching a fit and acting out of anger…instead, you saw a peaceful man and that kind of peace comes from none other than God.

If you have never seen the arrest video, I think it’s important that you view it. You can watch it here in Part 1 of this series.

Consider this as well.  These are lyrics that Michael wrote during this time….

If I sail to Acapulco or Cancun Mexico

There the law is waiting for me

and God knows that I’m innocent

If they wont take me in Cairo

Then Lord where will I go

I’ll die a man without a country

and only God knew I was innocent now

These lyrics were written by Michael Jackson while going through his 2005 child molestation trial

Now, I ask you…does this sound to be coming from a heart full of “nephilim” spirit or someone guilty of such heinous acts?  To learn more about Michael being called a nephilum (very serious spiritual accusations, please read Part 1)  OR…is the outcry deep from the soul of someone falsely accused who feels devastated and hopeless in the situation he is in, devastated about being lied about?

Here is proof that the family who accused Jackson in 2003, and who were the prosecution witnesses in Michael’s 2005 trial, completely changed their story:  The sound is very low in this video, so you have to turn your speaker way up or use headphones:

Accusers change their stories

Let’s understand this very thoroughly….The Jackson Timeline from MSNBC:

  • Feb. 6, 2003:  Bashir documentary airs in the US
  • Feb 7:  Alleged molestation begins…the charges against Michael (after the Arvizo’s      changed their story) state the 7 acts of molestation started on this day…the very day AFTER this documentary airs!
  • Feb. 14:  Joint DCFS and LA Police probe begins which is later found to be unfounded and the case is closed.
  • Feb 18:  Santa Barbara investigation begins (due to alleged concerns over what was seen in the Bashir documentary)
  • Feb. 24:  Joint DCFS and LA Police probe ends.  Case closed, unfounded charges.  Below, the statement from the Arvizo family to DCFS during their initial investigation.  Note the date is November 26th, 2003 on the following document…when the Arvizo’s changed their story, they stated that molestation had begun on Feb. 7th, the day after the Bashir documentary aired, and yet, this document, dated Nov. 26th, 2003.  Why is that?

According to David Edwards, it’s due to the fact that November 26th is the day that the document was leaked, even though it had been completed back in February.   The original version didn’t leak.

“Someone from the DFCS leaked it to the press, or to (Mark) Geragos, who leaked it himself (I’m not sure). Larry Feldman considered filing a lawsuit over that leak, but had nooooo problem with whoever leaked Jordan’s declaration from December 1993!” said Edwards.

“I don’t know the exact date, but their investigation was completed at the end of February,” continued Edwards.  “That end date is critical because initially when MJ was arrested, the alleged molestation happened for 2 weeks in February, while the DCFS was doing their investigation! But when MJ was indicted in April 2004, all of a sudden the molestation dates changed to the end of February through March 12(?). Sneddon shifted the dates in order to help secure an indictment, and to cover for the conspiracy and “forcing” them to shoot the rebuttal video.  The molestation originally was said to have occured on February 7-20, and there were 7 lewd acts and 2 counts of plying Gavin with alcohol. But then the dates were changed to Feb. 20  through March 12, 2003, and the lewd acts dropped to 4, while the alcohol charges increased to 4!” stated Edwards.

You can find more in-depth information on this issue HERE

Here is an excerpt from the above source:

Also, keep in mind that at the time of the prosecution’s timeline, there were at least two on-going independent investigations. Also remember prosecutors are claiming an alleged conspiracy started first, then alleged molestation, then the alleged conspiracy continued. According to them, the family was kidnapped specifically so Jackson could molest the accuser. Besides being illogical, it is simply another version of events that have emerged during the course of this “case”. The defense notes this change in their Memorandum in Support of Motion for Mental Examination dated Nov 12 2004. They say:

Somewhere, the perception of the facts in this case was significantly altered, and the Indictment no longer followed the details and chronology recounted by Psychologist Katz. …In view of repeated interviews and witness statements, the change in facts, counts, and dates has created an irreconcilable inconsistency with no explanation. (pg 10)

The defense also highlights what a number of legal analysts and lawyers questioned at the time concerning the “lewd acts” alleged. At first, they were said to have begun Feb 7 2003 according to the initial charges. Again, this Feb 7 date was based on more than two dozen interviews with the family and more than 7 interviews with psychologist Stan Katz. However, these alleged “lewd acts” miraculously jumped to Feb 20, near the end of the month. For the record, the Santa Barbara sheriff’s department reportedly began what ended up to be a 2-month long investigation into this allegation on Feb 16 2003 sparked by a complaint from Carole Lieberman. Yeah, her. The Los Angeles Department of Children & Family Services (DCFS) investigation was sparked by a complaint from a teacher. That DCFS investigation found the allegations to be “unfounded” (see DCFS memo). The family exonerated Jackson of these allegations being made by so-called “concerned citizens” based on nothing but the suspicion of these “concerned citizens”.

Here also is some additional information from David Edwards in regards to these charges being changed:

In the initial felony complaint that was filed on December 18th, 2003, MJ was charged with 7 counts of “lewd acts” upon a child and 2 counts of administering an intoxicant between February 7th and March 10th, 2003, but in the grand jury indictment filed on April 21st, 2004, the dates changed to February 20th and March 12th, 2003, the number of lewd acts decreased to only 4 counts, an “attempted lewd act” charge was added, the counts of administration of an intoxicant increased to 4, and all of a sudden there was a charge of conspiracy to engage in child abduction, false imprisonment, and extortion, with five “co-conspirators” unindicted, despite their refusal of full immunity in exchange for their testimony against MJ! From the “Jackson Charged with Conspiracy to Kidnap” section of the Veritas Project:


Another problem with the conspiracy allegation is that although five of Jackson’s associates were allegedly involved in the kidnapping of the family, Jackson is the only one who has been charged with a crime. The five alleged co-conspirators remain un-indicted and have all been offered immunity if they agree to testify against Jackson.

Joe Tacopina, an attorney for one of the accused co-conspirators, insists that his client has rejected Sneddon’s offer of immunity and maintains that the Arvizo family’s claims are ludicrous.

Here is the defense’s motion to have Janet Arvizo subjected to a mental examination, where they described the aforementioned discrepancies between the initial complaint and indictment. From pages 9 through 11 (much of it was redacted, as this motion was attached to a prosecution motion to oppose it):


Mr. Michael Jackson submits this Memorandum in support of his Motion for Mental Examination of Complaining Witnesses. Mr. Jackson’s motion is based on the following grounds:

(1) The prosecution opened the door to permit a mental examination of the complaining witnesses by offering its own mental examination end expert testimony concerning their mental condition, and the complaining witnesses have waived the provisions of Penal Code section 1112 by employing an expert psychologist examine the witnesses’ mental status and provide expert testimony of mental condition;

(2) Mr. Jackson cannot effectively cross-examine and confront prosecution expert witness Psychologist Stanley Katz unless he is permitted equal access to the subject matter of the expert’s mental examination, which are the complaining witnesses, and precluding equal access to the witnesses for examination deprives Mr. Jackson of Ins Sixth .Amendment rights to confront and a cross-examine expert witnesses against him.

A. Statement of the Case

 1. Plaintiff7’s Complaint.

Plaintiff filed this action on December 18, 2003, charging Mr. Jackson with seven (7) counts of Lewd Acts Upon a Child in violation of Penal Code section 288a and two (2) counts of administration an intoxicant to a minor in violation of Penal Code section 222. The Complaint was based on interviews from three (3) complaining witnesses: Janet Arvizo, then age 35, who is the mother of the two (2) minor complaining witnesses, Star Arvizo, then age 14, and Gavin Arvizo, then age 13.

The complaint was based on more than seven (7) interviews conducted with the complaining witnesses by Psychologist Stanley Katz. Stanley Katz detailed the alleged conduct that formed the basis of the complaint, and the complaint mirrored his interviews and reports to law enforcement.  In addition, law enforcement conducted more than two (2) dozen interviews with the complaining witnesses, and more than a hundred separate interviews with other witnesses.

Mr. Jackson voluntarily surrendered to the Santa Barbara Sheriff’s Office on November 20, 2003, and was arraigned on the original charges on January 16, 2004. Mr. Jackson pleaded not guilty. However, the prosecution soon abandoned the December 18, 2003, Complaint and convened a Grand Jury to return an Indictment against Mr. Jackson. Without the benefit of witness cross-examination, the Grand Jury issued an indictment on April 26, 2004, consisting of one (1) count of conspiracy with five (5) other-unindicted individuals in violation of Penal Code section 1S2, four (4) counts of Lewd Acts Upon a Child in violation of Penal Code section 288a, one (1) count of Attempted Lewd Act Upon a Child in violation of Penal Code sections 664 and 288a, and four (4) counts of Administration an Intoxicant Ln the Commission of a Felony in violation of Penal Code section 222.

2. The witnesses changed the dates and facts for the indictment

 The Indictment was markedly different from the December 18, 2003, Complaint. The Complaint contained seven (7) counts of Lewd Acts Upon a Child, where the Indictment contained only four (4), plus one of Attempted Lewd Act Upon a Child. Somewhere, the perception of the facts in this case was significantly altered, and the Indictment no longer followed the details and chronology recounted by Psychologist Katz.

In addition, the Complaint alleged two (2) counts of Administration of an Intoxicant, where the Indictment alleged four (4). In view of repeated interviews and witness statements, the change in facts, counts, and dates has created an irreconcilable inconsistency with no explanation.

The dates of the alleged crimes also changed. The Complaint said five (5) of the seven (7) “lewd acts” allegedly occurred “on or between February 7, 2003 and March 10, 2003,” and all the other counts occurred between February 20 and March 10, 2003. But the Indictment now says that all but the new conspiracy charges occurred between February 20, and March 12. 2003. Now it is a conspiracy starting February 7, but no lewd act until February 20. This was not just a narrowing of the time period, but it was also a lengthening of the time period. Suddenly, something happened on March 12 that was not included in the Complaint.

In the Indictment, Mr. Jackson was charged with conspiracy to engage in Child Abduction, False Imprisonment, and Extortion. He was not indicted on the actual objects of the conspiracy itself, nor were these acts charged as stand-alone crimes or attempted crimes. Not even the alleged co-conspirators arc charged with the crimes.

Much thanks to David Edwards for the above synopsis

The chart below is originally from the Veritas Project (a website you should definitely check out, which shows how all of the people in the 1993 and 2003 cases, were connected.  I’ve also included various sources with lots of information on both cases below as well:




Regarding Diane Dimond:  http://mjjr.net/content/mjcase/part3.html

Regarding Jury Pool Tainting:  http://mjjr.net/content/mjcase/part4.html

Regarding DA Tom Sneddon:  http://mjjr.net/content/mjcase/part2.html and also:  http://mjjr.net/content/mjcase/santabarbara.html and this http://mjjr.net/content/mjcase/tomsneddon.html

Michael Jackson had always denied any wrongdoing: http://mjjr.net/content/mjcase/settlement.html

  • March 10th, 2003:  All alleged molestation ends.  Accuser and his family leave Neverland (this is from the second, changed story that the Arvizo family told later on).
  • March 10th, 2003:  LA social workers report their findings…listen to THIS!  Accuser’ family deny abuse, praise Jackson  NOTE that on the very same day in real time, LA social workers report that the family has denied abuse and praise Michael Jackson…YET…when the Arvizo’s change their story, they state this exact date as the date that suddenly the molestation ended and they left Neverland!
  • April 16:  Santa Barbara closes case stating that the evidence of criminal activity had not been met.
  • June 13:  Santa Barbara re-opens case after hearing Dr. Katz’s interview with the family which alleges abuse..so begins the 2nd version of the story being told by the accuser and his family….This interview included in this report was conducted by 3 Los Angeles social workers.  They repeated ver batum, all the statements made by the accuser and his family (it was taped).

In a televised interview, former Santa Barbara county Sheriff Thomas stated that the accuser had not confided in anyone until June…that his mother, brother and siblings didn’t know yet that Gavin had been molested, yet, if you know the details, in COURT, both Davellin and Star (sister and brother to Gavin) would go on to testify that they “witnessed” molestation and inappropriate behavior.  So again, a complete twisting of the story.  First they told authorities that they had just found out, just now, in June at the time…and in court, they stated that they actually witnessed the events!

So this case was not just about whether or not a boy was abused, or not (the emphasis being on NOT), but the entire details of the case changed…it was a complete change of story by the entire accuser’s family and the accuser himself.  First, he’s a good guy, wonderful, a father figure, humble, kind, loving, helped Gavin overcome cancer, and then suddenly they change the entire story and he’s a monster, he never helped them, Michael never helped Gavin in his cancer, he gave them liquor, they were in his bed….YET…check again the DCFS document above…where the mother of the accuser stated in this official document, that the children were never left alone with Michael Jackson, and that the times they slept in his bed, the entertainer (Michael Jackson) did NOT sleep in the bed with them, but rather slept on the floor.

In fact, the accusors had spoken VERY differently about Michael on several occassions, including what was shared in this excerpt of Aphrodite Jones’ book “The Michael Jackson Conspiracy”.  Mrs. Jones was a reporter covering the 2005 trial who believed Michael was guilty, until she had the facts, and consequently changed her mind.

Below is a quote from the Arvizo family, the ones who would then change their entire story and turn around and charge him with child molestation in 2003:  Here, they talk about Michael helping them and praying with them and talking to them about God.

This is an excerpt from Aphrodite Jones’ book “The Michael Jackson Conspiracy, with a foreword by Attorney Tom Mesereau”:

“The exact words that the Arvizo’s used to describe Michael were:  honest, very trustworthy, humble, loving, caring, funny, unselfish and attentive.  (this is from the same rebuttal video you will view below….something that the Arvizo’s had agreed to be a part of, before they turned around and changed everything they said…where part of the time they didn’t know they were being filmed)

Gavin spoke of the faith Michael gave him, of the faith Michael kept telling him to have, of Michael providing him with the faith to look forward to the future.  Gavin said that he never forgot Michael’s words, asserting that early on, he, depended on those words of faith to get him through many rounds of chemotherapy.

Janet looked into the camera and said that the doctors told her to “plan for a funeral”.  She said that the doctors told her that if the cancer didn’t kill Gavin, the chemotherapy would.  When Janet complained to Michael that her son was “not going to make it”, Michael would tell her not to listen to that.  Michael insisted that Gavin would live.  Years later Gavin would be told by doctors that there was no scientific explanation for him to be alive, that his cancer cure was a “miracle.”

Davellin told the jury that Michael Jackson had initially called her brother while he was at the hospital and later made calls to Gavin (Gavin was able to meet Michael through a show business contact who owned a comedy club and after learning of Gavin’s fatal illness, wanted to help make the boys’ wish come true) at his grandparents’ home.  All throughout this period, Michael was calling to give Gavin the hope to grow strong, telling Gavin to eat up all the cancer cells like Packman.”    Michael was trying to teach Gavin a visualization technique, suggesting that the boy visualize himself using healthy cells to eat up unhealthy cells.  Jackson wanted the boy to get well and invited him to make his way to Neverland.

Janet told the private investigator that she and her children had no stories to sell to the media, that whatever the media was trying to buy just didn’t exist.  The relationship between Michael Jackson and her children was pure and innocent.  Janet said that MIchael had prayed along with her and her kids, that Michael had talked to them about God.”

This tape, an excerpt from “The Untold Story of Neverland”, which are clips of Neverland and various aspects of the trial and what led up to it by Emmy-nominated filmmaker, Larry Nimmer

Now, how did the Arvizo’s change their story?  What prompted them to do so?  Did they have a history of this kind of behavior?

A little background on the Chandlers (1993 accusations) and Arvizo’s (2005 trial):

Consider This…

  • Did you happen to know that the Arvizo family (Gavin Arvizo is the boy who accused Michael Jackson of child molestation in 2003) tried to get money from other celebrities before Michael Jackson and that Gavin denied up until the last minute, that Michael had ever done anything inappropriate with him?

I have done an interview with someone who befriended and went to school with Gavin Arvizo before the accusations and also spoke to him afterwards and this interview will show that Gavin also told this friend and others, that Michael NEVER did anything to him and that this had become a way of life for him (lying/extortion).  This interview audio will be up soon.

The list of celebrities that the Arvizo’s tried to get money from includes Jay Leno, Chris Tucker and George Lopez.  Janet Arvizo, the boy’s mother, also had a record of making false prior allegations of sexual assault, physical assault and being held hostage in 3 other instances before Michael Jackson, which included her ex-husband and JCPenney/Tower Records guards.  She also made similar allegations against her father.

  • Did you know that while Janet Arvizo and her family were supposedly being held hostage by Michael, she was out charging expensive beauty treatments for herself to Michael’s account out and about town, where she could easily have had access to a phone to call for help?
  • Did you realize that Gavin Arvizo, the boy who accused Michael of child molestation, had a prior record of shoplifting?
  • Did you know that the Arvizo family filmed a rebuttal video to Martin Bashir’s documentary where they glowingly talked about how wonderful Michael has been to them, how he treated them like family, how loving he had been and how he had helped heal Gavin of his Stage 4 terminal cancer because he had given the boy hope and encouraged him to keep fighting for his life?  Later, they would claim that they were forced to make this tape and that it was all scripted for them.  As you have seen already in the video above, this was not the case.  You can clearly see that this was not scripted as Janet Arvizo is practically gushing about Michael and all that he has done for them and Janet and her daughter at times get emotional talking about Michael and how good he has been to them.  Not too long after they had made this tape and also praised Michael to others, they brought charges against him.
  • Did you know that there are clocks all over Neverland?  Gavin Arvizo claimed that they were being held hostage by Michael and that they were never allowed to know the time, which seems highly unlikely in the fact that clocks are displayed all over the Neverland grounds, including the big clock in the lawn.  The Arvizo’s had also claimed being kidnapped and held hostage by others prior to meeting Michael Jackson.
  • Did you know Neverland property is not unpenetrable?  There is a short, ranch-style fence that can easily be jumped over or gone “through”, which also seems to seriously discredit the Arvizo’s stand that they were being held hostage.
  • Did you know that the guest house that the Arvizo’s stayed in was the same guest house that has hosted Elizabeth Taylor, Marlon Brando and others and was right next to the main house?
  • Did you realize that Jordan Chandler, the boy behind the 1993 allegations, denied that Michael ever did anything improper to him UNTIL Michael refused to fund Evan Chandler’s (the boy’s father) new movie project for $20 million?  Which ended up being the same amount that Michael ended up having to settle for?  Evan Chandler, who was a dentist and aspiring screenwriter, claimed that he gave his son a mind-altering barbituate drug during a tooth extraction and that under this drug, the boy admitted wrong-doing on Michael’s part. Geraldine Hughes, who was the legal secretary to Barry Rothman (the lawyer Evan Chandler contacted), was witness to the extortion.  There is much more to this story though, as you’ll find out in my interview with Geraldine Hughes,  Evan (Jordan Chandler’s father) was taped saying that he was going to ruin Michael Jackson.  Coincidence?
  • DID YOU KNOW that Jordie Chandler’s (the boy who accused Jackson in 1993) description of Michael Jackson’s private parts, was absolutely WRONG?

From the VindicateMJ blog, which has done extensive research and coverage on both cases:

“In addition to getting the circumcision issue WRONG (Jordie’s drawing showed a circumcised penis and Michael was not circumcised), Jordan Chandler also claimed that MJ had a dark penis with light splotches, when in fact he had a LIGHT penis with DARK splotches! (Just like the rest of his body!)”

Just as a sidenote:  None of this is being brought up to invade what I feel should be Michael’s privacy…unfortunately, the media and all those involved in the accusations that came against Michael Jackson, completely took away his privacy and the only way to debunk the lies, is, to tell the truth, and unfortunately, that means that once again, Michael’s privacy is invaded to some degree.  This question comes up many, many times for people seeking truth about his guilt or innocence, so in order to show that he was indeed innocent and that it was all a lie, it becomes imperative to speak about it as the false information is already out there and it’s imperative that it’s debunked in order to show the truth.

It’s obvious in this video how upset he is over what happened to him (wouldn’t we all be?), how he was treated, the false charges of molestation and the strip search he was subjected to and had no right to refuse.  Very difficult to watch without wanting to cry yourself.  Again…do we GET IT yet?  When does the hate stop?  For those who continue to spread the lies or make jokes…has it sunk in yet?  We must stop this kind of hate and embrace the love that God asks us to and that Jesus’ died on the cross to make available to us.

Jordan Chandler’s description of Michael’s private parts…it was completely WRONG!  Read more here (links below):

Was Jordan Chandler’s description of Michael Jackson’s genitalia accurate?

In 1994, sources told USA Today that “photos of Michael Jackson’s genitalia do not match descriptions given by the boy who accused the singer of sexual misconduct.” Because this statement came from anonymous sources, some Jackson critics are quick to dismiss the article as erroneous and continue to insist that Jordan Chandler’s description was accurate. There has never been any evidence to substantiate this claim; on the other hand, the fact that no charges were ever brought against Jackson indicates that the description did NOT match. A member of the grand jury in 1994 even told CNN that “no damaging evidence was heard.”





The above VindicateMJ blog series was written by Helena of the VindicateMJ blog

Further information on Jordie Chandler’s description and how it was an epic miss, keep reading:

JIM THOMAS, FORMER SANTA BARBARA COUNTY SHERIFF said about the photographs of Michael Jackson’s genitals and Jordan Chandler’s description of them:

  • “Well, what I hear from my investigators from back then is that it was almost identical. I don‘t know that to be a fact, because I didn‘t view them. But I understand they were very consistent.”


I really feel sorry for this guy. The Verital Project says that the photographs of Michael’s genitals were so popular with the policemen at the time of the 1993 investigation that almost everyone in the sheriff department saw them  – except the poor Santa Barbara county sheriff who was actually the one who was investigating the case!

Ridiculous though it is, this quote made me think that many of us still listen too much to “Who says What” about that alleged match – while we are quite capable to do without the valuable opinion of these people and reach for the truth all by ourselves…

And the facts already found here show that the so-called “match” Thomas was speaking about is a LIE which doesn’t have a leg to stand on.

Source:  http://vindicatemj.wordpress.com/2010/09/01/was-it-match-or-mismatch/

More very important information for truth (see the links below): 


Many thanks to Helena of the VindicateMJ blog for the above blog post


What really happened in 1993? 

  • Did you happen to know that both boys’ parents, in both cases, used the same lawyer and same psychologist?
  • Did you know that pedophiles have hundreds of victims, not just two?
  • Did you realize that DA Tom Sneddon searched several COUNTRIES for victims of Michael Jackson, AND had a website looking for any information on Michael, and found NO ONE!
  • Did you know that there was no DNA evidence found (not even a hair, body fluid, anything) found at Neverland Ranch during the 2003 raid according to Michael’s attorney Tom Mesereau?

Mesereau went on to say in his interview with Jay Leno that DNA is always found in these types of cases if a crime was committed.

As far as Gavin Arvizo (the boy who falsely accused Michael Jackson in 2003?)  David Edwards takes him and the media, to task as well:

Sneddon wanted Gavin to testify in private, but Mesereau objected because MJ had a constitutional right to confront his accuser in open court, while the media objected strictly because their 1st Amendment Rights would have been violated. in their pleading, not once did they mention that MJ had a right to confront his accuser; they only were concerned about their own agenda


Many thanks to David Edwards for the blog post above

The above VindicateMJ blog post links include blog posts of which some are credited to Helena O, the owner of the blog, and some are credited to David Edwards, one of the writers for the blog.  Many thanks to them both for their contributions.

These statements are just a tip of the iceberg on the truths that surround the Michael Jackson molestation cases, and unfortunately, much of the public isn’t aware of them because the media did not report much of these facts and focused instead on the prosecution while leaving out much of what happened with the defense during the trial.


This may shock many who have not yet seen this and I think it paints a very clear picture as to what was going on behind the scenes and where the loyalties lie.  

We have talked about how so many in both cases were connected, including people from the media (who were making their living off of writing and reporting lies about Michael Jackson).  Here even more disturbing news with pictures to prove it, of connections between people that are obviously a MAJOR CONFLICT OF INTEREST.

David Edwards, in his blog post of the transcription of the “Frozen In Time” seminar with Tom Mesereau, shows you other disturbing connections between people involved with going after Michael Jackson (Tom Sneddon) and someone who has made a living off of lying about Michael Jackson and getting the public to believe the lies (Diane Dimond).  She is also pictured with Ron Zonen (the prosecutor in the 2005 trial!!!), Zonen’s girlfriend Louise Palanker (who was, believe it or not, a friend of the Arvizo’s and a prosecution witness and below they are all pictured with Stacy Brown, who wrote a scathing, disgusting book of lies on Michael Jackson.

Are you starting to connect the dots yet?

From David Edwards:

 No conflict of interest?  Are you kidding me, Court TV?  And Dimond isn’t just all warm and cozy with Sneddon!  Here are some photos with her and her buddies Ron Zonen, his “girlfriend” Louise Palanker (a friend of the Arvizos and a prosecution witness), and Jackson family traitor Stacy Brown! These are posted on Palanker’s blog.

Louise Palanker, a friend of the Arvizos who is now “engaged” to prosecutor Ron Zonen,having lunch with Zonen, Dimond, and Stacy Brown, who co-wrote “The Man Behind The Mask” with Bob Jones (in the 1st photo above).

And here is a breakdown of a radio interview conducted in July 2007 with Dimond, Palanker, and Zonen!

@ 1:40 when Dimond asked Zonen about the difference between a mediator and a prosecutor, and he makes an ironic comment that crime victims (SUCH AS MOLESTATION!!) don’t want to “mediate” anything with their perpetrators; instead they want that person literally executed! When I heard this, I immediately thought of Evan Chandler, of course! Instead of seeking justice against MJ, he wanted to negotiate film deal?!!!

Fast-forward to @ 32:00 They joke about “banishing MJ” (in reference to rehabbing MJ for his crimes), and then Dimond goes on to spread more rumors about him having liver failure due to drugs and alcohol, and wanting to be a “greeter” and have fans pay to meet him and chit chat. Zonen went on to say that he doesn’t believe that MJ can still sing. They then go on to whine about getting his kids taken away from him, and insinuating that MJ is a bad father because he has the audacity to homeschool his kids. According to Zonen, MJ fans are “idiots” and “morons”. The highlight of this segment, and probably the entire show, was @ 42:00 where Zonen says that MJ is STILL GUILTY, and why is Jesse Jackson and Mesereau SUPPORTING MJ?!! Palanker said that Mesereau LIED in his opening statements about her and the Arvizos! This segment is a prelude of what we can expect from Zonen next week at the Los Angeles Law Seminar! (Which will be sold on DVD, in case you guys didn’t know!)

@ 57:00 They bring up one of MJ’s lawyers Howard Weitzman, who initially represented him in 1993, and sued Dimond and V. Guitterez over that videotape, and Dimond mocked him for it by saying that he was trying to “silence her”.

@ 73:00 Zonen is asked about if he has ever tried a case that he didn’t believe in (i.e. did he think the person was truly guilty). Zonen told a story about how he wrongfully convicted someone, and then filed a motion to have him declared factually innocent. I wonder if he’ll ever do the same thing with MJ? Probably not!

@ 83:00 Zonen has the audacity to criticize Mike Nifong, the prosecutor of the Duke Lacrosse players, for his malicious prosecution. Ironically, he says that Nifong was heavily influenced by the weight of people descending on him to control the direction of the investigation. (i.e. people like Rev.’s Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton who wanted to prosecute because they initially believed the accuser.) Of course, this same thing happened with Sneddon, with people like Dimond and Gloria Allred pressuring him to investigate MJ after the Bashir doc. aired. He also said that Nifong should have used better judgement when evaluating the credibility of the accuser, which he admitted was NONE! Coming from Zonen and Dimond, this is pretty disgusting because they obviously practice a “do as I say, not as I do” mentality! This is literally stand up comedy! Zonen describes how the Duke players had legitimate alibis, but yet MJ had one too, so he and Sneddon rearranged the dates of the molestation!


According to the MJJ-777 blog, Palanker gave the Arvizo family money while Gavin Arvizo was ill.  She also testified in the trial and to this day holds to her opinion that Michael Jackson was guilty.


I think of high interest is not her opinion of Michael Jackson being guilty, but rather her associations with people who were all hell-bent on convicting Michael due to what appears to be their own agendas.

Are you ready to learn the TRUTH of what happened in both 1993 and 2003 and during the 2005 Trial of Michael Jackson?  Here are some resources:

Learn more about both cases HERE

You can read most of the 2005 trial in-court transcripts HERE  This includes testimony by Gavin Arvizo and his brother and sister, as well as other key witnesses.

There are also over 300 Court Documents which you can access HERE. (thanks again to David Edwards for this link).  The documents include mostly pleadings between the defense, prosecution, and the media.


The above link will take you to all of the court events and what motions were filed


You can do a document search at the above links



The website above explores in-depth the untold story of the Michael Jackson trial

Details on both trials and links to interviews, video and much more:


You will also see that the media’s only concern was access to anything and everything in this trial, as David Edwards puts it, to spin it, make Michael Jackson look guilty, get your viewership and make money off of this story.

Here, blogger David Edwards speaks out

The media didn’t give a damn about MJ’s right to a fair trial, they just wanted to televise EVERYTHING, and they wanted access to EVERYTHING so they could spin it and make him look guilty. they knew EXACTLY what they were doing!

By taking a look at the documents, this will give you a very good idea of why this trial was a complete farce, how lacking in credit and believability the witnesses were and how, without a doubt, Michael was INNOCENT!

You can also view a documentary that will blow the case wide open as well, which I highly recommend viewing.  Larry Nimmer, award-winning and Emmy-nominated filmmaker, created this DVD that clearly shows what happened in the 2005 trial.

About the DVD

Preview of the DVD

(see clips of the DVD, including the raid of Neverland Ranch, some of Gavin Arvizo’s interrogation, and much more)


Below…yet another instance where the media lied about Michael’s behavior around children.  Here, the boy himself is debunking the rumor!  Richard Matsuura, a boy who had spent 4 days with Michael, denies a Vanity Fair article that states that he was given wine by Michael.

Richard Matsuura

Matsura stated that Michael NEVER said or did anything inappropriate over the 4 days he spent in his company.  Matsura said that he himself did drink a champagne toast under his father’s supervision and that he did later become sick.  Michael never gave him the alcohol as stated in Maureen Orth’s “Vanity Fair” article.

Subsequently, after this came out, Orth says she was never able to actually speak to Richard Matsura, but that she stands by her own source’s story.  Can I just say this…..WHAT????

My question is….when did getting the story second-hand instead of straight from the horse’s mouth, replace honest journalism????

The best source for a story is ALWAYS, ALWAYS the person in question whenever possible.  Here that would be Richard Matsura.  In her other articles, she should have spoken to Michael himself…but my guess is Michael would not give her the time of day.

Anybody can claim they have spoken to all kinds of sources, however, the truth comes out in time…because truth will always play itself out and Maureen’s stories were complete bunk.  How can I say that?  Simple.  Because once you begin to know and see who Michael really was, once you see the truth, what kind of person he was, the truth behind all that came against him, her stories hold absolutely no water.  Michael’s character stands true.  God is all about truth.  Her stories and stories like them can’t survive in the light and wither without the lies that back them up.

For those who don’t know the history of Maureen Orth and her personal vendetta against Michael Jackson, here is but a brief example of the idiosy of her articles written about Jackson with a poison pen, for Vanity Fair Magazine:

This from the Vanity Fair homepage in June 2009:

“…I spoke to hundreds of people who knew Jackson and, in the course of my reporting, found families who had given their sons up to him and paid dearly for it. I found people who had been asked to supply him with drugs. I even found the business manager who told me on-the-record how he had had to wire $150,000 to a voodoo chief in Mali who had 42 cows ritually sacrificed in order to put a curse on David Geffen, Steven Spielberg, and 23 others on Jackson’s enemies list. I sat through two trials and watched his bizarre behavior on the stand when he said he did not recognize his publicist of a decade.”

Come on now.  Does she really expect us to believe that a man who dearly loved animals, and would not even kill a spider that was on stage during one of his performances, that he would wire money to have cows sacrificed!  This is the kind of lunacy that the public is actually BELIEVING (yet, they won’t believe the things that Michael Jackson says about himself or take the time to find out the truth)…

The irony is that we are being brainwashed into believing that it was Michael that was odd and bizarre!  News Flash!  We have lost our sensibility.  We grab on to horror stories that not only are absolutely crazy, but are also false, and we believe them simply because somebody said so!  Have we sunk SO LOW as a society that we are actually being drawn into believing that a man who his entire life gave to others and cared deeply about animals and children and gave of his time and money and fought so hard for peace and wanting humanity to love one another…would do something this horrific and sick?  If this is what award-winning journalism looks like, then I am truly scared.

Stay Tuned for Part 3 of this series, where we will explore:  

  • Minister claims that “We are the World” is the most demonic song ever written.  Is this true?  
  • Also Very in-depth analysis on the number 777 and it’s significance as well as it’s significance to Michael Jackson
  • “You will know them by their fruits”  Scriptural proof that Michael Jackson was a man of God
  • What is a corybantes?…minister accuses Michael of being one, and how that ties into his vitiligo 
  • Some shocking things about vitiligo that you may well have never seen and not know about
  • The direct connection between accusing Michael of being a devil worshipper and how that directly correlates to the accusations about his being a child molester.
  • Accusations about demonic lyrics, etc. vs. the truth about Michael’s spiritual lyrics and lots more!