Book: Remember the Time: Protecting Michael Jackson in His Final Days / Review @pg8

[whateverhappens50]

I have just finished reading the book and I found it very moving. It made me really upset at what has happened since he passed. How his poor childrens worlds been turned upside down. And what the estate are doing by creating an artificial Michael performing songs with music he never had any input in. I respect the views of those who are boycotting the book but if you are thinking of reading it I would really recommend that you do.

I toally agreethere is so much more to the invasion of Michael Jackson privacy it is very moving and very touching gives him a human side. I think its perfect for a mike novice to read who may have the wrong idea about him. It may not be for hardcore fans who are leary about folks talking personally about mike. I came away feeling quite moved.

 

[Tygger]

On November 15, 2006, in London, England, the "World Music Awards" were held.

I believe Whitfield may have started December 2006.

These bodyguards were very excited by red carpet events however; they ridiculously stated they had a distaste for protecting the King Of Pop as opposed to Michael. No worries as the NOI arrived in time to protect the King of Pop and Michael in late 2008 and 2009.

I do wonder how Garcia, the third bodyguard, figured into these tales. What is his point of view?

 

[#MJforever57]

Yeah i read that in the book too their said it was two Michael and the King Of Pop the BG really didn't know the King Of Pop.

 

[#MJforever57]

I do wonder how Garcia, the third bodyguard, figured into these tales. What is his point of view?

I was thinking the same thing.

 

[#MJforever57]

I toally agreethere is so much more to the invasion of Michael Jackson privacy it is very moving and very touching gives him a human side. I think its perfect for a mike novice to read who may have the wrong idea about him. It may not be for hardcore fans who are leary about folks talking personally about mike. I came away feeling quite moved.

I agree with you in the bold.

 

[reibish]

I am really confused...which book did Bill write, then? There was the Karen Moriarty project from a few years ago that they all mutually abandoned, but the only one I can find is the one written with Tanner. I'd like to read both. I'm skeptical of which MJ books to buy and don't get just any old one.

 

[Spyce]

I am really confused...which book did Bill write, then? There was the Karen Moriarty project from a few years ago that they all mutually abandoned, but the only one I can find is the one written with Tanner. I'd like to read both. I'm skeptical of which MJ books to buy and don't get just any old one.

Hi Reibish, welcome to MJJC!

If you're talking about Bill Whitfield, this is the book he wrote along with Javon Beard- Remember the Time: Protecting Michael Jackson in His Final Days.

For more books you can read, I suggest checking out this thread, Good "Michael" books: http://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/threads/132411-Good-quot-Michael-quot-books

 

[Victory22]

I don't remotely feel there's any double standard for mj fans, i know i don't feel under any obligation whatsoever to start defending the not guilty verdict for oj and apparently for every other not guilty verdict in the american system. I think fans' arguments for mj's innocence are a little more sophisticated than 'he was found not guilty, end of' -the facts of the case provide the evidence of his innocence which were confirmed by the 14 not guilty verdicts on even misdemeanour counts. Whether you think it's fair or not, the oj verdict is seen by many as a byword for a bad jury decision. It's annoying to have haters continually throw this verdict up to downplay mj's, to imply it's another example of a celeb 'getting away with it'. It's annoying because there's simply no comparison between the 2 cases. The acquittal in oj's trial seems to have been down to the toxic distrust of the aa community with the lapd, rather than with the complete lack of merit or evidence in the prosecution case as was the case with mj. So no, i don't feel i need to treat everyone the american jury system decides to acquit as similar to mj.

[edit- just realised these partic posts re oj were posted ages ago, only just noticed them}

I agree with many of the things you said in your post but I disagree that OJ’s acquittal was because of mistrust of the judicial system. The truth is the prosecution did not prove their case and the defense did a very good job of creating reasonable doubt. First of all there were other races beside AA’s on the jury and second African Americans are as capable as any other race of following jury instructions and rendering a fair verdict. I’m not blaming you but I am sick of the media blaming the OJ verdict on race.

 

[#MJforever57]

I agree with many of the things you said in your post but I disagree that OJ’s acquittal was because of mistrust of the judicial system. The truth is the prosecution did not prove their case and the defense did a very good job of creating reasonable doubt. First of all there were other races beside AA’s on the jury and second African Americans are as capable as any other race of following jury instructions and rendering a fair verdict. I’m not blaming you but I am sick of the media blaming the OJ verdict on race.

And that the key in the bold.

Michael settle in 1993 but in 2003 he took it to court and his defend put reasonable doubt in the jury mind and their came back with a verdict of not guilty. Today ppls still believe that Michael is guilty their don't care what the verdict was in 2005.

I believe because he settle in 1993 that is why the ppls still believe Michael is guitly that imo.

 

[HIStory]

And that the key in the bold.

Michael settle in 1993 but in 2003 he took it to court and his defend put reasonable doubt in the jury mind and their came back with a verdict of not guilty.

You guys are not doing any favour to Michael by comparing his not guilty verdict to OJ's. In fact drawing a parallel between the two is a popular hater argument. They are two completely different cases and the reasons of the acquittal were very different. In OJ's case it was indeed creating a reasonable doubt. In Michael's the case was simply very weak.

 

[dewey]

The part where he confided in Bill about not being able to do the most ordinary of errands for, or even play at a public park with his children, that he couldn't go anywhere without chaos ensuing, that he knew deeply and painfully so, what it was like to not have the gift of anonymity...that he physically tore a camera out of a wall...well, it just breaks my heart. He paid a HUGE price for his worldwide fame and it just reminds me that 'celebrity' can be crushing.

 

[gerryevans]

The part where he confided in Bill about not being able to do the most ordinary of errands for, or even play at a public park with his children, that he couldn't go anywhere without chaos ensuing, that he knew deeply and painfully so, what it was like to not have the gift of anonymity...that he physically tore a camera out of a wall...well, it just breaks my heart. He paid a HUGE price for his worldwide fame and it just reminds me that 'celebrity' can be crushing.

Yeah, it can be crushing, but I recently saw a televised phone interview MJ did when he turned 50. He said the happiest time of his career was recording the Off the Wall and Thriller albums and their reception by the public. I mention this because despite how crushing his celebrity was, MJ cited a period in his life when his fame was at its highest peak. When his celebrity went beyond just crushing, but still this was a period when he was most gratified.

MJ had been famous since he was an 11 year old. That was the vast majority of his life. Sure, there were times when he became disgruntled, but on the whole, I think he had long ago reconciled himself to it, because despite how it restricted him for public outings, there were magnificent positives. He was the guest of world leaders, traveled the world, created his own special world.

If not for those malicious allegations and their horrific consequences, which eventually led to him literally fighting for his life, I tend to believe he would have been a contented man, especially after the arrival of his children. As he was also one of the most ambitious artists ever in the industry, and worked very hard to achieve his goals. Enormous fame definitely came with that package. It was a price he seemed willing to pay. Many artists have commented on how when they'd stopped working, MJ would just keep going.

It was the allegations that warped his existence and every aspect of his life and outlook, and what pains me for him. Just think, during the trial period, he had been taped in a private conversation on a private plane. It's no wonder he reacted as strongly as he did to the thought of a camera secretly taping him.

His fame per se didn't crush him IMO, the Chandlers and Arvisos did, and all the Diane Dimonds, Sneddons, and other snakes that came with the vipers' den.


BTW...here's that interview I mentioned.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xVRFS8zcspo

 

[Michael_lover]

I want this book!!!!

 

[Petrarose]

I'm half way through the book and I have mixed feelings so far. I'm surprised so many fans have latched on to this book in the way they have because some of the stuff makes me question these guys.
( I know most want to counter the negative books I get that and respect that, but just because most is positive doesn't make it the truth imo.)

They come across as very biased in some parts to me. Also some of their own doings just get glossed over.
Some examples: Bill was told to go pick up a kitten for Paris. He finds the guy that bought the cat and asked him how much he had to pay. The guy says I guess just what I paid for it, 25 dollars. Next sentence : 'I gave the man 300 dollars. I put down some of my own money too.' Why would you do that if he just wanted 25?? Makes no sense but doesn't get explained.

Also they seem to have a bit of an ego sometimes. Basically if you didn't welcome them with open arms or spend time talking to them, they will be negative. They write about the first meetings and the ones that weren't that great (Raymone, the other bodyguard - can't find his name right now.)get a bad rep yet the one that was nice to them (Grace) gets all the praise. The bias is especially noticeable when they mention the expensive apartments. They make a big deal about Raymone staying there yet later mention Grace was staying there too. So I guess Raymone spending too much money is bad but Grace spending the same large amount is no problem?

Then when they go to Virginia and these other guards are also there they sound very bitter. After spending about 6 months working for Michael it already sounds like they feel they are the only ones who can do the job right. (Which sounds a lot like what every other person in Michaels life started to believe after being with him. Seriously many throughout his life seem to feel like if they weren't around Michaels world would just crumble. I guess maybe Michael blurred the lines between employe and friend sometimes. That would explain why people would turn bitter against him when they got fired.)

If the anecdote is true and Bill told Michael he didn't feel right leaving, that he didn't trust these other guys and Michael replied: 'Bill, I've had security all of my life. Don't worry I'll be fine.' it is quite telling to me. I'm not doubting that Michael liked these guys but I'm pretty sure Michael had no problem switching bodyguards if needed. They even mention he had different bodyguards in Japan which was no problem since Michael told them he was gonna use different guys. Yet the mere thought of different guys in Virginia sents them off for some reason.
Funny how they don't trust anyone else to do their job yet they went against Michaels orders three times in the book (And I haven't even finished)

Honestly I think these guys were a bit starstruck and loved the idea of being his only trusted guards. They were not gonna let that job go to someone else. (They sound a little childish sometimes to me)
Now to be clear I'm not hating this book. The stories of Michael with his kids are wonderfull and some of the insight of what Michaels life was like during that time paints a broader picture. I can believe they wanted to show the different side of his life to the public.
I'm just not convinced that these guys are telling every side of the story here and I wouldn't be surprised if they love having all of these fans clinging to their every word.
They seem to inject a lot of their own thoughts of what Michael was doing and why as facts and I'm not a big fan of that. (Just in general I find that irritating)

Others have also pointed out that they seem to have missed certain events that happened during their time with him. Also they changed some of their stories from the older q & a's which seems a bit strange.
(They said he had a huge Phone bill, now all of a sudden they know Michael wasn't calling up people to just chat? From a free IPhone to couldn't afford to buy one? etc.)

Anyway, nice book so far but I'm gonna take most of it as just their opinion.
I don't regret buying it yet, I guess I just don't understand some of their thinking in this book sometimes.

(I hope I don't get attacked for this post, again I'm still gonna finish reading it. )

Thanks so much for your post. It is very enlightening to have different perspectives of things, especially when you include the details from the book that made you question or feel a certain way about the text.

Gerryevans I agree with your post as well. That is why I cringe at the phrases like "his sad, depressing life" which I see in reports like the one a few pages back, and is also used routinely by the media. They give the impression that everything about this man's life was sad as though he never had a happy moment. They fail to pinpoint exactly what caused grief in his life, which you outlined correctly.

 

[Leanne]

Haha I need to start reading Man in the music first then I will order this book, been hearing and seeing good reviews on this book so why not give the book a chance. Lol

 

[Bubs]

I finally got my book and finished it two days. I would warmly recommend people to read the whole book with open mind. Also people should remember that this book is their account what they experienced working with Michael Jackson, not King of Pop.

It was well written book as it gave insight how they dealt with change of being hired to protect to KOP to protecting Michael Jackson (the man behind the title), and also how bodyguards operates in generally

Sometimes I could feel their desperation how much they wanted to change things after seeing all those shady people in Michael's inner circle and how they saw them screwing Michael's money, but they weren't in the position to make any changes. They made me think of ourselves, how we talk here and wished MJ would have gotten rid of some bad people around him, these guys were doing the same thing than us.

Also they seem to have a bit of an ego sometimes. Basically if you didn't welcome them with open arms or spend time talking to them, they will be negative. They write about the first meetings and the ones that weren't that great (Raymone, the other bodyguard - can't find his name right now.)get a bad rep yet the one that was nice to them (Grace) gets all the praise. The bias is especially noticeable when they mention the expensive apartments. They make a big deal about Raymone staying there yet later mention Grace was staying there too. So I guess Raymone spending too much money is bad but Grace spending the same large amount is no problem?

I think if you finished the book, you know now that they were angry at Bain and of course it can be felt in the book. Bain was telling them all sort of excuses why she couldn't pay their salary, yet they found out that MJ thought Bain was staying on hotel and at the same time she was renting very expensive condo, both of them paid by Michael. Also they met Bain in hotel and saw the dinner bill which was big, while they went without salary for months and it got so bad that they electricity was cut off in their own houses because Bain didn't pay to them, and she kept telling there were no money to pay them, yet the same time she was screwing Michael's money for her own use.
It made sense to me that they were bitter towards Bain, not to Grace because Bain was the one screwing with the money and lying for having an office etc.

Then when they go to Virginia and these other guards are also there they sound very bitter. After spending about 6 months working for Michael it already sounds like they feel they are the only ones who can do the job right. (Which sounds a lot like what every other person in Michaels life started to believe after being with him. Seriously many throughout his life seem to feel like if they weren't around Michaels world would just crumble. I guess maybe Michael blurred the lines between employe and friend sometimes. That would explain why people would turn bitter against him when they got fired.)

I think they were pissed of to Bains attempts to replace them with her own people so she could call all the shots, and thats because they felt that Bain was no good person.

They wrote about people getting possessive around Michael, maybe they too fell for it a little bit but didn't realise it? I was wondering that during their employment, MJ made them to do things that wasn't really bodyguards job, such as building a dance studio, going shopping for him, babysitting etc, maybe that way MJ blurred the lines what was their job description? MJ gave jobs to people who weren't competent of the job, such as hiring Bain to be his manager.

These guys definitely did more than bodyguards job description but they couldn't stop it, and eventually grew to take care of those issues. Once you get accustomed doing something, it is understandable that you might feel noone else can do better job than you.

I'm just not convinced that these guys are telling every side of the story here and I wouldn't be surprised if they love having all of these fans clinging to their every word.

No, they are telling their side of the story and how they saw things and from their perspective.


Btw, earlier on this thread there was a talk about their impression of MJ meeting homeless people like it was MJ's first time when he saw them. I think bodyguards might have gotten that impression because the way MJ said "wow are there really homeless". I thought MJ was thinking out loud that as US is such a rich country, how could there could still be homeless people, and bg's thought he was seeing them first time.

 

[Victor]

 

[Spyce]

:lol: I love that part.

 

[Petrarose]

Who else tried this butter and hot sauce combination? I never heard about eating popcorn like that until someone mentioned some pages ago that it was in the book.

 

[Spyce]

Who else tried this butter and hot sauce combination? I never heard about eating popcorn like that until someone mentioned some pages ago that it was in the book.

Spray butter I can understand.... but the Tobasco? Sorry, but I'm a woos (chicken) when it comes to spicy foods/condiments, and I can't imagine putting Tobasco on my popcorn and eating it that way. It just sounds so wrong :lol:

 

[Virre]

Michael had Tabasco on everything, literally. One time when still living at Neverland he put it on his vanilla ice-cream, but that made even him realize he went to far. He said "but you gotta try".

 

[Soundmind]

what was their impression of Grace ?

 

[Word Smith Sr]

Michael had Tabasco on everything, literally. One time when still living at Neverland he put it on his vanilla ice-cream, but that made even him realize he went to far. He said "but you gotta try".

Haaaaaahahahahaha !!!! Thank you so much for this. I love this kind of never say never attitude. Can I ask you where you read that Virre ?

 

[dewey]

:lol: I love that part.

I died laughing when I read that, Spyce. :lmao: (I'm almost done with it, just a few more pages.)

 

[Bubs]

Nobody mentioned Michael doing laundry?
The image MJ doing laundry is just too cute, given that he was so messy otherwise

 

[Silouette]

Lol! I know quite a few people that will put hot sauce on their popcorn....
and potato chips too! :lol: Now I know of ONE more who did it....Michael!

I don't care what anybody says about Michael Jackson trying to act like or turn himself into a white man. Anybody who insist on taking his own spray butter and hot sauce to a movie theater? That man is black, ghetto and hood.

I never had any doubts anyway.

Thanks Victor for posting that page.

Haaaahhh Michael. I miss you so dam much!

]

 

[sfosteredi]

Who else tried this butter and hot sauce combination? I never heard about eating popcorn like that until someone mentioned some pages ago that it was in the book.

I tried it after reading that page. It's good! The thing is to just shake a few drops of hot sauce in the bag and shake it. You won't get hot sauce on every piece.You can add more as needed. Thanks Michael!

 

[Magicgirl]

I haven't read the book and don't plan to waste money on that. Even if it was for free online, even then I doubt I would read it. For me it was enough to hear the review of the book not wanting to read it or to trust it. Is incredible how many fans so easily are eager to believe in what is written there. I would say MJ was not that type of person they want people to believe he was in this book, some things are just not in his nature or were just misinterpreted.

 

[Bubs]

I haven't read the book and don't plan to waste money on that. Even if it was for free online, even then I doubt I would read it. For me it was enough to hear the review of the book not wanting to read it or to trust it. Is incredible how many fans so easily are eager to believe in what is written there. I would say MJ was not that type of person they want people to believe he was in this book, some things are just not in his nature or were just misinterpreted.

You post is the reason you should read the book

You say Michael wasn't the type of person they want people to believe?
They wrote that MJ spend countless hours with his kids and teaching them history etc, he did everything for his kids in his mind, so are you saying I'm not to believe it, because according to you MJ not that type of person.
What they told us are already know to us, we only got more detailed account from their point.

They told us a little snippets of how hard it was for Michael to go on movies, shopping and little bit of cleaning on the side etc - we already knew that.

Not at one point did I got impression that they were trying to portray Michael in bad light. Ok, there might have been some talk about money problems, but those occasions came with explanations so they just didn't throw it out there for tabloid hyenas to salivate over.

 

[Justthefacts]

I haven't read the book and don't plan to waste money on that. Even if it was for free online, even then I doubt I would read it. For me it was enough to hear the review of the book not wanting to read it or to trust it. Is incredible how many fans so easily are eager to believe in what is written there. I would say MJ was not that type of person they want people to believe he was in this book, some things are just not in his nature or were just misinterpreted.

Unless you were his Mother spendt countless hours with him or his best friend you have no idea what type of person Michael was.