Some info on the Chandlers

[Bad7]

Carrie Fisher, Debbie Reynolds' daughter AKA Princess Leia.
I haven't read the book and probably won't ever, but everytime I see an excerpt, it makes me laugh. Because it makes them such obvious con artists and extortionists.
Nobody in their right mind would act like this. Ever.

There's so many times that left me puzzled. So many contradictions and so many times in which it seems like one big joke. The Mickey quote I will never forget. Nobody talks about a family member who has been abused like that.

 

[HIStory]

You know, I had the same thinking was it one big script? Especially 'cast of characters' at the start of the book. That's really not the wording I would of used. There are far too many times in which things aren't taken seriously.

I especially also love how Ray paints the picture of Evan not wanting a dime of the money and it all being for Jordy, as if to paint the picture of taking money not being so bad... yet Evan got money in the settlement and constantly haggled Jordy for money after the settlement.

Well, he even sued Jordan for money in 2005. LOL.

And then there are court docs from Nathalie Chandler telling us how Evan lived off Jordan's money after the settlement and refused to work and pay child support for his other kids. Oh, the concerned father! LOL.

 

[Bad7]

Well, he even sued Jordan for money in 2005. LOL.

And then there are court docs from Nathalie Chandler telling us how Evan lived off Jordan's money after the settlement and refused to work and pay child support for his other kids. Oh, the concerned father! LOL.

The same concerned father who wasn't fit enough to testify, but fit enough to try to kill Jordy in 2005.

Another thing I noticed in the book, sort of an after thought by Ray, was to mention Dr. Gardner. He says Gardner believed Jordy. Yet we only saw mentions of parts of the interview in the book and the transcript released never gave a concluson. I also don't believe Ray mentions in the book quite why Jordy was sent to Stan Katz if Gardner believed him. I don't even think Katz got a mention in the book.

 

[HIStory]

It was easy for Ray to claim in 2004 that Dr. Gardner believed Jordan as Dr. Gardner died in 2003. BTW, they make the same claim about Dr. Abrams, that he believed Jordan but according to an interview Dr. Abrams gave in 2003 he could never make a determination on whether Jordan was telling the truth or not:

Although Dr. Abrams dutifully reported the case, ten years later, on December 12, 2003 he told CBS News that he did not spend enough time with Jordan Chandler to conclude whether the boy was telling the truth or not:

“I think that this [children changing their stories] is a possibility in both cases, that there could be coaching, but, again, I wasn’t given the opportunity in the initial one to even try to find out.” [1]​

Like you said it's very telling that they took the case from Dr. Gardner to Dr. Katz (who worked with Feldman since 1987 and who was involved in the infamous McMartin case).

 

[Bad7]

It was easy for Ray to claim in 2004 that Dr. Gardner believed Jordan as Dr. Gardner died in 2003. BTW, they make the same claim about Dr. Abrams, that he believed Jordan but according to an interview Dr. Abrams gave in 2003 he could never make a determination on whether Jordan was telling the truth or not:



Like you said it's very telling that they took the case from Dr. Gardner to Dr. Katz (who worked with Feldman since 1987 and who was involved in the infamous McMartin case).

I'd never heard that about Abrams. That's very intriguing.

I was staggered when I found out Katz had been a part of the McMartin case. It was extremely dodgy to me how once again, in 2005, Feldman referred a boy accusing MJ to Stan Katz.

 

[Bad7]

I just recalled the whole suicide drawing Jordy drew. Evan putting on it 'don't let this happen'. As if that's what you'd put on your kid's suicide note. :doh:

Heck, you wouldn't even put anything on it you'd ask the kid about it.

 

[barbee0715]

Well, he even sued Jordan for money in 2005. LOL.

And then there are court docs from Nathalie Chandler telling us how Evan lived off Jordan's money after the settlement and refused to work and pay child support for his other kids. Oh, the concerned father! LOL.

It's all this kind of stuff as well as the fact that Michael was denied basic civil rights that I wish someone would get together and do a doc about. The 'Tabloid Truth' PBS doc was an excellent start.
I never had any doubt in the Chandler case, and just spent the time being angry and avoiding the press, but when you actually fall on the facts of the case, you're just startled by it.

It's so ludicrous-there's just no case there.
And no case with the Arvizos.
It's just all really, really hideous.

 

[MJresearcher]

The whole "cast of characters" thing is really puzzling to me as well, it makes it sounds like the whole thing is a screen play. The wording is interesting, making it sound like a movie or play gives the impression that it was all just a big act, at least for the Chandlers.

 

[Bad7]

The whole "cast of characters" thing is really puzzling to me as well, it makes it sounds like the whole thing is a screen play. The wording is interesting, making it sound like a movie or play gives the impression that it was all just a big act, at least for the Chandlers.

I had this thinking too. I wondered if it was me reading too far into things, but it's not just that 'cast of characters' page. Ray at times calls it a 'tale'. The main story of the book is also in three parts. Sort of like a 'beginning, middle and end' (maybe I'm reading too much into the three part thing). Part four is basically padding and Ray's attempt to draw from other sources what paedophiles are like and what 'MJ is really like', quoting from Randy Taraborelli ffs.

As the opening act of this twisted tale was drawing to an end

Is this really the sort or language to be used?

There are far too many times when things aren't taken seriously given the nature of the accusation. Why would you even have a pun as your title in the form of 'All That Glitters'?

 

[HIStory]

Then when Evan sued MJ again in 1996 they were again trying to stir as much publicity for the case as possible. I have a court document from that case. It was written by Lisa Marie Presley's lawyer because she too was deposed in that case. Her lawyer complains in it that Evan Chandler called the media on her when she went to court to give her deposition and how Evan Chandler is trying to publicize the case to the media and trying to create great publicity for it.

Here is that motion I mentioned above:

But the Chandlers were soooooo shy of the publicty. LMAO.

 

[Bad7]

Correct me if I'm wrong on this...

There were those photos of Jordy on a skiing trip in was it 2003? Yet before then the media hadn't published an adult photo of him I don't believe. So somebody within the Chandlers tipped them off despite 'not wanting media attention'.

 

[analogue]

Can some people please stop calling him Jordy. His name is Jordan. And he should be treated like an adult.

 

[Bad7]

Can some people please stop calling him Jordy. His name is Jordan. And he should be treated like an adult.

My bad. The book constantly refers to him by his nickname so I've been use to calling him Jordy/Jordie.

 

[Bad7]

Some new information - https://turningthetableonthechandlerallegations.wordpress.com/2016/03/18/tabloid-sales-assault/

Very interesting what June says regarding media exposure.

 

[HIStory]

Not the Chandlers but the Arvizos, but I did not want to open a new thread for this:

A Lorton, Va., man was charged Nov. 9 for first degree assault, three counts of second degree assault, and reckless endangerment against a Waldorf woman.The victim told police of several instances where she was physically assaulted by Star David Arvizo, 25, who she says is her ex-boyfriend, according to the application for statement.

http://www.somdnews.com/independent/crime_and_courts/waldorf-woman-assaulted-threatened-at-gunpoint/article_1735a186-e898-5610-b098-33058705b3ed.html


More:

Star David Arvizo

• Age: 25
• Address: 7631 Highland Woods Ct Apt Bg
• City: Lorton
• State: VA
• Zip Code: 00000

Charge 1: Reckless Endangerment
Charging County: Charles, MD

• Charge Date: 11/09/2015

Charge 2: Assault Sec Degree
Charging County: Charles, MD

• Charge Date: 11/09/2015

Charge 3: Assault First Degree
Charging County: Charles, MD

• Charge Date: 11/09/2015

http://atlaspublicrecords.com/name/star-d-arvizo/lorton-va/ac000f09cd




[h=4]Assault in the first degree.[/h]

(1) A person is guilty of assault in the first degree if he or she, with intent to inflict great bodily harm:
(a) Assaults another with a firearm or any deadly weapon or by any force or means likely to produce great bodily harm or death; or
(b) Administers, exposes, or transmits to or causes to be taken by another, poison, the human immunodeficiency virus as defined in chapter 70.24 RCW, or any other destructive or noxious substance; or
(c) Assaults another and inflicts great bodily harm.
(2) Assault in the first degree is a class A felony.

http://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9A.36.011

 

[Bad7]

These supposed death threats are absolute nonsense and not wanting media exposure. It was BS before, but with June having said what she did it just adds to the BS. Laughably, in Ray's book he claims a woman came to the door to threaten the family and he then followed her as she left PMSL. Then he claimed that they sat down on a park bench and he told her the full story ROFL. Telling a stranger the story of your nephew's molestation! He also claimed to want to look in her handbag in case of a weapon, she refused. In the end they struck a deal for Ray to look in her handbag in return for 'possibly' letting her go (ROFL). As if he had any sort of hold over her to stop her leaving. He said he considered restraining her LMAO, but then he mentioned the whole 'publicity' thing which, as we know, the Chandlers hated oh so much.

In the end he says he took her back home as it was dark and she was thin so he felt sorry for her. In the mean time he'd 'decide her fate'.

He says she revealed she came from the UK with a group of MJ fans. They were staying in a hostel. This was the 'deciding factor' and he rung the police. Quite why this woman, who had supposedly made threats, willingly went with Ray, and incriminated herself by telling him about this supposed hostel, is a mystery.

He mentions it was her who left graffiti at Evan's practice. I can't remember her name, but I believe there's only one on record of having threatened the Chandlers, and she was from the UK and left graffiti.

There's also no mention of anybody else who was at this supposed hostel when the 'police raided'. He never mentions them. Only this one girl's belongings with supposed evidence of her death threats. If I'm not mistaken she's the only person ever confirmed to of 'threatened' them.

 

[HIStory]

Some new information - https://turningthetableonthechandlerallegations.wordpress.com/2016/03/18/tabloid-sales-assault/

Very interesting what June says regarding media exposure.

That's interesting.

A portion of June Chandler’s declaration in the Schwartz v Chandler case:

• I suspect that defendant has either influenced or been instrumental in keeping alive the public’s interest in our lives, much to my dismay and consternation. I believe that he, or those acting on his behalf, have been continually providing the media with information regarding my son, myself and defendant. In particular, defendant and his brother have authored a book regarding our ordeal. While they have purportedly agreed to refrain from publishing the book, they have nonetheless advised me that the transcript mysteriously disappeared from defendant’s home. At the same time, a National Enquirer reporter that had been hounding me has suddenly revealed that he has a manuscript. In light of these facts, and since defendant and his counsel have not articulated any particular reason why a videotaped deposition is necessary, I believe defendant seeks to acquire the videotape not just for the instant proceeding, but for other uses including media and commercial exploitation.

It echo's what Evan tried to do to LMP in the Evan vs. MJ et al. case in 1997-98, ie. what I posted above: http://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/t...dlers/page13?p=4139414&viewfull=1#post4139414

 

[Bad7]

That's interesting.



It echo's what Evan tried to do to LMP in the Evan vs. MJ et al. case in 1997-98, ie. what I posted above: http://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/t...dlers/page13?p=4139414&viewfull=1#post4139414

There's so much that contradicts their fear of publicity. They embraced it willingly. Diane Dimond was Evan's closest ally Ray states in his book. If you don't want publicity, why the heck is a tabloid journalist, with her own TV show, your closest ally?!

 

[HIStory]

Going back to the new info on the Turning the Tables blog.

Reporter: He (Victor Gutierrez) said the LA DA office’s investigator was his source and showed him the tape. He would brag that he was a source for him and Diane Dimond. She (Dimond) had a source in the LA DA’s office because when I was working OJ she was getting stuff –and Hard Copy was paying for it. They got an entire copy of the murder book of Nicole and Ron Goldman and it came from someone in the DA’s office. It must have been the same source who worked on Michael Jackson. This was supposedly the same source for the video but you know if there was a video they (DA) would have used it. I mean (laughing) they wouldn’t have kept it quiet.

Obviously there was no video. In fact, Los Angeles Deputy DA Lauren Weis gave a declaration in the MJ vs. VG case stating that the only person to have ever claimed to have seen the video was VG. Last paragraph.

Reporter: When Michael — the last trial with the Hispanic kid. I was hired by ABC to work on it. At the time they were negotiating with me they were negotiating with Diane Dimond. They were assembling a team and Diane Dimond wanted to bring in Victor. ABC was the one. He was in Chile –didn’t they (ABC) get him the visa to come back?

How interesting that DD was vouching so much for this pedophilia advocate, VG.


This is interesting:

Me: Well the Chandlers sold stories to the Enquirer too.
Reporter: I don’t know. Whose names are on the bi-lines?
Me: I have to look it up. — They (Chandler’s) were calling the tip line.
Reporter: I think it was him (Evan) because nobody was paying attention to the story. The tips started coming in I would say about 2 months before the story broke. I mean, they didn’t call every day but probably once a week and each time they would call they would give a little information, then a little more. The reporter from the local –KNBC news ,Conan something, got tipped off and reported the story. The enquirer was sitting on the story and afraid to publish it for about a month because they really –I mean they only had that source the caller and the caller didn’t want to ident–, didn’t want money which was highly unusual. The caller didn’t identify themselves and they were just trying to push the story and the Enquirer was afraid of getting sued because contrary to what people believe they were very careful to push a story unless they knew there was some truth to it. The TV guy was able to report it because there was a raid. After that everyone went crazy and there was competition between the Bryan Anderson’s and the guys from Splash. The MJ tabloid stories were a big deal in England. —-

So the Chandlers (Evan) kept "tipping off" the NE even before the case broke. That would mean even before Jordan told anything to Dr. Mathis Abrams (Aug 17. which is the same day Abrams reported it to authorities). Heck, if the 2 months is true then this was even before Jordan allegedly "confessed" anything at all (July 11).

I wish we could establish this for certain, because this would be another great evidence about how the allegations existed in Evan's head before Jordan allegedly "confessed" anything at all. How convenient that then Jordan allegedly "confesses" the same things that Evan made up in his mind months before...

Another interesting part:

Me: I’m sorry, the article I was thinking of was September. The bi-lines say David Duffy and Julia Coates.
Reporter: David Duffy is dead and has been for a long time and as far as I know Julia Coates still works for the Enquirer.
Me: they did a story about a month after the allegations came out and they have a lot of quotes attributed to Evan.

Reporter: Julia Coates…Does it say Evan told the enquirer or Evan told a friend? Because if it says, “Evan told us or Evan told the Enquirer.” If they quote him directly. One thing to keep in mind is the Enquirers style of writing…second hand quotes they have attributed to a friend. So their quoting him but not directly.
Me: “The alleged victim’s father told the Enquirer”
Reporter: They spoke to him.
Me: How much did they pay for stories back then?
Reporter: Back then, pretty good money. Is it on the cover?
Me: I believe so.
Reporter: 20 grand, 30 grand if it was a big cover story. Back then you got good money. Now your luck if you get 500 dollars because nobody buys printed publications anymore.

Me:Susan Yu called the DA’s office and they mistook her for Diane Dimond, you know they were buddies with Dimond.


Reporter: Yeah, they were buddies and they were buddies with Victor too.

Me: Did Victor ever talk to Ray?
Reporter: Ray hated Victor.
Me: I think they were on Hard Copy together.

Reporter: Not together. They might have been in the same segment but I’m sure they were not interviewed together (laugh) I mean, you know what I’m saying? They might have been in the same segment but interviewed separately. Victor got all that stuff from the Chandler’s maid. I know he never spoke to you know. He was very good at charming all of the Hispanic maids.

Reporter: They only turned on Michael when he said no, he wouldn’t finance the movie. That’s one of the reasons the police had such a problem bringing a case. Also, all of the people involved sold their stories somehow; they couldn’t bring that case to court. All the witnesses sold their stories for a lot of money and weren’t credible. That’s why the case didn’t get anywhere.


Me: That didn’t stop Sneddon from trying again later on.


Reporter: He kept pushing on it and on it and the only reason that settlement was pushed was because Johnny Cochran was going to take OJ’s case and he couldn’t have two very high profile cases going.

Me: how do you know that?

Reporter: I know that because I was working on both stories and he pushed for a settlement of the Michael Jackson case. Remember how the Michael Jackson case was settled suddenly? That’s the reason it was pushed through. Johnny Cochran recommended that they do a settlement because he …and it was before the OJ case started. It was after OJ killed Nicole.
Me: I think the entire ordeal was very upsetting to Michael and he just finished rehab.
Reporter: He didn’t want to settle, he didn’t want to settle. They convinced him that it was the right thing to do and Cochran was one of the reasons. The case wasn’t going anywhere and but it was taking it’s time and all of a sudden he was on the dream team. The OJ case was bigger than the Michael Jackson case and he pushed for a settlement. That’s what the other lawyer wanted, Larry Feldman. He didn’t get involved in the case to get justice for anybody he wanted – he’s a plaintiff’s attorney specializing in getting big settlements for his clients. He was not used to going to court, he was not a litigator. So, he wanted to get a settlement for his client. He didn’t want to go to trial or get into a civil case with Michael Jackson, he wanted money. Then it played out that that didn’t happen and now Cochran wanted to go on to this other case. That’s probably why Michael was such a mess and he didn’t want to settle. You don’t get a lawyer like that to go to trial you get them to negotiate a big settlement. The OJ lawyers were litigators, they’re going to fight that they’re not going to settle. If you look up Feldman’s case history he specializes in getting big settlements without going to trial.

Well, that the OJ Simpson case was the reason why Cochran wanted to settle is wrong though. OJ only murdered Nicole in the summer of 1994, months after the settlement. I do believe Cochran pushed for a settlement. Not because of OJ, but because that was the most convenient for the lawyers on both sides.


A tabloid broker that the blog owner talked to in 2013. From what he says (other details in his interview) it seems to me it's Ken Wells who was also mentioned in the MJ vs. VG lawsuit in a declaration. The declaration was given by a private investigator, Eric Mason and this "broker" is telling the exact same story in this interview in first person, so I think it is Ken Wells.

So in this 2013 interview he says Wade Robson's lawyers contacted him trying to find dirt on MJ. Very interesting.

Broker: Okay, lol, sorry it’s just that I’ve been dealing with this Michael Jackson thing so many—well not so many but there was a period of time were everybody contacted me and you just never know just what’s going on. Just as recently as this Wade Robson thing. His attorneys contacted me about two, three months ago I guess and I had nothing to say to them.


What did they want?


Broker: Well they wanted to see what information I knew regarding Michael Jackson and I told them that I didn’t want to talk to them.

Ugh, he’s another one. I really don’t think his lawsuit is going to go anywhere—they have another hearing next month. The statute of limitation is up to file a claim and why would you do something like that after the person died.


Broker: Here’s what it was, it’s very simple. They thought they were going to get a hush, hush settlement and Michael Jackson team was not playing it. They’re not doing settlements anymore okay. So then it got leaked, I think they leaked it. Thinking it would embarrass Michael Jackson’s Estate and that didn’t happen. So now it kinda turned around on them. Like you’ve been making all these claims that he was a great guy –within the last year and all of a sudden you’re turning on a dead man. I think it’s backfiring on him. He’s definitely going to lose the law suit. First he said, oh …its repressed memory then he says, oh …well he didn’t say it it was his lawyer. Now he’s saying he remembers everything. Well if you remember everything you should have filed a claim earlier so he’s going to lose that. I think he’s going to try and live off the lime light, his 15 minutes of fame on this.


That was my first impression—that he was trying to get money from the estate to keep this BS quiet.


Broker:The Estate is making money hand over first so everybody is trying to get their piece. You have the show in Vegas, the touring show around the world, you have his Las Vegas game –his machine is the number two selling game, slot machine. I mean their making tons and so people are trying to get a piece –I mean it’s just money. Now if it was me and I was molested or had a child who was molested I wouldn’t give a damn about any amount of money. It would be about taking the person down and if you have proof bring the proof. That’s just the way I look at it so. I’m a little jaded because I’ve seen tabloids –I don’t believe anything in the tabloid really, nothing because I see where it comes from you know.

 

[HIStory]

Not the Chandlers but the Arvizos, but I did not want to open a new thread for this:



http://www.somdnews.com/independent/crime_and_courts/waldorf-woman-assaulted-threatened-at-gunpoint/article_1735a186-e898-5610-b098-33058705b3ed.html


More:




http://atlaspublicrecords.com/name/star-d-arvizo/lorton-va/ac000f09cd




Assault in the first degree.



(1) A person is guilty of assault in the first degree if he or she, with intent to inflict great bodily harm:
(a) Assaults another with a firearm or any deadly weapon or by any force or means likely to produce great bodily harm or death; or
(b) Administers, exposes, or transmits to or causes to be taken by another, poison, the human immunodeficiency virus as defined in chapter 70.24 RCW, or any other destructive or noxious substance; or
(c) Assaults another and inflicts great bodily harm.
(2) Assault in the first degree is a class A felony.

http://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9A.36.011

BTW, what did Ron Zonen say about these boys being good, wholesome, Christian boys? LMAO.

 

[Bad7]

I find it dodgy how Cochran was friends with Larry Feldman (I think they'd been friends for 20 years was it?), and how Feldman ended up with more money than both parents combined. I know lawyers take a cut, but he got something like $5 million if I recall correctly. Feldman then worked for Cochran some years later.

Weitzman wanted a settlement so he brought in Cochran, who just so happened to agree regarding a settlement. I can't remember where I read it, but a good point is that neither of Weitzman or Cochran would probably want to risk such a major case (Feldman was also mentioned). Imagine losing a case of such magnitude if you were Weitzman and Cochran! They'd probably never be hired again by a celebrity.

 

[HIStory]

I found this about Star Arvizo on the website of the court in Charles, Maryland where he was charged.

http://casesearch.courts.state.md.us/casesearch/inquirySearch.jis

ETA: Some more info about the case from the Court's website:

Looks like the alleged victim already tried to get some sort of restraining order against him earlier.

The Peace Order (link is external) is a form of legal protection for anyone who is experiencing problems with an individual, including someone in a dating relationship, a neighbor, a stranger, or anyone else. The Peace Order enables an individual (Petitioner) who wishes to be left alone to ask the Court to order another person (Respondent) to stay away and refrain from any contact with you.

http://www.peoples-law.org/peace-orders

 

[Justthefacts]

The whole Chandler thing is just so damn strange. I was on that blog a few days ago, the writerfrom the NE says that it was either June or someone close to her that leakedthe whole Monaco story about Michael buying her and her kids things andsuch. But why do that, especially sinceyour husband made it clear he did not want Michael buying you anything? Just odd

 

[HIStory]

The whole Chandler thing is just so damn strange. I was on that blog a few days ago, the writerfrom the NE says that it was either June or someone close to her that leakedthe whole Monaco story about Michael buying her and her kids things andsuch.But why do that, especially sinceyour husband made it clear he did not want Michael buying you anything? Just odd

Ray Chandler claims in his book that it was a friend of June that sold the story.

 

[Bad7]

Delete.

 

[Bad7]

Edit: Ignore. Found my answer.