Page 4 of 35 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 521

Thread: Shana Mangatal is publishing a book on Michael's Birthday 2016

   
  1. #46
    Points: 5,483, Level: 47
    Level completed: 67%, Points required for next Level: 67
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    945
    Points
    5,483
    Level
    47
    Thanks
    153
    Thanked 777 Times in 332 Posts

    Default Re: Shana Mangatal is publishing a book on Michael's Birthday 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by respect77 View Post
    Oh yes, I forgot once you discussed the Estate for a short while. But 99% it's the allegations. BTW, you are not someone to call others a liar here. You have had about 2-3 different accouts here and lied about it when called out. And with all your accounts here your obsession have always been the allegations.
    Not just the Estate I also posted about MJ's iTunes stats for that matter but I don't see why you are obsessed with this.
    Why is that relevant? I said that I use this board to gather info about the allegations and to see how people react to certain arguments. WTF is your problem with that? Is it somehow obligatory to post about other things? Why are you so irritated by this?
    Yes you lied, put words in my mouth and also suggested, without any proof, that Shana was deluded like Tatiana, that her mother is a liar and her reviewers are liars. So please you are not someone to call others a liar.


    Quote Originally Posted by respect77 View Post
    I repeat myself because that's my simple stance.
    No that was not your stance initially. You flat out suggested that Shana is delusional and a liar and her mother too
    and the people who support her book are liars too. When I challenged you to name a valid reason why
    all those people would be lying you just said people can lie for many reasons, and that's it.
    That's a far cry from just "I don't know yet and she should show proof for me to believe her".
    You also made some rather weak arguments as to why you think she is a liar like
    her comments on Paul Walker and of course her mother supporting her because she is her mother.
    Anyway, it's fine if you think she is a liar but I wanted to know why you think that whether you have proof
    like an obvious contradiction or her claiming something that was simply impossible or someone who knew
    her and MJ saying that she is full of shit MJ didn't even like her. Or some proof that all of her supporters
    or any of them are liars. So far you showed no proof, just admit that you don't have any if you don't, and move on.

    Quote Originally Posted by respect77 View Post
    I have no obligation to believe her until she provides evidence, no matter how many long rants you write about how necessary she is to defend MJ against the allegations. Until she provides evidence all that is pretty much a moot point.
    Now you repeat this nonsense again like I said you should believe her. I never said you should! Get it?
    Heck I don't believe her myself I simply don't know whether she is telling the truth or not.
    And I didn't argue that she is necessary to defend MJ against the allegation either. You are lying again or you simply don't pay attention to what I write. I said that any and all witnesses who saw MJ with those families can be relevant and Shana stated that she would be willing to testify for MJ and if Shana is telling the truth it would make Robson/Safechuck look beyond ridiculous in a way that the general public can easily understand. And if you got out of your MJ fan bubble and paid attention to what non-fans regularly bring up against MJ and how haters are using the Lanning profile against him you would have little doubt that. There is a reason why Zonen was so desperate to establish that MJ was not attracted to women at all and never had a relationship with any woman and his marriages were shams. He was no fool. I know for a fact based on years of experience that this is an effective weapon against MJ, you chose to not acknowledge it, fine.
    You should watch this to see how people generally think about serial boy molesters:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xpY4V3-cBA&t=5m56s

    Quote Originally Posted by respect77 View Post

    I didn't even say Melissa cannot be Shana by any means, I just said at this point we have no evidence it is her and this is a speculation. That's all I said. Not that it is definitely not her.
    No you didn't answer what I actually asked. Do you think it's a coincidence that all those things apply to Shana?
    If you think that it's fine but that's what you think? Yes or no?
    I just want to see some reasonable explanation about those similarities.


    Quote Originally Posted by respect77 View Post
    But you obviously want me to embrace the Melissa=Shana idea right now because you keep pushing me about it further.
    Bullshit. You are putting words in my mouth again. I never said that Melissa is definitely Shana
    and I don't want you to embrace that idea at all.
    I'm looking for an explanation why the two persons are so similar. It's possible that others know some other girl
    who worked with MJ and was a coordinator and was a model and was on the tour and also cared about MJ. I was looking for that info
    in fact I'm sill looking for it.
    What I said is that the odds of two girls being so similar is low.
    But not impossible.
    So you should have simply said that you don't know any other person with those attributes (if that's the case) instead
    as usual you let your own twisted interpretations run away with you.


    Quote Originally Posted by respect77 View Post
    It's alright with me if you think Melissa is Shana, or if any female name ever mentioned in connection with MJ is now Shana in your book - that's your opinion and maybe you are right,
    Keep your fantasies for yourself I never said that Melissa is Shana. Show me just one post where I said Melissa is Shana.
    I asked others whether they have an explanation as to why these two girls are so similar and noted that if they
    are not the same girls it would be an odd coincidence.

    This is what I wrote, don't you remember?

    But it sounds like he calls her Melissa so that certainly doesn't make things any clearer LOL
    Anyway, if not true this would be an awful lot of coincidences don't you think?

    Quote Originally Posted by respect77 View Post
    maybe you are wrong. All I say is that I need more evidence to say Melissa is Shana but you are trying to push me to say something that I cannot honestly say at this point.
    I'm not pushing you to do anything. I was ASKING you whether you think it's just a coincidence and whether you or others
    have a reasonable explanation as to why these two girls are so similar.
    Which part of that you don't understand?




    Quote Originally Posted by respect77 View Post
    If you believe that Melissa is Shana that's fine with me. I am not here to convince you otherwise. Maybe you will be proven right too. But it's just a speculation so far. You are the one trying to millitantly convince others about Shana
    You are the one who misinterpret my posts, my questions and put thoughts in my head which I don't have.
    I repeatedly said that I'm on the fence on this issue, I repeatedly said that Shana has to show proof before I make up my mind.
    All I want is to know whether someone can explain the odd similarities between Melissa and Shana (if Mj indeed said Melissa on that tape), whether anyone has proof that the people who support her are liars
    or whether anyone has proof that Shana is a liar. If I see such info I would stop paying attention to this whole issue.

    Quote Originally Posted by respect77 View Post
    and not being able to admit that until there is actual evidence of anything it's a matter of opinion and speculation and people who think she is not telling the truth have every right to think so about these unproven claims and they are not the ones who have to prove anything. It's Shana. Because no, the burden of proof doesn't shift on people who don't believe her for not believing her. That's an absurd idea.
    It's not absurd to demand evidence when you call someone delusional and a liar.
    You were not open minded and I wanted to know why not. Not because I thought you should be open minded
    but because I wanted to see whether she is indeed a liar.
    Now you say you are open minded which is fine but that's not how you started.


    Quote Originally Posted by respect77 View Post
    Photos are not the only way to prove a relationship. It can be notes, poems, letters. Which are bound to happen between lovers. Especially when it comes to MJ who seemed to write notes and letters to people all the time. Just show us something that is more intimate than "I want you to appear in Ghosts".
    While I would understand if someone wants to keep a relationship secret he would not write
    such notes and letters I agree that's it's more likely than not that such documents should exist or should have existed at least.
    And as I said I too want proof before making up my mind so you are beating a dead horse.

    Quote Originally Posted by respect77 View Post
    The Lisa Marie analogue is a bad one. First of all we DO have a note from MJ to Lisa that has an intimate tone.
    We do but only because it leaked not because Lisa disclosed it. Moreover, MJ didn't want to keep his relationship
    with Lisa secret. Anyway, all I'm saying that just because Shana is not publishing intimate notes does not mean she is a lying.
    My parents never wrote notes or letters to each other I know it for a fact that doesn't mean they didn't have a relationship.

    Quote Originally Posted by respect77 View Post
    We don't have any such thing from Shana as of now. Maybe we will but for now we don't. Lisa didn't release notes but she is not someone who has to prove anything.

    LOL explain that to the millions who think her relationship with MJ was a sham.
    I agree that she doesn't have to prove anything to us but it's not that Lisa has not been called a liar just like
    you thought Shana is a liar. Even after that note was published people still think she lied MJ lied and the whole thing
    was a fraud.

    Quote Originally Posted by respect77 View Post
    Shana, however, is yet to prove her relationship with MJ. She is just about to release a book about her supposed relationship with MJ, so she is not being private about it or keeping it a secret. If she had something, anything substantial to back up her claims I am pretty sure she would. Maybe she will. But so far she hasn't. All she provided so far rather suggests a distant, working relationship.
    I agree that she has to show proof. But if there was proof that she is a liar I wouldn't care what she has to tell in her book, obviously. Or anything else she has to tell for that matter. And I would certainly wouldn't want to see her anywhere near the Robson case
    if it goes to trial. I don't know whether she is telling the truth or not but I'm open to the possibility that she is
    based on the info available at this stage.
    It was you who dismissed her as deluded right away instead of waiting for more info and then failed
    to provide evidence that she is indeed deluded.

    Now I repeated myself a lot too to make sure you finally get what my stance is.
    Last edited by redfrog; 23-05-2016 at 10:37 PM.

  2. #47
    Points: 64,872, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 52.0%
    Achievements:
    Three FriendsOverdriveVeteran50000 Experience Points
    HIStory's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    7
    Points
    64,872
    Level
    100
    Thanks
    19,489
    Thanked 35,108 Times in 9,070 Posts

    Default Re: Shana Mangatal is publishing a book on Michael's Birthday 2016

    LOL, redfrog.

    For someone who keeps claiming that he doesn't mind if others don't believe Shana you sure do very long and emotional rants in her defense.

    The whole thing started with me making a sarcastic remark about her Paul Walker story that expressed scepticism in her claims. Yes, she does sound like a delusional groupie to me and I find it convenient that from MJ to Paul Walker celebrities supposedly had a crush on her at first sight - well, according to Shana herself, that is. Maybe it is true, but to me it sounds self-serving and delusional and a bit narcissistic. It was a simple opinion and the impression I have of her. I am not the one who has to prove anything. She is the one who is making claims, writing a book and who has things to prove here. Why don't you go to Shana's Facebook and demand proof and answers from her?

    You flat out suggested that Shana is delusional and a liar and her mother too
    and the people who support her book are liars too.
    And as long as you cannot prove they are telling the truth I have every right to that opinion. Have you ever proven that Shana's story is the truth? Then why are you so emotionally invested in me not believing her? LOL.

    There is a reason why Zonen was so desperate to establish that MJ was not attracted to women at all and never had a relationship with any woman and his marriages were shams. He was no fool. I know for a fact based on years of experience that this is an effective weapon against MJ, you chose to not acknowledge it, fine.
    It was so effective that the prosecution won the case with that argument. Oh, wait...

    In any case, whether it is an effective argument or not with "common people" who often fall for fallacies, is besides the point here. That you need this argument to fight haters about this point won't make Shana's story true.

    BTW, your selectiveness about what is a good argument in court is funny. Apparently if it is your idea then it is a great argument. LOL. For example, in the Robson thread you argued that Mez should have claimed MJ was asexual. I said such an argument would have been probably immeditaly shred to pieces by the prosecution by just showing the amount of adult magazines MJ had. Then you went into all kind of explanations into how asexual people can have adult magazines too. Why would they, I don't know, but let's say they do. However, in a jury's eyes it still probably would have made the asexual argument look like a desperate lie, because (whether it is true or not that asexual people keep adult magazines too) "common people" won't see the reason why an asexual person would keep buying adult magazines every month and have them in his nightstand. So I am glad Mez was actually smarter with his arguments than that. It would have been an unnecessary argument that would have only made the defense look desperate when they did not need to be desperate.

    No you didn't answer what I actually asked. Do you think it's a coincidence that all those things apply to Shana?
    If you think that it's fine but that's what you think? Yes or no?
    I just want to see some reasonable explanation about those similarities.
    Yes, for now I think it is a coincidence or not even that. Maybe it is just you who make them strikingly similar in your mind. What I mean is that when I look at this timeline on this Shana supporting blog: http://michaeljacksonandshanamangatal.blogspot.hu/ it does not seem to me that her contact with MJ was more than sporadic over the years. Shana was Sandy Gallin's secretary and as such she had a couple of visits to MJ shows backstage and stuff like that. It doesn't seem to me that she was a co-ordinator for MJ or worked on the Dangerous tour. She was there two times (Hawaii, Tokyo) as a visitor. That's when her photos with the band were taken.

    Also you were being misleading with the quote that you put here from Todd Mangatal about Shana being a coordinator for MJ. In the context Todd talked about one event in 2004. That is more than 10 years after that Melissa worked for MJ. Once again, the full quote doesn't only show that we are talking only about one event here in 2004, but also it seems to portray a more formal, working relationship than anything.

    2004: Shana helped coordinate the celebration at Michael’s Never Land Ranch.

    Her brother Todd blogged about this back in 2004
    1-15-04 My sister Shana Mangatal still supports Michael Jackson 100%, and as promised I must update you on the issue with Shana and Michael. You may recall in my previous e-mails I indicated that my sister was busy with helping coordinate the celebration at Michael’s Never Land Ranch in Santa Barbara. Yes, two weeks prior to Christmas she was asked to contact and invite many of her celebrity friends as well as Michaels’ to attend the celebration. Of course, she was glad to help and immediately got busy inviting folks. Needless to say, she did a great job, because many of the celebrities were thrilled to receive an invitation, and many attended. As for the day of the event, her responsibility was to take care of all the Jackson family needs, therefore she coordinated everything that involved the Jackson family, the photos, the place they would be seated, and whatever they needed, etc. As Shana and I talked I asked her to give me some details about the day of the event. She pointed out that she was very pleased to assist with the coordinating, and felt the event was very successful. She was happy that her good friend Tommy Davidson had agreed to host the event, and was a bit distracted and embarrassed the day of the event when he gave her a loud “shout out” on the Mic. Being as personal as she is, she didn’t go in much detail about the day’s activities, except that she was very busy making sure everything she was responsible for was handled properly and correctly. I asked if she had time to mingle with the celebrities and she stated she really didn’t have much time, but was able to say hi to many. At the end of the day she did spend a little time with Michael, who expressed his appreciation to her for “being there for him”, for her help with the event and it’s success, and most importantly for all her support. Of course, this touched her dearly.
    http://michaeljacksonandshanamangata...ally-date.html

    How does this make Shana and Melissa's supposed "similarities" so striking? It's like saying Norma Staikos and Evvy Tavasci must be the same person because they both did similar jobs for MJ as a secretary, although with many years apart. LOL.

    I'm not pushing you to do anything. I was ASKING you whether you think it's just a coincidence and whether you or others
    have a reasonable explanation as to why these two girls are so similar.
    Which part of that you don't understand?
    They are similar to you. Two girls who work in Hollywood used to model. Big deal. Many more girls did too. It's not so much of a coincidence if both Shana and Melissa did and they don't have to be the same person for that. As for the co-oordinator stuff, I already said what I think about it above. Shana was working for Sandy Gallin, not MJ and apparently she was twice on the Dangerous tour as a visitor, not as someone working on the tour.

    I repeatedly said that I'm on the fence on this issue
    You keep claiming you are on the fence but you don't behave like someone on the fence. You behave like someone who is invested in Shana's story being true. When someone says they don't believe Shana you demand that they prove and support their stance for not believing her - basically asking people to prove a negative which is a fallacy. Scepticism over claims that have never been proven in the first place do not require proof or support. It's Shana who has the burden of proof, not those who don't believe her. I will keep repeating it because you still don't seem to grasp that basic concept of how an argument works.

    Anyway, all I'm saying that just because Shana is not publishing intimate notes does not mean she is a lying.
    My parents never wrote notes or letters to each other I know it for a fact that doesn't mean they didn't have a relationship.
    Funny, that you demand me to prove that Shana is a liar, but you are much more lenient towards Shana's burden of proof, when in reality she is the only one with a burden of proof here. You also excused her lack of intimate photos with MJ earlier. Then I said there are other ways to prove a relationship - for example notes, letters. And now you are saying that it doesn't mean she is lying if she doesn't show such notes. Technically not, but don't you see how your bias shows when you seek excuses for her lack of evidence, all the while demanding proof from her sceptics? You are very obviously not neutral here.

    Your parents might not have written letters or notes, but MJ did very often. He did write such notes to Lisa. (Lisa actually said she has a lot more notes like that.) Shana is writing a book. Shana chose to publicize her alleged relationship with MJ. So she should provide at least some real evidence. If not pictures, notes or letters, something else. These were just examples of possibilities. If she doesn't people have every right to be sceptical and think she is a liar.

    LOL explain that to the millions who think her relationship with MJ was a sham.
    I agree that she doesn't have to prove anything to us but it's not that Lisa has not been called a liar just like
    you thought Shana is a liar. Even after that note was published people still think she lied MJ lied and the whole thing
    was a fraud.
    Then this whole Shana story isn't that vital in MJ's defense. If people didn't believe Lisa, someone who has her own money and doesn't write books about MJ, they won't believe Shana either, especially if she doesn't provide evidence. So why would this be the big story that would help to defend MJ? Some woman claiming something with no evidence won't convince anyone. You will not be able to tell a jury what you keep telling me here: "prove me she is lying and she is delusional if you don't want to believe her". LOL. In a court it will be the exact opposite (as it should be): "Shana dear, prove us you had a romantic relationship with MJ. What's your evidence for that? Backstage photos with MJ's band won't do."
    Last edited by HIStory; 24-05-2016 at 08:23 AM.

  3. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to HIStory For This Useful Post:


  4. #48
    Points: 24,667, Level: 95
    Level completed: 32%, Points required for next Level: 683
    Overall activity: 2.0%
    Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteranTagger Second Class10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Texas, USA
    Posts
    6,943
    Points
    24,667
    Level
    95
    Thanks
    20,003
    Thanked 6,845 Times in 3,036 Posts

    Default Re: Shana Mangatal is publishing a book on Michael's Birthday 2016

    ^^I laughed about Shana and Melissa being the same person-I was reading different interviews with people who worked with Prince the last few years. Three different ones about exhausted assistants who worked there, toured with him, coordinated everything he needed. 24 years old. Former models. Three different girls.

    I had an on and off relationship with a guy for three years and we didn't leave notes, although I'm a prolific note writer. Reading this, I realized I have no pictures either. So, I guess proof or no proof doesn't really mean anything-

    I think it just matters if her story sounds credible. Tatiana's story sounded too crazy to be credible.

    I saw Tatiana once where she said she was fired from the Bad Tour because after the "kiss", her agent realized he had a crowd pleaser and asked for way too much money. So she was let go. Now THAT finally sounded credible.
    Last edited by barbee0715; 25-05-2016 at 06:03 AM.

  5. #49
    Points: 24,374, Level: 95
    Level completed: 3%, Points required for next Level: 976
    Overall activity: 13.0%
    Achievements:
    Overdrive10000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Ms. BlueGangsta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    A Place With No Name.
    Posts
    2,880
    Points
    24,374
    Level
    95
    Thanks
    1,143
    Thanked 2,132 Times in 971 Posts

    Default Re: Shana Mangatal is publishing a book on Michael's Birthday 2016

    So.....there's going to be a book signing at the MJ one birthday celebration in Vegas.
    I wonder what book is being signed....

  6. #50
    Points: 16,584, Level: 82
    Level completed: 47%, Points required for next Level: 266
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Three Friends10000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Real Life
    Posts
    4,054
    Points
    16,584
    Level
    82
    Thanks
    82
    Thanked 135 Times in 74 Posts

    Default Re: Shana Mangatal is publishing a book on Michael's Birthday 2016

    I have to admit I have a bit of a pet peeve about people marketing these catchy titles to MJ fans. I must also admit however that I am utterly impressed with her boldness, her self belief and amazing networking ability and smarts for getting MJ to trip over her any number of ways that he did is quite impressive. According to her brother's blog she had her sights set on marrying MJ from childhood and lo and behold when she got to LA she stumbled upon a job as his manager's secretary, now that is smart! And befriended his nanny! Brilliant! And used her show biz contacts to help coordinate the party at Neverland, (since afterall she's the secretary with all the contacts) brilliant! Surely her mom was proud.

    ..and just "happened" to run into him in Vegas! Wow! and impressed fans so well with what MJ said to her when he saw her by surprise, knowing fans would be utterly impressed to think it was more.

    I don't guess she and Grace could have both had it bad for MJ though.. we've heard the "Grace" stories too... but I guess friends can share?

    As for the book I won't concern myself with true or not true because I've pretty much decided that "tell all" books even for so called "good" purposes are written to make money especially if marketed specifically within the MJ FAN community.

    It was a curiousity for her to get into any type of back and forth with Firpo Carr when during the trial MJ had clearly said that he doesn't trust him and that FC does not speak for him (despite the numerous talk shows Mr Carr did and calling himself MJ's spiritual advisor)

    She also did an episode of Entertainment Tonight during the trial without consent from MJ or his attorney as in two separate statements they each said for MJ's well meaning friends to refrain from interviews about MJ unless otherwise instructed by his legal team, does anyone recall?

    Debbie Rowe did the same thing when she had plastic surgery on ET and MJ was said to have cited that as the reason he withdrew their financial agreement since she didn't stay away from the press as agreed.

    Some of MJ's former management team members endorsing this book?

    How can anyone really consider that a confirmation of a true relationship? How silly is that?

    Relationships, especially intimate relationships don't have to be proven, written about, or talked about to the world, especially if you know MJ had an issue with his personal life not being for public consumption.

    Tatiana may be a nuttier case but she did the same thing and so did Pearl Jr., exploit what opportunity they had with MJ, to impress MJ's fans for their own glory, money, attention or whatever their personal true agendas are.

    This "book" project is more than meets the eye imo

    There's a reason for everything imo

    Even in this crazy society, can you really sell a marginally interesting "book" about MJ for more than the cost of 3 MJ music CDs??
    Last edited by SoS; 25-05-2016 at 08:03 AM. Reason: a thought ..

  7. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to SoS For This Useful Post:


  8. #51
    Points: 5,483, Level: 47
    Level completed: 67%, Points required for next Level: 67
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    945
    Points
    5,483
    Level
    47
    Thanks
    153
    Thanked 777 Times in 332 Posts

    Default Re: Shana Mangatal is publishing a book on Michael's Birthday 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by respect77 View Post
    LOL, redfrog.
    For someone who keeps claiming that he doesn't mind if others don't believe Shana you sure do very long and emotional rants in her defense
    I didn't defend her I defended myself against your insane assumptions about what I supposedly wanted to achieve.
    You also keep ignoring that fact that nowhere did I say I believe her or that she should not show proof so you are beating a dead horse.

    To make it worse your whole theory makes no sense.
    Why the heck would I want to convince YOU of all people that she is telling the truth?
    Are you a potential juror? No.
    What difference would it make if you believed her? You believing her would suddenly make her a good witness?
    Where is the connection between your opinion of her and whether her story, if true, could help beat Robson/Safechuck or the perception that MJ was into boys?

    You keep repeating the same falsehoods about what I supposedly think and it's obvious you didn't even bother to read my previous post.
    So for the last time:
    - The reason why I asked you to show proof was that you were sure not sceptical but sure that she was nuts.
    I merely was interested in whatever info you and others may have about her which proves she is liar.
    For example, a pattern of her making shit up about celebs and herself would have been proof like if she indeed had come up with stories about all kinds of celebs hitting on her. Or a statement by Frank Cascio I might have not seen or heard he knew her if he has said she is lying and here's X Y Z why I would have considered as proof. You have no such info, fine. It's that you have to have! It's that if you do I'd like to know about it.

    - It's clear that for whatever reason at this point she is not willing to disclose any photo, letter, note. Others already asked her for it. So for me asking her would be completely futile.

    - A photo, note or letter wouldn't even be enough to prove that she had a 15 year long romance with MJ.
    A full timeline with dates, locations and how exactly they kept it under the radar, who
    knew about them etc. would be necessary.

    - The issue is not whether you believe her or whether you have the right to be sceptical that's a strawman, noone said you don't have the right. I don't give a **** about whether you believe her or not.
    The issue is information which could prove that she is a liar. That's what I'm interested in .
    I'm not emotionally invested in you not believing her why in the world would I be? I myself don't believe her
    at this point. But I don't go as far as you did and say that she is deluded either simply because there is not proof of that
    like there is proof that Tatiana is in lala land, for example.

    - You know very well that in criminal court the burden of proof is higher than in a civil court.
    So just because Zonen's tactic didn't work in 2005 does not mean it would not work in a civil court.
    You also know that Ken Lanning was on the prosecution witness list and Clemente would have testified
    if he had not cancer. Did you read the report they wrote? Do you know why haters love that report?
    You can bet that they would call experts like Clemente or Lanning or even those two themselves.

    - This is a ridiculous fallacy: "That you need this argument to fight haters about this point won't make Shana's story true. " I don't need this argument I'm quite OK with what the evidence shows to this point and that is that MJ never had sex with anyone but one woman. And nowhere did I argue that Shana's story is true so what's your point?

    - This is yet another idiotic exaggeration: "BTW, your selectiveness about what is a good argument in court is funny. Apparently if it is your idea then it is a great argument. LOL.""When and where I did I say that only my ideas are good arguments in court? Stop putting words in my mouth.

    - Whether you like to admit it or not those who are not MJ's fans DO make the leap from frequent bed sharing to him being a predator. That perception can be fatal in a civil court.

    - You are totally clueless about asexuality that's why you have no idea why an asexual would have adult magazines.
    It may also be an umbrella term used to categorize a broader spectrum of various asexual sub-identities. Due to the wide range of this spectrum, gray asexuality encompasses a variety of individuals under the "ace umbrella." Individuals who identify with gray asexuality are referred to as being gray-A, a grace or a gray ace.[1][4] Within this spectrum includes terms such as "hyposexual", "demisexual", "semisexual", "low sexual intensity", "asexual-ish" and "sexual-ish".
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gray_asexuality
    Attraction
    Many asexual people experience attraction, but we feel no need to act out that attraction sexually. Instead we feel a desire to get to know someone, to get close to them in whatever way works best for us. Asexual people who experience attraction will often be attracted to a particular gender, and will identify as lesbian, gay, bi, or straight.

    Arousal
    For some sexual arousal is a fairly regular occurrence, though it is not associated with a desire to find a sexual partner or partners. Some will occasionally masturbate, but feel no desire for partnered sexuality.
    http://www.asexuality.org/home/?q=overview.html
    - It's funny that you demand proof from Shana but you don't apply the same standard for MJ's entire adult life and are convinced that he was heterosexual as in having sex with women like other "normal" hetero guys. What proof do you have that was the case? I'm certainly open to new evidence and I change my mind if I see it but I never saw any proof that MJ had regular sex like sexual people do.

    - Tom Mez should have explained why MJ didn't see sharing a bed with children as something sexual and most of all why he could spend so many nights with kids in his bed without doing anything sexual while he didn't have an adult companion with him during the same period. He and MJ were damn lucky that Hultman was pressured by the other jurors to put that bedsharing equals sex idea aside and only focus on the evidence against the Arvixos because that idiot and Cook and a third juror were quite ready to convict MJ and one reason Hultman said was this:
    "It's hard for me to imagine that this man would spend 365 days in bed with a boy and only watch television".

    - It's hardly desperate if it's the truth. If MJ was asexual that should have been established in court. If he was having regular sex with women that should have been established. You are only glad Tom Mez didn't bother with any of that because Hultman and Cook and the Asian-American juror were willing to give up ultimately. Otherwise it would have been a hung jury, a disaster for MJ. Two jurors declared on TV that MJ was a pedo and got away with it. Are you glad about that too?

    - I keep claiming that I'm on the fence because that's exactly what I've said from the beginning and instead
    of taking what I actually say you imagine that I BEHAVE like I'm not on the fence. What if you stopped making
    assumption and simply paid attention to what I actually write?

    - "You behave like someone who is invested in Shana's story being true"
    What does that even mean? How do you come up with this theory about my behavior when my words
    shows the exact opposite? If I don't think she is deluded I must think she is telling the truth?
    That's what you think? If so you don't have much talent to detect nuances.

    - Yes you can prove if someone is lying. You can prove that McManus, Cachon, Bob Jones are liar, can't you?
    Similarly one could prove that Shana is a liar. Simple as that and it has nothing to do with proving a negative.

    - I'm not more lenient towards Shana's burden of proof, in fact unlike you I wouldn't even accept a note as a proof
    as it can be a forgery. And some photo showing the two together would not be proof of a romance either. I want to
    see the details and whether they all add up. At the same time the reasons you gave why you think she is nuts
    were just silly. Her mother supporting her because she is her mother stuff like that. That's just not enough to convince me that she is crazy. Just like some MJJ employee backing her does not convince me that she is telling the truth.

    - That MJ wrote a lot notes in general is not relevant. How often he wrote notes to women he wanted to keep secret is relevant. The lack of such notes if not proof that she is lying. If I wanted to keep a relationship secret I wouldn't leave a trail behind.

    - Most people in MJ's life is not vital to his defense in court. You exaggerate again. I didn't say that OMG if Shana doesn't testify Robson wins. That's bull. But everyone who saw the Robsons and MJ together and who knew MJ's true character and is a credible person can be very helpful to defeat him. I think that's obvious, especially since he cannot speak for himself.

    - People didn't believe Lisa because of the timing and because the marriage went south quickly. And frankly, because she is Elvis's daughter. The whole thing looked PR and damage control.

    - "they won't believe Shana either, especially if she doesn't provide evidence."
    LOL thank you Sherlock If she doesn't provide evidence she will be laughed out of the room and make a complete fool of herself. I don't even understand if she is lying what in the world she is thinking where will all this lead? Why is this good for her? But actually even then she could be used to defend MJ as just another example where people claim to have sex with him and make shit up about him to make money or attention when none of it is true. She would join Theresa Golsalves, Jason Pfeiffer, Scott Thorson Jordan Chandler, Gavin Arvizo, Robson Safechuck and Francia, Terry George, Daniel Kapon, Joe Bartucci and the Canadian ****er who was coached by Rodney Allen. And the countless Billie Jeans.


    Quote Originally Posted by respect77 View Post
    Also you were being misleading with the quote that you put here from Todd Mangatal about Shana being a coordinator for MJ. In the context Todd talked about one event in 2004. That is more than 10 years after that Melissa worked for MJ. Once again, the full quote doesn't only show that we are talking only about one event here in 2004, but also it seems to portray a more formal, working relationship than anything.
    No I didn't want to suggest that Todd was talking about 1992 just that Shana was working as a coordinator.
    MJ didn't even say on the tape that she was a coordinator during the rehearsals just that she was a coordinator.
    Like if you said that someone is a DJ but that doesn't mean he was the DJ at a particular party.
    Can two girls who were both models, who both loved MJ, who both were around the band, who were both coordinators be with MJ in 1992? Sure it's possible. I just don't think it's very likely.


    Quote Originally Posted by respect77 View Post
    So why would this be the big story that would help to defend MJ?
    Who said it would be the BIG story? It's just one of many things which could defend him.
    It's not that "OMG if Shana doesn't testify Robson wins", nobody said that. Stop exaggerating.

    It's just a fact that a romance with a woman, if proven, would shoot a hole in one of the haters's favorite arguments, which I can hear many times from random people too. Why?
    First of all they cannot say that it was PR like they say that about his marriage to Lisa.
    And most of all because of this: name just one serial boy molester who molest from age 25 to age 45
    and who has a secret romance with a woman especially during the very same period when he is in love with and "marries" a boy!
    You know why the Catholic Church was invaded by boy molesters?
    Because it's the perfect place to have both access to boys AND not be suspicious for not having relationship with women.
    Sandusky, Father Porter, Rodney Allen, Marc Collin Rector , Africa Bambataa, Christopher Michael Bradshaw, Thomas Hacker, Norbert Maday, William Vahey -- all serial boy molesters none of them had romances with women.
    It's part of their profile, one that Clemente actually mentioned when he said that MJ only took trips with boys only slept with boys.
    And that's from a so-called expert.

    Quote Originally Posted by respect77 View Post
    Some woman claiming something with no evidence won't convince anyone.
    Which is why I wouldn't even consider using her to defend MJ unless there is solid irrefutable proof.

    Quote Originally Posted by respect77 View Post
    You will not be able to tell a jury what you keep telling me here: "prove me she is lying and she is delusional if you don't want to believe her". LOL.
    A jury's objective is not the same as mine. My goal at this point is to find out whether there is proof that she is lying
    since it's clear that whatever proof she has she won't show it before that book comes out.
    You are missing the point.

    Quote Originally Posted by respect77 View Post
    In a court it will be the exact opposite (as it should be): "Shana dear, prove us you had a romantic relationship with MJ. What's your evidence for that? Backstage photos with MJ's band won't do."
    Actually, in court it would take much more than just photos or notes to prove that she is credible. Her entire testimony should be consistent and her demeanour and body language should show confidence and that she is not lying. Unlike Jason Francia or Janet Arvizo, for example.
    Last edited by redfrog; 25-05-2016 at 01:28 PM.

  9. #52
    Points: 5,483, Level: 47
    Level completed: 67%, Points required for next Level: 67
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    945
    Points
    5,483
    Level
    47
    Thanks
    153
    Thanked 777 Times in 332 Posts

    Default Re: Shana Mangatal is publishing a book on Michael's Birthday 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by barbee0715 View Post
    ^^I laughed about Shana and Melissa being the same person-I was reading different interviews with people who worked with Prince the last few years. Three different ones about exhausted assistants who worked there, toured with him, coordinated everything he needed. 24 years old. Former models. Three different girls.
    Prince liked to be surrounded by hot chicks all the time it's not that surprising that he would employ former models.
    But MJ as far as I know didn't have that habit (except maybe in the studio if LA Reid was telling the truth) and it's not just that they are both models and were young. There are other strange
    coincidences:

    Quote Originally Posted by respect77 View Post
    Yes, for now I think it is a coincidence or not even that. Maybe it is just you who make them strikingly similar in your mind. What I mean is that when I look at this timeline on this Shana supporting blog: http://michaeljacksonandshanamangatal.blogspot.hu/ it does not seem to me that her contact with MJ was more than sporadic over the years. Shana was Sandy Gallin's secretary and as such she had a couple of visits to MJ shows backstage and stuff like that. It doesn't seem to me that she was a co-ordinator for MJ or worked on the Dangerous tour. She was there two times (Hawaii, Tokyo) as a visitor. That's when her photos with the band were taken.
    Actually, that website says that the drum photo was taken during the rehearsals "playing around on the drums at MJ's Dangerous tour rehearsal." and whoever the girl is on the tape was prepared to go on tour with him then for whatever reason she would not.
    Glenda: Is she going on tour with you?
    MJ: No....not anymore.
    The tape was made in Jun 1992 before MJ went on tour. The towelhead meeting took place amid rehearsals and according to that photo Shana was there. It's possible that she was just there as a friend but it could also mean that she was a coordinator and dealt with the band during the rehearsals.
    In any case Shana says that she wrote about a similar episode in her book and what MJ talked about on the Glenda tape
    "sounded familiar" however she could not explain why MJ called her Melissa or whatever name or nickname he was using
    it's a little unintelligible
    Anyway, if she wrote about it in her book and stole the story pretending that it was her Melissa could kick her ass:



    Quote Originally Posted by barbee0715 View Post
    I had an on and off relationship with a guy for three years and we didn't leave notes, although I'm a prolific note writer. Reading this, I realized I have no pictures either. So, I guess proof or no proof doesn't really mean anything-
    I think it just matters if her story sounds credible. Tatiana's story sounded too crazy to be credible.
    I agree. Her full story has to add up. If I would want to keep a relationship secret I would not leave a trail behind anyway. Moreover notes can be forged. Notes and letters even if they exist don't prove much if anything, depending on the content and would not prove a 15 year long romance unless she has a bunch of them.
    Last edited by redfrog; 25-05-2016 at 01:52 PM.

  10. #53
    Points: 64,872, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 52.0%
    Achievements:
    Three FriendsOverdriveVeteran50000 Experience Points
    HIStory's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    7
    Points
    64,872
    Level
    100
    Thanks
    19,489
    Thanked 35,108 Times in 9,070 Posts

    Default Re: Shana Mangatal is publishing a book on Michael's Birthday 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by redfrog View Post

    Actually that website says that the drum photo was taken during the rehearsals "playing around on the drums at MJ's Dangerous tour rehearsal." and whoever the girl is on the tape was prepared to go on tour with him then for whatever reason she would not.
    Glenda: Is she going on tour with you?
    MJ: No....not anymore.
    The tape was made in Jun 1992 before MJ went on tour.
    MJ says "not anymore" which suggests earlier Melissa went on tour with him. Probably Bad Tour then. Shana didn't. According to her she first met MJ in 1988 on the Bad Tour in New York, but she was just a fan and a teenager then. She was not being on tour with MJ, she just met him once as a fan. She started to work for Gallin in 1990.

    The towelhead meeting took place amid rehearsals and according to that photo Shana was there. It's possible that she was just there as a friend but it could also mean that she was a coordinator and dealt with the band during the rehearsals.
    I am sure there have been many rehearsals before and during the Dangerous tour and Shana being at the tour twice as a guest including attending a rehearsal doesn't prove in any way that she is the Melissa of the Glenda tapes and that she is the girl in this "towelhead" story. I don't think it even makes it a strange "coincidence" or anything like that. I am sure MJ had a lot of people around on tours and he often invited guests. Eg. he invited the whole office of Arnold Klein to the HIStory tour etc. Shana might have got those invitations to the Dangerous tour in a similar way - as she was working for Sandy Gallin. It doesn't seem anything more to me.

    Prince liked to be surrounded by hot chicks all the time it's not that surprising that he would employ former models.
    But MJ as far as I know didn't have that habit and it's not just that they are both models and were young. There are other strange
    coincidences.
    I don't think models in and around Hollywood who also work in another job (or people with other aspiration who do modelling for extra cash or fun) are that much rare. Many people go to Hollywood to make it this or that way, and that often includes some modeling too.

  11. #54
    Points: 64,872, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 52.0%
    Achievements:
    Three FriendsOverdriveVeteran50000 Experience Points
    HIStory's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    7
    Points
    64,872
    Level
    100
    Thanks
    19,489
    Thanked 35,108 Times in 9,070 Posts

    Default Re: Shana Mangatal is publishing a book on Michael's Birthday 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by redfrog View Post
    To make it worse your whole theory makes no sense.
    Why the heck would I want to convince YOU of all people that she is telling the truth?
    Are you a potential juror? No.
    What difference would it make if you believed her? You believing her would suddenly make her a good witness?
    Where is the connection between your opinion of her and whether her story, if true, could help beat Robson/Safechuck or the perception that MJ was into boys?
    You should ask these questions yoruself. Because you are the one who seems to be bothered by me not believing her.

    You keep repeating the same falsehoods about what I supposedly think and it's obvious you didn't even bother to read my previous post.
    So for the last time:
    - The reason why I asked you to show proof was that you were sure not sceptical but sure that she was nuts.
    I merely was interested in whatever info you and others may have about her which proves she is liar.
    *Sigh*.

    sceptical: doubting that something is true or useful:
    http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dict...lish/sceptical

    Saying I think she lies or is delusional IS being sceptical. I did not say I was sure she was nuts. I said this:

    Shana sounds like delusional groupie to me.
    That's a statement of an impression I had of her, not saying "I am sure she is nuts and I have evidence of it." And you talk about me exaggerating, when the whole thing started from YOU exaggarating my statement. LOL.

    But I don't go as far as you did and say that she is deluded either simply because there is not proof of that
    like there is proof that Tatiana is in lala land, for example.
    I simply dared to express an opinion that "she SOUNDS like a delusional groupie to me" and you are going on about it for pages in novel-length rants, acting all offended on Shana's behalf, but you are not invested. Alright.

    - You know very well that in criminal court the burden of proof is higher than in a civil court.
    So just because Zonen's tactic didn't work in 2005 does not mean it would not work in a civil court.
    You also know that Ken Lanning was on the prosecution witness list and Clemente would have testified
    if he had not cancer. Did you read the report they wrote? Do you know why haters love that report?
    You can bet that they would call experts like Clemente or Lanning or even those two themselves.
    Yes, I am aware that a civil trial is more risky. But it is what it is, you cannot do anything about it.

    I am also aware of Lanning which is the hobby horse of haters nowadays, as it is yours apparently. It seems hater arguments make a big impression on you. The defense also had child abuse experts on their witness list who probably would have challenged Lanning and Clemente's views. Thing is with expert testimonies that you can always bring experts supporting both sides of the case especially in a filed that is not exact science, like psychology. Of course, an expert hired by the prosecution will argue that MJ fit the pedophile profile to a T. That's why he is hired. And an expert hired by the defense will argue the exact opposite. Lanning or Clemente never talked to MJ, so their evaluation of MJ means nothing to me, especially knowing which side hired them and for what purpose. And especially knowing that their evaluation is based on inaccurate beliefs about the case and MJ rather than facts. At least that was the case when I once had a debate with Clemente on YouTube. It was painfully obvious how little he actually knew about the case. He made totally erroneous assumptions about what was even alleged and based his "expert opinion" on what he basically made up in his mind about the case, not even what was really alleged, let alone the truth. Among other things he told me that as Gavin sat there with MJ on the Bashir documentary he perfectly showcased the signs of a boy molested by MJ. That it was in their demeanour right there that MJ molested him and Gavin was a victim. Except, according to Gavin's allegations MJ had not molested him yet then. LOL. So when I told this to Clemente he started to go on about how he is right because he has degrees in the field. Appeals to authortity fallacy, because your degrees don't make you automatically right, when you are actually wrong about the basic facts of the case that you base your "expert opinion" on. You will have to show why you are right and not just keep bragging about your degrees as if that is the trump card that wins an argument in itself even in face of facts. So much about these expert opinions.

    I am not saying that a jury who hear about the case for the first time, not knowing or grasping the details, cannot find them compelling or cannot fall for such fallacies. Of course they can. But again, a jury trial, especially a civil one IS risky, no matter what. You are just not able to eliminate that risk, especially not with arguments that you suggest about asexuality that may as well make things worse in a jury's eyes. You just cannot predict such things.

    - This is yet another idiotic exaggeration: "BTW, your selectiveness about what is a good argument in court is funny. Apparently if it is your idea then it is a great argument. LOL.""When and where I did I say that only my ideas are good arguments in court? Stop putting words in my mouth.
    It's just the typical behaviour you desplay on this board - that you have a better idea about how to defend MJ than anyone, including Mesereau. Didn't you go on about how Mez should have had argued this or that (eg. the asexual thing) in court? That did look like you think you are smarter than him and somehow you could have defended MJ better with your arguments even if he did win the case and there is no guarantee that your strategy with the asexual nonsense would have been effective (in fact, I tend to think it would not have at all).

    - Whether you like to admit it or not those who are not MJ's fans DO make the leap from frequent bed sharing to him being a predator. That perception can be fatal in a civil court.
    I am well aware that some people think that way, but that doesn't make it true. Nor does it make it true that MJ was asexual. Only he can talk about his own sexuality and he won't be able to. What do you expect in a civil trial? That the lawyer for the Estate all of a sudden will start arguing that MJ was asexual? When MJ himself never claimed such a thing when he was alive? How would that look? Even at best it would just look like desperate speculation on the part of the Estate lawyer.

    - You are totally clueless about asexuality that's why you have no idea why an asexual would have adult magazines.
    Except that was not my main point. I actually said for argument's sake let's say you are right about that. My argument was that there is no guarantee a jury of "common people" would see that argument as convincing, in any case. I think the asexual argument would have carried the very high risk of a jury considering it as desperate and basically a lie - with all the adult magazines MJ had. That was my point.

    - It's funny that you demand proof from Shana but you don't apply the same standard for MJ's entire adult life and are convinced that he was heterosexual as in having sex with women like other "normal" hetero guys. What proof do you have that was the case? I'm certainly open to new evidence and I change my mind if I see it but I never saw any proof that MJ had regular sex like sexual people do.
    According to Mez Michael himself said he was heterosexual and MJ certainly knew his sexuality more than you do. Unless you think he lied about his sexuality. Do you?

    I don't think the lack of many visible women in his life proves he was asexual or even that he had a low libido. There are many reasons why people don't have a lot of sex. In MJ's case that might have been a lack of trust in people, including potential parters or there could be other reasons. What is a "normal hetero guy" to you anyway? What is the ideal of a "normal hetero guy" that MJ should have lived up to in your book to be considered "normal" by you? IMO there isn't such as a "normal hetero guy". Some people have more partners, some people have less partners, some people are easygoing when it comes to sex, some poeple are not and they are not going to have sex with a lot of people, not because of a low libido, but because they don't have that kind of deep intimate bond with many that they need. To try to put people in little boxes, like if you had this many women and this much sex then you are "a normal heterosexual guy" and if you didn't then you are not or you are some other sexuality than what you claim - sorry, but that is extremely narrow-minded.

    - Tom Mez should have explained why MJ didn't see sharing a bed with children as something sexual and most of all why he could spend so many nights with kids in his bed without doing anything sexual while he didn't have an adult companion with him during the same period. He and MJ were damn lucky that Hultman was pressured by the other jurors to put that bedsharing equals sex idea aside and only focus on the evidence against the Arvixos because that idiot and Cook and a third juror were quite ready to convict MJ and one reason Hultman said was this:
    "It's hard for me to imagine that this man would spend 365 days in bed with a boy and only watch television".
    I don't deny that the fallacy that bed sharing=sex might sway a jury. But your idea of this whole asexual argument is just not the solution for that. In fact, if anything it would make things look worse 1) because it might not even be true, 2) because it just might sound like a desperate lie for a jury that looked at MJ's
    adult magazines.

    - It's hardly desperate if it's the truth. If MJ was asexual that should have been established in court.
    And if he wasn't that makes you think he was a child molester? I'd like to know that now, because you really sound desperate for that asexual argument.

    If he was having regular sex with women that should have been established. You are only glad Tom Mez didn't bother with any of that because Hultman and Cook and the Asian-American juror were willing to give up ultimately. Otherwise it would have been a hung jury, a disaster for MJ. Two jurors declared on TV that MJ was a pedo and got away with it. Are you glad about that too?
    Yes, we are lucky that most of the jury wasn't as stupid and/or biased as Hultman or Cook (conveniently the same jury members who later tried to shop book deals, so it's not like they might not have been invested in a "guilty" verdict - considering that's the more sensational and that's what the media wanted). Jury trials are often a matter of luck in terms of how logical a jury is. It's made of common people, some are more logical, some are more emotional, some are not able to see through fallacious arguments, some are, some have prejudices, some not. That's why some say the jury selection is the most important part of a trial. This may or may not be a good thing in the US justice system, but it is what it is and we will just have to live with it and that it makes especially a civil trial a lottery. But I don't think your asexual argument would solve this problem, on the contrary. You assume that if Mez had argued MJ was asexual the jury - including Hultman and Cook - would have just believed it and then everything would be so happy and rosy because Hultman and Cook would have never made those comments after the trial. That's a bit naive. I don't think they would have bought the asexual argument. Especially looking at MJ's adult magazines.


    At the same time the reasons you gave why you think she is nuts
    were just silly. Her mother supporting her because she is her mother stuff like that. That's just not enough to convince me that she is crazy. Just like some MJJ employee backing her does not convince me that she is telling the truth.
    LMAO. I never said she was "nuts" or "crazy". I said: "She SOUNDS like a delusional to me". You are flipping out about that simple opinion ever since thorugh pages long rants. But you are not emotionally invested. LOL. The mother thing is also something that you just love taking out of its context, don't you? YOU were the one who brought up her mother's support for her as one of your evidences for her. It was YOU, remember?

    Her mother is backing her up regarding this whole thing, so is Gregg Mitchell who worked for MJJ Productions
    now I see Shaq O'Neill being quoted supporting this whole notion that something was going on between the two.
    I only replied to that saying that a mother supporting someone is not surprising and will not convince me of anything.

    Shana's mother? Are you kidding me? It's not surprising if she supports her daughter.
    That's what I wrote about her mother AFTER you brought the mother argument up first. So stop twisting this around, will you already?

    - People didn't believe Lisa because of the timing and because the marriage went south quickly. And frankly, because she is Elvis's daughter. The whole thing looked PR and damage control.
    Yet, Lisa has more proof about their relationship and even that it was not a sham, than Shana does so far.

    No I didn't want to suggest that Todd was talking about 1992 just that Shana was working as a coordinator.
    MJ didn't even say on the tape that she was a coordinator during the rehearsals just that she was a coordinator.
    Like if you said that someone is a DJ but that doesn't mean he was the DJ at a particular party.
    Can two girls who were both models, who both loved MJ, who both were around the band, who were both coordinators be with MJ in 1992? Sure it's possible. I just don't think it's very likely.
    Oh I am sure MJ had a lot of girls chasing him around, including models. I don't find it "too coincidental" at all.


    Sandusky, Father Porter, Rodney Allen, Marc Collin Rector , Africa Bambataa, Christopher Michael Bradshaw, Thomas Hacker, Norbert Maday, William Vahey -- all serial boy molesters none of them had romances with women.
    I don't know about the others, but Sandusky was married all along while he molested those boys. He has been married since 1966. He seemed like your "normal heterosexual guy", as you like to put it. Married, had kids - like "normal heterosexual guys" at his age are supposed to be. There are also other molesters who are married and look perfectly "normal" to outsiders. Many even have children. So much about a profile.
    Last edited by HIStory; 25-05-2016 at 03:30 PM.

  12. #55
    Points: 5,483, Level: 47
    Level completed: 67%, Points required for next Level: 67
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    945
    Points
    5,483
    Level
    47
    Thanks
    153
    Thanked 777 Times in 332 Posts

    Default Re: Shana Mangatal is publishing a book on Michael's Birthday 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by respect77 View Post
    MJ says "not anymore" which suggests earlier Melissa went on tour with him. Probably Bad Tour then.
    Yes it's possible. But its also possible that Glenda's question refers to the Dangerous tour not tours in general given that MJ was ready to go on tour at the time "will she go on tour with you" and you answer that no not anymore that can mean that she was supposed to go but not anymore.
    Do you know about any girl on the Bad tour who was a model and was in love with MJ and whom MJ was interested in? I sure don't.
    And during the all years these tapes have been public there hasn't been anyone who figured out the link between a girl named Melissa on the Bad tour
    and the girl on the tape?

    Quote Originally Posted by respect77 View Post

    I am sure there have been many rehearsals before and during the Dangerous tour and Shana being at the tour twice as a guest including attending a rehearsal doesn't prove in any way that she is the Melissa of the Glenda tapes and that she is the girl in this "towelhead" story.

    Shana wasn't in Hawai on the Dangerous tour that was during the HIStory tour in 1997. The Dangerous tour didn't even have concert in Hawaii.
    On the drum picture she looks like on the picture taken in Japan so it was in 1992.
    Yes it could have been taken in Japan but what was she doing there and what was she doing with the band?

    Quote Originally Posted by respect77 View Post
    I don't think it even makes it a strange "coincidence" or anything like that. I am sure MJ had a lot of people around on tours and he often invited guests. Eg. he invited the whole office of Arnold Klein to the HIStory tour etc. Shana might have got those invitations to the Dangerous tour in a similar way - as she was working for Sandy Gallin. It doesn't seem anything more to me.
    Yes but how many girls can you name who were around MJ in 1992, they got invited on the tour, hung out with the band, were models, were coordinators
    were in love with MJ who knew where all the offices were including MJ's (which Shana most likely did if she worked for his manager)?
    MJ: And I was in the back office?
    Glenda: So she knows where the office is?
    MJ: Of course she always knows where all the offices are...

    That's the question, what are the chances of ALL those things being true to two girls at the same time? One who nobody ever saw or heard (Melissa) and another who pops up around MJ time and again for 15 years.
    That's more than just both Shana and Melissa having some kind of link to the band or both being on tour with him at some point at least.

    Quote Originally Posted by respect77 View Post
    I don't think models in and around Hollywood who also work in another job (or people with other aspiration who do modelling for extra cash or fun) are that much rare. Many people go to Hollywood to make it this or that way, and that often includes some modeling too.
    Probably it's awfully rare for two girls being models, coordinators, getting access to the band and rehearsals and MJ's office in 1992 and who are both also in love with MJ. I'm pretty sure that doesn't happen every day.
    Also it's strange that while Shana pops up around MJ for the next 15 years Melissa is nowhere to be found even though MJ said "I'm gonna be with her"
    and "I'm kinda interested in this girl". If Shana claims her relationship with MJ was secret than his relationship with this Melissa should be taught to the CIA.


    Anyway, what do you think about Shana's response? I find it odd, for the sake of change.
    She didn't say the girl on the tape is not her rather that she wrote a similar episode in his book and what was said on the tape sounds familiar.
    If she is a liar she stole the story and pretends to be Melissa isn't she afraid that the real Melissa would expose her? Why would she risk something like that what's the point? It's not that she will become rich because of this book so why would she tell such a blatant lie pretending to be someone else even?

  13. #56
    Points: 64,872, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 52.0%
    Achievements:
    Three FriendsOverdriveVeteran50000 Experience Points
    HIStory's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    7
    Points
    64,872
    Level
    100
    Thanks
    19,489
    Thanked 35,108 Times in 9,070 Posts

    Default Re: Shana Mangatal is publishing a book on Michael's Birthday 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by redfrog View Post
    Do you know about any girl on the Bad tour who was a model and was in love with MJ and whom MJ was interested in? I sure don't.
    And during the all years these tapes have been public there hasn't been anyone who figured out the link between a girl named Melissa on the Bad tour
    and the girl on the tape?
    And do you think we would know about every single person who worked around MJ and who were in love with MJ? Maybe, after all, there have been loyal people in his life who kept their relationships with him to themselves. Maybe Melissa is just one of those. Or maybe she is not alive any more.

    Shana wasn't in Hawai on the Dangerous tour that was during the HIStory tour in 1997. The Dangerous tour didn't even have concert in Hawaii.
    On the drum picture she looks like on the picture taken in Japan so it was in 1992.
    Yes it could have been taken in Japan but what was she doing there and what was she doing with the band?
    Ok, so she wasn't in Hawaii, then that's basically one concert that she attended on Dangerous tour. Why does it matter what did she do at the drums? What does that picture prove to you? To me she just seems like simply posing for a photo with the drums and then with the band. Just having fun backstage. What does that prove about her being Melissa?

    Yes but how many girls can you name who were around MJ in 1992, they got invited on the tour, hung out with the band, were models, were coordinators
    were in love with MJ who knew where all the offices were including MJ's (which Shana most likely did if she worked for his manager)?
    MJ: And I was in the back office?
    Glenda: So she knows where the office is?
    MJ: Of course she always knows where all the offices are...

    That's the question, what are the chances of ALL those things being true to two girls at the same time? One who nobody ever saw or heard (Melissa) and another who pops up around MJ time and again for 15 years.
    That's more than just both Shana and Melissa having some kind of link to the band or both being on tour with him at some point at least.
    I just don't think this is as coincidental as you see it. To me it would not be surprising to have all kind of girls in Hollywood offices that also work as models sometimes. Hollywood is full of aspiring models and actors, actresses etc. I would think being a coordinator is pretty common there too. And there were probably many people MJ invited on tour, including women. And I am sure there were LOTS of women around MJ who had a crush on him. LOL.

    Anyway, what do you think about Shana's response? I find it odd, for the sake of change.
    She didn't say the girl on the tape is not her rather that she wrote a similar episode in his book and what was said on the tape sounds familiar.
    If she is a liar she stole the story and pretends to be Melissa isn't she afraid that the real Melissa would expose her? Why would she risk something like that what's the point? It's not that she will become rich because of this book so why would she tell such a blatant lie pretending to be someone else even?
    Maybe that's exactly why she won't say point blank that she is Melissa. Because notice that she did NOT say she was Melissa. She kind of insinuated it was possible, but in a way she can still safely backtrack if it is needed (for example if it doesn't fit her own story or a real Melissa happens to appaer). So my opinion is that it was a tactical response by her.

    If Shana claims her relationship with MJ was secret than his relationship with this Melissa should be taught to the CIA.
    Well, there is also a Kathy mentioned on the tapes (she was rather a friend, but apparently a close one) that we never otherwise heard about. I am sure there have been people in MJ's life who we don't know about and who never came out to publicly talk about him.

  14. #57
    Points: 25,481, Level: 96
    Level completed: 14%, Points required for next Level: 869
    Overall activity: 1.0%
    Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points
    InvincibleMJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    2,760
    Points
    25,481
    Level
    96
    Thanks
    2,973
    Thanked 3,988 Times in 1,317 Posts

    Default Re: Shana Mangatal is publishing a book on Michael's Birthday 2016

    I don't mind tell-all books if the people who write them stick to true stories. But unfortunately most people who write tell-alls don't have enough material to write a whole book, especially when the book focuses exclusively on their experiences with another person - so in order to make their books marketable many stories in them are often exaggerated or completely fabricated. Another thing that I don't like is the very little acknowledgement that it's just this person's point of view which might have been influenced by many things and therefore there's a lot of room for wrong interpretations. Having said that, writing a tell all is not going to put people in my bad book automatically, but so far I don't think there are many MJ tell-alls that I like.

    Going back to Shana, I don't think I would call her book a tell-all. Not until I have reasons to believe her story. She's been talking about her 'relationship' with Michael for years but never really backed up her claims. And it's not like she didn't try to - she often posts a lot of MJ things on her profile but they all suggest that she's more like a fan. IMO some of the things she posted are actually kind of weird bearing in mind that she claims she was Michael's longtime girlfriend.
    Last edited by InvincibleMJ; 25-05-2016 at 05:56 PM.
    The King Of Music

    "I am forever, we are forever."

  15. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to InvincibleMJ For This Useful Post:


  16. #58
    Points: 12,492, Level: 73
    Level completed: 11%, Points required for next Level: 358
    Overall activity: 9.0%
    Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    2,225
    Points
    12,492
    Level
    73
    Thanks
    6,580
    Thanked 2,769 Times in 764 Posts

    Default Re: Shana Mangatal is publishing a book on Michael's Birthday 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by redfrog View Post
    Prince liked to be surrounded by hot chicks all the time it's not that surprising that he would employ former models.
    But MJ as far as I know didn't have that habit (except maybe in the studio if LA Reid was telling the truth) and it's not just that they are both models and were young.
    You keep going on about 'Melissa' being a model but from what I can remember (it's been a while since I last heard the tapes) Michael never says that. Glenda asks him if she models too and Michael kind of evades the question by replying "she does all kinds of things".

  17. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to LindavG For This Useful Post:


  18. #59
    Points: 16,584, Level: 82
    Level completed: 47%, Points required for next Level: 266
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Three Friends10000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Real Life
    Posts
    4,054
    Points
    16,584
    Level
    82
    Thanks
    82
    Thanked 135 Times in 74 Posts

    Default Re: Shana Mangatal is publishing a book on Michael's Birthday 2016

    To me "tell all" means tell all the world or fans "all" that can be told that fans or the world didn't already know about the subject from a private point of view. Fans by definition are supposed to love "tell all's" hence the perfect market place. It bugs me like how marketers put colorful toys or candy in the checkout isles at the store...vulnerable consumers and with fans also being the great fannNtasizers they are known to be...sadly they are vulnerable.
    Last edited by SoS; 25-05-2016 at 07:34 PM.

  19. #60
    Points: 40,066, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 63.0%
    Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,015
    Points
    40,066
    Level
    100
    Thanks
    2,198
    Thanked 14,408 Times in 3,825 Posts

    Default Re: Shana Mangatal is publishing a book on Michael's Birthday 2016

    Michael Jackson allegedly had a secret lover and is telling all in a new book that’s due out in August. Shana Mangatal says she had an on-again-off-again intimate relationship with Jackson for over 20 years. Mangatal, who’s now approximately 46-years-old, went on to say in an exclusive Radar Online interview that Michael Jackson’s death was so painful that she’s just now been able to openly talk about the “King of Pop.”

    In the book titled Michael and Me: The Untold Story of Michael Jackson’s Secret Romance, Mangatal reveals Jackson’s true sexuality, as well as how she was able to keep her affair with Jackson a secret for two decades.

    Not much is known about Michael Jackson’s secret ex-lover, but Shana Mangatal was reportedly once an actress who Jackson cast in two of his short films. According to Mangatal, after she met Jackson as a fan in 1988, the two became and stayed friends until Michael Jackson’s death from sudden cardiac arrest in 2009. Mangatal claims that Jackson flirted with her on their very first meeting, and that’s when she knew his true sexuality. Despite rumors that Jackson may have been asexual with no sexual feelings or desires at all, Mangatal says there was more to Jackson than meets the eye.

    “Their relationship was quiet and sweet and real — a closely guarded secret, known only to a few trusted employees and friends,” according to a press release mentioned by Page Six on May 20.

    Through a secret relationship that lasted for 20 years, Mangatal learned that Jackson really wasn’t the man-child that the media made him out to be. Even though Michael Jackson had several public heterosexual relationships over the course of his nearly 51 years alive, with his first serious “real date” as a teenager with American actress Tatum O’Neal in the 1970s, media attention still portrayed Jackson as possibly gay but not exactly straight either.

    But Mangatal says that Michael Jackson most certainly wasn’t asexual, bisexual, or gay. Jackson undeniably “loved women,” she wrote in her new tell-all book about her secret love affair with the late misunderstood superstar. A report published on Queerty, a popular online gay-oriented magazine, says that Jackson never really clued anyone in on his true sexual orientation. According to the report, at least one of Jackson’s two marriages was fake, sex talk made him extremely uncomfortable, and the fact that he had a child with a surrogate mother all lead fans to believe Jackson may have been asexual with no longing for sexual affection from either males or females.

    If fans would have known about Michael Jackson’s 20-year relationship with Shana Mangatal, views of Jackson’s sexuality may have been different. For years, Jackson had several different intimate encounters and phone conversations with Mangatal. Mangatal says they even wanted a formal relationship, but the timing was always off, mainly due to Jackson’s first marriage to Lisa Marie Presley in 1994, his second marriage to longtime friend Debbie Rowe in 1996, and fatherhood. Mangatal said she always wanted more with the iconic pop singer, but their secret relationship only occurred before, during, and after Jackson’s marriages.

    “There was a time when it progressed to the next level, but the reason it ended was because of his marriage,” said Mangatal.

    Shana Mangatal explained that Michael Jackson’s death was very painful to her. Not quite 10 years after Jackson divorced Debbie Rowe, the “Bad” singer was found dead of a prescription drug overdose. Mangatal didn’t reveal in the Radar Online interview how close she became with Jackson after his divorce from Rowe in 1999, but she did say that the book covers all of that. Michael and Me: The Untold Story of Michael Jackson’s Secret Romance will hit the stands on August 29, what ironically would be Michael Jackson’s 58th birthday.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •