Hollywood and I: Both Wrong About Michael Jackson

Moonwalker.Fan

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
3,584
Points
0
Location
Slovakia
by Jeffrey Scott Shapiro

It’s important to be honest with yourself – even when it turns out you were wrong. As it turns out, I was apparently wrong about Michael Jackson and I just wish that the rest of the people in Hollywood who keep talking about how wonderful he was would take a moment to consider that maybe they’re wrong, too.

On the eve of Michael Jackson’s death, I penned a column for FOX News in Michael Jackson’s defense arguing that he should be remembered for all his charitable accomplishments as opposed to the unproved accusations against him.

“Sure, Jackson was prosecuted twice, and although this reporter can’t acquit him of any charges, he was never convicted of a single crime,” I wrote. “He certainly didn’t deserve the tabloid innuendos that only fueled a toxic fire that was burning his reputation to a cinder in the court of public opinion.”

I stand by that statement, but there’s a difference between tabloid innuendos and facts, and to my surprise it turns out that although the most damning evidence against Jackson is indisputable, Hollywood and the media have paid little attention to it.

Even last week when the FBI released their own files on Jackson, including one report about a pair of Mexican boys that he may have molested in the 1980’s and a British boy who Jackson allegedly had phone sex with in 1979, it made little impact.

I was never a Michael Jackson fan, but I cheered in 2005 when he was acquitted on child molestation charges because his defense lawyer made a convincing argument that he was framed. I assumed that because the alleged victim’s mother seemed extortive, that her story and her son’s story were both lies.

I also convinced myself of what many others had, which is that Michael Jackson was just a strange guy who loved kids and didn’t want to hurt them.

There’s a darker side however, that cannot and should not be ignored even if Hollywood refuses to believe it. I learned about that dark side when I finally investigated the sexual abuse allegations in the wake of Michael Jackson’s death for a national news network earlier this year.

The first thing I discovered was a story reported by journalists Andrew Breitbart and Mark Ebner in their New York Times bestseller, Hollywood Interrupted, an investigative exposé of the entertainment community in Los Angeles.

Apparently, Jackson had a mysterious relationship with Frederick Mark Schaffel, a controversial gay pornographer who had a history of making films with young adult males over in Europe. When Schaffel wasn’t producing gay porn movies however, he had another job here in America – he was Michael Jackson’s personal videographer at Neverland.

When Jackson allegedly first ‘learned’ about Schaffel’s background, he immediately fired the pornographer and issued a public apology that pledged Schaffel would no longer be associating with him. However, a couple of years later Schaffel was allowed to return, and in 2005 he was named by prosecutors as an unindicted co-conspirator in Jackson’s sexual molestation case.

Despite this stunning, contradictory display of hypocrisy, the media never probed into why Michael Jackson hired a gay pornographer – fired him – and then rehired him to film children who were visiting his ranch or why the celebrity superstar was paying such absurd amounts of money to him.

During the 2005 trial it was revealed that Schaffel had apparently signed two checks in the amounts of $500,000 and $1 million to an account that he and Jackson were the only signatories. Schaffel also alleged that Jackson owed him another $3 million for “producing fees.”

No one knows what that money was actually for, but Breitbart and Ebner obtained a source in the Los Angeles pornography world who said that Schaffel, as the authors put it “had a predilection for young-looking performers, preferably straight, who he would recruit in Eastern European countries like Hungary and the Czech Republic for both his personal and professional pleasure.”

Later, I located a source of my own in Hollywood’s gay community who knew Schaffel, and he confirmed that Schaffel had a very suspicious reputation in connection with the films he produced.

The next revelation came while researching the original 1993 sexual abuse accusations made by Jordan Chandler. To my surprise, Chandler wasn’t the only boy whose silence Jackson bought. After Jackson settled with the Chandler’s in 1995 for an estimated $15 million he paid $2 million to another boy named Jason Francia in 1996. Francia’s mother worked at Neverland as a maid from 1987-1991.

All of this time, I had thought Jackson had only settled with one alleged victim, but apparently he had actually settled with two. That also meant that there weren’t only two boys who had accused Jackson of sexual abuse, there were three – Jordan Chandler, Jason Francis and Gavin Arvizo. The recently released FBI files indicate there could be more.

The next day, I found hundreds of blogs reporting that Jordan Chandler admitted he lied and wanted to issue a public apology to Michael Jackson. The story was even reported by an online European news site and for a short time on Wikipedia as well. Apparently, Jackson’s fans weren’t above fabricating lies to clear their hero’s name.

After persistent attempts to contact Chandler’s family to confirm or deny that rumor, I finally reached Jordan’s uncle at his Santa Barbara law office.

“Jordan never recanted any of the allegations he made against Michael Jackson because they are all true,” Ray Chandler told me during a telephone interview. “You know,” he added, “from the very beginning this has been a nightmare for Jordan and the entire Chandler family. Hopefully, now that Jackson has passed away, this will be closure for Jordan – may Michael rest in peace.”

Later, I learned that when both Jordan Chandler and Gavin Arvizo were asked to describe Jackson’s genitalia to law enforcement officials the two boys both gave accurate descriptions. I also read that when the LAPD served their original warrant on Neverland in 1993, police found children’s games and books in Jackson’s bedroom along with pictorial books featuring photographs of naked boys. Police said that it was common to find children’s books and toys in pedophiles bedrooms because they help lure innocent children.

What really interested police however, was a special indoor alarm – the only one of its kind in the entire Neverland ranch – connected to Jackson’s bedroom hallway to alert him if someone was approaching his door. One veteran LAPD detective who investigated nearly 4,000 sexual abuse cases said he believed the alarm was installed because Jackson was doing something in his bedroom he didn’t want anyone to know anything about.

Finally, I learned from Ray Chandler that when Jordan Chandler’s father, Evan, confronted Jackson face to face about sexually molesting his son, the singer reportedly didn’t take offense to the stinging accusation or even deny it. He simply smiled and in a soft, childlike tone and said, “I didn’t do anything wrong.”

In other words, Jackson never denied he had sex with the 10-year old – he just didn’t believe he did anything wrong. There’s a big difference between the two.

These stories are not tabloid tales based on flimsy sources, but rather true facts, most of which Jackson brought upon himself by paying off his accusers and permitting sexual deviants to have access to the children he invited to his home. Still, the media hasn’t breathed a word of any of this since the pop-star passed away.

Instead, Democratic Congresswoman Shelia Jackson Lee reminded the nation during Jackson’s funeral service that everyone is always innocent until proven guilty. But anyone who is honest knows that just because someone isn’t proven guilty in court does not mean they’re innocent in the real world. If that were true, then O.J. Simpson would be innocent too.

Back in July when I listened to Lee tell her audience that she was proposing a Congressional resolution that would name Jackson as a “great humanitarian,” I wondered how his alleged victims – and any other victim of child molestation felt at that moment. Perhaps in the midst of showing our reverence for Michael Jackson, I thought we should all take a moment of silence to show our consideration for them too.

Michael Jackson copped a plea in Hollywood’s court of public opinion that he was just an unusual guy who never grew up and loved kids and as the judge and jury many of us accepted that plea because we didn’t want to believe the alternative. I ended my original l column by saying that, “Michael Jackson deserves an accurate place in history.”

I stand by that statement.


http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/j...ywood-and-i-both-wrong-about-michael-jackson/

*************

Please, add your comments about the book CONSPIRACY, facts about conspiracy of Evan Chandler and his phone calls... and so on...

And it would be better to post the reporter an email with links/copied texts or downloaded court documents!
 
This guy is getting paid by somebody I bet. The FBI files were released and it still had no proof that Michael was a child abuser, so he's just inferring from whatever information that he can find that points in that direction from the files. It's really quite infuriating that this is still being debated.

I'll be writing a letter to this guy when I have calmed down from reading his garbage opinion.
 
I hate the fact that the guy turned from MJ is innocent to MJ is guilty. uggg! That pisses me off. :mat:

That is the point, the exact opposite side of Aphrodite Jones!!!

Thats why we - the fans - have to be defending Michael...

Its surreal that people like this so called investigative journalist and lawyer can be so... ridiculous...

This is a hidden agenda.

:timer:
 
E-mailed him;

---

I am quite disgusted with what you have recently said about Michael Jackson. It is attitudes like this that are the reason why people are afraid to help children, because they are afraid of being labeled as pedophiles.

Michael would NEVER harm a child in such a manner. He wasen't capable of something like that and you know that. Does it not bother you that Evan Chandler ACCEPTED the payout back in the first accusation? If your child was molested, you don't accept money from the one who molested him/her. You would want to see them rot in prison. Also, you have not done proper research. I mean you asked Ray Chandler. Of course he's going to say something against Michael.

Also, it was not Michael who made the payout. It was his insurance company and it was against his will as he wanted to prove his innocence. Whats funny is that he did prove his innocence in the 2nd molestation allegations, yet people STILL believed he was guilty. What is up with that? You ask the guy to prove himself and when he does you are STILL not satisfied?

You have also made the mistake by referring to the OJ trials. This is a VERY commen arguement that people use to prove their point that Michael was guilty.

What sickens me most is that you believe a man who drugged his son and a woman who previously made false allegations over a child-like man who gave so much to world. But I suppose you make more money out of reporting false stories that ruin an innocent mans reputation.

Michael Jackson was a victim of extortion and people took advantage of the one thing he cared about most in the world; children. I only pray his children do not see the bile you call an article.

Ashley Tait
---
 
... thanks... post this as a comment too.
there is reportedly a child abuse investigator... and he is so... creepy... about the article.
 
Holy crap, I got a reply;

---

Michael Jackson himself said he fired Mark Schaffel because his background as a gay pornographer with young males was dangerous to children - then he re-hired him - explain that to me please. If you're really someone who wants to protect children, what business do you have hiring someone like that - and sharing a secret checking account with them where you're paying them amounts like a million dollars? This is not something you can blip over and avoid - it is a key element. You don't hang out with people who have reputations for endangering children sexually if you're looking to protect them.

---

Oh sure, because those who direct porn are bad people. *rolls eyes* Please! It's a job like any other!

Other sources say the producer wasen't terminated fromt he project and that he never hid his past from Michael or Sony.
 
Michael didnt rehire him..., there was a reason for doing it.

Anyway... the point of the article is clear.

We should recommend him the book CONSPIRACY to know the facts!

It gets me nerve... of this son of bitch...

Can you see how gradually such articles are coming up...

Before that there were several other articles about the same issue, full of lies and twisted facts or better fabricated stories..., just a few moths after MJs passing...

Is that an accident?

Or media conspiracy to reduce the Michael Jackson impact on the net...

the mourning, the celebrations of Michael as an artist .... everything is so huge as for Michael that the haters and particular media groups (I call them conspirators - search the meaning of the word: conspiracy)... want to twist the reality and the - status quo - and not let people forget some particular things and thats why they repeatedly report about the BSs.

No, for me its not just an accident... it has the time line, its obvious and clear... just check it up...
 
Last edited:
How the hell does having a dude that once filmed gay porn, working for you as a videographer prove that you are a molestor?

.sfjghv.\dfkjdfhg,xcnvjkfhg i cant take this shit.
 
How the hell does having a dude that once filmed gay porn, working for you as a videographer prove that you are a molestor?

.sfjghv.\dfkjdfhg,xcnvjkfhg i cant take this shit.

I've been wondering that too!

Unless this guy believes the myth that anything gay = child molesting.

...Wait...Does that mean he just insulted gays via subliminal messaging?
 
I'm so sick and tired of people comparing MJ to OJ. If this writer was falsely accused of a crime and was found not guilty in a court of law, would it be right for me to write articles calling him guilty? That would be fair, wouldn't it? After all "...just because someone isn’t proven guilty in court does not mean they’re innocent in the real world. If that were true, then O.J. Simpson would be innocent too"? Every person ever charged with a crime is guilty then? Even if they were found not guilty? Give me a :censored: break! Michael had just about every department on his back, from the FBI to Child and Family services. After a decades worth of investigation and searching the globe for victims they found nothing. Why did they find nothing? Because there was nothing to be found. PERIOD.

This notion that Michael "paid kids off" and "gave out hush money" needs to stop, because it's getting ridiculous. The settlement didn't stop the accuser from doing anything other than speaking to the press. Why should Michael be blamed over Chandler's OWN decision not to testify? Michael was never indicted in 93. It wasn't because the money forbid Chandler from pressing charges. It was because he didn't WANT to press charges. There is a difference. Michael didn't settle to shut them up. He settled to get the civil case out of the way. You'd think these writers would use their brains and say to themselves "if I was expecting criminal charges, would I waste my time and resources on fighting in civil court?" I bet they would have settled too. Their lawyers would probably advise them to put all their energy into into preparing for a possible criminal trial that could subsequently land them in a jail cell. If their accusers later decide they no longer feel the need to get justice, what does that have to do with them? Nothing!
 
Last edited:
Can I ask a question? Why do so many so-called Michael Jackson fans keep posting websites and videos like this that continue to berrate him and call him a child molestor? He was obviously innocent of those charges. The only think you do by visiting these sites, only gives them more numbers and justifies their biased points of view. Anyone who truly believed Michael to be innocent will still believe him to be innocent. This author obviously believed Michael was guilty to begin with. Hollywood believed Michael was guilty to begin with and some are now trying to come out in support because it's the current trend and to ease their consciences. By buying or buying into their material, we doing exactly what Michael always preached out in his songs. Stop feeding the media monster and start spreading the truth!
 
Heeeeres we go;

Me
---
So he directed and produced gay porn. Big deal! It's a job like any other. Did you ever stop to think that maybe Schaffel is a good producer, despite what he previously produced? In any case, why did it matter what he previously directed?

Besides, Schaffel has said he was not terminated from the project he and Michael were working on and he never hid his past from Michael or Sony.
---

The moron
---
Letting a gay pornographer film children put in your supervision? You forget it was MICHAEL who released a statement condemning Schaffel when he fired him because Michael himself said HE was appalled at Schaffel's background. There is no excuse for re-hiring him. Would YOU let a pornographer film YOUR children? I doubt it. Especially when there are stories of him making movies of young males? Ashley, please - look at this for what it is and stop trying to convince yourself of something that makes no sense.
---

ME!!
---
Sorry, but I believe my sources over someone who takes the word of Ray Chandler. Again, just because he directed gay porn, does NOT make him a bad person or a danger to children.

Getting back to the real issue here. I'm so sick and tired of people comparing MJ to OJ. If you were falsely accused of a crime and was found not guilty in a court of law, would it be right for me to write articles calling you guilty? That would be fair, wouldn't it? After all "...just because someone isn’t proven guilty in court does not mean they’re innocent in the real world. If that were true, then O.J. Simpson would be innocent too"? Every person ever charged with a crime is guilty then? Even if they were found not guilty? Give me a break!

This notion that Michael "paid kids off" and "gave out hush money" needs to stop, because it's getting ridiculous. The settlement didn't stop the accuser from doing anything other than speaking to the press. Why should Michael be blamed over Chandler's OWN decision not to testify? Michael was never indicted in 93. It wasn't because the money forbid Chandler from pressing charges. It was because he didn't WANT to press charges. There is a difference. Michael didn't settle to shut them up. He settled to get the civil case out of the way. I would think you writers would use your brains and say to yourselves "if I was expecting criminal charges, would I waste my time and resources on fighting in civil court?" I bet you would have settled too. Your lawyers would probably advise you to put all your energy into into preparing for a possible criminal trial that could subsequently land you in a jail cell. If your accusers later decide they no longer feel the need to get justice, what does that have to do with them? Nothing!

I defend Michael not only because I loved him. But because I've seen first hand what false accusations can do to a person. Especially an accusation like that. I will not go into it, but I've seen the look of hurt plastered on their face. It's heartbreaking to even look at it.

Convince myself of something that dosen't make sense? I could say the same thing to you.
---

Hope you don't mind me using your words StephLuvsMJ. But your words are epic. =D
 
Okay...I've lost it;

---
Ashley,

I told someone else today that last year I knew a friend who was a racist - I stopped hanging out with them because to even be associated with someone like that was offensive to me. AS yourself this - would you associate with someone who Schaffel - you're forgetting the part where Breitbart and Ebner found sources who said Schaffel had a prediliction for 'recruiting' young boys. Believe what you want, but at some point you can't ignore fact after fact. I do believe the Chandlers. I do not believe Evan was out to extort Michael. He was a father who was furious over the fact his irresponsible wife - who has since changed her mind about defending MJ - allowed his son to be exposed to this dangerous person. Any parent would be outraged in that situation. His frustration over MJ no longer calling him was not jealousy - it was a sign to Evan that MJ knew he was in trouble and was avoiding him. Just because someone is famous doesn't mean they're a good person - I suppose you think Kobe Bryant and Robert Blake are innocent too?

---

People...said similer things..When they accused my uncle of child molestation..
 
I also wrote to Mr. Shapiro regarding his article. Here's my first email to him:

Mr. Shapiro,

I have read your article and it seems that you are at a crossroads as to whether Mr. Jackson was innocent or criminal towards children. While i appreciate you admitting to cheering when he was acquitted in 2005, i cannot seem to get my head around you stating that "there’s a difference between tabloid innuendos and facts" when the 'facts' that you have presented seem to be exactly of the latter - tabloid innuendos. You claim to be an investigative journalist and lawyer yet the supposed facts that you have presented have no substance nor do you give reliable sources to the supposed facts given. As someone who has researched thoroughly into Mr. Jackson's allegations (strong emphasis on allegations) i can understand how someone who does not look into these cases properly can find a lot of misinformation regarding them. But i would like to point out, i am simply part of the public and not an investigative journalist and it makes me a tad disappointed that you have not researched these cases more. It seems that you have put two and two together and got twenty.

I will admit, i am a fan of Mr. Jackson, of his music and of the man - i have a lot of respect for him - but that does not make me deluded or someone who refuses to see the so-called truth that many posters in response to your article are trying to make all fans out to be. I am someone who has found out the facts for myself, studied the cases and come to my own conclusion on the matter. In my opinion, Mr. Jackson was innocent of all crimes he was accused of. I know that there are many people on your comment section that think otherwise, but i suspect that 99.9% of those people that are claiming he was a criminal have got their 'facts' from media tabloid junk as 'sources' and have formed their opinion and judgment from that. As a journalist, Mr. Shapiro, i'm sure that you probably know how the media system works and i'm sure you also know how much the media can twist things and make them the gospel when they certainly are not.

I would like to ask one favour of you: do your research. That is not to insult you, sir, i am simply wishing for you to really study this topic and find out the real facts for yourself from reliable sources. Sure, i could give you a list of websites that will help you to find the truth faster plus a name of books for you to read. I could also point out what in your article is totally fictitious, but i won't, i will leave it up to you to figure out for yourself - you are an investigative journalist after all, right? If so, then the above favour i present will not be difficult for you to take up.

I agree wholeheartedly with the last statement you conclude your article with - Michael Jackson deserves an accurate place in history. He indeed does, and that is exactly why i want you to do your research. If you are standing by this statement, as you claim, you will find out the truth and give him his correct due. It would be interesting to see how different your opinion is once you have done your research and i would love for you to do a follow-up article showing your new findings.

Sometimes, Mr. Shapiro, what it is isn't always what it is - things simply aren't black or white. Pun intended.

Kind Regards,
Natalie

His response:

Natalie, the information about Schaffel is all factual. He was dismissed by MJ personally because MJ admitted Schaffel was dangerous - then he rehired him and Schaffel was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the 2005 trial. Interesting they shared a secret account where MJ wrote him million dollar checks - all innocent though, right? Natalie, honestly - look at it for what it is. I stopped seeing a friend of mine last year because she was a racist - I didn't even want to associate with her. Would YOU associate with a pornographer who had a reputation for making films of questionably young people - especially after being accused of pedophilic crimes?

My response:

Mr. Shapiro, thank you for your response.

Regarding Schaffel, please reveal your source(s) for this so-called factual information, then we can discuss the issue further.

Moving away from that subject, who are all your sources for the other 'facts' you have presented in your article? You only use Ray Chandler (of all people) as your source and Hollywood's gay community. Compelling.

You seem to use the words "apparently" and "allegedly" in your article which gives me the sense that you are either a) not 100% certain that your sources are in fact reliable, b) you already know that they are not reliable so you have to insert these words to cover yourself, or c) you have no reliable sources, and never did, and have to use these words so you don't look stupid and get scorned by people that actually do research and find out the truth.

I will have you know, Mr. Shapiro, that if i, in any way, suspected Mr. Jackson was a pedophile i would not support him. No way. I would not listen to his music or ever utter his name again. If i had come across any evidence that pointed to him being guilty i would not be having this discussion with you, i would be agreeing with you and praising your article for stating the truth. But, alas, your article is not the truth, along with thousands of other articles on the internet about Mr. Jackson.

Sadly, fabrication and sensationalism sells more and gets far higher ratings than the truth and actual facts. What does that say about our society?

Kind Regards,
Natalie

I haven't had another response from him yet, but i'll update when i / if i do.
 
I'm getting the impression that his article stands or falls with that Schaffel person, that and Chandler's words. I'm not knowledgeable about the videographer at all but I most certainly wouldn't believe a relative of the accuser.

You are both doing a great job. :hi:
 
I'm getting the impression that his article stands or falls with that Schaffel person, that and Chandler's words. I'm not knowledgeable about the videographer at all but I most certainly wouldn't believe a relative of the accuser.

You are both doing a great job. :hi:

Yeah. and besides. why did it matter that Schaffel did porn? I don't approve of porn, but hey it's a job like any other. People who film porn are hardly child molesters. Heck, he probebly has kids of his own.

This writer keeps saying that Schaffel filmed young boys...Errr, source? I highly doubt it. I'm assuming he means teenagers (age of consent or above. It's different in each country.). Hey, if they consented to it, then whats the big deal?
 
Thanks for your support.

Some people here just have a mouth full of chit-chat and are not doing anything to fight for Michael and his defence and those who are doing it call some of us "so-called fans"! (like, excuse me...XXX)

This is reality and we have to do something. Who else will do that?

Are the so-called journalists visiting MJ forums like this to know the facts?
NO!

Are the "ordinary" people (millions of them) visiting MJ forums like that to know the truth?
NO!

We are spreading the truth..., an MJ fan Charles Thomson with his blog is the example of the fighter...

I personally thank you for the defence! I try to do it permanently!

Yes, there are thousands of articles full of BSs but this kind of articles can not be tolerated!

This is the right section for any discussion!
 
MJ hired a gay pornographer but the couple the FBI went to see and the husband who ended on the stand during the trial also own a series of porn sites and the husband was a producer himself .

also Terry the guy that shapiro believes got a call from MJ , is an owner of many gay clubs and even got the money to start a business to hook gay couples in 1993 after he sold his story to a tabloid THE SUN .

He believed Terry and the philipino couple , but he is outraged MJ worked with a gay producer , last I heard 90% of people in Hollywood are in the closet gay .

Tell shapiro to stop visiting GAY porn sites before he go after MJ , who his 12 computers and their content for years did not show any HOMOSEXUAL material .

Bob Sanger , MJ's attorney during the trial did say infront of the judge when the prosecutors wanted to introduce the computers as evidence that all the adult material were HETEROSEXUAL in nature .


tell him , mj could have satisfied his desires through the internet , but there was NOTHING on his computers .

Tell him that Gavin never described MJ's penis to begin with .

As for Evan chandler , Evan was great as a father and did what every father would do to the degree his son left him when he was suffering from the most painful disease a man can suffer from , did not even attend his funeral , and no one of his family was even there to collect his aches . see how much his own children thought highly of him .


MJ hired schaffel to film children , no mj hired schaffel as a producer , the one who was filming was Hamid Moslehi and he was there for years .

and why sneddon did not go after Schaffel ? why did not the authority stop this very shady guy from doing all the horrible things he was and is doing ?

Tell him , everyone who works in the porn industry is bad , and Hollywood is filled with 'porn stars' , no one question them .Everyone watches porn including him . that's what I call hypocrisy .

the hypocrisy is what he posted in that article as fact , he is lying and he knows he is lying .
 
Schaffle threatened MJ during and before he sued him for 3.5 millions , ask him if MJ hired and paid schaffel to do shady things , why schaffel claimed he did not pay him ?

ask him why MJ took all these desperate measures to pay people off but did not buy schaffel silence ?

tell him MJ in court of law proved schaffel WAS PAID and DID NOT PAY production fees , for 'what more can I give' song .
 
Quote:
http://www.sanluisobispo.com/mld/san...s/14980708.htm

Jackson lawyer targets lack of documentation for money claims

LINDA DEUTSCH
Associated Press

SANTA MONICA, Calif. - A former associate suing Michael Jackson testified Thursday that he never got a receipt for a $300,000 payment he claims he delivered to a "Mr. X" in South America on the pop star's behalf.

The issue of the mysterious payment, for which no details were given, was used by Jackson attorney Thomas Mundell as an example of big-ticket claims made by plaintiff F. Marc Schaffel that are not documented.

Schaffel, who worked with Jackson on various projects for three years, testified Wednesday that he got the $300,000 from one of his own accounts in Europe and was never fully repaid.

He testified Thursday that in the entire time he was with Jackson he loaned the pop star millions of dollars and never once got a receipt.

Outside court, Schaffel's lawyer, Howard King, disclosed that disputes over receipts, statutes of limitations and work agreements have led him to cut the claim against Jackson almost in half, eliminating costs that could not be documented or were too old to be claimed.

He said that the claim against Jackson is now $1.6 million rather than the original $3.8 million."Mr. Schaffel is an idiot for not getting receipts," said King. "I don't think he is going to be making loans of millions of dollars to stars any more."

In court, Mundell showed jurors enlargements of ledgers that Schaffel submitted and pointed out discrepancies in accounting.

Regarding the split of a payment from a Japanese record company that gave $200,000 each to Schaffel and Jackson, Mundell said, "Show the jury a bank statement in which that $200,000 appears.""We don't have it here," said Schaffel.

"There is no such entry, is there?" said Mundell.

Schaffel said there was but it was not on any of the documents shown in court. He also said he tried to subpoena a witness to the transaction. And in later questioning he said Jackson told him to keep the money off the books.

Concerning the $300,000 Schaffel said he delivered in South America to someone listed on his ledger as "Mr. X," Mundell asked if he had any documentary proof regarding the money.

Schaffel said he did and handed a paper to the lawyer. But after a private conference with the judge it was not shown to the jurors.

King said outside court that the paper was a withdrawal slip from a bank in Brazil.

Neither Schaffel nor King would comment on where the money went. King, however, has said outside court that the actual payment was not made in Brazil but to someone in Argentina.

Schaffel also testified under Mundell's questioning that when he and Jackson decided to work together the pop star gave him $2 million for use in the business and discussed making a charity record.
"He gave me the $2 million for the record and expenses and the situation I can't talk about," he said, referring to the $300,000.

Mundell asked if Jackson trusted him "to use that money appropriately" and Schaffel said yes.

The attorney pointed out that Jackson did not have checks for the account in which the money was deposited and never made a withdrawal, but that Schaffel did.

Quote:
AP

Michael Jackson claims former associate concealed funds

Associated Press

LOS ANGELES - A former associate who is suing Michael Jackson for more than $3 million has been accused by the entertainer of concealing and misappropriating funds.

Jackson filed the cross-complaint against Marc Schaffel in Los Angeles County Superior Court on Oct. 18, his lawyer Brent Ayscough said Wednesday.

Schaffel filed the original lawsuit in November, claiming Jackson owes him $800,000 for producing two 2003 television specials and $2.3 million for payments and loans made to the entertainer over the past three years.

In the latest court filing, Jackson says Schaffel failed to pay costs related to the production of the Jackson song "What More Can I Give?" He also continued to represent himself as affiliated with Jackson after their business arrangement ended, according to the cross-complaint.

Jackson also claims Schaffel kept $250,000 in sculptures and paintings belonging to the singer.

Ayscough said Schaffel has tried to get a lien placed on Jackson's Neverland Ranch in Santa Barbara County.

Schaffel's lawyer Howard King dismissed the entertainer's accusation, calling it "another ridiculous claim."

http://www.bradenton.com/mld/bradent...t/13006338.htm

Updated AP article:

http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/...e/14981554.htm

Jackson lawyer targets lack of documentation for money claims

LINDA DEUTSCH
Associated Press

SANTA MONICA, Calif. - A former associate suing Michael Jackson testified Thursday that he never got a receipt for a $300,000 payment he claims he delivered to a "Mr. X" in South America on the pop star's behalf.

The issue of the mysterious payment was used by Jackson attorney Thomas Mundell as an example of big-ticket claims made by plaintiff F. Marc Schaffel that are not documented.

Schaffel, who worked with Jackson on various projects for three years, testified Wednesday that the money was his and he was never fully repaid.

He testified Thursday that in the entire time he was with Jackson he loaned the pop star millions of dollars and never once got a receipt.

Outside court, Schaffel's lawyer, Howard King, disclosed that disputes over receipts, statutes of limitations and work agreements have led him to cut the claim against Jackson by more than half, to $1.6 million rather than the original $3.8 million.

"Mr. Schaffel is an idiot for not getting receipts," said King. "I don't think he is going to be making loans of millions of dollars to stars any more."

In court, Mundell showed enlargements of ledgers Schaffel submitted and pointed out discrepancies.

Concerning the $300,000 Schaffel said he delivered in South America to someone listed on his ledger as "Mr. X," Mundell asked if he had any documentary proof.

Schaffel said he did and handed a paper to the lawyer. But after a private conference with the judge it was not shown to the jurors.

King said outside court that the paper was a withdrawal slip from a bank in Brazil.

Later on the stand, Schaffel added more details, saying he initially took money from an account in Budapest to Brazil to buy a condo, but later withdrew it and at Jackson's request "delivered it to its final destination in Argentina."

Referring to the molestation charges Jackson was acquitted of last year, Schaffel added, "The criminal case was at hand and it was a sensitive time. It was a very, very private transaction of a very sensitive nature for Mr. Jackson. And I never imagined he would not pay it back to me."

Schaffel also testified that when he and Jackson decided to work together the pop star gave him $2 million for use in the business and discussed making a charity record.

Mundell pointed out that Jackson did not have checks for the account in which the money was deposited and never made a withdrawal, but that Schaffel did.

In testimony and a declaration read to the jury, Schaffel also told of loaning Jackson $500,000 after the Sept. 11, 2001, attack on the World Trade Center. He said Jackson was initially stuck in New York, then took a bus across the country and called along the way, saying he needed the money to find shelter underground.

Schaffel said Jackson pulled up to his house in the bus and collected the cash.

Jackson's attorney challenged the story as a lie and noted there was a financial entry for $500,000 on Sept. 18 but it was just a transfer from one Schaffel account to another. Schaffel denied lying.
At day's end jurors were watching a videotaped deposition by Jackson, who will not testify in person.

He claimed a poor memory about his finances but recalled Schaffel as a man "who came to me with ideas."

Jackson said he became disenchanted with his new associate in November 2001 when someone gave him a video showing Schaffel directing an episode of a gay porn movie.

"What shocked me was that he was involved in that whole circle and I didn't know. It surprised me," he said.
 
that Shapiro guy is a pathological liar :

first of all in the FBI files they did not say there was investigation into two Mexican boys claims in 1984, the files list a claim by a tabloid reporter in 1993 that the FBI investigated before in 1984, the file concluded there was nothing to investigate , they found nothing , these allegations were unfounded .


as for Terry phone call, he harassed mj for years , he once met hin in 1983 and became obsessed with him, Terry himself spoke about stalking mj and trying to contact him but MJ would not answer his phones , I thought a pedo would be more than willing to speak with his 'victim' .


shapiro claims both Jordan and Gavin described mj's private parts another complete lie, no where in court documents or in Gavin's testimony he described or tried to describe mj's penis , as for jordan , sneddon's motion is for everyone to read , he only list a one spot on the left side of mj's penis as evidence it matched , mj suffered from vitiliogo and had a spotted dick , that was no evidence whatever . Ask him why sneddon did not say the length matched , the colour matched , why did not he mention whether jordan said mj was circumcised and whether that was indeed true , mj had spots all over his body , all over his face , and all over his penis , they found MANY spots on his penis of different shades but sneddon mentioned in his motion " chandler said there was a spot we found one, so he saw it " not that it was THE ONLY ONE and we found it .


schaffel , taped all of his conversations with mj , they were published on GMA , if indeed he had any damaging evidence or mj ever asked him to deliver any money to mr.ex in south America , it would have been on tape or paper .

the guy sued for 3.5 millions and got a judgment of 900.000 including attorney's fees , and the judge left the way open for mj to continue with his lawsuits against him . but mj after that was busy with the mess Randy left him in and sued his own attorneys , not to do with schaffel but they were also stealing from him .



ask him also whether he is a relative of Bobby Shapiro , you know the other pathological liar , who Evan hired to defend him when he was accused of extortion by MJ .

I blame no one but Jonie Cochran for that settlement , that man cared about the money only , he destroyed MJ's life to satisfy his friends .



back to that asshole schaffel,during the trial he contacted Harvey Levin and offered to sell very "shocking and revealing tapes of jackson talking about boys and sex ...etc " to Harvey's show back then Celebrity justice for $ 1 Million DURING THE TRIAL , but Harvey did not pay WHY ? because all mj talks about was his loneliness and the frustration he had toward some of the people who were working for him , who were not sending him cash , plus some highly edited statements against jews that Good Morning America bought and published as an evidence MJ was anti Semitic . that was the only shocking and revealing statement back then, Harvey did not feel those statement worth 1 million at all .

MJ's lawyer even tried to contact Harvey and listed him as a witness during the trial with schaffel , but Harvey refused to be interviewed by the lawyer, and even posted an article and asked MJ's team to stop harassing him and he did not care about MJ and was not interested in defending or testifying in his defense .


Schaffel threatened MJ if he did not pay him before he even filed the suit, he would release the "shocking incriminating tapes" but MJ did not bother with him , then after he filed the suit, he kept threatening if he would not settle , he would release the tapes , then when the trial started , his attorney would , after the court day ended , gave a press conference and told the journalists jackson should have paid or Mr.Schaffel would be forced to talk about the very disturbing conversations with his client in which MJ talked about his sexual desires to young boys ...etc . ( It was on tapes before , now it was conversations not taped )
as was posted in the article , he withdraw the money from an account in Europe to buy a condo in South America , and wanted MJ to pay for it , he did not provide any evidence the money was paid to anyone , and did not present any evidence it had any relation to mj . He claimed he did not need documnetation because MJ was doing very shady things and paying people off and he had never believed he wouldnot be rewarded for what he did . That's how fucked up that man was , he was hinting he was paying parents of children to shut up , IN COURT , and kept tell jurors please don't ask me why, who and how , just trust me it had to do with molesting kids !!!!!!!

He took 4 millions from a Japanese company on behalf of mj and MJ never saw a penny .

He also created a new company with Neverland name and MJ had no relation to it and was making deals on behalf of mj all the time .
 
Back
Top