Latest on MJJC
- Latest Michael Jackson News
- Click Here to Join Our Community
- Follow us on Twitter
- Wanna talk Michael? Come join the chat rooms
- The Michael Jackson Chart Watch
- Become an MJJC Patron
- Join the Premium Member Group and Get Lot's of Extra's
- Major Love Prayer - Worldwide Monthly Prayer Every 25th
- MJJC Exclusive Q&A - We talk to the family and those in and around Michael
- Join us in the Chat Rooms
- Find us on Facebook
Jordan Chandler Discussion Thread
- Thread starter Big Apple2
- Start date
Thanks for quoting this part in full, respect77. Notice that Gardener does say, "I would say, sleeping in bed, I'll call that sexual. Some people might not but I would." This means he acknowledges that there are different opinions on this being sexual, so I doubt he would conclude that Jordan's accusation was valid or true on that basis alone. If you look at Gardener's criteria, Jordan is clearly lying and making a false accusation. He does not meet the criteria for truth at all.
So much of it just doesn't make any sense.
"He may have said"
"I don't specifically remember"
"I'm almost positive"
"But I do indeed remember"
He hedges every bet about something.
la_cienega--you are so right!!!! Both Gavin and Jordan have so many memory problems--Gavin said "to this day I can't remember when it happened"--oh, yeah, right. That's because IT NEVER HAPPENED!!!
"He may have said"
"I don't specifically remember"
"I'm almost positive"
"But I do indeed remember"
He hedges every bet about something.
la_cienega--you are so right!!!! Both Gavin and Jordan have so many memory problems--Gavin said "to this day I can't remember when it happened"--oh, yeah, right. That's because IT NEVER HAPPENED!!!
Yes, bluetopaz, you are right about the bed sharing thing being something people get stuck on. But they don't realize that's how MJ grew up--all the boys sharing one room with 3 bunk beds and doubling up, so that MJ slept with Marlon, and that happened in the motel, hotel rooms too when they started out. This was a poor family in the beginning and many poor families just don't have a separate bedroom and/or a separate bed for each child.
laurenjayne
Proud Member
Its been interesting what everyone has been pointing out, its blatantly obvious he was lying, everyway you look at it. Makes me feel ill with anger and disgust at what he claims happened
Bonnie Blue
Proud Member
Thanks jamba that was an interesting read. The thing is with gardener's book is that he made his name as a child psychologist who would defend parents (in the main fathers) as their expert witness in their custody battles with the other parent (usually mothers) who were claiming sex abuse in order to get sole custody. Apparently there was an explosion of such cases in the us in the 80s. So he'd be used to having quite a tough set of criterior for child accusers to meet and i'm pretty certain that some of his conditions won't be agreed to by other child abuse experts. What i've tended to notice is that in child abuse cases that the prosecutors will claim that child abuse victims are notoriously bad witnesses as they are traumatised and have shut out alot of details, so their recall of dates, number of times etc is poor. This type of argument is just another aspect of why child abuse cases are the hardest to fight against - if the child is an effective witness then that's great, and if the child is not, that could be because he/she has been abused. You win either way.
Last edited:
Bonnie Blue
Proud Member
That's a difficult argument to use for a grown up multi-millionaire though. Just because someone began out sharing a bed/bedroom doesn't mean it continues for decades when you grow up - i don't think the other jackson siblings do this for example. I agree that in this day and age it's an issue that is very bothersome for people, i tend to just concentrate on all the children who have shared beds with mj and who have had absolutely no reason to look back on it as an uncomfortable experience even with all that prodding from sneddon and the media and all the accusations. Tmez approached the issue head on in the trial and alot of commentators found it a weak part of the case as it did make people feel uneasy, but really there was no choice but to address it.
respect77 said:
I take your point about gardner seeing how suggestible jordan is, but i'm still surprised about the inclusion of that phrase about bed being sexual. I would have thought the whole point of such an interview was to get the boy's feelings and reactions about the relationship and so any 'leading' and imposing your own viewpoint would be verboten and unprofessional, almost like tainting the evidence with outside information.
Last edited:
One of the interesting points that Gardener makes--I will look for the exact quote later--is that the definition (legal) of 'child' and 'pedophile' is not agreed on. For example, I can see the problem with dates, exact number of times, etc., in a young child of 6 or around there, but when we get to s 'child' of 13 almost 14, as is the case with Gavin and Jordan, is this believable? I think not, especially when they are claiming it was their freakin' FIRST sexual experience with --hello--Michael jackson.
Also the definition of pedophile or improper touching, lewd and lascivious conduct, etc, is vague and unclear. For example, Jason Francia and the tickiling over the clothes for a short time (forget exactly but I think he said it was a minute or two) once a year for 3 years in a row--is this convincing as evidence to convict and send someone to jail? these are legal issues and in the absence of clarity they are open to interpretation, abuse, etc.
BTW I gave a synopsis of about 50 pages and Gardener's book is over 700 pages so I recommend people reading it for themselves for more info. I thought the criteria were the most relevant and also since Jordan was interviewed by Gardner they are good to know how he viewed true and false accusations (his mindset). (I am not saying Gardner is perfect or can't be criticized, either.)
I agree with what you say that "child abuse cases are the hardest to fight" and if the accusing child can't remember or can remember, it's an argument for abuse "either way."
Bonnie Blue,
That's a difficult argument to use for a grown up multi-millionaire though. Just because someone began out sharing a bed/bedroom doesn't mean it continues for decades when you grow up - i don't think the other jackson siblings do this for example.
Yes, this is a hard issue to address, but you have to consider that in that situation of the bed sharing at the Jackson home, Michael was the youngest and the most traumatized (IMO) due to the beatings and the heavy performance expectations so he may have needed it for a feeling of safety. I mean until there were more than 3 brothers, they had their own beds, so some had the experience of sleeping alone. Also in the doubling up, the older one did have his own bed (forget who it was) and only 2 beds were shared. I read that Joe had the boys sharing beds up to Michael's early teens--not sure if that is true though. Well, it is a complex issue but one that I think needs to be addressed so that people can accept that this may be unusual but not criminal. MJ sure defended it.
That's a difficult argument to use for a grown up multi-millionaire though. Just because someone began out sharing a bed/bedroom doesn't mean it continues for decades when you grow up - i don't think the other jackson siblings do this for example.
Yes, this is a hard issue to address, but you have to consider that in that situation of the bed sharing at the Jackson home, Michael was the youngest and the most traumatized (IMO) due to the beatings and the heavy performance expectations so he may have needed it for a feeling of safety. I mean until there were more than 3 brothers, they had their own beds, so some had the experience of sleeping alone. Also in the doubling up, the older one did have his own bed (forget who it was) and only 2 beds were shared. I read that Joe had the boys sharing beds up to Michael's early teens--not sure if that is true though. Well, it is a complex issue but one that I think needs to be addressed so that people can accept that this may be unusual but not criminal. MJ sure defended it.
Petrarose
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2009
- Messages
- 9,574
- Points
- 0
Guys ^^thanks for your response about the Gardner issue, but I am going to do some more research on this before I change my perspective on it. Right now I am going with the opinion that that interview in the book is not official, that the People requested Gardner do the interview because they knew of his views, that in such a situation the report will be given back to the People not to Evan, & that Gardner was an "expert" on telling when children were molested or lying which is why he was used. This is interesting because all of you (Respect, Jamba, Blue, etc.) I am usually 100% with your take on the allegations. Gardner it is true believed that if any adult shared a bed with a non-familial child it is a sexual act. I am going to go digging again & see what evidence I can come up with about the Gardner issue.
Jamba thanks for the book, but again it is not the interview. Evans book was printed in 2004, which would mean he had access to the book.
Jamba thanks for the book, but again it is not the interview. Evans book was printed in 2004, which would mean he had access to the book.
Last edited:
bluetopez
Proud Member
Yea I get what u are saying and maybe that's what he was trying to do? But, I felt it wrong either way. Him telling Jordan that (if he indeed did) would be leading. And that is not good if ur trying to dig for the truth.
About MJ sharing his bed as an adult still, is something that definitely stems back from childhood and why he didn't see it as wrong. He thought it was an act of kindness and caring. Even though many won't agree, that is MJs truth and reason. Which T-Mez was right to point out no matter how comfortable it made many. It had to be addressed to understand MJs thinking!
Last edited:
qbee
Proud Member
Michael lived in a small 2 bedroom home where he and his brothers would shared the same beds. Also when on the road the boys would have to share rooms/beds when traveling. So to him it was no big deal or anything out of the way .. to gather in the bed watch Tv or play vid games ets. and then fall asleep. Being brought up in that kind of life style Im sure he felt it was completly natural and normal to do that. There was nothing sexual about it.
Petrarose
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2009
- Messages
- 9,574
- Points
- 0
I agree. Michael's detractors never look at his actions from the perspective of Michael Jackson, but from their perspective. They do not understand that Michael spent as a child, teen, & adult days/weeks/months held up in hotels with no other companions but his brothers. They played in those rooms & did pranks to keep themselves occupied. He talks about this. He mentions also in the rebuttal footage that he feels the most lonely when he is in a hotel room & fans are outside shouting they love him. We have to imagine him holed up in the bedroom, he can't go outside freely, & he needs a recreational outlet. Now I could see why he would have these kids travel with him so that he can have some fun time in those dreary rooms, because no matter how expensive a hotel is, a room is a room. I could see how playing in a bedroom is an innocent activity for Michael as he plays with these kids, and he has said about a zillion times now why the guests were kids. However, some will disregard all this & focus on sex, including gardner.
Come to think of it, how many of us come home from work, get something to eat & end up in our bedroom lying down on it, eating on the bed, & watching tv on the bed. We would leave the bedroom to tidy up the kitchen & bathroom, to take a bath, to get ready for the next day, & then go right back to the bedroom to watch tv, work on the computer, or read a book. Some people in their 50s tell me that they sold their houses because after they came from work after the children left home, they would spend most of their time in the bedroom. They rarely went to the livingroom & dinningroom. It was kitchen, bathroom, & bedroom, so they sold their houses & bought small apts.
la_cienega
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 1,175
- Points
- 0
Most people also don't know that instead of forcing this purely as a civil lawsuit, and not a criminal one the way Michael wanted, and instead of constantly trying to up the ante to force MJ into a settlement, immediately within days of the settlement:
They tried to sell a book. Ray Chandler admits to that in his subpoenas.
So they can't claim the publicity was too much for them and they wanted their privacy. Their immediate desire was to get MORE public attention by selling their son's supposed abuse in a book. They completely refused to take their son's abuser to criminal court.
Then in 1996 Evan sued MJ again for $60 million and a demand to be allowed to release an album where he wanted to sing and dance about his son's sexual abuse - so much for fearing publicity. This lawsuit is interesting as it's the only time Evan I believe was ever deposed. He wouldn't do it for his son's sexual abuse, but he would for more money.
So people can't claim the Chandler's were just doing the only thing they could for justice. Then once again in 2005 instead of testifying all of them besides June who'd been cut off from them, refused. Instead Ray's book was published, which was ghost written by Evan, and it was MJ who demanded Ray show up in court with all the documents and info he claimed he had, and Ray refused. He refused to testify about his nephew's supposed abuser in court, no, he was happy just to sell books about it. He then recently told Randall Sullivan that the Chandler's hoped the 2005 trial would bring them justice, no explanations or questions from the clueless Sullivan about why Ray and the Chandler's hadn't pursued justice - which is an interesting word Ray used, because it means the insurance settlement was not justice, though they claim in their book it pretty much was - at any point from 1993-2005 themselves.
Looking back over the comments:
Okay, so Jordan claimed he tried to tell June and she didn't believe him, except she's never said this happened at all ever (which is why I imagine he said he couldn't remember when this was, he realized he couldn't just say a date only for June to get it wrong), but why hadn't Jordan tried telling Evan Chandler, the man who had been obsessed with MJ sexually abusing his son for about 2 months before his son confessed? He had one very eager to hear about this parent around him constantly begging for scraps of abuse stories, but instead Jordan claims he only once tried to tell his mother, who says she had no knowledge of any abuse. Why hadn't he volunteered easily to Evan even when he was begging to be told about this abuse later on in the dentist's chair, if with June he'd been the one willing to volunteer it? Why did Evan claim he had to force him to do it?
It's interesting, he never references his father at all in this conversation, does he? His father who'd rescued him from abuse, and who had been the one consumed by it, and there's no mention of what his father did for him here at all, or anything his father said or did.
I was reading Lady Gaga's crazy rant about her assistant in court, the assistant said Gaga made her sleep in the same bed with her because she hated being alone, actually two people have said that about Gaga, that she made them sleep with her. I'm not a fan of hers at all, but I thought it was interesting that other big celebrities who don't have any history of childhood abuse, or of having to sleep with your brothers growing up, had trouble sleeping alone too.
The thing with MJ is people have this idea that MJ would force children into his bedroom and his bed. That he spent hours and hours trying to get them to do it, tricking and luring them with every trick in the book. That the parents were somehow stripped of their rights and denied access to their kids and so didn't know about all this sinister stuff going on. The reality is that MJ and kids normally would just share rooms, not beds. Like Sean Lennon, Corey Feldman, Gotham Chopra, the Agajanian's, they all say MJ gave them a bed or took a cot, and that was it. Only a few kids fell asleep in his bed, and it was their choice, and with the consent and knowledge of the parents, almost all of which defend him about it.
The only ones who didn't was June/Evan, but Janet Arvizo even defended MJ about it repeatedly.
Yes.
Sneddon also asked Gavin towards the end if he'd ever had memory problems because of his cancer, Gavin said that when he had the cancer he had a few, but he was just fine now. I bet Sneddon was pissed Gavin had blown Sneddon's opening to give them an excuse for why their stories were such a mess.
And once again, proof that Sneddon was trying to manipulate the story into working better.
Last edited:
Ray's book, you mean, right? Yes, Ray would have had access to Gardener's book but it seems he didn't read it, otherwise he would have noticed how Jordan's statements and demeanor in the interview show that, according to Gardener's criteria, Jordan was fabricating his story. The interesting thing too is that Gardener's conclusions were not published.
If you argue that the People (prosecutors) sent Jordan to see Gardener, then it would be for the criminal trial (that never happened) because that was what they were investigating. Consequently, they would have had copies of Gardener's entire report, including his interviews with June and Evan and his conclusions. That would also mean that Sneddon had access to the whole report. However, we have never heard a peep about this from Sneddon or the LA DA, so that's why I don't think they were the ones who ordered that interview and assessment.
I was reading further and Gardener says in criminal cases it is difficult to interview all 3 parties to do a complete evaluation (the child, the accusing parent, and the accused), so the evaluator just has to do the best he/she can. Here is the quote: '"it is extremely difficult to achieve the goal of seeing all three parties when working in the criminal justice system. Under such circumstances, the evaluator should still do everything possible to achieve this goal, and when it is not achieved (the usual situation), then utilize whatever other materials may be available, materials such as depositions, trial testimony, videotapes, audiotapes, etc." (page 230)
About the sleeping together in bed is sexual, Gardener says "I would say, sleeping in bed, I'll call that sexual. Some people might not but I would."
"Right, and I consider that too, and that's where it switched."
"Most people would consider it sexual to sleep in bed with a person." (page 11)
And he's right in that most people did not/do not understand Michael's behavior and thought the worst, even though sharing a bed is not a crime in itself and can be totally innocent.
HIStory
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 6
- Points
- 0
Regarding the sharing bed issue - the media misrepresented what was it like. The picture they painted of Michael was of a predator who lured children in his bedroom while keeping away their parents. In reality, his two-story bedroom was a gathering place for families and friends, and the parents and families of the children were allowed to stay there as well as the children.
In his 2005 book, Lost Boy, Macaulay Culkin’s father, Kit Culkin wrote the following about these so called “sleepovers”:
He also wrote:
Frank Cascio corroborates this in his own book:
Heck, even June Chandler said on the stand in 2005 that she was allowed to go into Michael's room any time she wanted!
In his 2005 book, Lost Boy, Macaulay Culkin’s father, Kit Culkin wrote the following about these so called “sleepovers”:
He also wrote:
Frank Cascio corroborates this in his own book:
Heck, even June Chandler said on the stand in 2005 that she was allowed to go into Michael's room any time she wanted!
HIStory
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 6
- Points
- 0
Kingofpop4ever3000
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 1,533
- Points
- 0
I thought that Feldman didn't come into the case until at least November or December of 1993 after Evan's first lawyer and Allred quit the case.
Last edited:
HIStory
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 6
- Points
- 0
Allred quit late August, Feldman came in immediately after that. He filed the civil suit in September.
Kingofpop4ever3000
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 1,533
- Points
- 0
Thank you.
Bonnie Blue
Proud Member
Yes, gardener was involved in the civil suit. Why do you think feldman chose this man when he was well-known to root out false claims? You would think he would be looking for a sympathetic psychologist. Seeing june accompanied him, maybe she insisted upon it as she needed convincing of the claims. And then they changed to katz, was gardener a dry run to test out the story? We only have a partial transcript of the gardener interview years later, would we even know jordan had been to gardener if ray hadn't included it in his book? This type of info would only come out in a xexam at the civil trial and only if mj's lawyers suspected that jordan had been psychologist-shopping.
I remember reading somewhere that this gardener was a legal expert on false claims because it paid better as it was usually the father who was being accused and men have more money. He killed himself in a particularly horrible suicide if i remember right.
I remember reading somewhere that this gardener was a legal expert on false claims because it paid better as it was usually the father who was being accused and men have more money. He killed himself in a particularly horrible suicide if i remember right.
Bonnie Blue
Proud Member
jamba said:
When the hoohaa over bashir's doc erupted, sneddon came out publically and admitted that he couldn't charge mj just because he claimed he shared his bed with boys as it's not criminal. However during the trial, if he and zonen said it once, they said it a million times, how mj was sleeping with boys. I know geragos got really agitated on the stand with what they were doing using that form of words and brett and wade were riled by it too - it was all language designed to paint mj in a unsavoury light to the jury. 'Sleeping with someone' and 'going to bed with someone' just has sexual connotations in the west, you can't avoid that. The sleeping issue is super bothersome to me as it was so easily exploited by those wishing mj harm - evan, sneddon, the media etc. I wish someone in mj's circle had stepped in and pointed out the grave dangers of perception. This wasn't 100 or 50 years ago , it was the early 90s - the usa was in the grip of child abuse hysteria, the mcmartin case had been going on in the 80s, the most expensive criminal case in us history (until mj's probably). I think frank dileo said something about wishing in hindsight he had warned mj.
la_cienega
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 1,175
- Points
- 0
Brooke Shields also said something about wishing she'd told him, or claiming she had told him.
It's interesting in Sneddon's motions he states that in the Bashir doc MJ admitted to sleeping with boys. MJ never says "boys" in the doc, but Sneddon stated this as a matter of fact in the documents and I think the opening statements, and of course many people run with it still.
And people always ignore the female children MJ interacted with.
http://rhythmofthetide.com/category/the-allegations/female-kid-friends-the-allegations/
Reading Randall Sullivan's book I was pretty impressed with how silenced that aspect about MJ was, he ignored every woman who'd interacted with him in any way of course, but even though three girls testified in 2005 to sleeping in his bedroom and bed (Simone, his cousin) with him, Wade added that Brandi Jackson also was with them some nights when he stayed over and June Chandler even testified that one night even she, MJ, Lily and Jordan all slept in the same room together, you'd have thought this man who claimed to read the court docs (I don't believe he did), would have felt these things were something worthy of being noted somewhere.
It's interesting in Sneddon's motions he states that in the Bashir doc MJ admitted to sleeping with boys. MJ never says "boys" in the doc, but Sneddon stated this as a matter of fact in the documents and I think the opening statements, and of course many people run with it still.
And people always ignore the female children MJ interacted with.
http://rhythmofthetide.com/category/the-allegations/female-kid-friends-the-allegations/
Reading Randall Sullivan's book I was pretty impressed with how silenced that aspect about MJ was, he ignored every woman who'd interacted with him in any way of course, but even though three girls testified in 2005 to sleeping in his bedroom and bed (Simone, his cousin) with him, Wade added that Brandi Jackson also was with them some nights when he stayed over and June Chandler even testified that one night even she, MJ, Lily and Jordan all slept in the same room together, you'd have thought this man who claimed to read the court docs (I don't believe he did), would have felt these things were something worthy of being noted somewhere.
Last edited:
Petrarose
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2009
- Messages
- 9,574
- Points
- 0
Did anyone hear that Bashir told Gavin when he was videotaping them to put his head on Michael's shoulder as though they were lovers. It seems this information came from TMez. I always noticed that Michael did look uncomfortable when Gavin did that, so it seems Bashir had intended all along to make some claim for P----. Why would he ask Michael to have a child that he helped? He wanted a child there so he could manipulate the situation.
la_cienega
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 1,175
- Points
- 0
First time he was there he told MJ he'd hoped Macaulay Culkin would be there so he could film them together. Guess why?
MJ had Dave Dave the burn victim also there when Gavin was filming, guess whose interview was used?
omg are u serious?Snow White luvs Peter Pan
Proud Member
Are you guys saying the Arvizos wanted to f*ck Michael up since day one and then Bashit jumped on the bandwagon!? :shock: