Guys, I've been reading up on Anthony Pelicano all day now and things don't add up at all. He was a huge help for Michael in the 90s, questioned Jordan Chandler, even went after Victor Guitierrez and when he quit the case he has always said MJ was innocent. That his resignation wasn't a sign of him thinking he was guilty at all.
I did a lot of reading on VindicateMJ and TheMJAllegations, it's been keeping me quite busy. I read about this Paul Baressi guy and how he claims he was speaking for Pelicano when in truth he isn't associated with him at all. Pelicano didn't share his information, not even with Bert Fields, MJ's then lawyer. But I can't deny that the following things don't sit right with me. Anyone have anything more on this?
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ny...rts/anthony-pellicano-prison-release.amp.html
Mr. Pellicano very likely could have faced less time in prison if he had cooperated with the authorities, but he never talked. In his interview last year with The Hollywood Reporter, he discussed “omerta,” the Mafia code of silence, and the value of keeping secrets. Among them, he said, were Michael Jackson’s. Mr. Pellicano worked for Mr. Jackson in the 1990s but said he quit when he learned what The Hollywood Reporter described as “truths even darker than those alleged in Jackson’s molestation scandal.” The Jackson family and estate have denied all allegations of sexual misconduct against him.
Then there's also the stuff from The Daily Beast that I read on VindicateMJ
https://vindicatemj.wordpress.com/2014/04/13/barresi-pellicano-and-michael-jackson-fbi-files-part-2/
In the Daily Beast article of August 7, 2011 called Hollywood Hacker Breaks His Silence Pellicano was quoted saying that he quit the Chandler case because he had found out some truths. Then he allegedly dropped an ambiguous phrase saying that MJ ‘did something much worse than molestation’.
And in the chart published the same day by the same Daily Beast but only on a different page called Pellicano’s Reach, Pellicano said that he had indeed found some damning evidence, only it was not about MJ, but was about the accuser’s family.
This way those who read the article knew one thing, and those who saw the chart knew another thing. And it never occurred to anyone to bring the two pieces of information together.
However if they did bring them together the true message from Pellicano would read as follows:
Pellicano did find some truths … and it was damning information about the accuser’s family.
So yes, as VindicateMj puts it as well it seems the daily beast was twisting words, wouldn't be the first time. There's a good chance exactly the same is the case with this "The Hollywood Reporter" from the NYTimes article?
Or could Pelicano now have turned to the "dark" side, selling his words to media?
Also saw a video on YouTube where he apparently told the media a year ago that he had dirt on MJ. According to the description of that video Pelicano had said this to The Hollywood Reporter
This goes completely against what he actually said when he resigned.
So I did a search to see if The Hollywood Reporter is a tabloid because it sure sounds like one and it does seem to be one and it's also owned by Billboard........