Estate, Cascio and Porte Sued Over Three Songs on the "Michael" Album - Vera Senova Class Action

[Kapital77]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

I would like that Vera (our hero) could put some of our audio comparisons to the judge.

Not only sounds like the voice of Jason Malachi but also they copied some of Jason's own tracks....

"Room2breath" it's like a demo of "Keep your head up", etc....etc...

There are tons of evidences about this fraud..... but many never heard it.

By The way, its curious how only in some english forums surfaces cascio supporters while in the spanish forum everybody knows the truth and there are no fights.

I believe Jason and Cascios write here in the past and... Now.

 

[tricia70]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, However, most of us know that if somebody slapped Michael Jackson's name again on "Let Me Let Go" or "Mamacita", the same people who believe the cascio tracks are MJ's would think that those two Jason songs were sung by Michael as well. It's all right; some people just automatically consider it Michael. But when you look at the lack of evidence that it is Michael, there is no doubt that the doubters have better ground.


I. In my mind, it is concrete, but I respect the opinions of those who believe the songs are Michael's, as long as they respect facts and evidence.

Thank you for your post. The first bolded statement - sorry to say but you are wrong at least with me. No no and double no I've always believed those Malachi songs are definitely not Michael, especially Mamacita :doh:

To the second bolded statement. I do hope we have evidence either way for the sake of ALL MJ fans. I am keeping an open mind. I truly want this resolved so we can move on if that ever can be possible.

 

[Birchey]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

The Estate were not deceived, I think it was more of "holding a gun" to their heads in a way.

They knew these songs were coming but didn't get them in a workable condition until only a couple months before the Album release date. was it too late to scrap 12 potential MJ songs? Eddie had a fantastic entertainment Lawyer, was some contract signed which put the Estate in a sticky situation? Did they turn a blind eye to this in hopes things wouldn't be questioned?

I just think if these songs were given to them in their raw form, 6 months+ before the album was due to drop, they might not have been on the album. I think the 2 Johns would had time to investigate the songs properly, and wouldn't of had to get Weitzman to write a BS statement covering the songs, this sort of stuff should NEVER have to happen when Michael Jackson material is released, its a choice Branca "wanted to make go away", a mistake and thank god due to peoples uproar, the songs will never see another release, despite our friend Friedman claming "Water" was being held back for another collection, lets see Cascio release them independantly see how well they fair

I don't blame the Estate in hindsight, I don't like them very much for personal reasons but with deadlines, contracts and expectations it must be a stessful job sometimes, except the part where you can go listen to MJ all day and watch his concerts and private footage...........or wear his Jackets...................that part would be cool suppose xD

 

[Petrarose]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

^^I just don't understand why some advocate that the fan should be given their analyses or those from fans here, when she can get real experts who work in the field to do that. How is she going to go into court with fan made analysis---she is going to a real court with judges who are used to expert testimony.

This whole debate is very interesting. In the original thread in 2010, After listening to BN the night it streamed, I felt the song was off and thought there was a little Michael there and some other guy was brought up to fill in the empty spaces. I was asking Ivy if there was a percent a singer had to sing on a song for the song to be called HIS song, like the person had to sing 80% or something like that. I even went to the Sony building even though some fans said I should be careful, & tried to ask someone about the controversy. However, since I did not have a name of a person in the office the receptionist would not let me go up to the main floor. I mean, I was really enthusiastic about finding out what was happening especially after the tweets from the producer, him cussing out fans who were bothering him, and him calling out one of the T's about him going against the project because the T was not given a chance to work on a song or something like that. This led me to have reservations about what the T was saying. I ended up just buying the non-Cascio songs from the album.

So now after some years, I began to think about this thing again and feel it is too fantastic to be true--that all these people got together to commit this fraud including the people on the list from the letter to the fans. Since I don't believe all the experts came together to commit fraud for a few thousand dollars, I have come to the conclusion that the experts cannot be 100% sure, or can only say it is more likely or unlikely that it is Michael. Maybe they did not do a very detailed analysis--I don't know, but we will soon find out.

Then, why is only Branca's name on the filing? I find this curious. Why did the fan's lawyer put only Branca's name?

I expect both sides will rely heavily on experts, & since they may not give 100% certainty I don't know how this case will help anything. If the fan loses some will say it is just that they could not prove with certainty it was not Michael and it is really not Michael.

Ivy like you I am very interested in hearing what the depositions will reveal--I mean what will each party say about their actions? I am interested in the technical analysis to see the method used to unravel who sang from an expert's perspective. Then we have that issue about doing tests on songs from a cd vs the "raw" song. How will that make a difference in the results by the fan's expert vs the estate/sony experts. All in all it will be very interesting if it does not get thrown out soon.

 

[Birchey]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

^^I just don't understand why some advocate that the fan should be given their analyses or those from fans here, when she can get real experts who work in the field to do that. How is she going to go into court with fan made analysis---she is going to a real court with judges who are used to expert testimony.

He isn't talking about his analysis or fans analysis, only the voice comparisons fans have put together, the purpose of those is to let the listener judge, or the judge..........judge. I think if anything those comparisons would be good place for the professionals to start, seeing as fans have already raked both the Cascio and Malachi's tracks for samples where certain words are sung the same, same key, vibrato etc.

 

[WhoIsIt89]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

I don't really understand what you are saying is not true? You are right in as much as those very vocal estate haters would carry on regardless but this would give them plenty of ammunition and would be their answer for everything. I have been pleased to read on this board that for the most part fans would be willing to consider, if the plantiff wins, that the estate may have been deceived.

I don't think it's true in the sense that it seemed like you might've been implying that this shouldn't even be given a chance in court because if the plaintiff wins, it'll always be "mayday" for the Estate in terms of hater verbal barrages. That's going to happen regardless, Cascio songs or no Cascio songs. It would give them plenty of ammunition but that doesn't mean this should just be forgotten about and swept under a rug as opposed to a definitive judgement such as it being proven that it isn't Michael (or is, for those of you). Unfortunately that's just going to have to be something the Estate is going to have to deal with, because they let things get that bad. I don't think they'll have a larger amount of haters if its proven it isn't Michael, I think it'll be the same people, who simply will now be using the Cascio judgement to simply piggyback the same gripes they've always had.

@ Ivy, I didn't say EVERYONE will be willing to believe its Michael if it's proven to be with evidence. I said I think the majority would. So where's this "denial" stuff coming from? I'm not going to assume everyone who has spoken against these tracks wouldn't admit to being wrong if thats actually proven to be the case, because of the statements made by two members. That's neither here nor there though, because I'm not of the opinion that proof supporting the "it's really Michael" claims will EVER come to fruition.

And the "its too fantastic to be true" defense. "These numerous people got together, including the people on that list" (which proves me sort of correct when assuming that the multiple people comments were never in reference to the sole four people we were initially referring to). The "people on that list" wouldn't be involved with this, I'd lower the scale so to speak when assuming who was involved. The supposed producers, none of them have ever come out, to my knowledge, and co-signed or disputed the Weitzman statement. For all we know, they may have no idea they were even named in such a "official statement". So how would they be involved in the "cover-up" when not one of them has actually said anything about the subject or has given the slightest implication they're aware of this. The "experts" for all we know, they simply may not exist, that removes at the least, two more people from involvement. Quincy's come out and said he doesn't know who it is. So that removes another individual and only leaves the main four, and possibly the two exec's.

The reaso why Branca is the only one listed might be because this person remembers the reports that were out at the time which claimed that McClain never believed in the songs and that he and Branca got into a huge disagreement over them being considered for and included on the album.

 

[ivy]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

@ Ivy, I didn't say EVERYONE will be willing to believe its Michael if it's proven to be with evidence.

and I didn't say NO ONE will be willing to believe it's Michael if it's proven to be with evidence. If it's proven some will believe and some won't. So we have been saying the same thing all along

I'd lower the scale so to speak when assuming who was involved.

As far as the conspiracy goes perhaps yes but assuming they actually said they believe it to be MJ, they should be included in the number of people fooled.

The supposed producers, none of them have ever come out, to my knowledge, and co-signed or disputed the Weitzman statement. For all we know, they may have no idea they were even named in such a "official statement". So how would they be involved in the "cover-up" when not one of them has actually said anything about the subject or has given the slightest implication they're aware of this.

I don't know if they said it's MJ or if they changed their opinion or not but I'm pretty sure they are aware of it. A lot of people asked Bruce Swedien on Gearslutz - a forum he posts- he never responded. If my memory isn't failing me Damien Shields had contacts with several of them such as Forger and Freeze, so they would be aware too. Michael Prince is online and accessible. So again while I wouldn't make any claims about if they said such thing or not, I guess we can all agree that they would be aware that they are named in that statement.

The reason why Branca is the only one listed might be because this person remembers the reports that were out at the time which claimed that McClain never believed in the songs and that he and Branca got into a huge disagreement over them being considered for and included on the album.

but that reason doesn't make sense from a legal standpoint as Branca isn't being sued as Branca, he's being sued in his Executor position. See the thing is Estate isn't a legal entity and therefore cannot be sued. If you want to sue an Estate , you need to sue the Executors in their Executor position. That means if Estate loses this case it won't affect Branca in any way and any payment will come out of MJ Estate. So McClain's name on it or not doesn't make any difference from a legal standpoint.It seems to be symbolic than anything else.

 

[CaptainEoLove85]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

If this case ever reaches the trial phase, for me it won't be so much about proving the songs are fake (although that would be the best outcome, and one in which I'd hope for), but to have the songs removed from Michael's discography. If that's not possible or the fan loses the case, at least I could say she tried.

 

[LastTear]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

I don't think it's true in the sense that it seemed like you might've been implying that this shouldn't even be given a chance in court because if the plaintiff wins, it'll always be "mayday" for the Estate in terms of hater verbal barrages. That's going to happen regardless, Cascio songs or no Cascio songs. It would give them plenty of ammunition but that doesn't mean this should just be forgotten about and swept under a rug as opposed to a definitive judgement such as it being proven that it isn't Michael (or is, for those of you). Unfortunately that's just going to have to be something the Estate is going to have to deal with, because they let things get that bad. I don't think they'll have a larger amount of haters if its proven it isn't Michael, I think it'll be the same people, who simply will now be using the Cascio judgement to simply piggyback the same gripes they've always had.

The reaso why Branca is the only one listed might be because this person remembers the reports that were out at the time which claimed that McClain never believed in the songs and that he and Branca got into a huge disagreement over them being considered for and included on the album.

It isn't what I meant to imply. I hope it does get to court.

I dont know if that would be a reason for leaving McClain off - how realiable were the reports? Also, 'not believing in songs' doesn't necessarily mean he didn't believe the vocals were that of an imposter.

To be quite honest with you I still don't understand why the estate aren't included in the fraud claims.

 

[HIStory]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

As for who would accept what: it also depends on the nature, the amount and strength of the evidence. And there comes the subjective element of what is strong evidence to some and what isn't. We will have to see what evidence each side has. Just because an evidence is strong to some, it doesn't mean everyone else considers it as such and it does not even have to do with personal bias or unwillingness of accepting evidence. It may come down to the simple fact that some are genuinely not convinced by something that is convincing to others.

 

[MIST]

What about Jason Malachi?If he sang those songs didn´t he commit a fraud?
If he didn´t know from the beginning that they were going to say it was Michael singing he certainly must know it by now-I suppose some fans reached out to him-and he hasn´t said anything as far as I know.

 

[WhoIsIt89]

What about Jason Malachi?If he sang those songs didn´t he commit a fraud?
If he didn´t know from the beginning that they were going to say it was Michael singing he certainly must know it by now-I suppose some fans reached out to him-and he hasn´t said anything as far as I know.

Well, there was the infamous "confession". In which someone, who had access to Malachi's offical facebook page "confessed" to singing the songs. Things got around pretty quick, and it wasn't until the post itself made the front page of TMZ, when Malachi's manager, Thad something, said the page was hacked. This was followed by the entire account being deleted, Malachi's official website being shut down (also claimed to supposedly been done with hacking), and a video of him performing a handful of Michael songs from an outside event being removed from Youtube. Sooo yea....

 

[Kapital77]

I thinks this info is no longer on the net or in the place i found it:

"It’s a fresh new start for music manager and mogul, Frank Dileo, who has re-entered the music scene with new projects. The first of such projects is new recording artist, BOBBY EWING".

"He also is excited to be producing some new up-and-coming artists, such as Bobby Ewing. After finishing a copy of the album, Cascio hopes that a record deal will be in the future for Ewing, with Cascio himself as producer"

"THE SLIDESHOW is currently the working title of Bobby Ewing’s upcoming album which will be produced by Bobby Ewing & Frank Tyson"

There you have what they were doing before this madness:

 

[AnonAndy]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

I've kept an open mind about these tracks - I think it's possible the tracks are Michael but edited in a terrible manner, but also possible they're fake. I choose to listen to the songs as if it was Michael singing, in my mind, because I do like the songs themselves and feel they have Michael in the theme/style/lyrics.

As for the trial, I feel it is for Cascio & Co to prove they ARE real, rather than anyone else prove they aren't. This isn't like a murder investigation, we're talking about songs that were produced from original recordings - all of which will have left trails. If the songs are genuine, Cascio & Co have nothing to hide and can give us hard proof of where they originate. Please do not tell me Cascio just deleted all demos and original recordings - that is ridiculous if true and should be seen as very suspicious/destroying evidence.

Whatever happens we're all fans and love Michael and must not argue, but debate sensibly.

 

[Condor9333]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

Wait what? New and modern doesn't equate to sounding like a totally different person. Second, despite what you just said, if you tell me that Michael's voice doesn't sound the same as it does on his previous albums, I'm going to assume you to be a flat out liar. Michael simply sounds older on Invincible and thats not even in every case, for example, Threatened sounds like it was recorded in the mid-90's, yet we know that isn't the case. he still has all of the trademarks that makes his voice so special. Only thing he "changed" was that he left out the "hee-hee's". Even on 2000 Watts , after the first listen, if you weirdly had any doubts, you recognize thats Michael, from the vibrato, to the grit in his throat when he's belching ad-libs.

Michaels claps are present throughout ALL of his albums, so what exactly is new and modern about that?

This logic used in that post is simply ridiculous. Michael never once didn't sound like himself. Nor do I think that he believed new and modern meant, to change his pronounciation, the complete tone of his voice, and speaking pattern (the line "Mama say mama got you in a zig zag" is simply the person talking instead of singing).

I meant modern sounds,electronic betas ,instrumentals and dissorted voice in few songs...
Yeah i know MJ voice,but maybe Michael really sung Cascio sons,you cant know for sure if it is him or not.
You know we (fans) cant say its fake if only evidence is that it doesnt sound like MJ. (he was in bad shape,sick,or tired,angry... no matter.He cant produce every song flawlessy.Maybe Cascio didnt have enough material to work with,i mean usefull vocals so they used what they had).
No one proved opossite yet... maybewe figure it out soon...

DO YOU REMEMBER WHEN EARLIER THIS YEAR DEMO OF ILTWYL LEAKED,EVERYONE WAS SAYING ITS FAKE,OF BEAT ETC UNTIL STEVE CONFIRMED ITS REAL? IT PROVES THAT MJ ISNT PERFECT.
IF ESTATE proves all 1 Cascio songs are Michaels,ill accept it.Why cant you?

 

[Condor9333]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

We're talking about the vocals so the electronic beats don't really have anything to do with it.

Vocally, yes I believe Michael's trademark vocals are all over Invincible and many comparisons can be made where he sounds like previous albums. He did do new things vocally but not 100% new, unique and different to the point that there's not ONE vocal that doesn't sound like a previous vocal.

That is the case with the Cascio songs. If it's him, he never once sounded like that before, he never slips back into a classic sounding vocal once like he does all throughout Invincible. It just doesn't make any sense.

I meant modern sounds,electronic betas ,instrumentals and dissorted voice in few songs...
Yeah i know MJ voice,but maybe Michael really sung Cascio sons,you cant know for sure if it is him or not.
You know we (fans) cant say its fake if only evidence is that it doesnt sound like MJ. (he was in bad shape,sick,or tired,angry... no matter.He cant produce every song flawlessy.Maybe Cascio didnt have enough material to work with,i mean usefull vocals so they used what they had).
No one proved opossite yet... maybe with this case we figure it out soon...

DO YOU REMEMBER WHEN EARLIER THIS YEAR DEMO OF ILTWYL LEAKED,EVERYONE WAS SAYING ITS FAKE,OF BEAT ETC UNTIL STEVE CONFIRMED ITS REAL? IT PROVES THTA MJ ISNT PERFECT.
IF ESTATE proves all 1 Cascio songs are Michaels,ill accept it.Why cant you?

 

[Petrarose]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

I meant modern sounds,electronic betas ,instrumentals and dissorted voice in few songs...
Yeah i know MJ voice,but maybe Michael really sung Cascio sons,you cant know for sure if it is him or not.
You know we (fans) cant say its fake if only evidence is that it doesnt sound like MJ. (he was in bad shape,sick,or tired,angry... no matter.He cant produce every song flawlessy.Maybe Cascio didnt have enough material to work with,i mean usefull vocals so they used what they had).
No one proved opossite yet... maybe with this case we figure it out soon...
IF ESTATE proves all 1 Cascio songs are Michaels,ill accept it.Why cant you?

I was wondering what other elements could make the songs sound different except for reasons given such as sick, basement, etc. Is there something technical that could have been done, to make the singing sound different?

 

[Condor9333]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

I was wondering what other elements could make the songs sound different except for reasons given such as sick, basement, etc. Is there something technical that could have been done, to make the singing sound different?

IF he was sick,or tired etc...
.Acoustic of room - basement. The thing he sing them through PVC pipe,also disorts voice.
yes, autotune, or any kind of over processing his voice with software.

If estate or casio proves its real im fine with it.
If not, ill just have them in my Mj folder titled casio songs and thats it.
I like some songs no matter are they real or not.

 

[Birchey]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

Well, there was the infamous "confession". In which someone, who had access to Malachi's offical facebook page "confessed" to singing the songs. Things got around pretty quick, and it wasn't until the post itself made the front page of TMZ, when Malachi's manager, Thad something, said the page was hacked. This was followed by the entire account being deleted, Malachi's official website being shut down (also claimed to supposedly been done with hacking), and a video of him performing a handful of Michael songs from an outside event being removed from Youtube. Sooo yea....

Correction, first they claimed it was a fake facebook account, then after fans pointed out it was real, Thad then claimed it had been hacked.

 

[Birchey]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

IF he was sick,or tired etc...
.Acoustic of room - basement. The thing he sing them through PVC pipe,also disorts voice.
yes, autotune, or any kind of over processing his voice with software.

The sickness excuse would be weak as hell, same with the tired excuse, that would mean MJ was sick or tired whilst recording 12 songs over a few weeks, we saw MJ out and about and also doing the Ebony shoots during this he looked fine. Plus being sick wont completly change your voice.

The Acoustics wont change your voice dramatically, we have heard WBSS 2008 recorded in the same place, he sounded fine. Plus we have heard MJ sing in small rooms, large rooms, booths, bathrooms, outside, indoors, arena's, halls, stadiums. Always sounding the same.

As for the vocal processing argument, this began with Teddy Rileys comment but was soon proven as BS once the 12 Demos were heard, the vocals were the same on those versions and Teddys mixes.

 

[WhoIsIt89]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

I meant modern sounds,electronic betas ,instrumentals and dissorted voice in few songs...
Yeah i know MJ voice,but maybe Michael really sung Cascio sons,you cant know for sure if it is him or not.
You know we (fans) cant say its fake if only evidence is that it doesnt sound like MJ. (he was in bad shape,sick,or tired,angry... no matter.He cant produce every song flawlessy.Maybe Cascio didnt have enough material to work with,i mean usefull vocals so they used what they had).
No one proved opossite yet... maybewe figure it out soon...

DO YOU REMEMBER WHEN EARLIER THIS YEAR DEMO OF ILTWYL LEAKED,EVERYONE WAS SAYING ITS FAKE,OF BEAT ETC UNTIL STEVE CONFIRMED ITS REAL? IT PROVES THAT MJ ISNT PERFECT.
IF ESTATE proves all 1 Cascio songs are Michaels,ill accept it.Why cant you?

Show me where I said I wouldn't accept it if the Estate provided actual proof. I'll wait...And everything you just claimed has been proven wrong. You clearly haven't been following this situation, because "it doesn't sound like him" isnt the sole reason or "evidence" that has been raised to support our argument of these songs being frauds. Numerous vocal comparisons have been made since the very first stream of Breaking News, of the Cascio songs and Malachi vocals in which notes are sung the same, words like "away" are pronounced exactly identical to each other, the vibrato is the exact same. Yet when these songs are compared with each and every past Michael record you can think of, there are no matches. The fact that Michael listed none of these song titles on the multiple personal lists he had left in his room of the songs he planned on working on in the very near future, not one Cascio song is present. The so-called "pre-edits", have nothing in them like fingersnaps, headphone bleeding, foot stomps or clapping, or Michael talking into the mic asking for another take or a do over of a certain lyric or note, that is consistent with Michael's past demo takes. Yet we're supposed to believe these are guide vocals and that Eddie had "little" to work with? Uhm no.

Eddie, nor the Estate has EVER up to this point presented a shred of evidence to support their claim of these songs. Yet we should just believe them right? The Estate themselves have chosen not to have anything to do with these songs anymore, and logic tells me that has a lot more to do with more than just fan reaction.

Michael was sick, are you saying we should really consider this excuse? 2007 at the Cascio home wouldn't be the first time Michael was sick in his life. In fact, we already have access to Michael's "sick" vocals, WBSS live in Munich during the History Tour. Michael STILL doesnt sound like the person on the Cascio songs. And he certainly doesn't sound like Jason Malachi.

And whats ILTWYL? And that "PVC Pipe in the shower" story is complete bullshit. Shame some fans have become so gullible with the defense of these songs. I get that you'd like to believe its Michael, because who wouldn't? But everything you said has already been disproven in the past, long before you joined into this debate of sorts. And the fact that if legally proven these songs arent Michael, that you'd still include them in your personal MJ catalog, worries me. Because that then means that PriceOfFames theory of people just like listening to someone who sounds like Michael, would be proven true. At least in your case. But aye, whatever floats your boat.

 

[AlwaysThere]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

For a moment, let's all sit back and consider something. Right now, completely erase the tracks from your mind. Don't worry about how the vocals sound or how they were recorded; we can get to that later. For now, I want to put forth a few questions (which have been asked before) regarding the actual creation of these tracks, most of which does not make any logical sense.

- How in the world did Michael Jackson finish twelve songs in two months? Any one of his collaborators, whether recent or older, can testify that it would take Michael years to finish a song. He worked on Hollywood Tonight for nine years, a song that was fully written lyrically, and never recorded the bridge or third verse. He was even less prolific in his later years, as many have revealed.

- There are only two people in the world to testify that they were in the room when Michael recorded the vocals: James Porte and Eddie Cascio. None of Eddie's family members have commented that they heard any music or saw Michael recording; even Frank Cascio in his book said that he was never in the studio with them. Eddie has given one interview regarding the songs, while James has remained completely silent. Wouldn't you think that someone, even one of Michael's own children, would have heard some of the music that they were working on in the three months Michael resided with the Cascio family? (Also, Allow me to set in stone that THESE ARE FINISHED SONGS. Each song has TWO VERSES, FULL CHORUS VOCALS, A COMPLETE BRIDGE SECTION and NUMEROUS AD LIBS. Regardless of the merit of the vocals themselves, these are far from "song fragments," as some have attempted to make us believe.)

- The Cascios claimed that Michael was so pleased with the songs that he requested all other vocal takes be erased; they later retracted this claim by saying that the alternate takes were erased to make space on the hard drives. Several questions arise simply from these two comments. If these takes were supposedly "rough vocal demos" and "not up to Michael's standards," why would he be so pleased with them that he would delete every other take? Why wouldn't the Cascios simply buy another hard drive, or move the outtakes to another? When has Michael ever asked to completely delete a vocal performance?

- People only began hearing Michael's supposed vocals months after he passed away. Even this Angelo fellow, who was working on the songs since June, I believe, said that he did not work with Michael's vocals; rather, he worked with James's. Why wouldn't the Cascios offer Michael's vocals if, at the time, the tracks were complete?

- Around November 2010, a freelance journalist over on another forum spoke to Jason Malachi over the Internet (when he still was pushing his own independent music) and asked him if he was involved with the production of the Cascio songs. According to him, Jason said that "he couldn't comment on it". If he wasn't involved, what was holding him back from just saying no?

- It has been long claimed that Eddie has proof that Michael recorded the songs. Where is it? There is no logical explanation as to why he would withhold evidence that would put thousands of furious fans to shame.

Regarding the vocals themselves, there's nothing to say that hasn't already been said.

I don't hate these songs; some of them are actually written and produced quite well. Stay, Water and Burn Tonight are all pretty great pop songs, in my perspective. I hate the idea that Eddie actually attempted to pass them off as Michael Jackson songs and expect the fan base to not notice that something was fishy with the situation. Listen to Breaking News. That is hands down the most pathetic attempt at sounding like Michael Jackson I've ever heard.

 

[Birchey]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

A quick note on the above post, MJ recording 12 Songs in 2 Months, with a great deal of research we worked out you can reduce the 2 months dramatically, I don't have the figures here to show but it was down to mere weeks MJ was available to work on this stuff. Also taking into account MJ supposedly wrote enough of these songs to merit a writers credit, and whilst this was happening they had to build a studio in the first place.

 

[WhoIsIt89]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

Mikuhl Jaxsun!!

 

[Condor9333]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

Show me where I said I wouldn't accept it if the Estate provided actual proof. I'll wait...And everything you just claimed has been proven wrong. You clearly haven't been following this situation, because "it doesn't sound like him" isnt the sole reason or "evidence" that has been raised to support our argument of these songs being frauds. Numerous vocal comparisons have been made since the very first stream of Breaking News, of the Cascio songs and Malachi vocals in which notes are sung the same, words like "away" are pronounced exactly identical to each other, the vibrato is the exact same. Yet when these songs are compared with each and every past Michael record you can think of, there are no matches. The fact that Michael listed none of these song titles on the multiple personal lists he had left in his room of the songs he planned on working on in the very near future, not one Cascio song is present. The so-called "pre-edits", have nothing in them like fingersnaps, headphone bleeding, foot stomps or clapping, or Michael talking into the mic asking for another take or a do over of a certain lyric or note, that is consistent with Michael's past demo takes. Yet we're supposed to believe these are guide vocals and that Eddie had "little" to work with? Uhm no.

Eddie, nor the Estate has EVER up to this point presented a shred of evidence to support their claim of these songs. Yet we should just believe them right? The Estate themselves have chosen not to have anything to do with these songs anymore, and logic tells me that has a lot more to do with more than just fan reaction.

Michael was sick, are you saying we should really consider this excuse? 2007 at the Cascio home wouldn't be the first time Michael was sick in his life. In fact, we already have access to Michael's "sick" vocals, WBSS live in Munich during the History Tour. Michael STILL doesnt sound like the person on the Cascio songs. And he certainly doesn't sound like Jason Malachi.

And whats ILTWYL? And that "PVC Pipe in the shower" story is complete bullshit. Shame some fans have become so gullible with the defense of these songs. I get that you'd like to believe its Michael, because who wouldn't? But everything you said has already been disproven in the past, long before you joined into this debate of sorts. And the fact that if legally proven these songs arent Michael, that you'd still include in your personal MJ catalog, worries me. Because that then means that PriceOfFames theory of people just like listening to someone who sounds like Michael, would be proven true. At least in your case.

1.)My mistake.
2.)Estate and Cascio wouldn risk that kind of fraud for few millions $ since both have enough money. What would they gain from it?
They would risk their jobs and future buisness for money they alreay have?I dont think so.
3.)I personally dont think its Michael, but if they prove it is him ill accept it.
4.)I like Water,Soldier boy and Burn tonight no matter who sings them, Malachi,impersonatorr or my grandfother.
5.)I meant when Demo of The way you love me leaked at begginig of this year.Everybody said its fake,of beat,dont match with instrumentals... Until Steve001 confirmed it is.
6.)Bottom line:its probably not Michael,but if Estate proves it is thats it.Its possible due to enviroment,tehnology or sickness,or overdubbing,processing i dont care whata that they dissort voice.
Well see soon so no need to argue..

 

[Birchey]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

Mikuhl Jaxsun!!

Everybody's wanting a piece of?

 

[Birchey]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

1.)My mistake.
2.)Estate and Cascio wouldn risk that kind of fraud for few millions $ since both have enough money. What would they gain from it?
They would risk their jobs and future buisness for money they alreay have?I dont think so.
3.)I personally dont think its Michael, but if they prove it is him ill accept it.
4.)I like Water,Soldier boy and Burn tonight no matter who sings them, Malachi,impersonatorr or my grandfother.
5.)I meant when Demo of The way you love me leaked at begginig of this year.Everybody said its fake,of beat,dont match with instrumentals... Until Steve001 confirmed it is.
6.)Bottom line:its probably not Michael,but if Estate proves it is thats it.Its possible due to enviroment,tehnology or sickness,or overdubbing,processing i dont care whata that they dissort voice.
Well see soon so no need to argue..

The Way You Love Me, there was nothing fake about it, a few fans only who didn't know its origins thought it wasn't MIchaels original demo because the best was off tempo. I and many others knew this was official since 2011 and once a source we had let people know this, its accept by all and we didn't even have any hand in making the tracks. A stark contrast to Eddie and Co who made these songs but no matter how many excuses they pull up and then change we don't believe them for good reason.

 

[ivy]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

- The Cascios claimed that Michael was so pleased with the songs that he requested all other vocal takes be erased; they later retracted this claim by saying that the alternate takes were erased to make space on the hard drives.

just a little question : isn't this what taryll said eddie said hence hearsay? shouldn't we differentiate between what they actually said and what other people claim they said?

 

[WhoIsIt89]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

1.)My mistake.
2.)Estate and Cascio wouldn risk that kind of fraud for few millions $ since both have enough money. What would they gain from it?
They would risk their jobs and future buisness for money they alreay have?I dont think so.
3.)I personally dont think its Michael, but if they prove it is him ill accept it.
4.)I like Water,Soldier boy and Burn tonight no matter who sings them, Malachi,impersonatorr or my grandfother.
5.)I meant when Demo of The way you love me leaked at begginig of this year.Everybody said its fake,of beat,dont match with instrumentals... Until Steve001 confirmed it is.
6.)Bottom line:its probably not Michael,but if Estate proves it is thats it.Its possible due to enviroment,tehnology or sickness,or overdubbing,processing i dont care whata that they dissort voice.
Well see soon so no need to argue..

1.) Fair enough.
2.) Again, if you were tune with all of this, few of us actually think money was Eddie's motive. And we've already explained why the Estate were willing. Perhaps they weren't that willing at all, but jumped the gun on these songs, with the hopes of 12 brand new Michael Jackson songs, thats a whole album of never before heard MJ songs, which equals great profit for them. They were willing to overlook certain red flags. But perhaps they may have been legally binded and by then it was too late for them to do anything against the already planned for release tracks.
3.) Okay.
4.) Sorry to hear that.
5.) People thought the demo was fan-made because of the beat. Nobody ever claimed that it wasn't Michael singing.
6.) All of those things have been disputed and destroyed in the face of such disputes.

 

[Birchey]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

just a little question : isn't this what taryll said eddie said hence hearsay? shouldn't we differentiate between what they actually said and what other people claim they said?

Alot of us put more merit on what Taryll has said, he clearly doesn't have a reason to lie, plus a few more of us know this excuse was also used to everyone in those meetings as claimed by another one of Michael's engineers. Seeing as Eddie has had every oppurtunity to claim otherwise, or actually answer these questions with reasonable answers yet he chose not too. Either way we are just on a forum and not in a court, and you can pick one sentence out of a whole post that makes a lot of sense and shows alot of facts and throws a sh*t ton of doubt on Eddies word, what the problem is no one can give answers to the whole situation, where as for everything "official" thats been said we can pull up multiple pieces of evidence which put serious doubt to it.