Latest on MJJC

Jordan Chandler Discussion Thread

Sneedon should be mad at the Chandlers yes but also HIMSELF actually. Because he challenged a motion so he could be noisy in the Civil trial. So he could work his case around it for a criminal trial. So he did nothing to stop it. But, he ended up playin himself like a fool when the Chandlers decided to settle out of court instead! I bet right behind his back?! But, for him to admit he was played would make MJ look good and make the Chandlers look bad and Sneedon will not do that. He got to much EGO! He forever needs people to believe Jordan was a "Victim." Pfff DUMB!

Now, it's even worse the media was so mad at Sneedon after losing the 05 Trial that he blamed them right back on the Rita Cosby show. Whining over how he was receiving calls from media after the Bashir doc, tellin him to do something about it. Thanks "Mad Dog" for telling us all that u & the media had an agenda against MJ....A Modern day lynching planned before there was even an accusation even! :mat:
 
Last edited:
bluetopez said:
Thanks "Mad Dog" for telling us all that u & the media had an agenda against MJ....A Modern day lynching planned before their was even an accusation even! :mat:
Click to expand...

Yeah. And let's not forget how according to the Arvizos' timeline MJ started to molest Gavin after the Bashir docu. While the whole world was watching... So when the docu was on the media weren't right yet about MJ molesting Gavin, so MJ quickly took action to make them right about it? LOL.

It's just so maddening how the media knows all this (because they do), yet they just don't tell and they act like these were credible allegations. It was a modern day witch hunt and lynching indeed. I wish someone would took it upon him to really analyze what the media did in this case. It's so shocking, it would be such an important story to tell, not just from MJ's point of view, but also from society's. How we let ourselves to get brainwashed by the media. How the media manipulates us. How the media has agendas that they follow even in the face of evindence to the contrary. How the media is not about uncovering the truth and telling the truth to people. How the media has become a modern way of lynching people. And about how us, humans treat people who are different and how prejudiced we really are...
 
Last edited:
Yeah. And let's not forget how according to the Arvizos' timeline MJ started to molest Gavin after the Bashir docu. While the whole world was watching... So when the docu was on the media weren't right yet about MJ molesting Gavin, so MJ quickly took action to make them right about it? LOL.
Click to expand...
I know it's so ridiculous. That Timeline so pissed off Carole Lieberman. lol That Psyco....oops I mean "[FONT=arial, sans-serif]Psychiatrist" said on TV that she told Sneedon not to do that because it wouldn't work, she wanted him to leave it as it was. MJ first arrangement Charges showed a different timeline, MJ allegedly molesting Gavin before the Bashir doc. SMH Dumb ass media of course ignored that too, [/FONT]conviently[FONT=arial, sans-serif]! Both Timelines were problematic, period! But, to change it like it was nothin, should have raised some major red flags to the general public. But, when ya dealing with so many sheeps....[/FONT]-_-
 
quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by bluetopez
Thanks "Mad Dog" for telling us all that u & the media had an agenda against MJ....A Modern day lynching planned before their was even an accusation even! :mat:
Click to expand...


Omg wow didnt know sneddon said that...wow
 
bluetopez said:
I know it's so ridiculous. That Timeline so pissed off Carole Lieberman. lol That Psyco....oops I mean "Psychiatrist" said on TV that she told Sneedon not to do that because it wouldn't work, she wanted him to leave it as it was. MJ first arrangement Charges showed a different timeline, MJ allegedly molesting Gavin before the Bashir doc. SMH Dumb ass media of course ignored that too, conviently! Both Timelines were problematic, period! But, to change it like it was nothin, should have raised some major red flags to the general public. But, when ya dealing with so many sheeps....-_-
Click to expand...

LOL, Carole Lieberman? The "psychiatrist" who considered someone like Daniel Kapon credible? LOL. But even she could see the ridiculousness of the timeline. Not that the original timeline did not have problems, that's why they needed to change it. You are right, it's crazy how the media and the public did not see red flags all over when the prosecution changed charges (like that first they claimed MJ molested Star as well, then that claim disappeared) and the timeline at will.
 
bluetopez said:
Sneedon should be mad at the Chandlers yes but also HIMSELF actually. Because he challenged a motion so he could be noisy in the Civil trial. So he could work his case around it for a criminal trial. So he did nothing to stop it. But, he ended up playin himself like a fool when the Chandlers decided to settle out of court instead! I bet right behind his back?! But, for him to admit he was played would make MJ look good and make the Chandlers look bad and Sneedon will not do that. He got to much EGO! He forever needs people to believe Jordan was a "Victim." Pfff DUMB!

Now, it's even worse the media was so mad at Sneedon after losing the 05 Trial that he blamed them right back on the Rita Cosby show. Whining over how he was receiving calls from media after the Bashir doc, tellin him to do something about it. Thanks "Mad Dog" for telling us all that u & the media had an agenda against MJ....A Modern day lynching planned before there was even an accusation even! :mat:
Click to expand...

Blue good one, and this also shows that the lynching of Michael was also MEDIA driven--imagine calling the DA to do something about a person who merely claims that kids share his bed. What interesting minds automatically thinking sleeping on bed = sex; if that was the case, a lot of my elderly relatives would be in prison now.

Respect that project about the media and its activities, If I was retired and could devote some good research to it, I would definitely do it. In fact, it is something I always think about. If done right it would cause a big shake up. I would get those publishes who publish textbooks to publish it, if it can be slanted as a socialpsych writing. You know like the books they had us read in graduate school.
 
Last edited:
bluetopez said:
Sneedon should be mad at the Chandlers yes but also HIMSELF actually. Because he challenged a motion so he could be noisy in the Civil trial. So he could work his case around it for a criminal trial. So he did nothing to stop it. But, he ended up playin himself like a fool when the Chandlers decided to settle out of court instead! I bet right behind his back?! But, for him to admit he was played would make MJ look good and make the Chandlers look bad and Sneedon will not do that. He got to much EGO! He forever needs people to believe Jordan was a "Victim." Pfff DUMB!
Click to expand...

Oh he's always tried to convince people about the Chandler case.

Since 1994 he's been telling people Michael was found to have books with naked boys in them, and that the description was an exact match.

Of course it would turn out that MJ had 2 books, one sent by a fan, the other inscribed by him about how it was a childhood he hoped his kids could have. Not exactly the damning evidence he made it seem.

And the description, he seems to have seized on one blotch he claims was in the same approximate area, but ignores the circumcision issue completely. I imagine if the photos/description had finally been shown then we'd discover the blotch was just in the same side of him, and that there were dozens of other blotches that didn't match up - Dr Strick said MJ's penis was both white and black, Jordan never says that in his own description.

Sneddon was lucky when the case went dead in 1994, because 2005 exposed him.

bluetopez said:
I know it's so ridiculous. That Timeline so pissed off Carole Lieberman. lol That Psyco....oops I mean "[FONT=arial, sans-serif]Psychiatrist" said on TV that she told Sneedon not to do that because it wouldn't work, she wanted him to leave it as it was. MJ first arrangement Charges showed a different timeline, MJ allegedly molesting Gavin before the Bashir doc. SMH Dumb ass media of course ignored that too, [/FONT]conviently[FONT=arial, sans-serif]! Both Timelines were problematic, period! But, to change it like it was nothin, should have raised some major red flags to the general public. But, when ya dealing with so many sheeps....[/FONT]-_-
Click to expand...

Yeah, Carole was all talking about how she didn't believe the molestation only began after the Bashir doc. So she was making up things that even the Arvizo's weren't saying happened. Funny.

She's also the one who talked about how Michael playing with kites in his backyard with his cousins in the 90s made it look like he was "aroused" around children. She's Taraborrelli's psychologist, he uses her throughout his book. And people still stan for him.

I'm very relieved he no longer churns out his crappy books, because he'd get the shit Sullivan is getting now, as they're basically the same books, just different author.
 
^^But where do they see this arousal, which I never do. How was this woman allowed to make up so much lies in public and go unchallenged by Michael's attorneys. I really do not understand why no one asked her to come to court with proof. Something needed to be done to these quasi-professionals who deliberate misled the public and deliberately lied about someone's condition, because their stories caused severe & negative repercussions for Michael. One of my greatest regrets is that Michael's lawyers never went vigorously after people like that like Cary Grant did with that comic. People learned that you could say anything about Michael and get away with it.
 
Just the fact that he was playing with them and running about having fun, it wasn't about like a visible erection or anything.

That's how silly and ridiculous this is.

I think someone around him even said that even Mike playing kites with kids was seen as perverted and crazy. And it's true, that really happened, someone involved in the allegations really said that.

But only the fans take note.
 
la_cienega said:
Just the fact that he was playing with them and running about having fun, it wasn't about like a visible erection or anything.

That's how silly and ridiculous this is.

I think someone around him even said that even Mike playing kites with kids was seen as perverted and crazy. And it's true, that really happened, someone involved in the allegations really said that.

But only the fans take note.
Click to expand...

Oh I know he did not have a visible erection--this was just a rhetorical question and pointing to the foolishness of these claims.

Sooner or later Jordan will be forced to come clean about this, and I am really confident that this will happen before I die.
 
I think the only way to show to the world what really the 93 case was about, what the chandlers the media and sneadon were about, what really happened and how it went down, what they didnt want the public to know, is a documentary film by some respected director. That will open the eyes of the public and change the opinion about Michael of some.
Articles and books are good, but they dont reach wide audience as film documentaries shown in cinemas and causes attention.

Its all good what we discuss here,but that doesnt help or change anything. It just clears the fans about what they already knew and makes us angry, that all this is unknown by the public.
 
Last edited:
Getting the fans to be as informed as possible is important though.

Like MJ said, it starts with us. We have to know as much about the allegations as possible and make sure all the other fans do too. We are the only ones who fight for him and speak for him and change things for him.

If a documentary is ever made about it, it'll be because some fan somewhere has made some director or someone else hear the truth and care about investigating it.

Petrarose said:
Oh I know he did not have a visible erection--this was just a rhetorical question and pointing to the foolishness of these claims.

Sooner or later Jordan will be forced to come clean about this, and I am really confident that this will happen before I die.
Click to expand...

Sorry, see I felt I had to point it out because the situation is just so stupid. Anything involving him and a child was considered criminal.
 
A good documnentary would be great, but fans do not really have the means for that. So we have to do what we can. Ie. writing blogs and websites and hope that someone somewhere who has the means to get that info out to the wider public will get interested. I know a lot of people won't read such sites. I also know that many people actually do not have the logic and brain to distinguish between credible info and non-credible info. (It's sad but that's how it is, not only in this case.) So haters can mislead them. And unfortunately Michael has some of the most persistent, obsessed haters out there, who seem to spend much of their days with spreading lies and half-truths about him on the Internet. That's why fans need to get themselves educated and spread the truth. Otherwise the lies will become canon.

But eventually, I feel only a confession from Jordan would change things. It's unfortunate that Michael's reputation is in the hands of such a coward who doesn't seem to know what's the right and moral thing to do, but that's how it is.

Petrarose said:
Sooner or later Jordan will be forced to come clean about this, and I am really confident that this will happen before I die.
Click to expand...

I really hope that you are right, but I'm not holding my breath. But I keep dreaming about the day when Jordan decides to have integrity and tells the truth. Michael so doesn't deserve to have that stigma on him. But until Jordan doesn't come forward it's up to us fans to spread the truth. Also fans need to know that this issue is the single biggest stumbling block for most people when it comes to MJ, his reputation and legacy. Not things like the "Michael" album - that's nothing compared to the harm the allegations do to his legacy. I wish we only had to talk about the "Michael" album as the biggest threat to MJ's legacy!

ETA: And I don't know what possibly could "force" Jordan to come clean. Only his conscience, but we don't know how much of that he has. At least he seems a little better than the Arvizo kids, who seem to be very primitive and vindictive (vindictive for that Michael did not lose the trial and did not finance them for life). There are signs that there's a bit more bad conscience about what they did in the Chandler family. Some positive comments on MJ from people who we know are associated with the Chandlers (actually are close friends of Jordan or even family members). Obviously, I'm not talking about Ray Chandler, who still seems to play spokesperson for Evan's side. I don't think Ray is close to Jordan at all.

So there seems to be a little bit of desire in the family/friend circle there to send out positive signals about Michael, to somehow "compensate" for what they did. But to come out clearly and openly about it, to say it loud and clear in front of the whole world that Michael did not do to Jordan what he was accused of - that's a whole different matter. That takes guts and I don't know if Jordan has that. So far it seems he does not.
 
Last edited:
Snow White luvs Peter Pan said:
Isn't what the movie Redeption (if that project can see the light) would try to do?
The book is very informative why that money was given. If anyone is interested to read it: http://jetzi-mjvideo.com/books-jetzi-04/red/red0a.html
Click to expand...
Actually this discussion about Jordan was Split off from the Thread about Geraldines Book and movie she wants fans to fund.
So most involved in this discussion are aware and have also been discussing that in the thread below. Thanks for the book link.

Redemption: Geraldine Hughes wants fans to fund Movie based on her book
 
There are signs that there's a bit more bad conscience about what they did in the Chandler family. Some positive comments on MJ from people who we know are associated with the Chandlers (actually are close friends of Jordan or even family members).
Click to expand...
Like who? What family members? I know that Jordan step-dad at the time and his mother June never said MJ did anything to Jordan, even though his mom took part of settlement and got money out of it too. And his former step-dad tried to sue him for breakin up the family. But, they never said MJ did anything to Jordan, so is it them u speak of or other family members?
 
You know even though i am angry at jordan but if he did finally come out & say the truth i think i could forgive him, i mean isnt that what michael taught us!
 
bluetopez said:
Like who? What family members? I know that Jordan step-dad at the time and his mother June never said MJ did anything to Jordan, even though his mom took part of settlement and got money out of it too. And his former step-dad tried to sue him for breakin up the family. But, they never said MJ did anything to Jordan, so is it them u speak of or other family members?
Click to expand...

I think june felt forced to do it cuz evan was the father of her child and she felt he wa stelling the truth, i guess thats her reason why she went along with what evan claimed happen


I just wish she couldve seen his b.s and told him to bugg off
 
She took par to get money nothing more. And what was her reason for the bs lies she told in 05? That family is scum
 
Justthefacts said:
She took par to get money nothing more. And what was her reason for the bs lies she told in 05? That family is scum
Click to expand...

I think in the begininng she felt forced to do it but then when the $$$ came around she chose that instead of intergrity
 
I think she felt she had to, because she was with Michael and Jordan most of the time. She would have been accused of being a bad mother. But she never said that Michael did anything to Jordan. I think that when she was cross examined in 05, she confirmed saying things to law enforcement that were damaging for Evan - something like all he was interested in was money. Does anyone remember that ?
 
And saying in 05 that she allowed Michael too sleep with her son after he cried made her sound like Mother of the year? Again covering your own ass is no excuse for doing the wrong thing
 
Justthefacts said:
And saying in 05 that she allowed Michael too sleep with her son after he cried made her sound like Mother of the year? Again covering your own ass is no excuse for doing the wrong thing
Click to expand...
No, definitely not, and just in case, it was not what I meant ! I agree with the bolded part.
 
June Chandler always maintained during the 93 allegations that MJ never touched Jordan and so did the Step-dad. And on the stand in the 05 trial June said the same about MJ not touchin Jordan. That whole MJ was crying thing though sounded like a bad exaggeration, she was trying to not look bad in front of the jury as a mother! So she made it sound like she had no choice. SMH

But, she was one greedy lady too. She was part of the settlement gettin 1.5 million. If she was afraid to loose Jordan and sited with them for that reason, she could have atleast refused to take money.
 
bluetopez said:
June Chandler always maintained during the 93 allegations that MJ never touched Jordan and so did the Step-dad. And on the stand in the 05 trial June said the same about MJ not touchin Jordan. That whole MJ was crying thing though sounded like a bad exaggeration, she was trying to not look bad in front of the jury as a mother! So she made it sound like she had no choice. SMH

But, she was one greedy lady too. She was part of the settlement gettin 1.5 million. If she was afraid to loose Jordan and sited with them for that reason, she could have atleast refused to take money.
Click to expand...
 
My impression of June on the stand was of a woman who tried to distance herself from all this, but she also knew why she was there, who called her to testify (the prosecution) and what they expect from her. Hence the little story about Michael crying to be able to sleep with Jordan. Funny, that no one else ever claimed any such thing that Michael would cry to let any child sleep with him. Other parents say it were always the kids who wanted to sleep in his room and Michael was always like "if your parents are OK with it, you can". Not crying, shaking and forcing it. But that was the most damaging story June told on the stand and the Chandlers never claimed that any molestation happened that night (nor did June claim that).

On the other hand June actually refuted a lot of stories told by Ray Chandler in All That Glitters.

For example there is a story in ATG about "another boy" (Brett Barnes) who traveled with Michael, June, Jordan and Lily in a limo in February, 1993. ATG claims he sat on Michael's lap and Michael caressed and kissed the boy “on the ear and the cheek” with “soft, lingering kisses”. Now, June was asked about this story on the stand by the prosecution in 2005, but she did not talk about “soft, lingering kisses” and did not describe the scene or Michael's behavior as disturbing at all. She also said Brett sat next to Michael, not on his lap.

The differnce between the Brett story and the crying story is of course that for the Brett story if June claimed anything else on the stand she could have been refuted by Brett himself. So she had to tell the truth about that. But for the "Michael cried to sleep in the same room with Jordan" story there is no third party witness, only the Chandlers and Michael, so she could lie or exaggerate about that one. And she had to offer something for the prosecution. It also has to be noted that these stories all first popped up after June switched sides to Evan's. Before that June dismissed Evan's fixed ideas about molestation.

My impression was that June is a very clever, cunning woman. She also kind of tried to distance herself from it all. Like when she corrected the person who questioned her: "I did not sue Michael Jackson, Jordan Chandler did." Like she did not want anything to do with it.

But in her passive-agressive way June is just as much to blame as Evan. She could have stopped it, but as soon as she smelled money, she followed the money. Dave Schwartz was in debt at the time and they asked Michael to lend them money. When Michel refused, June and Schwartz switched sides...
 
For example there is a story in ATG about "another boy" (Brett Barnes) who traveled with Michael, June, Jordan and Lily in a limo in February, 1993. ATG claims he sat on Michael's lap and Michael caressed and kissed the boy “on the ear and the cheek” with “soft, lingering kisses”. Now, June was asked about this story on the stand by the prosecution in 2005, but she did not talk about “soft, lingering kisses” and did not describe the scene or Michael's behavior as disturbing at all. She also said Brett sat next to Michael, not on his lap.
Click to expand...

The funny thing bout this story is if michael were a pedophile ( WHICH HE IS NOT) there would be no way he would do that infront of june cuz she wouldve kicked his ass! i mean cmon no mother would allow that to happen infront of their eyes and not do anything bout it. That is why that claim is so ridiculous
 
It's not impossible that the parents will try to blackmail the criminal instead of reporting him to the police.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top