Latest on MJJC

Michael - The Great Album Debate

^^ I agree...I don't think this is a debatable issue...That's the problem. Perhaps all the surrounding controversy and what not is a debatable issue, but not the voice itself, hence, as you said, why the believers haven't been able to come up with one single comparison in favour of it sounding like Michael Jackson. Not one single one.

It doesn't sound like Michael Jackson because it isn't him. Ever think about that? ;)

Yeah, yeah, this is all my 'opinion'.







(but it's really not :p)
 
StellaJackson said:
The press had no problems printing allegations about Michael without any evidence to back it up. Also, it isn't an assumption that the songs are fake. It is an absolute undeniable fact. Jason is the lead vocalist. The songs sound identical to him and not like Michael at all, coupled with motive, a huge number of red flags and the total inability of anyone to provide evidence that Michael had anything to do with these songs. 9 months later and still not one believer can tell us one part of any song that they think sounds like Michael.
Click to expand...

Being a "doubter" i think there is a imposter on the tracks somewhere. BUT....i do have to say, we dont know for sure that Jason Malachi is infact the vocals on the Tracks. Could it be a unkown person that we could mistake as Jason? Could their be Michael vocals somewhere hidden in the track? i think so. (not talking about the ad-libs here).
 
StellaJackson said:
The press had no problems printing allegations about Michael without any evidence to back it up. Also, it isn't an assumption that the songs are fake. It is an absolute undeniable fact. Jason is the lead vocalist. The songs sound identical to him and not like Michael at all, coupled with motive, a huge number of red flags and the total inability of anyone to provide evidence that Michael had anything to do with these songs. 9 months later and still not one believer can tell us one part of any song that they think sounds like Michael.
Click to expand...

fyi - lawsuits and police complaints can be printed. such complaints are a few of the things that doesn't fall under "defamation".

and if it was an "absolute undeniable fact", there would be a lawsuit and the "truth" would have been "revealed" as that's not happening you don't have an "absolute undeniable fact" but only a "strong conviction".

everyone should really understand what is a fact and what is not a fact.
 
Billyjeanplxiv said:
Being a "doubter" i think there is a imposter on the tracks somewhere. BUT....i do have to say, we dont know for sure that Jason Malachi is infact the vocals on the Tracks. Could it be a unkown person that we could mistake as Jason? Could their be Michael vocals somewhere hidden in the track? i think so. (not talking about the ad-libs here).
Click to expand...

I doubt there is another impersonator who has all the same vocal characteristics as Jason, shares the same motive, and lives just a few hours drive from Eddie Cascio. And the only genuine Michael vocals are the pasted adlibs. He simply isn't there.
 
ivy said:
fyi - lawsuits and police complaints can be printed. such complaints are a few of the things that doesn't fall under "defamation".

and if it was an "absolute undeniable fact", there would be a lawsuit and the "truth" would have been "revealed" as that's not happening you don't have an "absolute undeniable fact" but only a "strong conviction".

everyone should really understand what is a fact and what is not a fact.
Click to expand...

Just because someone hasn't filed a lawsuit doesn't mean there isn't a case for one. I do understand what is a fact and I really don't need to be told. It is a fact that the sky is blue because we can all see it. It is a fact that Jason is singing these songs because we can all hear it.
 
StellaJackson said:
Just because someone hasn't filed a lawsuit doesn't mean there isn't a case for one.
Click to expand...

sure but go back to my first post and see why I'm not expecting a lawsuit and without filing lawsuit you really cannot uncover the truth.

a legal complaint (police report), seeking justice (criminal /civil lawsuits) - win or lose - versus twitter posts are totally different things.

It is a fact that the sky is blue because we can all see it. It is a fact that Jason is singing these songs because we can all hear it.
Click to expand...

it's not that clear cut and you are kidding yourself if you really believe that. like I said you are mixing up a "strong belief" with fact.

If you have that "fact" what's stopping you from revealing the truth in a court of law?
 
StellaJackson said:
I doubt there is another impersonator who has all the same vocal characteristics as Jason, shares the same motive, and lives just a few hours drive from Eddie Cascio. And the only genuine Michael vocals are the pasted adlibs. He simply isn't there.
Click to expand...

Maybe im doubting that its Jason. It could be. But, whos to say that it CAN'T be someone else? It very well could.

I believe Michael could have recorded something in Eddie's Studio. It could have been anything: Backing vocals, a few simple "ohh's" or maybe he just helped with a melody of the songs...and they butchered that. If Michael recorded there, James Porte's vocie could also be masking it.
 
Billyjeanplxiv said:
Maybe im doubting that its Jason. It could be. But, whos to say that it CAN'T be someone else? It very well could.

I believe Michael could have recorded something in Eddie's Studio. It could have been anything: Backing vocals, a few simple "ohh's" or maybe he just helped with a melody of the songs...and they butchered that. If Michael recorded there, James Porte's vocie could also be masking it.
Click to expand...

It can't be someone else in my opinion because the evidence points straight to Jason. The vocals contain all his characteristics such as that awful vibrato, pronounciation etc. Also, Michael did record in the Cascio basement in that time. The new backing for vocals for WBSS 2008 were recorded there, so when Eddie said in the making of the album documentary "this is where Michael recorded those backing vocals" (ie the shower) he wasn't lying. It's not what he said but what he doesn't say that's the give away. He's never stated that Michael recorded those twelve songs specifically.
 
StellaJackson said:
John McClain was the one who was against the tracks, and contacted Thad Nauden (Jason's manager) several weeks before Breaking News was streamed. The key to this whole issue may very well lie in what was said during that conversation. Although it was probably just a denial. Having said that though, I'm fairly certain Nauden knows it is Jason.
Click to expand...

Wasn't it Branca who contacted Nauden?

I get the complete opposite impression from what Thad Nauden have been saying. That he doesn't have a clue and finds the whole thing ridiculous to the point of not even bothering asking Jason about it.
But thats just my impression.
 
Thanks for enlightining me on that information i didnt know. I mean it could be Jason as you say...but i think it could also be someone else. lol When i was talking about Michael recording in the studio, i was directing my comment torward the 12 Tracks. I think there is his voice somewhere in there. (other than ad-libs)
 
Willy said:
Wasn't it Branca who contacted Nauden?

I get the complete opposite impression from what Thad Nauden have been saying. That he doesn't have a clue and finds the whole thing ridiculous to the point of not even bothering asking Jason about it.
But thats just my impression.
Click to expand...

yes it was Branca and then Weitzman.

I talked to Thad 3 times, he's quite adamant that it's not Jason. He wasn't really happy about all the negativity this brought to Jason as well.
 
The Jacksons' actions or lack of actions are not indicator of anything.

Why they haven't done anything yet? May be it's as difficult for them to establish probable cause as we do. Yes, they can go to probate court. But, they need to be able to present valid evidence. Just because their last names is Jackson do not make it easier for them to obtain evidence that is admissible to the court of law. May be they don't care. Who knows?

Even if the songs 100% genuine, so what? My listening experience will not be changed. The sounds of the songs will still be distorted.
 
Willy said:
Wasn't it Branca who contacted Nauden?

I get the complete opposite impression from what Thad Nauden have been saying. That he doesn't have a clue and finds the whole thing ridiculous to the point of not even bothering asking Jason about it.
But thats just my impression.
Click to expand...

I just double checked and yes you are right. It was John Branca. I'm guessing that Weizemann's follow up call was to gain permission to use Jason's name on a statement if needed, as it was. I think Nauden would have to be in the know so as to prevent him from suing Jason who technically, was breaking his contract with Nauden by appearing on another label, albeit uncredited. The comment that bothers me most from Nauden is the following one about the calls from the Estate: "Man..... I just wish you would have called me at least a year and a half earlier." What would have been different a year and a half earlier? Well, Jason wouldn't have recorded the songs then.
 
^^

to go to probate court is pretty much over. they could have done it prior the album release. I mentioned this before Taj went to probate court as representing Katherine and talked against TII movie release (said that it was being rushed the quality would have suffered) and rejected the memorabilia tour. In probate court it's not a matter of "evidence". Katherine is a beneficiary and she can object to projects (such as the TII example), Executors make a counter argument why the project should happen and judge makes a decision based on that not hard evidence.

that's why I mentioned the "probate court" as it's being an easier alternative for Jackson's than taking it to trial and establishing probable cause.

edit: remember Alejandra and how she dragged it in the probate court and delayed for months her eviction from the house with nothing but hearsay.
 
So. Michael recorded backing for WBSS 2008 in Eddie's studio. As im listening to his vocals now.......they sound like Michael. As for the Cascio vocals...what are some other excuses they used to try to prove it was Michaels vocals without any evidence.

I've heard: Processing, PVC pipe, Shower...?


EDIT: when does Jason's Managher say "man...i wish you would have called a year and a 1/2 earlier?" is there any source?
 
Last edited:
ivy said:
yes it was Branca and then Weitzman.

I talked to Thad 3 times, he's quite adamant that it's not Jason. He wasn't really happy about all the negativity this brought to Jason as well.
Click to expand...

Well he's not going to admit it is he? Lol. And it certainly wasn't bad publicity from Jason. His career was going no where anyway. And if Jason was bothered about negative publicity he should have had the balls to speak out and publicly deny his involvement. His silence speaks volumes.
 
ivy said:
^^

to go to probate court is pretty much over. they could have done it prior the album release. I mentioned this before Taj went to probate court as representing Katherine and talked against TII movie release (said that it was being rushed the quality would have suffered) and rejected the memorabilia tour. In probate court it's not a matter of "evidence". Katherine is a beneficiary and she can object to projects (such as the TII example), Executors make a counter argument why the project should happen and judge makes a decision based on that not hard evidence.

that's why I mentioned the "probate court" as it's being an easier alternative for Jackson's than taking it to trial and establishing probable cause.
Click to expand...

just wondering whether the jacksons' could go to the probate court to ask for "specific songs" to be removed or the jacksons need to object the whole album. we all know the jacksons' do not object the whole album. so, if they don't have issue with the non-cascio tracks, why would they go to the probate to objec the whole project?
 
sure he won't so there goes your (generally speaking) confession hopes. I at least talked with him and I didn't get the vibe that he knew something and withheld. I personally do not know how you came to that conclusion.

and I think by I wish you called me earlier, he was referring to the time that MJ was alive and that the ability of Jason working with him. If you followed Jason after the TMZ story that has been his dream and scenario to push.

just wondering whether the jacksons' could go to the probate court to ask for "specific songs" to be removed or the jacksons need to object the whole album. we all know the jacksons' do not object the whole album. so, if they don't have issue with the non-cascio tracks, why would they go to the probate to objec the whole project?
Click to expand...

they could have gone and made the argument that there's a controversy about the songs and that would negatively affect Michael's legacy and Estate most probably would do the counter argument of what they said in their statement - how they checked for the authenticity.

Like I said this is not an issue of win or lose , what I'm saying is that Jackson's complained about TII in a court of law but they didn't complain about the album or the songs. It's level of action I'm comparing here. It's like Randy advocated for AEG lawsuit and he's happy with the developments. There's no one advocating for this issue, they never did. Katherine supported HTWF and Mann and put herself against the MJ Estate in lawsuits, nothing similar is happening in this instance.

all I'm saying is I'm not seeing any fight to reveal the truth as you call it.

edited to add: and lack of evidence hasn't really stopped Jacksons for making claims. Remember Joe trying to rewrite the law saying that he was the father and needed to get a share and totally bypassed the notion of "beneficiaries". HTWF lawsuit was basically based on Melissa getting a message from spirits. And in AEG lawsuit Katherine made the conspiracy and emotional distress claim only to later remove it when the judge asked for "proof". they have made unsupported without evidence claims before multiple times.
 
ivy said:
sure he won't so there goes your (generally speaking) confession hopes. I at least talked with him and I didn't get the vibe that he knew something and withheld. I personally do not know how you came to that conclusion.

and I think by I wish you called me earlier, he was referring to the time that MJ was alive and that the ability of Jason working with him. If you followed Jason after the TMZ story that has been his dream and scenario to push.
Click to expand...

And his wish came true. Plus, it's only logical that Nauden would know. And he didn't say "earlier", he said "a year and a half earlier", which suggests to me that he was referring to when Michael died.
 
Last edited:
ivy said:
sure he won't so there goes your (generally speaking) confession hopes. I at least talked with him and I didn't get the vibe that he knew something and withheld. I personally do not know how you came to that conclusion.

and I think by I wish you called me earlier, he was referring to the time that MJ was alive and that the ability of Jason working with him. If you followed Jason after the TMZ story that has been his dream and scenario to push.
Click to expand...

Thanks, and i havent really followed Jason much, i did know Michael was one of his idols.
 
ivy said:
they could have gone and made the argument that there's a controversy about the songs and that would negatively affect Michael's legacy and Estate most probably would do the counter argument of what they said in their statement - how they checked for the authenticity.

Like I said this is not an issue of win or lose , what I'm saying is that Jackson's complained about TII in a court of law but they didn't complain about the album or the songs. It's level of action I'm comparing here. It's like Randy advocated for AEG lawsuit and he's happy with the developments. There's no one advocating for this issue, they never did. Katherine supported HTWF and Mann and put herself against the MJ Estate in lawsuits, nothing similar is happening in this instance.

all I'm saying is I'm not seeing any fight to reveal the truth as you call it.
Click to expand...

The family actions on other matters (complaint about TII, support of HTWF and Howard Mann and litigation against AEG) are irrelevant. As I mentioned, the family does not oppose the whole album as far as I understand, so they might not want to go to probate to delay the whole project? They might not want to jeopardize the $250 million deal with Sony? I'm just brainstorming here. I don't know if the $250 million deal with Sony would be impacted because of any probate court action.

May be because I'm very indifferent to the Jacksons. Their actions or the lack of actions really doesn't mean much to me. Also, we have to keep in mind that we don't really know them. We don't know 100% what their motives are.
 
Last edited:
StellaJackson said:
And he didn't say "earlier", he said "a year and a half earlier", which suggests to me that he was referring to when Michael died.
Click to expand...

let's do a little math

Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Michael Jackson's Estate Part 2.
October 19 - Received another call from my idol's estate.

Man..... I just wish you would have called me at least a year and a half earlier.

I'm here if you guys need me again.

GOD Bless!

RIP MJ.

at least a year and half earlier from October 19, 2010 is April 19, 2009 or earlier. He clearly was talking about Jason somewhat working with Michael for TII.

edited to add: Around April 15 the auditions for TII was happening. So perhaps Thad and Jason was hoping for a background singer position.
 
Ivy, just for my own curiosity, could you tell me if the following scenario is possible?

Let's say the Jacksons family goes to the probate court and claims the songs to be included in the album are not authentic and thus ask the album to be cancelled. Will the judge ask all projects with Sony to be put on hold? Will Sony have ground to rescind the contract with the Estate because of probate court intervention?

I want to see what will the possible outcome be if the Jacksons did go to the probate court.
 
He wasn't clearly referring to that at all. Usually people generalise in that type of conversation or posting. He was generalising by saying 18 months as opposed to saying 16 months and however many days.
 
StellaJackson said:
He wasn't clearly referring to that at all. Usually people generalise in that type of conversation or posting. He was generalising by saying 18 months as opposed to saying 16 months and however many days.
Click to expand...

see what I added. April 2009 was the time that the auditions for TII was happening and being mentioned in the media. He clearly refers to that time period for TII auditions and not a time period after Michael's death.

I find it funny seeing the assumptions (such as generalization in this case) when the dates don't fit your scenarios. :)

Let's say the Jacksons family goes to the probate court and claims the songs to be included in the album are not authentic and thus ask the album to be cancelled. Will the judge ask all projects with Sony to be put on hold? Will Sony have ground to rescind the contract with the Estate because of probate court intervention?
Click to expand...

I would only expect a delay and not a "put on hold" and especially not for "all". For example any issue with the album would have nothing to do with the DVD releases. For example if they went to the court and made that argument I would have expect Estate back their position up with their authenticity research and get go ahead. It will probably would only bring a delay of 1-2 hearings , 1-2 months. The contract question cannot be answered without seeing the contract but unless they had set predetermined dates, I don't think so. Plus delays due to unforeseeable events (another party suing) wouldn't be Estate's error.
 
ivy said:
see what I added. April 2009 was the time that the auditions for TII was happening and being mentioned in the media. He clearly refers to that time period for TII auditions and not a time period after Michael's death.
Click to expand...

If they thought that Jason could have been hired to be in TII then they are even more stupid than we originally suspected.
 
ivy said:
I would only expect a delay and not a "put on hold" and especially not for "all". For example any issue with the album would have nothing to do with the DVD releases. For example if they went to the court and made that argument I would have expect Estate back their position up with their authenticity research and get go ahead. It will probably would only bring a delay of 1-2 hearings , 1-2 months. The contract question cannot be answered without seeing the contract but unless they had set predetermined dates, I don't think so. Plus delays due to unforeseeable events (another party suing) wouldn't be Estate's error.
Click to expand...

Thanks!

Then, why would the Jacksons not go to the probate court? I have no idea. You may not like what I'm about to say. People do not always find truth out from the justice system. I certainly do not expect "truth" be unveiled if legal action is brought in this case. Isn't the Casey Anthony case an example of how truth may never be unveiled by court of law? What truly happened to Caylee? We still do not have an answer.
 
Something new is coming soon.

I can feel it.

Maybe by page 1000.

Then the thread can be closed.


:lmao:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top