Michael - The Great Album Debate

@Bumper

There's a hugeeee difference between doing it knowingly and willingly and being duped. If the company is not knowing it then they are clearly not daring to do such a thing.

Let's give another example : Assume that you plan for a week, make arrangements, prepare and go shot someone - it's premeditated murder. Assume that someone breaks in your house and you shot that person - it's self defense. In this example both times the outcome would be you shooting a person but how and why and your culpability would be two hugely different things.

Let's give another example : Assume that you buy, hide and take a trip to transfer drugs between your country and another one, it would make you a drug smuggler. Assume that a friend of yours has given you a package asking you to deliver it to their relative during your trip, police stops you and they find drugs in the package. In both examples you would be transferring the drugs between two countries but while the first version that you knowingly and willingly did the smuggling would be criminal, but the second one when you had no idea of what you were doing would be a totally different situation, you would be a victim, a person being taken advantage of someone else in that situation.

Color me surprised. I would have thought that the the difference between knowing and willing and unknowing and unwilling would be clear and I wouldn't have need to type all of these. But I guess in the quest to disagree with me no matter what people lose their common sense. No biggie.

Milli Vanilli example is clear, You have one producer in the video era finding a nicer face that could dance , it's not the first time he did it, it's not the last time. He doesn't even want to fraud the masses, he just wants a local disco hit. He hides what he did from every officials by recording it secretly at 4 AM and /or by clever album credits. Companies releasing it without knowing if these people sang or not.

So sorry regardless of how many irrelevant videos or album covers you post ( I at least post the relevant album credits - not contracts or administrative papers) it's not going to change the fact that Milli Vanilli example doesn't include an evil record company that said "yess let's put these dancers so that we can fraud the people around the world and make money muhahahaha" , they didn't know, they weren't willing, they didn't dare to take a risk. So it cannot be used as an example for "see record companies do such things".

However Milli Vanilli case can be used to support Stella's theory that Sony could be duped to believe these are the legit vocals. None of these people were there when these songs were recorded, so they have no first hand idea about who sang it or not. Combine that with your theory of vocal analysis is not definitive and prone to errors and you have a nice strong example for making your case. Try focusing on that rather than wasting your time trying to disagree with me.
 
you're right. who has the guts to release demos where the singer doesn't mean to do something..or he mumbles...doesn't know what words to sing, and still sounds magnificent? That was Michael. It was like when he cried after Motown25 because he thought it wasn't good enough, and some boy came up to him and gushed about his dancing. Even if Michael tried, he couldn't screw up. His voice was just too strong for that. I remember the This Is It rehearsals, where he was weak, and whispering, and still, the entire choir behind him couldn't be heard, because of the power of his voice. They seemed so weak in comparison. I just about fainted when i witnessed that. A whisper from a sick weak man is greater than a whole bunch of someone elses' full professional healthy singing voices. I mean that's just crazy. I never heard of that, before.
I haven't watched TII much (many beautiful moments, but also confronting moments :( ). What song are you referring too? Want to enjoy that too :)
 
Haaa! :) I've been around , just had nothing to say really. Thanks for your warm words :)

Gee you finally admitted what I have known for a long time--you have nothing to say really. Sometimes it is good to own up to things. At one point I thought your kids took you to a spa in Arizona and left you there. I was thinking of sending the police to check out the place and see how you were doing. I am glad you have finally come forward with this public statement about having nothing to say. Now everything is back to normal in the thread.
 
@Bumper

There's a hugeeee difference between doing it knowingly and willingly and being duped. If the company is not knowing it then they are clearly not daring to do such a thing.

Let's give another example : Assume that you plan for a week, make arrangements, prepare and go shot someone - it's premeditated murder. Assume that someone breaks in your house and you shot that person - it's self defense. In this example both times the outcome would be you shooting a person but how and why and your culpability would be two hugely different things.

Let's give another example : Assume that you buy, hide and take a trip to transfer drugs between your country and another one, it would make you a drug smuggler. Assume that a friend of yours has given you a package asking you to deliver it to their relative during your trip, police stops you and they find drugs in the package. In both examples you would be transferring the drugs between two countries but while the first version that you knowingly and willingly did the smuggling would be criminal, but the second one when you had no idea of what you were doing would be a totally different situation, you would be a victim, a person being taken advantage of someone else in that situation.

Color me surprised. I would have thought that the the difference between knowing and willing and unknowing and unwilling would be clear and I wouldn't have need to type all of these. But I guess in the quest to disagree with me no matter what people lose their common sense. No biggie.

Milli Vanilli example is clear, You have one producer in the video era finding a nicer face that could dance , it's not the first time he did it, it's not the last time. He doesn't even want to fraud the masses, he just wants a local disco hit. He hides what he did from every officials by recording it secretly at 4 AM and /or by clever album credits. Companies releasing it without knowing if these people sang or not.

So sorry regardless of how many irrelevant videos or album covers you post ( I at least post the relevant album credits - not contracts or administrative papers) it's not going to change the fact that Milli Vanilli example doesn't include an evil record company that said "yess let's put these dancers so that we can fraud the people around the world and make money muhahahaha" , they didn't know, they weren't willing, they didn't dare to take a risk. So it cannot be used as an example for "see record companies do such things".

However Milli Vanilli case can be used to support Stella's theory that Sony could be duped to believe these are the legit vocals. None of these people were there when these songs were recorded, so they have no first hand idea about who sang it or not. Combine that with your theory of vocal analysis is not definitive and prone to errors and you have a nice strong example for making your case. Try focusing on that rather than wasting your time trying to disagree with me.


Gosh,

I don't know how to make myself clear. Um, nobody here is saying that what you say is wrong. But nobody here is focusing on the administration and a company that was duped.

The point is, no matter whether the company was duped or not, what matters is the fact that there clearly were false claims and presentation to the consumers that those two guys were the singers.

In other words, in our situation, nobody gives a damn if SONY or the Estate got duped. They anyway covered their asses and they always can claim that they got duped.

The point is that if someone manages to dupe others, no matter at which level (Eddie's, Teddy's, Sony's, Estate's,...) it is completely a possible scenario, yet many people are claiming inhere that nobody would take such risks as it would have implied that many people would be involved in sharing the secret.

Further on, the point is, if Eddie was the only one knowing the secret with a bunch of people, it is not an as impossible scenario as many tried to claim here.

They all washed their hands off by saying "we hired forensics, they say it's MJ" and that was it. If later somehow it's revealed that it is an impostor, well SONY or the Estate could always claim that they were duped just like the companies claimed they were duped with Milli Vanilli.

So, nobody actually cares about who or which company got duped, but what people really care about is the fact that there indeed was false claim that the voices belonged to those two guys and that such secret was shared by a bunch of people!

Back then nobody really knew their voices, so nobody complained. But in our case, the huge fanbase knows MJ's voice and they hear that something IS worng with those vocals. Yet again, the Estate and SONY wash their hands off by stubbornly saying "we hired forensics, they say it's MJ" without actually further investigating, without listening to the fan base and without holding back the release of the tracks until the problem gets solved.

The ultimate point is, neither the Estate nor SONY give impression that they actually care. I am backing my claim by seeing that they anyway released those tracks despite the huge protests and by seeing that they simply wash their hands off from any possible guilt thanks to the unnamed "forensics' analysis" which actually allows them to play the poor victim card if ever those tracks are revealed to be fake. It'll be extremely easy for them to say "we unfortunately got duped by Eddie and misinformed by the (unnamed) forensics, we are terribly sorry".
 
Last edited:
Gee you finally admitted what I have known for a long time--you have nothing to say really. Sometimes it is good to own up to things. At one point I thought your kids took you to a spa in Arizona and left you there. I was thinking of sending the police to check out the place and see how you were doing. I am glad you have finally come forward with this public statement about having nothing to say. Now everything is back to normal in the thread.

Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! :)
 
So, did we all agree to move onto the Fraud part of this debate, and drop the JM stuff? No matter who the singer is "thats endless debate". But we all agree there is fraud right?
 
@Bumper

if that's your "ultimate" point then refrain from claiming the "record company dared to do such a thing". Without knowledge they couldn't be daring anything, it's as simple as that. If I stand at the edge of a cliff and I jump that's daring. If you come behind me and push me, that's not me daring anything.

You have no evidence that Arista knew, or used loopholes to cover their asses in their quest to defraud the millions. to the contrary the vocal credit in US edition when the European versions didn't have such credit demonstrates that Arista didn't know a damn thing. If they did, they would have been smarter and continued the no /vague credit.

Also Arista weren't able to "wash their hands" even though they didn't know and never accepted any responsibility. They faced over 25 lawsuits and had to agree to refund the album and concert monies to anyone requested. So the example also shows that no contract, administrative papers or "we didn't know" protects companies. If and when such fraud is uncovered, the companies are required to refund the money at least. Arista could not play the "victim card" even though they didn't know. While Frank Farian was fined around half a million for the scheme he created , Arista's refund plan was around $25 Million. So one can even argue that such event was more financially harmful to the record company then the mastermind and the imposter.
 
Gosh,

I don't know how to make myself clear. Um, nobody here is saying that what you say is wrong. But nobody here is focusing on the administration and a company that was duped.

The point is, no matter whether the company was duped or not, what matters is the fact that there clearly were false claims and presentation to the consumers that those two guys were the singers.

In other words, in our situation, nobody gives a damn if SONY or the Estate got duped. They anyway covered their asses and they always can claim that they got duped.

The point is that if someone manages to dupe others, no matter at which level (Eddie's, Teddy's, Sony's, Estate's,...) it is completely a possible scenario, yet many people are claiming inhere that nobody would take such risks as it would have implied that many people would be involved in sharing the secret.

Further on, the point is, if Eddie was the only one knowing the secret with a bunch of people, it is not an as impossible scenario as many tried to claim here.

They all washed their hands off by saying "we hired forensics, they say it's MJ" and that was it. If later somehow it's revealed that it is an impostor, well SONY or the Estate could always claim that they were duped just like the companies claimed they were duped with Milli Vanilli.

So, nobody actually cares about who or which company got duped, but what people really care about is the fact that there indeed was false claim that the voices belonged to those two guys and that such secret was shared by a bunch of people!

Back then nobody really knew their voices, so nobody complained. But in our case, the huge fanbase knows MJ's voice and they hear that something IS worng with those vocals. Yet again, the Estate and SONY wash their hands off by stubbornly saying "we hired forensics, they say it's MJ" without actually further investigating, without listening to the fan base and without holding back the release of the tracks until the problem gets solved.

The ultimate point is, neither the Estate nor SONY give impression that they actually care. I am backing my claim by seeing that they anyway released those tracks despite the huge protests and by seeing that they simply wash their hands off from any possible guilt thanks to the unnamed "forensics' analysis" which actually allows them to play the poor victim card if ever those tracks are revealed to be fake. It'll be extremely easy for them to say "we unfortunately got duped by Eddie and misinformed by the (unnamed) forensics, we are terribly sorry".

This is something I've been sort of saying all along. Sony aren't to blame for the creation of the songs and there is no evidence to suggest they had any involvement. They always have the get out clause of "we got duped". I'm sure people had doubts or suspicions and turned a blind eye, but that isn't a crime. The focus should be on Eddie Cascio and James Porte. They were the only ones there. They are the first hand witnesses and they have all the answers. James Porte had no problem being interviewed about working with Boys 2 Men but he works on an entire album with the worlds greatest singer and refuses to talk about it? With all those songs there must be lots of stories from the sessions, recordings of Michael talking in between takes etc. Just what are they hiding? I should think the answer to that is obvious.
 
@Bumper

if that's your "ultimate" point then refrain from claiming the "record company dared to do such a thing".

Where did I say "the record company"? I referred to the company which hired Rob and Fab who made them sign the contract and made them shut up.

Without knowledge they couldn't be daring anything, it's as simple as that. If I stand at the edge of a cliff and I jump that's daring. If you come behind me and push me, that's not me daring anything.

Again, I was not referring to the record company. However, in our case the record company (SONY) did hear our protests, yet they didn't care.

You have no evidence that Arista knew, or used loopholes to cover their asses in their quest to defraud the millions. to the contrary the vocal credit in US edition when the European versions didn't have such credit demonstrates that Arista didn't know a damn thing. If they did, they would have been smarter and continued the no /vague credit.

When the hell did I say that? I said nobody said what you were saying was wrong. I said that nobody cared whether they knew it or not, but that the fact was:

1) the consumer was duped
2) the fraud was organized
3) the secret between Rob&Fabd and those who hired them and made them sign the contract was kept (untill the incident)

That was the point. All the rest is blahblah about who duped who. Who cares.

Also Arista weren't able to "wash their hands" even though they didn't know and never accepted any responsibility. They faced over 25 lawsuits and had to agree to refund the album and concert monies to anyone requested. So the example also shows that no contract, administrative papers or "we didn't know" protects companies. If and when such fraud is uncovered, the companies are required to refund the money at least. Arista could not play the "victim card" even though they didn't know. While Frank Farian was fined around half a million for the scheme he created , Arista's refund plan was around $25 Million. So one can even argue that such event was more financially harmful to the record company then the mastermind and the imposter.

Who's talking about Arista anyway? I said, that the main focus was on the fact that fraud CAN exist, that the secret CAN be kept among more than two people in the music industry and in Teddy Riley's words "sky's the limit", especially nowdays. Now who's responsible that's none of our business at the moment. The most urgent and important thing is to prevent such things by requesting from SONY and Estate to hold back such ambisuous releases. The fact also remains that we haven't received a single satisfactory or relieving piece of information from neither Estate or SONY. If you can live with it, fine. But I can't. Only the day they show me tangible things, then I'll give them credit.
 
you guys....this doesnt sound friendly


anddd

@Bumper

if that's your "ultimate" point then refrain from claiming the "record company dared to do such a thing". Without knowledge they couldn't be daring anything, it's as simple as that. If I stand at the edge of a cliff and I jump that's daring. If you come behind me and push me, that's not me daring anything.

You have no evidence that Arista knew, or used loopholes to cover their asses in their quest to defraud the millions. to the contrary the vocal credit in US edition when the European versions didn't have such credit demonstrates that Arista didn't know a damn thing. If they did, they would have been smarter and continued the no /vague credit.

Also Arista weren't able to "wash their hands" even though they didn't know and never accepted any responsibility. They faced over 25 lawsuits and had to agree to refund the album and concert monies to anyone requested. So the example also shows that no contract, administrative papers or "we didn't know" protects companies. If and when such fraud is uncovered, the companies are required to refund the money at least. Arista could not play the "victim card" even though they didn't know. While Frank Farian was fined around half a million for the scheme he created , Arista's refund plan was around $25 Million. So one can even argue that such event was more financially harmful to the record company then the mastermind and the imposter.


This is cool Ivy. So with this that means Sony is still reliable for what Eddie and James may have done? Should the Cascio tracks be fake
 
@Bumper

then perhaps you should read better when you decide to join to a conversation. The post that prompted my response was this


I only brought up Millli Vanilli as an example for those who like to say a record company would never do something like or similar to what some believe happen with the Cascio tracks because it's to risky. But, the past show that yea they could if they wanted too and one actually did.


so yeah the discussion was about a record company doing it in the past and be able to do it again.

It's also kinda wrong to refer to Frank Farian's production entity "Far Music Production" as a real company, because it's not really a company such as Jab Me Music, Angelikson or Ghost Manor. Regardless of the name of " Far Music Production" it's still one person - Frank Farian.

that the secret CAN be kept among more than two people in the music industry

Well in Milli Vanilli case just days after the "Girl You know it's true" became a hit the guy who was paid $7500 to rap on it went to the media saying he sang on the record. So the secret wasn't really kept in that instance.
 
This is something I've been sort of saying all along. Sony aren't to blame for the creation of the songs and there is no evidence to suggest they had any involvement. They always have the get out clause of "we got duped". I'm sure people had doubts or suspicions and turned a blind eye, but that isn't a crime.

For some reason when I say the same thing as you it still receives objections :) I don't know why.

This is cool Ivy. So with this that means Sony is still reliable for what Eddie and James may have done? Should the Cascio tracks be fake

I don't think there's a "get out clause" or "wash their hands" just because they could be duped. They are still the distributors of the product (just as Arista) and would be required to give refunds to anyone that wanted it. They might not face more serious consequences if they were an unsuspecting party in this but regardless they can't really get out of refunding the purchase price. In other words they might not be held responsible for "fraud" but held responsible in regards to "refund obligations".
 
@Bumper

then perhaps you should read better when you decide to join to a conversation. The post that prompted my response was this

Oh, sorry for shifting to the core point instead of playing with words and administrative issues between parties.





so yeah the discussion was about a record company doing it in the past and be able to do it again.

Shame on me. I should be damned for daring going to the relevant point with the Cascio debate.

It's also kinda wrong to refer to Frank Farian's production entity "Far Music Production" as a real company, because it's not really a company such as Jab Me Music, Angelikson or Ghost Manor. Regardless of the name of " Far Music Production" it's still one person - Frank Farian.

Shame, shame on me for calling his "entity" a company. How stupid I am.



Well in Milli Vanilli case just days after the "Girl You know it's true" became a hit the guy who was paid $7500 to rap on it went to the media saying he sang on the record. So the secret wasn't really kept in that instance.

Well he obviosuly wasn't paid enough.

p.s. And again, the discussion gets shifted away from the core issue.
 
ivy;3696579 said:
@Bumper

then perhaps you should read better when you decide to join to a conversation.

Just a little reminder that the Milli Vanilli topic was started much longer ago by me in this very thread (bluetopez re-ignited the subject by asking if anyone had already talked about Milli Vanilli case), and i went on further by giving another example of fraud in the music industry. Here's is this little reminder:

Plastic Bertrand


Biography


[edit]Early life and bands

[...]
[edit]As Plastic Bertrand

[...]
[edit]Comeback

[...]
Legal issues


In 2010, an expert appointed by a court stated that the voice of Lou Deprijck, the composer/producer of "Ça plane pour moi," on a record from 2006 is the same voice as on the original 1977 recording. "Today it appears from the report of the experts that the voice of 'Ça plane pour moi' is Lou Deprijck's voice," stated the newspaper La Dernière Heure on Monday, 26 July 2010. Plastic Bertrand previously disputed the allegation, but on 28 July 2010 the singer finally revealed that he is indeed not the singer of any of the songs in the first four albums released under the name Plastic Bertrand.[SUP][2][/SUP][SUP][3][/SUP]
[edit]Discography

[edit]Albums


[edit]Singles


  • 1975 "New Promotion/You'll Be The One"
  • 1977 "Ça plane pour moi/Pogo Pogo"
  • 1978 "Bambino/Le Petit Tortillard"
  • 1978 "Super Cool/Affection"
  • 1978 "Sha La La La Lee/Naif Song"
  • 1978 "Tout petit la planète/C'est le Rock'N'Roll"
  • 1979 "Tout petit la planète /J'te fais un plan/Hit 87"
  • 1979 "Sentimentale moi/Quais Quais Quais Quais"
  • 1979 "Sentimental me/Sentimentale moi"
  • 1979 "Le Monde est merveilleux/ J'te fais un plan "
  • 1979 "Sans Amour/Plastic Boy"
  • 1979 "Téléphone à téléphone mon bijou/Stop ou encore"
  • 1980 "Téléphone à téléphone mon bijou /Kangourou Kangourou"
  • 1980 "Hula Hoop/Amoureux fou de toi"
  • 1981 "Jaques Cousteau/Paradis"
  • 1981 "La Star à pécole/Baby Doll/Coeur D'acier"
  • 1982 "L'amour Ok/New York/Coeur d'acier/Stop ou encore"
  • 1982 "Ping Pong/Coeur D'Acier"
  • 1982 "Duo Avec Nathalie"
  • 1983 "Arret d'autobus/Mon Nez, mon nez"
  • 1983 "Chat/Fou des Fifties"
  • 1983 "Major Tom/Miss Italie"
  • 1983 "Gueule d'amour/Down Town"
  • 1985 "Astérix est Là/Le Secret du druide
  • 1986 "Je l'jure/La Fille du premier rang"
  • 1986 "Let's Slow Again/Toujours plus haut"
  • 1987 "Amour, Amour"
  • 1988 "Démente a la menthe"
  • 1989 "Slave To The Beat/Plastiiic Acid Mix"
  • 1990 "Sex Tabou"
  • 1991 "House Machine/Club Control feat. Plastic Bertrand"
  • 1994 "Les Joueurs de Tchik Tchik"
  • 2002 "Play Boy/Canape"
  • 2003 "Plastcubration/Tous, Touchez-vous"
  • 2005 "Machine/Remixes"
 
Last edited:
It's hard to believe that Artista didn't know about it and just got duped? Especially when the albums were already out in europe. o_O

But anyways how ignorant of record companies if this is how they operate and don't pay attention to what those working for them are doing?! However Sony was warned long before and hired their own experts so the "duping" theory can't be used on them.
 
Ivy, thanks for the official documents, but I don't think that anyone contested nor talked about the administrative papers.

Now read again what has been said in this thread for a zillionth time regarding Milli Vanilli. The argument stands:

Some people used the argument that no company would ever take any risks to use fake singers and claim that vocals belong to them when in reality the vocals belong to others. In other words, what's on the paper nobody really cares because what's on the paper is NOT the issue. The issue is presenting to people two guys and falsly claiming that the vocals we hear belong to them. Now I don't know why you are even twisting somehting that is crystal clear. The vocals do not belong to those two guys, which means that the company DID dare to falsly claim what should have never been claimed in the first place.


Now, don't you see what others are trying to say? If company can cover their asses with a bunch of papers and falsly claim something, then they do it. The administrative papers and the contracts may be ambiguous, but the two guys presented as singers (who actually aren't) are unambiguously presented as if the vocals belonged to them and to no one else. I don't know why is it so complicated to understand. By extention, people say that if it was done once, it could be done twice, three times and many other times as long as the companies are administratively covered and ultimately as long as they can generate huge profits.

I don't know why you need to go to great extents such as posting contracts and administration to simply "correct people" when actually nobody is denying those papers. Why turning the blind eye on what the people are really trying to say here?

The case is simple, we have videos showing us two guys to whom the vocals don't belong, yet unambiguosly presented as if the vocals do belong to them on the cover of their album, in their music videos and even during live performances. So companies do dare such things. Period.



[youtube]sZG-VvlErJY[/youtube]

[youtube]sjcsgROJ83c[/youtube]

[youtube]QrTpPbD6VoQ[/youtube]

[youtube]ReklDIQS-n8[/youtube]

[youtube]NwrL9MV6jSk[/youtube]

[youtube]ds_APrR4pz0[/youtube]
images

milli-vanilli-eilcom.jpg
images
images

No, doubt, Bumper. People think that big companies would never take risks to snow people for big money because they have much to lose. There are big companies that love money and when you love money, fear,care and intelligence go out the window. People will repeat history, just because they can, and they are too desperate to worry about the consequences, even if they saw another company fail at it. The notion is...'it can't happen to me'. And for me to think that a company can't know what's going on in their quarters is me thinking that snow is dry. Companies know when a gnat is crawling on their padded locks. They know when unsolicited material is entering their doors, and they always throw it away. They know when they are snowjobbing people.
 
It's hard to believe that Artista didn't know about it and just got duped? Especially when the albums were already out in europe. o_O

But anyways how ignorant of record companies if this is how they operate and don't pay attention to what those working for them are doing?! However Sony was warned long before and hired their own experts so the "duping" theory can't be used on them.

Well, sadly it can. They can always say that forensics assured them it was Michael. So if one day it is revealed otherwise they can always play that forensics' analysis card.
 
It's hard to believe that Artista didn't know about it and just got duped? Especially when the albums were already out in europe. o_O

But anyways how ignorant of record companies if this is how they operate and don't pay attention to what those working for them are doing?!

Well you need to account for the differences between countries. From the moment Milli Vanilli songs were released they were suspicion that they didn't sing. They had these heavy German accents when speaking and none while singing. Some said perhaps they were working to perfect their pronunciation for the recording. Plus in Europe it really didn't matter that much. There had been other lip syncing groups (Boney M , Technotronics, Black Box) , it didn't matter.

Arista who saw the success of Milli Vanilli wanted to release their albums in USA, they got the rights, unknowingly and unsuspectingly assumed that they are singing , gave them the vocals credit, sold millions of albums and then woke up to a scandal. Well probably they realized something wasn't right as the time went on but I think they didn't have a clue when they put "vocals : rob &fab" on the album insert.

As for the record companies I don't think attending to recording sessions is a habit of them and in this instance they were just getting the US distribution rights.


However Sony was warned long before and hired their own experts so the "duping" theory can't be used on them.

Well, sadly it can. They can always say that forensics assured them it was Michael. So if one day it is revealed otherwise they can always play that forensics' analysis card.

see I was waiting for the forensics discussion to start so yay.

the discussion up to this point has been "would big companies do such thing?" (emphasis added on big) some say yes, some say no. I'm saying Arista / Milli Vanilli can't be used as an example for "yes" as they didn't know.

The question then becomes a matter of profit versus risk. How much risk is there , how much profit is there and is it worth to take the risk for it. Arista example demonstrates that the big companies - in our example Sony / MJ Estate - has a lot more to use financially than the producer or the imposter. Like Stella said it's a lot more reasonable to believe that Sony believed the word of a 25 year friend of Michael and most probably Sony wouldn't like to strain their already weak relationship with MJ fans by angering them more.

From Estate standpoint it's even a lot more clearer. You got 2 men who are getting 10% of everything they bring in - which averages to $4 Million a year for each of them currently. You have a family that wants to remove them from their position for 3 years, you have an audit request. You have the fact that only a mishandling of the Estate can remove them from their positions. So you see that these people have no motivation to be a part of such thing. To the contrary they have all the reason in the world to stay as far away as anything that can make them lose their $4 Million a year job.

So like Stella theorizes it's a lot more reasonable to think that Sony and MJ Estate or at least MJ Estate had no involvement / no knowledge of this alleged fraud.

Now it brings us to the forensics. If you think they had no knowledge / no involvement then there's no reason to suspect the legitimacy of the forensic experts. If you believe for example Executors would not want to lose their jobs then you can be assured that they would have brought in the best expert for a legitimate analysis.

Then you are given the information that the experts have determined it's Michael. so you are left with 3 possibilities

- it's really Michael

- the imposter is good enough to fool that it's Michael - every expert would also come to it's Michael conclusion

- it's inconclusive - even though some might say Michael and some say not Michael, it could never be determined for certain

Note: I'm confused about what kind of penalty you expect that you think that they can get out of it. They are the distributor and they cannot be able to get out of customer reimbursement - in other words refunds regardless of their involvement / knowledge - just like Arista.
 
Well you need to account for the differences between countries. From the moment Milli Vanilli songs were released they were suspicion that they didn't sing. They had these heavy German accents when speaking and none while singing. Some said perhaps they were working to perfect their pronunciation for the recording. Plus in Europe it really didn't matter that much. There had been other lip syncing groups (Boney M , Technotronics, Black Box) , it didn't matter.

Arista who saw the success of Milli Vanilli wanted to release their albums in USA, they got the rights, unknowingly and unsuspectingly assumed that they are singing , gave them the vocals credit, sold millions of albums and then woke up to a scandal. Well probably they realized something wasn't right as the time went on but I think they didn't have a clue when they put "vocals : rob &fab" on the album insert.

As for the record companies I don't think attending to recording sessions is a habit of them and in this instance they were just getting the US distribution rights.






see I was waiting for the forensics discussion to start so yay.

the discussion up to this point has been "would big companies do such thing?" (emphasis added on big) some say yes, some say no. I'm saying Arista / Milli Vanilli can't be used as an example for "yes" as they didn't know.

The question then becomes a matter of profit versus risk. How much risk is there , how much profit is there and is it worth to take the risk for it. Arista example demonstrates that the big companies - in our example Sony / MJ Estate - has a lot more to use financially than the producer or the imposter. Like Stella said it's a lot more reasonable to believe that Sony believed the word of a 25 year friend of Michael and most probably Sony wouldn't like to strain their already weak relationship with MJ fans by angering them more.

From Estate standpoint it's even a lot more clearer. You got 2 men who are getting 10% of everything they bring in - which averages to $4 Million a year for each of them currently. You have a family that wants to remove them from their position for 3 years, you have an audit request. You have the fact that only a mishandling of the Estate can remove them from their positions. So you see that these people have no motivation to be a part of such thing. To the contrary they have all the reason in the world to stay as far away as anything that can make them lose their $4 Million a year job.

So like Stella theorizes it's a lot more reasonable to think that Sony and MJ Estate or at least MJ Estate had no involvement / no knowledge of this alleged fraud.

Now it brings us to the forensics. If you think they had no knowledge / no involvement then there's no reason to suspect the legitimacy of the forensic experts. If you believe for example Executors would not want to lose their jobs then you can be assured that they would have brought in the best expert for a legitimate analysis.

Then you are given the information that the experts have determined it's Michael. so you are left with 3 possibilities

- it's really Michael

- the imposter is good enough to fool that it's Michael - every expert would also come to it's Michael conclusion

- it's inconclusive - even though some might say Michael and some say not Michael, it could never be determined for certain

Note: I'm confused about what kind of penalty you expect that you think that they can get out of it. They are the distributor and they cannot be able to get out of customer reimbursement - in other words refunds regardless of their involvement / knowledge - just like Arista.
monitor_out_window.jpg
 
So if its not MIchael, there is now reason the Executors can be kicked from their job :eek:

only if they knew

the trust document says Executors cannot be held responsible for the mistakes that happen during "good faith" actions.

If we assume that there's a fraud

- if they knew, they participated in it for whatever reason / motivation, they hid the truth etc, yes they can be removed from executor position
- if they didn't know, hired a legit expert that said it's Michael etc, in other words they had "good faith" - believed the songs to be legit and didn't have the "bad" intentions of fraud, deception and such, they won't be seen responsible for the mistake

this reality demonstrates that it's highly unlikely that the executors would participate in such alleged fraud knowingly and willingly and it would also make it highly likely that they had a legit investigation into the song authenticity - assuming that they want to keep their Executor position which comes with $4 Million a year salary

so if we conclude that they genuinely thought the songs to be Michael and that you still believe the songs not to be Michael for certain, then you are dealing with a fake that's good enough to fool every test and every expert or at least give inconclusive results which cannot be proven or debunked either way.

edited to add: this also shows that Jacksons have nothing to prove the alleged song fraud. As we have seen how hell bent they are to remove Executors, if they had anything that showed mishandling of the Estate they would have ran to the court with that rather than sending letters with empty threats of trying to challenge the will 3 years too late.
 
only if they knew

the trust document says Executors cannot be held responsible for the mistakes that happen during "good faith" actions.

If we assume that there's a fraud

- if they knew, they participated in it for whatever reason / motivation, yes they can be removed from executor position
- if they didn't knew, hired a legit expert that said it's Michael etc, in other words they had "good faith" - believed the songs to be legit and didn't have the "bad" intentions of fraud and such, they won't be seen responsible for the mistake

but this reality demonstrates that it's highly unlikely that the executors would participate in such alleged fraud knowingly and willingly and it would also make it highly likely that they had a legit investigation into the song authenticity - assuming that they want to keep their Executor position which comes with $4 Million a year salary

so if we conclude that they genuinely thought the songs to be Michael and that you still believe the songs not to be Michael for certain, then you are dealing with a fake that's good enough to fool every test and every expert or at least give inconclusive results which cannot be proven or debunked either way.

Every?

Name one single test that has been done and one single expert that took part in the analysis. Where's that official analysis report?
 

I know that there's been one Sony expert and one Estate expert.

I meant that if this goes to court to remove Executors for the alleged fraud and if they argued "look we didn't know , our expert said those are legit songs", the action would be to hire other experts to test the songs. And those independent / court appointed / paid by the other side experts could also come back with "It's Michael" result.

Which would make every party in this event to walk away free and innocent. That would either mean it's really Michael on the songs or that the fake is good enough to fool every expert or test to come up with "It's Michael" determination.

Note: it could also come "not michael" - resulting in removal of Executors or as inconclusive - not able to prove one way or another.


Name one single test that has been done and one single expert that took part in the analysis. Where's that official analysis report?

After the latest coup against the Executors that I'm 100% sure that they didn't and they won't be showing their hand. I do understand that you as a fan want the transparency and the information but the Executors are dealing with complex dynamics and they wouldn't be going around making stuff public. In other words they would be holding to the expert reports until if and when they are challenged in a court of law - where it matters.

Edited to add : I know you have the idea of "We didn't see it so it didn't happen" in regards to forensic experts. However I have the opinion of "the only way to walk away from this not affected is if they believe the songs to be legit and have something that can back up this belief - the expert reports". So I believe the expert reports are real and legit. This is strengthened by the fact that the Jacksons did not challenge the Executors in this regard or used it to try to remove them.
 
I know that there's been one Sony expert and one Estate expert.

You know? How do you know? Did you see any experts or did you read any of their analysis?

I meant that if this goes to court to remove Executors for the alleged fraud and if they argued "look we didn't know , our expert said those are legit songs", the action would be to hire other experts to test the songs.

Which is exactly what I have been saying - "the forensic analysis card" and "I didn't know card", but when it comes to the fans division because of their release, they don't give a damn.

And those independent / court appointed / paid by the other side experts would also come back with "It's Michael" result.

That's something you can't vouch for. Maybe some experts would come up with different results.

Which would make every party in this event to walk away free and innocent. That would either mean it's really Michael on the songs or that the fake is good enough to fool every expert or test to come up with "It's Michael" determination.

This is invalid because we can't speculate on something that we don't know. We don't know:

-who are those experts / were there any ?
-what did they analyse (copy pasted material/voice?)
-how they proceeded? (what was the thing that gave them the assurance that it is 100% Michael?)
-did they go for the scientific approach i.e. did they compare with soundalikes in order to eliminate the slightest doubt, or did they do the strict minimum (which wouldn't be very scientifical, thus invalid)?
-how well do those forensics actually know MJ's voice besides using different tools?
-etc, etc.



After the latest coup against the Executors that I'm 100% sure that they didn't and they won't be showing their hand. I do understand that you as a fan want the transparency and the information but the Executors are dealing with complex dynamics and they wouldn't be going around making stuff public.

What a lame excuse!!!! (not your words, but the Estate's reasons for not releasing the analysis!)

Showing their hand? What are you talking about? What harm can it do to show it's MJ on those tracks anyway? How can you even defend something which goes completely against Michael Jackson's interest to show the world that it is MJ's voice on thsoe tracks? It's all benefit for them! When you have something 100% authentic, you just show it. When it comes to release the proof regarding the voice issue it is not as complex as you are relentlessly trying to portray. They clearly are hiding it from the public eye because they are afraid of something.
 
Last edited:
It's my understanding that the extent of the the investigation from Sony and the Estate consisted of the following:

- two phone calls from John Branca to Thad Nauden to ask if his client was involved with the recordings.
- a phone call from John Doelp at Sony to ask him the same thing
- a listening session with various people who had previously worked with Michael. Opinion was split. Some said it was, some said it wasn't and some weren't sure. The only consensus was that there were certain Mj trademarks that were mysteriously absent from the recordings? Only those who said they believed it was Michael had their name added to the statement from Wetzemann.
- the opinion of two musicologists, which in itself proves that Eddie has no conclusive proof. These tests were not infallible and are open to interpretation.

Also it is important to be aware that the statement was written as a result of a crisis meeting on November 9th in Miami, the day after Breaking News streamed. Before then, there had been no mention of any tests at all yet they suddenly ended up claiming on the statement that these tests had happened. Also. I don't think Jason Malachi's own recordings played any part in the tests. They did not compare the Cascio tracks to him.

Remember, when the proverbial hit the fan behind the scenes, these songs had already been bought and paid for. Sony had a vested interest in adding 12 contemporary Mj songs to their catalogue for obvious reasons.
 
Last edited:
Lame excuse indeed...They had 2 years to show their hand as fans desperately begged for it.
 
Back
Top