The Hoax Theory - Discussing Errors, Inconsistencies, Observations and Other Theories

mysterygirl7

Proud Member
Joined
May 3, 2004
Messages
1,879
Points
48
Location
over the rainbow...
Why the urgency?



Exactly my thoughts.



Yes, agreed. I'm sure it's repugnant to many.

Why don't you get this closed up, and locked down, if you have a problem with my question. I think people on here, have become really mean lately... we have always been allowed to discuss this topic. You are a moderator, you should be open-minded. Why don't you ask Gaz, why this topic is here in the first place, instead of attacking me.
 

Anna

Free As A Bird
Joined
Mar 22, 2009
Messages
6,696
Points
63
Why don't you get this closed up, and locked down, if you have a problem with my question. I think people on here, have become really mean lately... we have always been allowed to discuss this topic. You are a moderator, you should be open-minded. Why don't you ask Gaz, why this topic is here in the first place, instead of attacking me.

No one is attacking you. Gaz wants it open, so it will stay open. But moderators are still allowed to express their feelings about topics like this.
 

NatureCriminal7896

Proud Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2019
Messages
10,309
Points
0
Why don't you get this closed up, and locked down, if you have a problem with my question. I think people on here, have become really mean lately... we have always been allowed to discuss this topic. You are a moderator, you should be open-minded. Why don't you ask Gaz, why this topic is here in the first place, instead of attacking me.

I been gone for a week so i'm catching up on things I miss on here. but I do agree that people has been awful mean and rude lately as usual. if we not fighting about ablum we fighting about the estate.

I agree we all need to voice our opinions but I also think it a way to voice your opinion a kind respectful way. I believe some of us don't get out much due to 19 which is understandable or just having a bad day.

I don't think your question was bad. in my opinion I do feel some threads need to be remove from the site. like very old threads with not much going on with it. but the rules here it up to the owner to decide what stay and goes.

my advice is try to be more careful what you post and comment on. none of us are prefect here. also try to stay away toxic and heated topics like theses.
 

mysterygirl7

Proud Member
Joined
May 3, 2004
Messages
1,879
Points
48
Location
over the rainbow...
I been gone for a week so i'm catching up on things I miss on here. but I do agree that people has been awful mean and rude lately as usual. if we not fighting about ablum we fighting about the estate.

I agree we all need to voice our opinions but I also think it a way to voice your opinion a kind respectful way. I believe some of us don't get out much due to 19 which is understandable or just having a bad day.

I don't think your question was bad. in my opinion I do feel some threads need to be remove from the site. like very old threads with not much going on with it. but the rules here it up to the owner to decide what stay and goes.

my advice is try to be more careful what you post and comment on. none of us are prefect here. also try to stay away toxic and heated topics like theses.

More CAREFUL??? I'm useally the most careful... to the point, where everything I post is boring! So if I have to be more careful than that, then I might as well better leave. Thanks anyway.
 

Mikky Dee

Sunset Driver, Midnight Rider
Joined
Mar 8, 2016
Messages
2,993
Points
63
Why don't you ask Gaz, why this topic is here in the first place, instead of attacking me.

There is nothing in my post that is an attack of any kind. I merely asked what the sudden urgency is, this year. You resurrected an old thread to ask your question in February and when there was zero interest in it, you asked it again now, in June. And being a moderator shouldn't mean that I have to be completely devoid of my own opinions or feelings on various topics - I am a member on MJJC as well, so I'm not always "working". Anna provided an answer to your question, by the way and as I previously posted, I agree with her response.
 

NatureCriminal7896

Proud Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2019
Messages
10,309
Points
0
More CAREFUL??? I'm useally the most careful... to the point, where everything I post is boring! So if I have to be more careful than that, then I might as well better leave. Thanks anyway.

sorry I don't make the rules. this is the internet you know. people can say what they want. if you don't like it my advice is to stay away from some topics. anyway have a good day.

I don't think question was wrong though. you was only asking a question. anyways *shrugs*
 

Yazman

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
572
Points
0
Location
Australia
I'm not a believer in the death hoax idea but man, if you don't like it, don't post in here. I just came in here to see what people were saying and it's pages of people running it down and calling people crazy. Like, if you don't like it, just don't go in here. It's not hard.
 

SoS

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
4,096
Points
63
Well this thread is here for a reason? Mods undermine Gaz decision for a discussion thread and complete and lively discussions can’t peacefully happen because of people who reserve the right to derail it with judgement over and over again?

It says “observations “ and “inconsistencies” and every fan ought to be allowed, encouraged even, to analyze together in peace.

Do moderators already happen to know why Liberian Girl theme was chosen? Is that an offensive question to ask in an “observation” thread?

It’s far enough into the board that a person would have to go out of their way to hunt and click a few times to come in here just to offer their overly critical statements of THE OBVIOUS.

“He’s dead let him go”. GENIUS. How many times do deeper thinkers have to keep hearing that?

Sorry to be rude in kind - it’s just frustrating not to be able to enjoy a peaceful discussion on a discussion board where people try and some stimulated thought from a simple question. Please let people think (out loud) in peace.

WERE there really toys in the courtroom or were they photoshopped?

Speaking of photoshop... why did Brian Oxman remark that that browner-skinned pic of MJ which to many of us looked to be from the 80s, was photoshopped? Why was so much of the memorial and funeral not themed for more current MJ?

Any theories? Thanks
 
Last edited:

Anna

Free As A Bird
Joined
Mar 22, 2009
Messages
6,696
Points
63
SoS;4299465 said:
Well this thread is here for a reason? Mods undermine Gaz decision for a discussion thread and complete and lively discussions can’t peacefully happen because of people who reserve the right to derail it with judgement over and over again?

It says “observations “ and “inconsistencies” and every fan ought to be allowed, encouraged even, to analyze together in peace.

We are not undermining Gaz. Gaz doesn't want to censor this kind of discussion, but that also means not censoring the people who object to this kind of discussion. This thread is abhorrent to a lot of the members here, so if you choose to participate that is something you just have to accept.
 

Mikky Dee

Sunset Driver, Midnight Rider
Joined
Mar 8, 2016
Messages
2,993
Points
63
We are not undermining Gaz. Gaz doesn't want to censor this kind of discussion, but that also means not censoring the people who object to this kind of discussion. This thread is abhorrent to a lot of the members here, so if you choose to participate that is something you just have to accept.

Thank you, Anna.....and speaking from the point of view of BOTH a member and a co-moderator, I completely agree.

Free and uncensored discussion is exactly that. We accept all points of view and everyone has the right to express their opinions in any of our threads, as long as they are respectful towards others. The fact that certain discussion topics are allowed on the forum certainly does not mean that only one side of that discussion can be tolerated. That is counter to the idea of open discourse and debate.

Finally, accusing staff of undermining Gaz is a form of dissent and it's also offensive. All staff convene with each other and speak regularly behind the scenes, about how the forum is being run. We check with each other and make sure that what we are saying and doing, both as individuals and as part of a team, is above reproach.
 

SoS

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
4,096
Points
63
You might consider that the first word in this thread title is “Hoax” which is an offensive concept, repugnant to many to be sure. It is old from 2009 when all this speculation first began and seems to elicit the biggest “knee jerk” responses...what MJ wouldn’t do to his: children, family fans etc.

To be clear ...please read my sentence again in context.....my POINT was in stating that you undermine the decision for the thread to be here when you allow or interject derailing comments..,.else why is this thread here if the TOPIC can’t be freely engaged? Continuously negative feedback about the thread’s existence imho undermines its presence. Yes everyone has free speech without exception, including negative, it’s just this thread that gets it the most gratuitously in my opinion.

Eg,

After 4 months of “crickets” since February someone repeats the question in June and then is asked, what’s the “urgency”..

All I am asking is that you guyz try and make the thread more functional for such a sensitive discussion...it’s already tough enough.

That’s my feedback and my opinion.

Another is about “alleged”

al·leged
/əˈlejd/
Learn to pronounce
adjective
(of an incident or a person) said, without proof, to have taken place or to have a specified illegal or undesirable quality.

I would go with the theory that minus a verdict it is all “alleged” until this defendant is found guilty or not,

however..

It seems to me the question of “alleged victim” asks, is there proof there is a victim...clearly the question answers itself by it being a murder trial plus the autopsy pics in evidence so it is evident and obvious fact that there is a victim, so nothing is “without proof” as far as that ....the only next question then is in the victim”s identity.

How can the date be an “allegation” when we all watched it unfold on the exact date? The date is not on trial. - the person is - the date is not “alleged” at all...we were there.

At the time of the rendering of the verdict there was no “alleged” victim or date - those were facts that created the case in the first place.

It is an oddity to be sure. Similarly the 911 call:

“Ok let’s get him on the floor”

“Oh ok then, you have a doctor there who has more authority than I do”

At what point did the 911 operator say, “I just gave a doctor with more authority than me, instructions on how to administer CPR for a patient who is most likely dying seeing as how they’re not breathing”....

..maybe alert his immediate reports and/or higher authorities that someone’s life is in peril under the care of a doctor that does not know CPR

If you or I (or any reasonable prudent person) got on a call with a patient who’s not breathing and a doctor that does not know CPR we would not sit there calmly saying to call back if you need anything else.

We would at the very least stay on the call and probably proceed to help the doctor make sure CPR is being administered correctly enough to help the victim. Doctor could have been drunk for all the 911 operator knows.

Questions like these and many others deserve concentration and respectful dialogue and careful analysis...this of all places should be the safest most engaging place to do it imo.

JMHO Thanks
 
Last edited:

Mikky Dee

Sunset Driver, Midnight Rider
Joined
Mar 8, 2016
Messages
2,993
Points
63
Murray knew how to do CPR. He also knew it was a waste of time because Michael was already dead and had been for a while, before finally being discovered by Murray. The 911 call and the "pretending" to administer CPR, etc. was all smoke and mirrors for the benefit of others, because Murray did not want to pronounce MJ dead at the house. If he did, then the negligence was all on him and he wanted to avoid that, at all costs and try to save his own hide. That's why the entire facade of Michael being rushed to hospital and worked on by hospital staff happened......Murray told the paramedics when they arrived that he had found a weak pulse, but that is likely to have been a lie, like much of what came out of his mouth, that day and many other days afterwards. MJ was pronounced dead at 2:26 in the afternoon at Cedar Sinai, but Murray knew damn well that it happened MUCH earlier than that and the paramedics probably knew it, too....they just had to bow to the "superiority" of a doctor and act upon what he told them.
 

Anna

Free As A Bird
Joined
Mar 22, 2009
Messages
6,696
Points
63
SoS;4299558 said:
To be clear ...please read my sentence again in context.....my POINT was in stating that you undermine the decision for the thread to be here when you allow or interject derailing comments..,.else why is this thread here if the TOPIC can’t be freely engaged? Continuously negative feedback about the thread’s existence imho undermines its presence. Yes everyone has free speech without exception, including negative, it’s just this thread that gets it the most gratuitously in my opinion.

Eg,

After 4 months of “crickets” since February someone repeats the question in June and then is asked, what’s the “urgency”..

All I am asking is that you guyz try and make the thread more functional for such a sensitive discussion...it’s already tough enough.

That’s my feedback and my opinion.

Gaz allows opposing opinions and objections in this thread, so your ignorant comment about us "undermining" him is totally void, in any context.

The existence of this thread is tolerated by staff. But that doesn't mean it gets to be exempt from criticism or objection. No one is stopping you from discussing things in here, but to expect to be able to discuss something like this without opposition, on a fan forum is, frankly, ridiculous. Unless there are actual attacks or insults being thrown around, people are free to say what they wish on either side.
 

Anna

Free As A Bird
Joined
Mar 22, 2009
Messages
6,696
Points
63
Mikky Dee;4299586 said:
Murray knew how to do CPR. He also knew it was a waste of time because Michael was already dead and had been for a while, before finally being discovered by Murray. The 911 call and the "pretending" to administer CPR, etc. was all smoke and mirrors for the benefit of others, because Murray did not want to pronounce MJ dead at the house. If he did, then the negligence was all on him and he wanted to avoid that, at all costs and try to save his own hide. That's why the entire facade of Michael being rushed to hospital and worked on by hospital staff happened......Murray told the paramedics when they arrived that he had found a weak pulse, but that is likely to have been a lie, like much of what came out of his mouth, that day and many other days afterwards. MJ was pronounced dead at 2:26 in the afternoon at Cedar Sinai, but Murray knows damn well that it happened MUCH earlier than that and the paramedics probably know it, too....they just had to bow to the "superiority" of a doctor and believe what he told them.

Exactly. The paramedics said Michael was clearly dead on arrival. They only took him to hospital and continued working on him at Murray's insistence.

SoS;4299558 said:
It seems to me the question of “alleged victim” asks, is there proof there is a victim...clearly the question answers itself by it being a murder trial plus the autopsy pics in evidence so it is evident and obvious fact that there is a victim, so nothing is “without proof” as far as that ....the only next question then is in the victim”s identity.

How can the date be an “allegation” when we all watched it unfold on the exact date? The date is not on trial. - the person is - the date is not “alleged” at all...we were there.

At the time of the rendering of the verdict there was no “alleged” victim or date - those were facts that created the case in the first place.

Just saying "victim" already assumes crime. Not everyone who dies is a "victim". The prosecution were saying a crime had occured on that date and had the evidence to prove it, but that didn't automatically legally make it so. That's the point of the trial, for the jury to decide if Michael was the victim of a crime that had been committed by Murray on that date. That's why everything is "alleged". There is nothing odd about this, it's just the way it works.
 

miss rose

Proud Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2019
Messages
247
Points
18
some say mj's soul was tired and damaged, and that the trial really ruined him. This is true, but for those who'd like to have faith that he could still be alive, here is a good question. Could mj doubles and impersonators, have helped to carry some of the load...?
 
Last edited:

mysterygirl7

Proud Member
Joined
May 3, 2004
Messages
1,879
Points
48
Location
over the rainbow...
SoS;4299558 said:
You might consider that the first word in this thread title is “Hoax” which is an offensive concept, repugnant to many to be sure. It is old from 2009 when all this speculation first began and seems to elicit the biggest “knee jerk” responses...what MJ wouldn’t do to his: children, family fans etc.

To be clear ...please read my sentence again in context.....my POINT was in stating that you undermine the decision for the thread to be here when you allow or interject derailing comments..,.else why is this thread here if the TOPIC can’t be freely engaged? Continuously negative feedback about the thread’s existence imho undermines its presence. Yes everyone has free speech without exception, including negative, it’s just this thread that gets it the most gratuitously in my opinion.

Eg,

After 4 months of “crickets” since February someone repeats the question in June and then is asked, what’s the “urgency”..

All I am asking is that you guyz try and make the thread more functional for such a sensitive discussion...it’s already tough enough.

That’s my feedback and my opinion.

Another is about “alleged”

al·leged
/əˈlejd/
Learn to pronounce
adjective
(of an incident or a person) said, without proof, to have taken place or to have a specified illegal or undesirable quality.

I would go with the theory that minus a verdict it is all “alleged” until this defendant is found guilty or not,

however..

It seems to me the question of “alleged victim” asks, is there proof there is a victim...clearly the question answers itself by it being a murder trial plus the autopsy pics in evidence so it is evident and obvious fact that there is a victim, so nothing is “without proof” as far as that ....the only next question then is in the victim”s identity.

How can the date be an “allegation” when we all watched it unfold on the exact date? The date is not on trial. - the person is - the date is not “alleged” at all...we were there.

At the time of the rendering of the verdict there was no “alleged” victim or date - those were facts that created the case in the first place.

It is an oddity to be sure. Similarly the 911 call:

“Ok let’s get him on the floor”

“Oh ok then, you have a doctor there who has more authority than I do”

At what point did the 911 operator say, “I just gave a doctor with more authority than me, instructions on how to administer CPR for a patient who is most likely dying seeing as how they’re not breathing”....

..maybe alert his immediate reports and/or higher authorities that someone’s life is in peril under the care of a doctor that does not know CPR

If you or I (or any reasonable prudent person) got on a call with a patient who’s not breathing and a doctor that does not know CPR we would not sit there calmly saying to call back if you need anything else.

We would at the very least stay on the call and probably proceed to help the doctor make sure CPR is being administered correctly enough to help the victim. Doctor could have been drunk for all the 911 operator knows.

Questions like these and many others deserve concentration and respectful dialogue and careful analysis...this of all places should be the safest most engaging place to do it imo.

JMHO Thanks

Thank you so much for the support. I thought people were being really mean to me. Also it seems now to be alright to discuss EVERYTHING regarding MJ's apperance, plastic surgery etc. So why is it not ok, that I post in this thread, who has been here since 2009?
 

SoS

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
4,096
Points
63
mysterygirl7;4299734 said:
Thank you so much for the support. I thought people were being really mean to me. Also it seems now to be alright to discuss EVERYTHING regarding MJ's apperance, plastic surgery etc. So why is it not ok, that I post in this thread, who has been here since 2009?

Absolutely. We didn’t name the thread, “Hoax Theories...” for goodness sake. Of course people are sensitive to that word, I know I am.. but it doesn’t stop me from being able to discuss everything else about this crazy mystery.

They fix it where people can’t discuss any “inconsistencies” or anything without some knee-jerk responder to the word “hoax” icing up with some version of “he died” like everyone is here just for cramps and giggles.
and treat us like it’s our fault that all the negativity is distracting.

On another note , when is someone going to address my comment about the date is not “alleged” and that photo shopped picture on the covers of newspapers all around the world... the 911 operator acting like it makes sense for a non-breathing patient to be in the care of a “higher authority “ who isn’t properly performing CPR. “Call us back if you need anything else”. nobody has any theories I guess.

I realize it’s a mystery to everyone really - it is quite an oddity.

I think the biggest oddity to me is Murray stating on Dr Oz that when he came back in the room it wasn’t the same person laying there (that’s odd) the oddest thing of all being that Dr Oz didn’t ask him what the sam hill he meant by that.

Any theories?

I wonder what is each person’s biggest “oddity”?

No doubt in my mind that every honest fan has at least one...even if they completely concluded that MJ unfortunately is completely 100% dead.
 
Last edited:

SoS

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
4,096
Points
63
Anna;4299588 said:
Exactly. The paramedics said Michael was clearly dead on arrival. They only took him to hospital and continued working on him at Murray's insistence.



Just saying "victim" already assumes crime. Not everyone who dies is a "victim". The prosecution were saying a crime had occured on that date and had the evidence to prove it, but that didn't automatically legally make it so. That's the point of the trial, for the jury to decide if Michael was the victim of a crime that had been committed by Murray on that date. That's why everything is "alleged". There is nothing odd about this, it's just the way it works.

Firstly thank you for adding a modicum of logic to the discussion. That does make sense up until you toss in the date. That one sentence in the verdict rendering would still be inconsistent considering that the date is the one certainty in the entire debacle.

As for the “alleged victim” I can see that the prosecution was alleging that MJ was a victim of Murray. They still should have just said, decedent “.

Lastly, what did Joe mean by, “there’s more”. His comment was described as, “cryptic”
 

SoS

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
4,096
Points
63
Anna;4299543 said:
We are not undermining Gaz. Gaz doesn't want to censor this kind of discussion, but that also means not censoring the people who object to this kind of discussion. This thread is abhorrent to a lot of the members here, so if you choose to participate that is something you just have to accept.

In that case why not delete that awful term, “Hoax Theory” from the title.

Since we’re being sensitive to fans’ feelings I will add that Michael Jackson’s death is too serious to too many fans not to be able to discuss it in peace to whatever degree we need to.

Especially since obviously “Hoax” is not an option. JMHO
 
Last edited:

SoS

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
4,096
Points
63
Murray knew how to do CPR. He also knew it was a waste of time because Michael was already dead and had been for a while, before finally being discovered by Murray. The 911 call and the "pretending" to administer CPR, etc. was all smoke and mirrors for the benefit of others, because Murray did not want to pronounce MJ dead at the house. If he did, then the negligence was all on him and he wanted to avoid that, at all costs and try to save his own hide. That's why the entire facade of Michael being rushed to hospital and worked on by hospital staff happened......Murray told the paramedics when they arrived that he had found a weak pulse, but that is likely to have been a lie, like much of what came out of his mouth, that day and many other days afterwards. MJ was pronounced dead at 2:26 in the afternoon at Cedar Sinai, but Murray knew damn well that it happened MUCH earlier than that and the paramedics probably knew it, too....they just had to bow to the "superiority" of a doctor and act upon what he told them

Firstly, thank you for adding a modicum of logic to this discussion. Since the beginning in 2009 every answer begs another question which is an oddity in itself.

Re bolded:

My only question for this answer is, if that’s the case (Murray was doing it only for “show”):

Before Alverez arrived on the scene Murray had plenty of time to do the one thing anyone would do when putting on such a serious show (with his very life on the line and his only audience at the time being the body guard) and the habitual, instinctive thing any heart doctor “staging” CPR would do which is to put the patient on the floor - that is the main thing that would constitute a “staged” CPR just for “show”.

Secondly, it would seem to me that Murrsy would have had every reason to suspect that a bodyguard (of all people to put on a life saving “show” for, especially with this patient being the body guard’s boss) , that Murray would have every reason to suspect that the body guard probably has had some CPR training himself - being that the body guard is afterall, in the life saving business. Not to mention many body guard types have been in some form of official training eg., law enforcement, military etc where CPR exposure is likely

The body guard shouldn’t have had to have anyone to tell him to tell the doctor to put the patient on the floor.

His first reaction when he saw this should have been the same as anyone’s especially with him watching first-hand Murray handling his boss that way.

Here’s an analogy albeit loose but so I make my point clear-

If a fireman is going to stage putting out a fire is he going to prepare ahead of time then “forget” to include the hose or the water with his very life on the line? I’m sure that people forget the darndest things when they panic. It’s just that some things are instinctual. Even if he knew Michael was dead, that still doesn’t make sense given his career instinct. It should have been quite automatic.

Absurdity of the century: Heart doctor forgets to put heart -challenged patient on floor. Patient’s personal body guard doesn’t happen to notice. Farcical.

It’s not like Murray didn’t call Alverez after he prepped the scene if he had been with his dead patient for that long before calling him in there...or before calling Amir or whomever he called to get Alverez there.

Fits under the thread title - “errors”
And if it wasn’t so tragic, at first blush it looks like a “comedy of errors”

comedy of errors
phrase of comedy
a situation made amusing by bungling and incompetence.
except this is the farthest thing from funny.

Random Footnote:

A good executive protection training school or company has the following curriculum outline as part of their training:
Protective Advances – Protective Intelligence – Radio Communications – Motorcades and Routes – Firearms and Special Tactics – Public Affairs and Media Control – Emergency First Aid/CPR/AED

https://www.worldprotectiongroup.com/analysis-the-bodyguard-vs-the-executive-protection-agent/
 
Last edited:

SoS

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
4,096
Points
63
some say mj's soul was tired and damaged, and that the trial really ruined him. This is true, but for those who'd like to have faith that he could still be alive, here is a good question. Could mj doubles and impersonators, have helped to carry some of the load...?

I wonder if you are joking. Or a new fan perhaps?

OR...you just Wanna Be Starting Something? lol

This question has been hashed over and over since 2009.

We already know that through the decades he used doubles a lot so, obviously so... but sadly that is not an option although it gets a lot of speculation from fans who hope against hope.

I’ve heard only the most absurdly ridiculous theories about it personally.

If you’re heard anything that makes some kind of good sense please share. Every theory I have personally ever heard about “doubles” is utterly senseless ...so far.

Meanwhile, he’s dead, let him go.
 
Last edited:

ScreenOrigami

Proud Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2019
Messages
2,682
Points
48
SoS;4299751 said:
I think the biggest oddity to me is Murray stating on Dr Oz that when he came back in the room it wasn’t the same person laying there (that’s odd) the oddest thing of all being that Dr Oz didn’t ask him what the sam hill he meant by that.

If you seek a serious discussion about the inconsistencies in MJ’s homicide case, I suggest to watch the actual trial videos instead of Dr Oz.
 
Last edited:
Top