Tuesday, September 27, 2011

Justice 4 whom? Thoughts on Conrad Murray

The commencement of Dr. Conrad Murray's trial draws closer by the hour. As the media readies itself to discuss the case, one little phrase seems to conspicuously squirm its way into every pre-trial broadcast: "Justice for Michael."

But what does that even mean?

I admit I have not followed the Dr. Murray shenanigans; I haven't paid any attention to his women or his child support payments or his strip club trips. Nor have I paid any attention to the "Michael was murdered" crock of bull and any of La Toya Jackson's shadow creatures. It seems to me that what happened on June 25, 2009 is pretty straightforward: a doctor hired by Michael Jackson to administer him the anesthetic propofol accidentally let him die, or, rather, Jackson died while legally under his care.

This seems to also be supported by the autopsy report made available to the public: Jackson died of an "acute propofol intoxication"; the contributing factor to his death was something the coroner called a "benzodiazepine effect"--the sedatives given to Jackson (lorazepam, midazolam, diazepam, and nordiazepam) were enough to aid in the further suppression of his already compromised breathing.

But all of that is the technical nitty-gritty of it.

The take home point of it, for me, was that was how the faded King of Pop died and it was Murray who'd given him the drugs that lead to his death. It happened and that was that; nothing more to say, right? Well, I'd be incorrect; because celebrities cannot be killed (even though they can kill, rape, molest, assault, or steal with reckless abandon), much ado must be made about Jackson's 'untimely' demise.

In other words, someone has got to pay for taking out one of our shining stars.

But let's step back just a tad and remove our alleged moral indignation: Michael Jackson--that "shining star"--was a hardcore drug addict and a suspected (hell, probable) repeat child molester.

I should note that I am not unfamiliar with the law. According to the law, all people have worth and all people do not deserve to die. And this is a point I fervently accept: even if Jackson was a pedophile (and he was) or a drug addict (yes, he was that, too), rationally speaking, that does not mean someone should get away with 'killing' him, no matter how amusing we--as imperfect sometimes irrational creatures--may find the death of a drug-addicted pedophile.

So, I am not taking the position that, even though Jackson was undoubtedly a pedophile (and he was most likely a child molester, too), his death was warranted. I will not pretend, however, that that does not lower his worth somewhat; denying this would be cognitively dissonant. But I will take the position that Michael Jackson's drug abuse should, without a doubt, give anyone pause before they try to send Dr. Murray to the slammer.

Let's repeat: No matter if he could moonwalk or made the best-selling record of all time, Michael Jackson was a hardcore drug addict who has been addicted to substances for years.

That is why I said all of this was incredibly straightforward: a drug addict died from a drug overdose.

Well, okay then, right? Isn't it reasonable to suspect that when a drug addict dies, a substance will be what delivers that final blow? This is certainly what happened with Jackson, was it not?

There's been anecdotal evidence that he'd taken propofol before Dr. Murray came around, and, according to people like nurse Cherilynn Lee, the likelihood is incredibly great that had Dr. Murray not been 'selected' by Jackson to be his "milkman"*, he would have found another star-struck, possibly money-hungry doctor to give him his goods.

And if you don't believe me that Jackson was a hardcore drug addict, check out this explosive document filed by Dr. Murray's defense team regarding the testimonies of those who were well-acquainted with Jackson's addictions. The proposed testimony that really struck me was that of his longtime friend and nanny, Grace Rwaramba:

Note that Grace stated Michael Jackson's own children had seen their father passed out in a drug-induced stupor; Prince and Paris had to be about five and four, respectively, when they'd called for help.

Interestingly, Grace's statements tend to corroborate findings by journalist Maureen Orth. In the July 2005 issue of Vanity Fair magazine, Orth's article, "CSI: Neverland", mentioned Jackson's drug haze was such a constant theme that it led to lax care of his own children's health,
A medical worker who treated Jackson that year [2002] told me recently that Jackson’s bodyguards were worried about him, and that Jackson himself acknowledged how easy it was for him to obtain drugs from doctor friends. He said that Jackson traveled with a huge black suitcase containing an array of powerful prescription drugs, pre-loaded syringes, and IV bags and a collapsible IV pole, and that he spent whole days watching a video of Disney’s Fantasia over and over again. He said Jackson’s children got bored watching the film so many times, and he added that Prince Michael had several teeth rotting from eating too much candy.
(Read the article; Orth also mentions--back in 2005--Michael Jackson's use of propofol. Again, if it wasn't Dr. Murray, it would have been some other fall guy about to go on trial for 'murder'...)

As perhaps even more corroboration to Prince's teeth being rotten, TMZ reported that one of Jackson's doctors had been admonished for giving anesthesia, without a proper license, to Blanket Jackson back in July 2008--when the boy was just six-years-old--for a two-hour dental procedure.
TMZ has obtained internal documents from the Nevada Board of Dental Examiners, which detail Michael Jackson's interactions with Dr. Mark Tadrissi.   According to the documents, Tadrissi told Michael he couldn't perform the procedure on Blanket because he lacked the permit.

According to the Board's investigator, Michael didn't want to hear about permits and told the doctor, "Have an anesthesiologist do whatever type of sedation required."

Tadrissi capitulated and performed the 2 hour procedure on Blanket ... who was 6 years old at the time.  An anesthesiologist had Blanket sedated the entire time.
Although nothing is available to detail what procedure Blanket underwent, is it not too speculative to suggest, given the numerous anecdotes about Jackson's kids loving candy** (as well as Orth's aforementioned piece), that Blanket was getting decayed baby teeth pulled by Dr. Tadrissi?

It's certainly fathomable!

Now, I'm not suggesting Jackson's seeming neglect of his children is in any way a suggestion that he did not love them. It is, however, a telling indication of his stubborn drug abuse.

And it is Jackson's drug history--a history peppered with illicit narcotics, Demerol abuse, Xanax and OxyContin pill-popping, bills in the thousands to pharmacies***--that arouses within me the darndest feeling of, "What the hell is going on here?"

Like I've said: Michael Jackson's death was amazingly straightforward; a drug addict died of an overdose of a drug he not only wanted but had a history of using. Why the moral outrage? Why do we need a small-time cardiologist--one who has, at the very least, a handful of patients who adore him--to go down for the predictable death of a drug addict?

I do not believe for one second the glut of 'taking Murray down' has anything to really do with stopping doctors from dispensing drugs to patients, that it has to do with some great moral crusade for which Dr. Murray will be the first 'example'. Had Jackson survived these bizarre nighttime rituals, no one would necessarily care that he still owed money to pharmacies or developed abscesses around his puncture wounds. And had Jackson been the typical junkie, dying in some urban crackhouse, even if a drug pusher was responsible for injecting the last fatal hit, everyone would have said, "NHI," or "no human involved."

But because the drug addict was Michael Jackson, someone has to bear the blame...and it makes little sense to me.

No one should mistake this seeming apathy to mean that Jackson deserved it. Michael Jackson should not have died. He should not have been a drug abuser. He should have went into therapy and moved to heal himself of the devastatingly odious demons of his childhood abuse (physical, emotional, and sexual) and his confused sexuality that no doubt plagued his spirit and led him to destructive behaviors with morphine, boys, and booze.

However, let us not kid ourselves and pretend that Michael Jackson was murdered.

Okay, it shall be known given its absolute fact: Dr. Conrad Murray is not a murderer. What he is was a naive and financially-crippled doctor seduced by the prospect of receiving in excess of $100,000 a month by a mega-celebrity. In other words, the man is human, a fact that conveniently slips the minds of even rational people who realize Jackson's death would have made not even a ripple had he not been the King of Pop.

So, Dr. Murray is a physician, bound by a Hippocratic oath saying to, "Do no harm"; this is significant in what way? I'm not suggesting we devolve into nihilism, but how would letting Dr. Murray slide on this junkie's death, perhaps, lead to a collapse in America's stance against medical malpractice?

Was this even medical malpractice? It's not exactly akin to Joe Schmoe going into surgery and his doctor forgets to remove the surgical sponges from his abdomen, leaving them to divert the blood supply from some nearby organ; it isn't like doctors reusing single-use vials of medication for multiple patients to save money, leading to the spread of hepatitis (this happened out here in Nevada); hell, it isn't even what happened to actor Dennis Quaid.

Was this not just the death of a drug addict, albeit a rich, famous, and talented one?

And that is what I'm saying here: Michael Jackson should not have died but it happened; and it is the how it came to happen--years-long drug abuse--that should have guided Los Angeles prosecutors in how they went about dealing with Dr. Murray: they should have let this situation be something the state medical boards where he was licensed deal with.

Now, I am not suggesting that Dr. Murray is blameless in Jackson's death. No, he does have some culpability in the fact Jackson was never able to moonwalk on that London stage. In spite of the fact Michael Jackson was very much familiar with propofol, I doubt he had the know-how to set up his oxygen tank or knew that he'd need a condom catheter while he was under. Those details are things only a doctor would know.

But I think something's missing: what about blaming the addict?

With all of this talk about "Justice for Michael", what kind of 'justice' is possible when our victim was  another Hollywood addict and our perp accidentally caused his death?

(Let it sink in: it was an accident.)

So, before anyone bashes me for being heartless and cold and lacking in compassion, honestly ask yourself: "Why do I care that Michael Jackson is dead and why do I want to see someone pay for it?" 

It's a question worth considering, and honest answers, such as, "Because he's a celebrity," are not only understandable, albeit somewhat repugnant, but demonstrate an amazing self-awareness!

My feelings: I do not believe Dr. Conrad Murray is a murderer; therefore, despite the fact Jackson's death was listed as a homicide by the Los Angeles County Coroner's office--a determination I find specious--I do not believe he should be charged with anything in relation to that death with regard to the law. I also believe that the vast majority of the blame for Jackson's death should be on Jackson himself, to the point that, if anyone should be charged with 'murder', it should be Jackson for his own suicide. Additionally, I believe that Jackson's drug abuse led directly to his untimely demise; simply, had he not been an addict (in more ways than just drugs), he would still be living today.


It is time for a pre-trial prediction: in spite of the fact I am sure a lot of painful and explosive truths about Michael Jackson will emerge from Dr. Murray's case, I believe, given Jackson's celebrity, Dr. Murray will be found guilty, reason be damned. I am certain his jury is already teeming with celeb-obsessed Jackson sympathizers.

Dr. Conrad Murray may escape jail time but he will be legally branded Michael Jackson's killer. This, of course, will end his career.

As a reasonable person, the latter is much more of a bitter pill to swallow than that of a famous junkie's death. I do not know when we, as a collective, will start blaming Jackson for his choices, even the one that caused his death. However, I'll make a singular effort...

Now, please, do not blame me if, when asked how I feel about Michael Jackson's death, I respond with a flippant, "Eh..."

* Propofol is sometimes called "milk of amnesia", given its white, milky appearance; Michael Jackson was said to refer to it as his "milk", so Dr. Murray was, euphemistically speaking, a "milkman".

** In the children's interview with Oprah Winfrey, Paris Jackson remarked that a fond memory of her father was his treating them with Coca-cola and Snickers candy bars.

*** The 2003 searches of Neverland Ranch and related properties by the Santa Barbara Sheriff's department uncovered various articles indicating Jackson's use and abuse of prescription drugs, as well as a nexus to people who used illicit drugs. From various search inventory documents:

 (left: here; right: here)


1 – 200 of 208   Newer›   Newest»
More Speculations? said...

"I should note that I am not unfamiliar with the law"

That's an understatement.

"a drug addict died of an overdose of a drug he not only wanted but had a history of using. Why the moral outrage? Why do we need a small-time cardiologist--one who has, at the very least, a handful of patients who adore him--to go down for the predictable death of a drug addict?"

Because (ignoring all of your gross speculation) even a drug addict's life has value. Because Murray is responsible for administering the drug that killed him.

If a drug addict, while crossing the street, get's hit by a car and is killed, the driver is still responsible and will be trialed for murder.

"I do not know when we, as a collective, will start blaming Jackson for his choices, even the one that caused his death. However, I'll make a singular effort..."

Mature people don't "blame" people for their choices and mistakes; we try to understand them, because we understand that we also are full of faults and make mistakes.

Michael's life has value not because he was a celebrity but because everyone's life has value. Even your inhumane life.

Brenda said...

"Okay, it shall be known given its absolute fact: Dr. Conrad Murray is not a murderer."

This post is not worthy of you, Desiree. You're delving into legal matters based on what? Your opinion? A better title would have been "My Musings on the Conrad Murray Trial" which would have absolved you from any expectations of explaining the legal ramifications of Murray's actions.

Was Michael a drug addict? Of course. He struggled with addictions for at least a decade and a half. What does that have to do with Murray's actions? Michael isn't on trial. Murray is. There are many levels of murder in the justice system. Many. We laymen may say murder but the legal system may say vehicular manslaughter, 1st degree murder, manslaughter, so on and so forth.

Sprouting opinions is a staple of the blogosphere but you have prided yourself on never being sloppy. But this post ... you show no knowledge or understanding of the charge Murray is accused of only your opinion about Michael's addiction struggles.

Lucy said...

Hi Desiree, I've been reading your blog since December, and I agree with you about Murray. This whole thing really, really makes me angry and I just don't see how he is ultimately to blame for MJ's death.

@ Brenda, your comment irritated me so I want to say something to a couple of your points:

You said: "This post is not worthy of you, Desiree. You're delving into legal matters based on what? Your opinion?"

Is it not true that you also delve into legal matters when you discuss his child molestation case? Yes, so what is the difference? Oh, that you disagree about Murray.

You said: "Was Michael a drug addict? Of course. He struggled with addictions for at least a decade and a half. What does that have to do with Murray's actions?"

It's a part of his defense, that it shows that MJ was used to self-administering substances, dangerous substances. They claim that it was MJ that gave himself the final dose that killed him. It's relevant.

You said: "We laymen may say murder but the legal system may say vehicular manslaughter, 1st degree murder, manslaughter, so on and so forth."

So what's you point? This is about common sense. Sure, Murray might be legally responsible, but how fair is that? And does it jive with what common sense would dictate? I don't know if it does. In my mind, murder implies malice. I don't think a drunk driver is a murderer just because the law says they are guilty of manslaughter. It was an accident; had they not been drinking, it wouldn't have happened. Legal punishment is one thing, but being labeled a murderer when in reality you had no malice, no intent; that's another.

You said: "Sprouting opinions is a staple of the blogosphere but you have prided yourself on never being sloppy. But this post ... you show no knowledge or understanding of the charge Murray is accused of only your opinion about Michael's addiction struggles."

And you have ultimate knowledge and understanding? Please enlighten me, so I may cast off my ignorance and join the "Justice 4 MJ" camp. I don't see how Murray should go to jail for a drug that MJ wanted and had used before. He was going to pay Murray $150,000 a month just to have him inject propofol into his arm. He begged others to give it to him. How is MJ not culpable in his own actions? Basically, Murray was hired to be the guy to get the drug, administer it, and monitor him will he used it; that was what he was worth to MJ. The fact that Murray could be interchanged with a host of other doctors is the reason that he shouldn't go to jail. He can have his license revoked, but no jail time.

You claim to be looking at the law, but there is no common sense. Ask most people and they'd tell you that MJ was responsible for his own death. It just so happens that he may have had a doctor holding the syringe. It still does not erase the fact that he sought out and condoned the use of the drug. The law tried to charge Anna Nicole Smith's doctors and friends with conspiracy to give her drugs that continued the addiction that lead to her death. They tried to put the blame for a celebrity's death on others. It didn't work. I believe they are doing the same thing here.

Lady C said...


I was just looking back on some of the Murray trial today, and I just heard an interview with MJ's past publicist, Raymone Baine. One of the points that she brought up was the phone recording of a very slurred Michael Jackson...I'm sure you've heard it. Baine questions the forensics of that phone conversation because she along with several others who have worked and known MJ for a long time didn't think that it was really him. Raymone doubts that it really was MJ. Yes, I have to admit that it didn't sound like MJ or even close to it, but IMO, and maybe you agree with this, MJ did not talk like the high-voiced MJ that the public is all too familiar with... at least pretty much of the time. I think that people expected it to sound like the MJ that they've always known; high-voiced. However it has been said by a few people who have heard the 'real' MJ, that his voice is indeed very deep. IMO, the voice on that recording does possibly sound like it could be MJ's knowing that his 'fake high voice' is not really his. Also it has been said that the Jackson family was taken aback by the voice of the drugged MJ?? Why was that I wonder? I do have to question though, why would Murray tape his conversation with a drugged out MJ??? What do you or anyone else think?

Lady C said...


I agree with what you said 100%...well said!! What happened to MJ was an accident, pure and simple. Yes, Murray was neglectful, but that IMO does not label him as a cold-blooded murderer! There was no malice or viciousness involved. What happened to MJ does not warrant prison time, only permanent license retrieval. Good point about the drunken driver. It happens every day. Take for instance the nurse in a hospital who mistakenly gives her patient a wrong dosage of medication, or better yet, a wrong medication where the container looks almost exactly identical of that of another. The patient dies...does that make her a murderer? It happens all the time; more than people think. I'm willing to be that if they were in that nurse's shoes they would be the first one to holler out "It was an accident, I'm not a killer". Why is it so different for Murray? Only because of who MJ was, that's all. If he was a regular Joe Blow, NO ONE would give a care in the world, especially if they knew he was a drug addict!!

Desiree said...


Thank you for your comment and I hope you've enjoyed my blog ramblings and continue to read!

Needless to say, you've taken the words out of my mouth with respect to Brenda's comment. To me, this is not about the 'law', this is about the facts.

And the facts say that Jacko was an addict. To me, an addict--an adult addict--who asks for drugs, gets them, and dies from them is a non-story.

Had he died like Heath Ledger, at his own hand, this would be yet another tragedy for the gossip pages.

In this country, we seem to have the most skewed and bizarre notions of death and worth. There's so much fake moral outrage with regard to this case it makes me want to SCREAM!

I feel sorry for Conrad Murray. His life will be over if he escapes jail. That's the tragedy, getting tied up with a junkie. I've made that quite clear in this Op-ed.

Desiree said...

Lady C:

As I type this comment, HLN's Murray coverage is in the background and I managed to hear the truly tragic recording of Jacko drugged up. I believe that was him and, yes, I definitely think it was sad because he was obviously in such a pathetic state by the end, given the childhood demons and the pedophilia.

I agree it did not sound like him--the Jacko that we are all familiar with--but the content of the recording sounded like the tripe he usually says (children, kids, children, etc.).

It was him.

"I do have to question though, why would Murray tape his conversation with a drugged out MJ??? What do you or anyone else think?"

Here's the thing I think I should make clear (given my stance on Murray, that he shouldn't be on trial at all):

Dr. Conrad Murray knew what he was doing was unethical. However, I think everyone should know unethical DOES NOT equal illegal! So, with this clarified, I personally have a feeling that Murray recorded Jacko for insurance. You know, 'just in case'.

That's just speculation, though.

Maybe he knew that, perhaps... eh... it wasn't the right thing to do going along with Jacko's propofol addiction. Just in case Jacko croaked--and he did, unfortunately--he would have something to show that this was a hardcore drug addict he was dealing with and this hardcore drug addict wanted a strange and dangerous drug.

It sounds gruesome, maybe callous, but let's enter reality: Michael Jackson was a junkie. He wanted it. He wanted it.

Desiree said...


Man, oh, man...

"You're delving into legal matters based on what? Your opinion?"

Uh huh, yeah...

"A better title would have been "My Musings on the Conrad Murray Trial" which would have absolved you from any expectations of explaining the legal ramifications of Murray's actions."

I called it 'thoughts', which is not wholly different from 'musings' (let's not forget it has "Your humble narrator" and "rant" tags, both of which designate pieces extraneous to the investigation ones). In what way, exactly, would 'musings' have offended you less?

"Was Michael a drug addict? Of course. He struggled with addictions for at least a decade and a half. What does that have to do with Murray's actions?"

It has tons to do with Murray's actions, namely that had Jacko not been addicted to propofol--feenin for his 'milk'--Murray would be tending to his other patients in one of his practices as we speak instead of on trial for the death of a junkie.

And that's what he was. I'm calling a spade, a spade. It doesn't matter if he could moonwalk or made 'Thriller'.

"Michael isn't on trial. Murray is."

Save the moral indignation, please.

Murray shouldn't be on trial because Michael Jackson was a drug addict who wanted the propofol. Matter of fact, as I've pointed out, there is evidence that he took propofol even before Murray and there's evidence that had Murray not been in position to fix Jacko his 'milkshakes', he would have moved to get someone else.

This is a fact, not an opinion.

"There are many levels of murder in the justice system. Many."

Conrad Murray is not a murderer. The charge leveled against Murray is manslaughter. Essentially this is a charge they give to people who the law thinks should get charged with murder but there is no intent or malice aforethought, so they substitute in 'gross negligence'.

Giving someone propofol is not illegal. It is unethical; since it is unethical, that means this is something that the medical boards should deal with. Not the courts. The courts should stay out of it.

"you have prided yourself on never being sloppy."

This blog entry was beautifully written and shows someone of a high IQ.

"you show no knowledge or understanding of the charge Murray is accused of only your opinion about Michael's addiction struggles."

Terrific, your opinion has been noted. I'll just add that I find it incredibly hypocritical that you would even attempt to chastise me, especially when you come to this blog armed with your anger and your books to accuse Jacko of not only being a pedophile--regardless if you're on the money--but of being a monster for it.

I am completely flabbergasted. You have to be the most bizarre Jackson fan/hater I've ever encountered!

Jessica said...

I watched Piers Morgan and he had on four of Dr. Murray's patients. It was definitely interesting to see how much they loved and respected this man. I was particularly touched by the the older man with the white hair when he said he knew Dr. Murray for 11 years and he felt that an injustice was being done. Seriously, I was tearing up. They say he did "pro bono" medical work on them--thousands of dollars he waived off. They said he'd take patients with no insurance and that he'd call and sometimes even visit his patients at home.

Its obvious that Dr. Murray isn't this murderer or a greedy doctor. From the way they lovingly described him, he seems to be a very competent and caring doctor. They said he was excited to work with Mike and that he really liked him. But what was most interesting to me is that they said he wouldn't have taken money to do something illegal; he wasn't a greedy doctor. And if you think about all the free medical care that he doled out (disorders of the heart are among the most common afflictions of Americans so this guy was really doing a service!) it was no wonder he was in debt.

What I think happened is this: Murray was hired to be Mike's personal doctor and Mike then asked him to supply him with propofol. Murray probably was hesitant but Mike cajoled him, saying stuff like "I'll give you $150,000 a month. Please, do this for me, I can't sleep and I have to do these concerts!" and he knew how much Murray liked him. I think Mike took advantage of Murray's good nature. Mike was begging for it. I think that it's possible that since Mike was doing well on the propofol for the few weeks he was using it, complacency set in and neither of them thought anything was going to happen, but it did eventually.

I do believe Murray was trying to help ween Mike off of his addiction to propofol and perhaps was using the benzodiazepines as a substitute to get Mike off relying--as he did in the past before he even met Murray--some much on propofol, since it was so dangerous. But how can you stop an addict when they want something so bad? Allegedly, Jason Pfeiffer said Mike asked him about where he could find a good anesthesiologist. Clearly that would show that he not only had used the drug before, but that he was actively seeking it and didn't care about the risks; that he was willing to take the risk.

I heard a defense attorney say that if he was charged with 1st or 2nd degree murder, the prosecutors would have to prove intent to kill, but they knew that would definitely not work in this case. Involuntary manslaughter, he said, was able to use the gross negligence as "intent", even though that isn't even the same thing. I think that's crazy. if there isn't any malice or intent to harm, how can you reasonably apply the label of murder; it's nonsensical in my opinion.

There's Wacko fans on the jury so hopefully Murray's defense will at least get in a good argument for reasonable doubt. I personally think Murray should have just sought a plea deal. They say the 4 years jail time is the least of his worries; he could face not only that but a huge fine, civil settlements, and loss of his professional license. To think, one patient can ruin all the good work a doctor, and this one patient was a drug addict that was asking for it. Too bad that this drug addict was also the King of Pop.

Jessica said...

Lady C,

I heard the tape of Mike talking all drugged up. it was incredibly disturbing and the more I heard it, the more disgusted I got. I kept thinking of his kids and how Grace told police that they had one time found him passed out. Makes me wonder what is the ratio of drugged up Daddy to normal Daddy they encountered growing up, even though they could still love him.

It's also not surprising that anyone on the "Team Mike" side would question whether the tape was of him. He is an innocent angel and can do know wrong. Now, I find it strange that his family could be shocked at this seeing that they did interventions and knew he was an addict. It seems like Mike was a different person to different people. I'm starting to wonder if he's a multiple personality. And it sounded like Mike to me, especially with all the kiddie references.

I agree with Desiree about why he recorded Mike; it was for insurance.


I co-sign with everything you said. I wonder if anyone would be saying murderer if Murray was their father or brother or friend. I don't think so. People don't want to admit it to themselves that all of this "rage" is due to the fact that it was Michael Jackson. When the celebrity is the defendant, the burden is on the victim to prove said celebrity is guilty, which is normal. But when the celebrity is the victim, the burden is on the defendant to prove he is innocent, which is all wrong. I hope the fans extend the same presumption of innocence to Murray as they wanted everyone to do when Mike was on trial in 2005. But of course, I won't hold my breath.

A.G. said...

They will play that recording later completely in the trial. MJ fans are already whining that this record must be fake, but they are unable to face reality and the simple fact that fake recordings never would be evidence in any trial. As I always predicted the truth is not nice in the case but it is the way it has to be. And if some Dr. Feelgoods and Hollywoods scenes are shaken up a bit, the better it is. See Dr. Klein. he has got a lot to answer for...

zeromarcy said...

yeah yeah...the main point: does that allow a doctor to somministrate propofol out of the hospital(even if ur patient was asking for it? and why that doctor did not call himself an anestesiologist?)? NO. oh wait once again u believe u are better than the police, and the entire LA legal system? do not answer i know what u would say.

Lady C said...


Good point about the Jackson Family being so 'shocked' at the voice of MJ on that tape. I didn't understand that one at all! For the life of me, when I heard how disturbed they were in hearing it, it made me shake my head and say to myself, what the heck did they expect? They knew good and well that MJ was a DRUG ADDICT and that he had a problem with drugs. Period. He had the problem for many years. That voice recording should've not be a shock to them at all. However it was heart wrenching to hear.
MJ was on the hunt for a 'Dr. Feelgood', or many of them I should say, for several years and just so happened to luck up on Conrad Murray because he knew could fenagle his way in and persuade Murray to give him whatever drug he wanted because Murray was in dire straits financially. Again, MJ knows how to 'seduce' his prey. Also remember, when you are dealing with a drug addict such as MJ, there is no reasoning with them whatsoever...they don't care about the ramifications of anything outside their own desires...it doesn't matter to them. MJ didn't seem to care about jeopardizing any relationships/friendships over drugs...he would put them in uncompromising positions to get whatever drugs he could get his hands on. If he couldn't get it from one person, he'd keep on looking until someone could fit the bill, and I believe that's what he did with Conrad Murray. However, I do believe Murray felt pressured by MJ.
I do agree with you about the Propofol; it had been used so much by MJ that it's use eventually became too complacent. I know that it's Conrad Murray on trial, not MJ and his lifestyle...but you have to wonder, is it really possible to leave out MJ's lifestyle of extensive drug use completely out of the equation?? I personally think that it's a very difficult if not impossible feat to accomplish. As we all can see, whether he's on trial or not, MJ's lifestyle has already been brought to the forefront; there's no denying it. It's only been one day thus far, but I have an inkling that more about MJ will be coming out...enough to the extent that MAYBE there is some reasonable doubt, but it's hard to say. Drugs played a big part in MJ's life way before Murray came on to the scene. I was even suprised to hear Rabbi Schumley say that other doctors other than Murray should also be on trial. I'm sure that's something that has resonated with Dr. Klein, even though he won't admit it. lol
I know things are not looking very good for Murray at this point...let's just hope that the members of the jury have common sense and can possibly see that it's not an absolute case. To say that Murray was negligent is one thing but to say he's cold-blooded murderer is another. IMO MJ is responsible for what happened to MJ.

Desiree said...


"the main point: does that allow a doctor to somministrate propofol out of the hospital(even if ur patient was asking for it? and why that doctor did not call himself an anestesiologist?)? NO."

I know you are foreign and siphon your information from American Jacko fans. As such you know very little about American law.

Dispensing propofol in any place outside of a hospital is not illegal. As such, Murray is not on trial for giving Jacko propofol.

That is an ethics issue.

Murray is being charged for Jacko having died while under his care. That's the issue at hand. The kneejerk "Propofol shouldn't be dispensed anywhere outside of a hospital" is irrational.

The main point is: Jacko was junkie, he'd used propofol before, and it was an accident. Murray is legally 'responsible for Jacko's death but the argument can be made whether that law, as it pertains to this case, is being prudently applied.

It is not.

If you disagree, your opinion has been noted.

"oh wait once again u believe u are better than the police, and the entire LA legal system?"

Funny becuase I know, had Jacko been rightfully found guilty of molesting Gavin Arvizo, you and other fans would have said that the law was wrong.

That's what they said about OJ Simpson.

It's all a matter of opinion. However, there's a difference between valid and invalid opinions and sometimes the law is wrong.

If you disagree with this piece, by all means, feel free to commiserate with Jacko fans over at Vindicate MJ...

Frenchie said...

"MJ is responsible for what happened to MJ."

Any rational person can see that. Unfortunately, the majority of MJ's fan base is not rational, and fans are the ones making the noise and getting quoted in the press. No one else cares enough to exert the same amount of time and energy that f'loons do. As a result, the media coverage is markedly one-sided.

For the last two years, Murray has been portrayed as a villain in the press. The man went to a wedding, and TMZ ran a critical story about how he *gasp* DANCED AT THE WEDDING. The horror! There was another hit piece about him taking his son to Disneyland. Spending quality time with his child? That's it; let's draw and quarter him!

Frenchie said...

By the way, that photo of fans outside the courthouse has me rolling. It looks like auditions for the next season of "The Biggest Loser".

Jessica said...


Yep, totally. Klein bears the brunt of Mike's addiction, in terms of being a supplier. of course, no one forced Mike to take the drugs, that's on him. Honestly, from what I see, it doesn't seem like Dr. Murray was a Dr. Feelgood, in the sense that he wasn't one of those doctors that are known (like Klein is) to dole out prescription drugs. This seems to be, so far, his only instance of exhibiting that kind of behavior.

I saw the Rabbi yesterday on Nancy Grace and he was shouting that we should put a stop to this, all these celebrities are addicts, blah blah blah, but where is the blame on the drug addict himself? No one is forcing them to take drugs.

Lady C,

The Jacksons are full of it in my opinion. They love Mike, but to be shocked? come on, I'm not buying it. They wouldn't have done all those interventions had not been the guy we'd heard on that tape. I think leaving his drug history out of evidence guts Murray's defense. It's very relevant, and, as Lucy rightly pointed out, it shows that Mike had no problem giving himself drugs outside of any doctor supervision. What was he on to make himself that high? And if Murray's on the other end of the line, Mike must have given himself something. It was in May at around 9 am, maybe a pit stop to old Klein? Klein had been feeding him 51 shot of Demerol in the last 3 months. and if that is the case, did Murray know about it? Obviously Mike was seeking "care" outside of just Murray, his hired doctor. This could be enough for reasonable doubt, showing that Mike was doing things outside of Murray's knowledge, and liable to take matters into his own hands to get his fix.

I was just thinking today that had Mike been able to administer the drug himself, there would have been know need for Murray or any doctor. Mike just happened to be addicted to a substance that needs another person to help with administering it and "keeping a look out". If a dog could do it, Mike would have hired a dog, LOL. Seems to me that Murray is hardly integral to Mike using propofol.

Jessica said...


LMAO about TMZ's coverage of Murray. I remember that they were imitating him and repeating "Double propofol, stat!" as if that's all he did as a doctor, LOL.

fans are the ones making the noise and getting quoted in the press.

Isn't it crazy? And then you have the problem with the jury not being sequestered. All of this will filter in. And is it just me, but how the hell did they manage in a population of almost 10,000,000 people, to get only 1 black juror and have a juror whose met Mike? I think that is insane.

By the way, that photo of fans outside the courthouse has me rolling. It looks like auditions for the next season of "The Biggest Loser".

LMAO. I was personally shocked by their appearances. It looked they went to Mississippi, grabbed a bunch of trailers and shook'em out onto the courthouse sidewalks. Perhaps they're some of Lynette's kinfolk? LOL. (I couldn't resist).

S.U. said...


Murray should knew about the Demerol shots, he blamed Klein for addicting Michael.

Lady C said...


I was just watching Showbiz Tonight on HLN, and they were talking about Jermaine's last interview about MJ and what plans he had after his world comeback. Jermaine, is still adamant that Michael was not a drug addict...he's not the hard-core addict that the media/defense has painted him to be. Now, correct my me if I'm wrong, but there have been SEVERAL people outside of MJ himself who can attest that he had a drug problem. Hmmm...let's see who I can recall; Lisa Marie - she distinctly recalls a very 'drugged' MJ upon picking him up from office visits from Dr. Klein on many occasions
, and also MJ was 'high as a kite' in the Martin Bashir interview. Even MJ's personal assistant, who testified today, said that he could recall MJ seeming a little 'off' after visits with Klein. Even Rabbi Schumley, the ass-kisser, even said on at least two occasions that I can recall in his book that, 1) MJ on the one of the voice messages that he left for the Rabbi, he seemed like he could've possibly been on something, and 2) he recalls the hotel incident where he visits Michael, and MJ has instructed a doctor there to give him a dose of pain medication (for his foot/leg I think)that was so high, it would've killed a horse; as the Rabbi put it. And last but not least, MJ himself back in 1993, during the Chandler scandal, admitted world wide that he had an addiction problem to pain killers....Not to also forget how his dear friend Ms. Taylor witnessed all this. So there you have it...MJ was drug addict. Also, what normal person do you know who has a insomnia problem, hires an anesthesiologist to put them down every night and bring them up every morning? Poor Jermaine is in complete denial of his brother's drug addiction. Has he forgotten all about the so-called drug interventions that his family tried to stag on MJ, only to have every one of them to fail?? Drug addiction is an illness like any other addiction...once you've been addicted it becomes a life long battle; like a recovering alcoholic, you can fall of the wagon at any time...it never really goes away. MJ may have called himself getting treatment in 1993, but I think we can honestly say how much of a big failure that was...MJ wasn't very sincere in getting the help that he needed back then as there were other pressing 'issues' that he was really more concerned about. His rehab stent may have happened, but ideally it wasn't effective...MJ didn't want accountability and he wanted the treatment only on 'his' terms..it wasn't realistic, IMO. Not to sound harsh or unsympathetic towards MJ, but I'm just calling it like it see it.

Lady C said...


"MJ is responsible for what happened to MJ."

MJ was a drug addict...Period. Everyone knows you can only help an addict once they realize they have a problem and want help... IMO, Dr. Murray is guilty of negligence and malpractic­e if anything. The fact be known, MJ would have found someone else to be his drug supplier if Conrad Murray had declined. Let's not also forget that MJ had several medications in his possession from other doctors, and many of these prescriptions had his staff member's name on them. Sounds like classic drug addiction behavior to me...hiding it in clever ways from others to not be exposed. MJ wasn't fooling anyone; many ppl around him knew what really was going on with the 'man in the mirror', he just didn't want to change his ways, unfortunately. MJ created his own environment that ultimately lead to his own demise by actively seeking out and surrounding himself with those who would supply his drug habit, while cutting off his family members, and anyone else who genuinely cared about his welfare and wanted to help him. Remember, when it came to working for MJ, either you were on the 'MJ train' or you were not. If you were not on board, all ties were cut.

Also, MJ always played the victim. Someone in an a posting online put it exact...

"Putting the family dynamics aside, a person is always, always the keeper of their own health and circumstan­ce when they become an adult. But either they grow out of that family dynamic and move on with their own life, or they get all caught up in the fantasy life of being the victim; in MJ's case it was a rich fantasy life...and it would seem that he chose the victim role in his life. He constructe­d a fantasy world around himself instead of living in a world of reality of which he either couldn't or wouldn't live in. There were probably many people over the years who tried to help him; outsiders who truly cared about him. And there were also plenty of others more than willing to tell him what he wanted to hear, maybe to exploit his talent or just to be in the light of a great star. I'm not condoning the behavior of these folks by any stretch. But how long would a normal, caring human being be able to watch Michael slowly".

Jessica said...

Lady C,

I don't think Jermaine is in denial; I think he's just lying to protect Mike's image. It's understandable for two reasons: one, that's his brother and two (biggest reason), it's profitable to keep his image squeaky clean. You have to look at his actions for a marketing/PR standpoint. They know that the fans are a large and highly lucrative group. They also know that the fans tend to got batshit every time something bad about Mike surfaces. Look how they reacted to Aaron Carter and Anthony Pellicano revelations. (By the way, what do you think about the Aaron Carter issue? I think it proved mike's sleepovers weren't as innocent as he claimed). Jermaine also was the one telling Stacy Brown that Mike was addicted to pills, cocaine, and booze. Maybe the stuff he uses to glue his hair in place is messing with his memory, LOL.

And don't forget that he wrote a song about his struggle with Demerol! I don't blame Mike for his addiction; he was self-medicating to sooth his demons. But that in no way, shape or form should be an excuse used to push his death on someone else.

Oh, and I saw Nancy Grace yesterday on Dr. Drew, and she was saying Murray should have been charged with 1st degree murder. I think she's a little fuzzy on her law. You would need to show malice and intent to kill. She's horrible; she's paid to be outraged. I doubt she really even cares about Mike's death. Disgusting.

give it a break already, said...

here i am again, all that convo about michael jackson's voice being slurred and on drugs is enough, i bet that man is twisting in his grave knowing he is being analyzed this way by a bunch of no necked monsters who wouldnt have a clue if it walked up and bit them in the face of what it was like to be him. you ppl seem to think it was easy being him. yes he wanted fame earlier in life but to be the boy in the plastic bubble his whole life, nobody would want. i bet if you tried being him for a year you couldnt handle it so forgive him for being sick of it after forty some odd years. get over it and keep you tiny opinions to yourself cuz at the end of it all you couldnt help him anyway . in fact his spent his whole life trying to get away from a holes like youself. get a life.

Lady C said...


That was an error on my part! You're absolutely right, Jermaine is lying. My bad.lol Yes, it only makes sense to keep the clean cut image of MJ alive as much as and as long as possible to maintain the lifestyle the Jackson family has. Without it, it would be non-existent. It's funny however; how one sibling, Jermaine, would insist that MJ was not a drug user/addict, while you have his sister, LaToya, saying that MJ was not well, and even Janet who said on Oprah Winfrey after his death, that they ALL knew that Michael appeared to have had a drug problem and was not well. They tried to stag interventions on various occasions that were unsuccessful. Although MJ died on the watch of Conrad Murray, a drug addict/abuser is what eventually MJ had become...JMO. My opinion is that MJ wasn't completely innocent just by the fact that he chose to live by the sword and he died by the sword. Drug abuse kills! This went on with MJ for years and years. Yes, if MJ could give himself the propofol injection, there would be no need for Murray. However, Murray was MJ's 'vehicle' to get access to the stuff...that's something that MJ couldn't get on his own. It if wasn't to be Murray, it would've been someone else. My question is...why the hell did Murray order so much of the darn stuff? LOL An equivalence of 4 gallons...Wow! That I don't understand. I do have to admit though, Murray has a lot of explaining to do. But the truth be told, it doesn't look good at all for Conrad Murray and he'll most likely go down for MJ's death...I'm almost certain of it. The defense has not, IMO, done a good job of presenting their case thus far, and there's a lot of damning evidence against them that I can't even began to explain possible how they would recover. I think that putting Murray on the stand at this point to explain himself is completely worthless and would just zap his character and credibility 100%. I too thought about why didn't he just cut a plea bargain, but I heard that it had to be offered to him by the prosecution side first before he could do so. IDK how true that is or how the plea bargain process works to even know how to answer that correctly. At this point the defense would have to come up with a strategy that would show solid resonable doubt, and IDK if they can do that.

Not sure of the Aaron Carter bit, I haven't had a chance to read on it yet, but maybe I'll get a chance to. As for Grace, I don't think that she's all that heart-felt about MJ either...really. Remember how she tore up MJ during his molestation trial...she made him out to be a monster.

Either way, the whole trial thing is sad and unfortunate. Even if MJ is vindicated, which so far looks to be the case, no one really wins. You now not only have Michael's children and family who lost a loved one, but soon you'll have another family/children who are going to loose their father as well. While Murray will still be physically living, he will be completely destroyed. It's sad. But one thing that I think will happen in the near future for sure, is a re-evaluation and sound protocol of how propofol and alike drugs are handled here on out.

Desiree said...

Lady C:

With regard to Aaron Carter, I wrote a long, detailed post about him. Very informative!


Stroker aka 'give it up':

"i bet that man is twisting in his grave knowing he is being analyzed this way by a bunch of no necked monsters who wouldnt have a clue if it walked up and bit them in the face of what it was like to be him. you ppl seem to think it was easy being him."

Jacko did all of this to himself. If he didn't want to be called a drug addict and a pedophile, he shouldn't have been a drug addict and a pedophile.

You are completely delusional, and don't bother saying that you've read all the evidence. If you've done that, you would agree with everything I've written about on this blog.

Most fans have not read everything (all sides)--they just play a game of telephone and repeat the same tired and inaccurate talking points and spin; this is why they can still believe he was some angel.

Stop complaining, too. If you dislike this blog so much, you don't have to read it. Why put yourself through the agony, Stroker? Give it up!

Lady C said...

give it a break already:

I'm trying to understand where you're coming from, and I see what you're saying. However, MJ after he reached adult age, was responsible for himself and his choices. Yes, he was introduced to fame at an early age,and was greatly impacted by his parents, but he also had the option when he got out on his own to make the changes to his life that would allow him to be happy. Childhood is one thing, but there comes a time in our life where we as an adult are responsible for life and no one else. MJ had that option, he just chose not to take it. There have been child celebs who decided later on in their life that fame and stardom was no longer a life for them and went on with their own life and were happy. MJ chose to stay in the fame and stardom venue because it's what he ALWAYS wanted...he greatly wanted fame/stardom and the accolades that came with it even in his adulthood. When you want fame so great to the magnitude that he wanted and will go to great lengths to seek it, it will come with a hefty price; that's unavoidable...and MJ was a person who knew that all too well. Not to bash MJ, this is just my opinion.

S.U. said...

Liza Minelli claimed in a interview that Michael wanted to marry a mysterious girl in the late 80´s. Funny that new wasn´t spread too much but the fans panties begin to drop xD

Sbibak said...

Desiree, great entry. I can't agree more with you, Lucy, Jessica or Lady C. regarding Dr. Murray.
I've saw part of the trial through TMZ, and sadly, I think there is no hope for him.

Is so unfair how they are using Prince and Paris presence in Michaels room to play with people sensibility.
It is a shame nobody was so concerned about the children while he was alive and appeared clearly high in TV dangling one of them over a balcony.

The witnesses are acting like they never saw Mj on drugs and just June 25 they discovered Dr. Murray upstairs and what was going on. Lying. How they have the nerve to say they saw him at rehearsals in he was wonderful and bla, bla, bla. If This is it is a collection of the best moments of Mjs during rehearsals, I cant image how bad it looks what was left out. He looks like a wounded animal.

If at all, Arny Klein and other doctors who treat those neurotic stars in Hollywood and are more like sanctioned dealers, are more deserving of a trial than doctor Murray. At least he was a prestigious cardiologist, apparently never involved in this kind of business before he met MJ.

Sbibak said...

The most truthful song he ever wrote was “Morphine”. His lyrics were mostly a bunch of nonsense or silly, sappy songs. Morphine is almost the only one that you feel he's speaking about something real. The lyrics are raw. Take note, floons.

He was high or drunk in the press conference in London. He was high or drunk in almost of his public appearances since 2000. I remember the phone messages he left to one of his friends rambling about conspiracies and demanding money... he sounded almost as bad as in the one recorded in Murray's phone.

He was a junkie and this was the illness that killed him.

By the way, nice to see you again, Lady C.

Jessica said...

My question is...why the hell did Murray order so much of the darn stuff? LOL An equivalence of 4 gallons...Wow!

Lady C, the reason Murray ordered so much propofol is because you need a lot of it to keep a person sedated for an extended period of time. It rapidly dissipates in the body so it has to be supplied continuously. That's why it's used as an IV drip. Murray needed a lot because he was most likely going to have to administer it for the entire "This Is It" tour.

I agree, it doesn't look good for Murray. I mean, if you really think about it, it's an open and shut case, pretty straightforward. However, that doesn't mean he should be convicted, in my opinion. I get how it looks but what really is it going to do to convict him? Is this unique situation really the most appropriate example to "fix" the celeb-doctor "drug ring"? Is Murray the best guy to use to make a political statement? He doesn't even have a history of being a Dr. Feelgood. He was a respected and talented doctor that did a lot of free medical care. If anything, they should go after Klein; allegedly he was drug peddling as a medical resident!


I agree, I don't know if they will be able to mount a good defense. People are too fixated on the fact that it's a celebrity death.

Is so unfair how they are using Prince and Paris presence in Michaels room to play with people sensibility.
It is a shame nobody was so concerned about the children while he was alive and appeared clearly high in TV dangling one of them over a balcony.

LOL, I was thinking the exact same thing. All of this over Paris's reaction; it's just to characterize Murray as a monster for taking her father away. But what about her and her brother, when they were 4 and 5, seeing him passed out and unresponsive, having to call the nanny? Mike could have died then, and she would have had the same reaction. mike would have clearly been to blame for orphaning his kids that time; no guy to take the fall for his death. The only person that said anything about the safety of his kids was Gloria Allred, filing a claim with CPS.

The witnesses are acting like they never saw Mj on drugs and just June 25 they discovered Dr. Murray upstairs and what was going on. Lying.

I wonder if they've been bought off to say this. There is no way that they never seen him intoxicated. In 2005, Jesus Salas the ranch manager said he saw Mike high on something on many occasions, and you mean to tell me that his own personal assistants never seen him high? Please. Many of them are from the Nation of Islam, probably the same ones that Jermaine brought in. If he and the Jackson family is hellbent on keeping Mike's image profitable, I wouldn't put it passed them to dole out some cash to send the doctor up the river while keeping the dirty secrets outside of public knowledge. And you are right, he looked horrible in "This Is It". All of this garbage about him being healthy is just that, garbage. How is in one interview they say he was looking awesome and in the next interview (or in Kenny Ortega's case, his email to Randy Philips), they say he's out of it, rambling obsessively, even that Mike needed a psych evaluation? It's all about keeping up the image.

Jessica said...


Don't forget "Stranger in Moscow" and "Speechless"

Both are, more or less, odes to the trials and triumphs, respectively, of being a pedo. LOL.

Lady C said...


Thanks for enlightening me on the Propofol; I had no idea that it took so much to keep a person under.lol Your point about Murray ordering enough for the duration of the "This Is It" tour was something I hadn't thought of. I wonder if anyone else had thought of that, especially since everyone thinks that Murray was crazy for ordering it in large amounts while trying to wean MJ off of it. It's too damn bad that the jury couldn't be sequestered. I totally disagree with Judge Pastor's stance on that...There's no way in hell the jurors are not going to be exposed to the media and all the outside reports...it's just not going to happen. For the life of me, I can't understand why in the hell would they select MJ fans to be on the jury. Yes, I know it's almost impossible to find someone who doesn't know about MJ or the circumstances surrounding his death, to think that I think is being unrealistic. However; there are people out there who are not MJ fans. Remember how Tom Sneddon was a stickler in selecting jurors for MJ's trial? They couldn't be black, yet alone a fan of MJ. Lol We did see the defense trying to trip up Alberto Alvarez today in his testimony...Hmm. I didn't get to hear all of Kai Chase today so I don't know what the out come with her was. We'll just have to wait and see how the defense presents their case after the prosecution. It'll be interesting to see if they can put a twist or a spin on things...If they can that is because it doesn't look like it's going to be any easy feat. Now there's talk of Murray testifying on the stand...Not sure how that's going to go over, but perhaps if he does, maybe some of his testimony will draw out more personal things about MJ that could prove to be embarrassing or give pause. IDK. We can only speculate and predict the outcome of the trial only by what we've seen thus far, but nothing is for certain. The Anthony Casey trial proved that for sure.

As for MJ and his staff of 'Boy Scout' bodyguards, they all are lying when they say that they've never seen MJ high/intoxicated. Everyone and their granny has stated that they've seen MJ high at sometime or another. LOL

MJ was NOT well in the 'TIT' documentary, at all. Heck, even Karen Faye and both of MJ's costume designers admitted that on live TV on 20/20. They said that MJ was so bad off, that they practically let the tape run out because he was in no condition to do anything...he couldn't get through one song or dance routine without falling over. I believe they said they spliced and pasted the film in many segments to make a complete shoot. Otherwise without it, the documentary wouldn't have existed because MJ was in no condition to do it. Like you said, even Kenny Ortega noticed how bad off MJ was.


The prosecution using the emotions of Paris is not surprising. They're playing that tape and milking it all for what it's worth. I can only imagine how traumatizing that was for her to see her father in the condition that she did, and her reaction is normal...it's something that anyone would expect if they saw what she saw. It's sad. What can you say...It's simply just a maneuvering tactic on the prosecution's part.

Thank you for the welcome back.lol

Jessica said...

Your point about Murray ordering enough for the duration of the "This Is It" tour was something I hadn't thought of. I wonder if anyone else had thought of that, especially since everyone thinks that Murray was crazy for ordering it in large amounts while trying to wean MJ off of it.

Lady C, yes, I honestly think it is a scare tactic. They are just trying to hammer home that this amount equals negligence of Murray's part, but truthfully, that is how much you'd need to use for an extended amount of time. I've said before that I was put under for extractions of my four wisdom teeth, and the procedure took about 45 minutes and I still had use a big drip bag of the anesthetic. So if Mike was trying to sleep for hours at a ltime, it was going to take a very large amount of the propofol, probably even more than the 4 gallons that Murray ordered. He'd most likely have to order more still.

When i was a freshman in college, my psychology professor said that he'd use to be called as an expert witness in court cases. He said he didn't do it anymore because it weighed on his conscience. To him, trials were not about getting down to the truth, they were about who can tell the best story, with an expert witness on both sides with completely different findings--even if the experts are in the same field. He's right, unfortunately.

I don't know if Murray should go on the stand. To me, if he has a good explanation for his behavior, he should testify. What better way to here what really happened that night-morning than from the only person alive that was there? I think if he's truthful, than he should testify and return some humanity to the "evil monster" portrayal the prosecutors are creating. Like Mike never took the stand in 2005 because Sneddon would have ate him alive. He was guilty of being a molester. Personally, I would have loved to read Mike's testimony to see how he defended himself, but guilty men never testify; it's a rule. Murray should testify to show he isn't hiding anything. But a skilled lawyer can trip up anyone. Look at Johnnie Cochran and OJ; he managed to create reasonable doubt in the face of overwhelming evidence.

I honestly don't know how Murray will fair. He'll probably go up the river.

Oh, I was watching E News and they said that Murray was verbaly accosted in the courthouse hallway but a "heavily tattooed woman with a stroller". She keep yelling "killer" or "murderer" and that judgment is coming. WTF? What is wrong with these Jacko fans? How the hell can they be so emotional over a man they never even met? It's ridiculous. Some fans had posters that superimposed Murray's face with the Grim Reaper and had Murray dressed as a clown saying "he's a joke of a cardiologist" or something of that nature. Tell that to the patients he saved. To think, all of this over a dead pedo. SMH

Desiree said...

I wrote this piece before the trial began and, as before it really started, just like now, I just don't want to follow it really because I feel so sorry for Dr. Conrad Murray; I just think there is no hope for him--they've got f'loons on the jury. I don't even know how that's even constitutional.

But I do look a little bit.

It's funny how these talking heads on TV following this case are highlighting the fan loonies and they're despicable placards. I'm thinking, "Who the hell cares what these fans think? They only like him because he can moonwalk and made Thriller..."

The rabidity is sickening; if I was a juror, I'd acquit just due to the fans' irrationality.

Too bad someone didn't just put a bullet through Jacko's head. Then the fans' picket line--"Burn in hell Murray!!!"--wouldn't be so reprehensible... perhaps it 'may' even be understandable.

I wonder if Jordie Chandler killed Michael Jackson how the media would discuss the case. Nancy Grace's low IQ'd ass has skewed her coverage so against Murray--saying that Jacko became an object to the people around him (really?) and that if we put Jacko on trial, instead of Murray, who'd fight for us, blah, blah, blah--but would she do the same against Jordie?

And if Jordie shot Jacko, claiming Jacko ruined his family's life because he'd molested him, what would the fans say? Would they say, "Justice 4 Jacko"?

Now that would be a good trial! All of the gory details of that 1993 situation. Jacko's legacy would be ruined for good, as it should be.

Desiree said...


"To think, all of this over a dead pedo. SMH"


And I said it wasn't about his being a pedophile child molester. But, truthfully, I do think we should kinda think about Jacko being a pedophile.

But his being a drug addict is most important.

So let's put everything on the scale...

Victim who was undoubtedly a drug addict, absolutely a pedophile, and most likely a child molester...


Defendant who has a thing for the ladies, has some child support issues, but has did pro bono work for his heart patients.

Murray for the win! At least on Desiree's scale. (I didn't tally in Jacko's 'charity work' because all celebrities give to charity and they usually put it on their resumes for narcissistic reasons. Jacko is no different.)

To me, the question is not about law, because there are tons of laws on the books that are just ridiculous, but about the specific 'Big Picture' in this case: should a respected cardiologist (is there any evidence that he was a Pusher like the evil Arnold Klein?) go to jail for someone who'd wanted the drug and had done the drug before and would do the drug again (had he survived, since there is precedent with this fact)?

If a defense attorney could get the opportunity to shape the discourse in that direction, I believe Murray would have a chance.

But, given this particular judge, I don't know if that's possible, even though it is highly relevant.

Another thing: I find it interesting that when Jacko was on trial (and I didn't follow it--I was 15-16 and couldn't give a flying fig about the Bleached One--but I can read transcripts of old broadcasts during the trial), it seemed like there was more precaution in the media when discussing the defendant, which was Jacko, than in this case.

I think you have to chalk that up to the celebrity factor: celebrities--because they are God's Chosen--always get the benefit of the doubt. There is no presumption of innocence given to a defendant when the celebrity is the victim; no victim is a bigger victim than a celebrity.

Murray's going down. To see his face in court is just tragic. I bet he thinks everyday what he could have done differently. Like never treating the colds of Jacko's test tube babies.

Lady C said...


I was thinking the same thing the other day in regards to what you said about your professor...at the end of the day, it's not about TRUE justice; it comes down to who can tell the best story regardless of background/expertise,etc. It's almost like someone going to a job interview...you go in and tell the best BS you can to get the job regardless of your past experience. It's all about convincing and acting. I think that it can also be said that it's something that carries over into the lawyer venue as well...again it's about who can put on the best act that's believable. I remember watching the movie, "Rainmaker", with Matt Damon, and at the end of the movie, he said something that's true...it was something to the effect that when one goes into law to fight for true justice and goes into it with genuine intentions to get justice, they
eventually somewhere along the way 'lose' themself, and become just another 'shark' out there swimming
in the water; you become tainted so to speak. Perhaps that goes to say that justice is not completely 'black and white' some shades of gray are permitted. IDK... I guess that's why I never became a lawyer; too much politics and red tape for me. lol However, I know there are no absolutes or guarantees in life for anything, except for death and taxes as the saying goes! lol

Now the breaking story as I type this, is how Judge Pastor has NOW decided to put a gag order on all lawyers/staff, etc. associated with this particular trial...all because a lawyer on the defense side gave his opinion to the media. IMO, a dollar short a day late!! What a dumbass!! LOL According to the judge, the defense was 'irresponsible' and could've put the trial in jeopardy. Now depending on who you ask, some will say that there was no gag order in place by the judge...some will argue that the judge makes this
condition known to all in the court room that no discussions of anykind can be conducted until the trial is over. However there was no 'official' gag order in place;one that would have been made known publicy. The judge's concern was that any opinions would possibley get back to the jurors. But, if you will recall, Judge Pastor was the one who rejected the request for a sequestered jury to begin with! lol Why? Because according to him, he had faith that this would be a fair trial and that the jury would uphold the law and not allow outside media reports to influence them...he didn't expect for them to come into contact with ANY outside reports??? That's completely crazy! So, if that's true and he believed that, then why the hell should he be so concerned about this lawyer's opinions getting back to the jury? LOL LOL The truth of the matter is, the judge should have sequestered the jury from the very beginning when it was requested. Period. He's been in this business long enough to know that when there is a high profile trial like this, the OJ trial, the Anthony or Melendez trial, as a responsible judge, you sequester the jury! Never mind the cost, money, budgets, etc. A person's life is on the line.

Lady C said...

Jessica (cont.)

Now I know from a few years back when I was on a trial for child molestation, we too weren't sequestered...and although it wasn't as high profile, I wasn't able to completely seclude myself from the outside media, reprots, etc. I did as instructed by the judge; not to discuss, read or research the case until after the trial is complete. However, realistically, I was not able to completely avoid outside influences. For example, being out in a public place somewhere and accidently over hearing others discuss the case and give their opinion is something that can't always be avoided. Yes, in some instances one may be able to remove themself from that, but not always can you do that. That's when true honesty comes on the juror's part; not allowing themself to be completely persuaded by what they hear and see outside of the court room vs. what they heard/wittnessed in the court room. But truthfully not everyone can do that; there's always a chance of having that one person be influenced by outside factors; media, family members, tv, newspapers, cell phones, etc. It can't be completely avoided unless there is complete isolation of the jury from the beginning. And even with sequestering, you still have to exercise some restraints of what can/can't be done by the juror while in seclusion. You have to remember, times and media have changed...media has changed because TECHNOLOGY has changed! lol Now days there's NOTHING one can't do on their cell phone...with FB and Twitter, everywhere you go, it's there. Bottom line is, Judge Pastor should have played it safe anyway and sequestered the jury from the get go so there wouldn't even be a remote chance of something leaking out and influencing the jury. Hell, I even heard while Pastor's order came in that there were reports from those on HLN that said LaToya Jackson was twittering from the court, forget what the defense lawyer did. LOL Need I say anymore? lol According to my memory, when I served on the jury, NO phones whatsover were allowed in the courtroom yet alone the court house.

A question for u...obviously MJ was alread dead on the scence before help came, perhaps for quite some time. Would an autopsy be able to determine the exact time of death? If so, wouldn't it have been listed on the report, provided the report was official and not 'tainted'? As there is some belief that the public report is not completely authentic at the hands of the Jackson family.

What is your take on Murray's reaction thus far in the trial? People seem to be taking note of his reaction and composure.

Lady C said...


I stand corrected in my previous statement...justice is green. Just as Desiree said earlier in this blog in regards to what Johnnie Cochran said, he was right. That's what's happening here in the Murray trial. They say that MJ is not the one on trial, Murray is...however, it's MJ's celebrity and money that is on trial and it's an influencing factor. Let's face it, money and celebrity in this country is a determining factor when it comes to justice. It's the 'have vs. the have-nots' and the have-nots always win. Perhaps society should have it 'official' that if you have any shred of celebrity or any mass amount of money, regardless of who you are and what you've done, you are excluded from any kind of accountability; the law does not apply to you. Hey, I mean we're doing that any way...why not make it official? lol Unfortunately, Murray will be made an example of and have to take the wrap for MJ's death.

Again I apologize for the lengthiness of my posts, but like Desiree said earlier to Opinionation, getting out completely what I want to say doesn't work in short order. LoL!

Desiree said...

Lady C:

I watched a bit of the case on TV today (I'm typically off on Fridays), and it seems to me that TruTV (formerly CourtTV) cuts the broadcast of the case to look favorable for the Prosecution.

It is amazing to me that--according to the fans--these were the same gaggle of reporters who'd covered the Jacko Trial in 2005 and, according to the fans, skewed the coverage against Michael Jackson, but they are now acting like a Jesus Christ was slain!

(Maybe that's hyperbole but it's pretty skewed, in my opinion.)

It's sort of sickening. I've always found Nancy Grace despicable, personally, regardless if she was ever rightfully calling Jacko a pedophile; she's paid to be outraged and represent the 'rage' of 'Middle America' who want 'justice' and it's complete bullshit. But, as per the constant barrage of the phrase "Tot mom" to describe Casey Anthony (she never bothered to use her real name--intelligent people know it was her way to dehumanize the woman; I think she was guilty, though), I seriously believe she tries to influence non-sequestered juries.

She is a total hack and she disgusts me. I find it mildly humorous, however, that every time she sums up the Murray case--saying, "Dr. Murray shot the King of Pop full of propofol and then left him alone in bed surrounded by his own urine" (bitch, please!)--she always adds that nonsense about Jacko shouldn't be the one on trial, etc., etc. She knows that everyone saw her calling Jacko a hardcore drug addict and a pedophile--one episode of her show she continued to harp on his boy books and how they were on the NAMBLA reading list, LOL--and that her Murray sum ups make her sound like a complete hypocrite.

The woman is vile and, personally, I believe she has a low IQ; the intellectual side of her brain activity was supplanted with raw and LOUD emotional outbursts.

Couple all of the media shenanigans together with the fact there are Jacko f'loons on the jury, Murray is done for.

MURRAY NEEDS TO TESTIFY! He has to. Only he and Jacko know what happened in that room and only he and Jacko know the dynamic between them; he needs to get up there and give some context. I hope the Defense puts on a good rebuttal case. Murray shouldn't be on trial AT ALL, poor guy... It's the drugs Jacko abused for years that sent him to his grave; no one else is responsible, ultimately, except maybe Evil Klein. There's no evidence Murray was a pusher, as I've said before.

I don't know if previous propofol usage is considered relevant in this case (I have no idea why they didn't let Jason Pfeiffer testify, seeing that he knew Jacko was looking for an anesthesiologist! Highly relevant!), but, assuming it is, the defense should bring up the fact that, if a cardiologist is considered so 'unqualified' to act as Jacko's milkman, why did Jacko allow Murray to ever go ahead with the 'service'?

This would bring the onus of the blame for Jacko's death back onto Michael Jackson himself!

Off topic, but what do you think of the Aaron Carter issue from 2 months ago? You weren't around to read that post I'd written on it and I was wondering if you did... It was very explosive--and he pretty much proved Jacko was into young boys--but the fans shut him down. They were scared shitless, though!

Lucy said...

@ Desiree, your point about Jordie Chandler is an interesting one. I suspect that the media would side with the the defendant in that case. I believe that the media typically will side with victims. However, given that MJ had been accused of molesting this boy back in 1993, the media would just be confirming what they already felt. Jordie Chandler would just be seen as a man taking revenge on his abuser.

I personally believe that the way the media is portraying Dr. Murray is in line with what the public wants. MJ's fans are the largest consumers of this whole thing so they will skew their coverage to cater to them. It just good business! Your point about celebrities being given the benefit of the doubt as defendants and being 100 percent the victims if they are plaintiff's is valid, but again, that is because that it what we want to see. We've propped these people up to the level of gods and we don't want to see them fail (for the most part).

You said: "the defense should bring up the fact that, if a cardiologist is considered so 'unqualified' to act as Jacko's milkman, why did Jacko allow Murray to ever go ahead with the 'service'?"

Good point. I was thinking the same thing as I watched the man whose company made the pulse oximeters testify. Clearly the prosecutors were trying to establish negligence on Murray's part by saying he bought the pulse oximeter that wasn't designated for extended wear and the one that didn't have an alarm. If supposedly he was under-qualified and that was the reason he got the wrong one, why did MJ hire him? Why did he decide to put his trust in a doctor that maybe didn't have the expertise to work with anesthesia? I think it really does go back onto MJ; he was the one that needed that fix and he would stop at nothing to get it. He played with fire and got burned. Only because he needed someone to inject him with the drug is the reason someone else is on trial. MJ is to blame for his death.

We just have to wait and see if the defense's argument about MJ drinking the propofol holds water. We have no clue if propofol ingested orally is toxic, but since they said it, maybe they know something we don't?

Lady C said...


I couldn't agree with you more...Murray is in a big pickle right now, and He as to testify; there's no way around it. I have to admit that I would be curious to see all what he has to say and what all he knows that none of us know. Who knows, there's the chance that if he starts talking, the jury may get an ear full and learn more than what they cared to know. The reporters talking about the case are hypocrites...they weren't defending MJ when he was on trial in 2005. They're just riding and glorifying the bandwagon; all because it's popular right now to do so. Remember,
they tore MJ's ass up in molestation trial! lol With that said, makes me wonder if the Jackson family has taken notice of that?...how do they feel knowing that the very same reporters and lawyers who are glorifying him now are the exact same ones who crucified him during the 2005 trial? If I were them, it would send a message that resonates loud and clear; that the media doesn't really care about MJ like they lead on. I mean hey, MJ said it himself, 'They really don't care about us'. All this so-called sympathy towards MJ now is unreal and it is sickening. Hypocrites! JMO--LOL!

I plan on reading the Aaron Carter entry this evening. That will be my entertainment for this evening; enough of the Murray trial for now. LOL

I too have wondered...why would MJ be stupid enough to hire Murray to be his doctor and caretaker if he was so incompetent, yet alone be caretaker of his kids??? Murray just has to take the stand and defend himself--he has to because they're eating him alive.

Desiree said...


I brought up the Jordie Chandler point because it's something I would like a fan to answer, and critically. Jordie Chandler shooting Jacko in the head would be the proverbial 'smoking gun'--pardon the pun--to Jacko having molested him. There would be no doubt; there would be no way for Jacko fans to explain why the boy who'd accused Jacko of molestation shot Michael Jackson besides his being a victim.

I would just be interested in the fans' reaction to that. Of course, I'd be glued to the TV screen, LOL.

I plan to write more on that case soon, three posts specifically. Amazingly, with all of the evidence available to the public with regard to that case, fans have yet to 'get it'. It makes me laugh...

Lady C:

I doubt Murray will testify, although he should. Most defense attorneys don't 'trust' their clients' abilities to withstand cross-examination. I believe part of this is because at least 90 percent of defendants are guilty. I know Tom Mesereau harped on Jacko testifying in his opening statement back in '05 but we all know that was a ruse.

But I bet that would have been awesome testimony to read! Jacko would've crumbled, probably even started to cry, LOL. And it's a pissing shame that they were never able to interrogate him either.

As an aside, I believe Gavin Arvizo was molested, regardless of the family's past. The fact that they found the boys' underwear in Paris' bathroom--the same size and brand worn by Gavin--is just odd.

And we know, seeing that 8 months had elapsed between the search and the alleged crime, there would never be any evidence found proving a molestation, which hard to do on it's own anyway.

If truly believe that if Sneddon had only charged Jacko with the alcohol plying and the molestation, still introducing in the 1108 evidence, Michael Jackson would be alive today, albeit in prison.

But all of that's in the past.

I'm just waiting for something good to come out of this trial. Something explosive, like illicit drug use.

By the way, what was it like to be a juror on a child molestation case, Lady C? Was it gruesome?

Lady C said...


I have a question that I asked Jessica earlier....IMO, I believe that MJ was dead way before all the commotion happened in the room like its been told--can an autopsy or any other forensic testing determine an exact time of death or a good estimate of it? I'm curious, because it seems apparent that MJ was long gone way before help arrived...the question was when did he actually die? Is there a possibility that MJ somewhere in the time before all of this happened, slipped himself a mickey that Murray knew nothing about? The reason I say this, is because it doesn't make sense to me now knowing that Propofol dissipates quickly and doesn't stay in your system for long periods of time and there was other drugs found in his system. Please forgive me, but I have to admit that I'm not all that pharmacological savvy when it comes to some drugs. We know what the toxicology reports say, however; I think we can honestly say that there's a remote possibility that the autopsy report that was made public may have been doctored up ???...for obvious reasons that is. lol So I guess the real issue here really lies in the time line of the events leading up to MJ's final hours, and I know that's what the defense is trying to get at. Btw, I read somewhere that the lawyers on the defense team looked as if they hated their client, Conrad Murray. I really hadn't noticed that reaction other than the defense lawyers looking stressed and Murray's stoic composure. The whole thing is wild, IMO.lol

What do you make of the 'private cream' issue that Murray supposedly wanted to go back and get to protect MJ's privacy? Do you think that there's some truth to it? You have to wonder though; its been told many times over from several ppl including MJ's sister LaToya, that MJ used and ordered a skin cream by the mother load...perhaps there is some truth to that. I don't know all what and how much stuff was retrieved by police/detectives after MJ's death, but you have to remember MJ's family; La Toya, Janet, and even Katherine maybe, had ransacked the house and removed many items from it way before the police ever got a chance to search it. I too, truly don't think that Murray will take the stand, but it would be VERY interesting to hear what he had to say about all of this in his defense because the prosecution has done a great job of making him look very incompetent and grossly negligent as a doctor...enough to make the average person to think that Murray was down right stupid.

Lady C said...

Desiree (cont.)

I know that his getting up on that stand is taking an enormous risk for his defense, but he has a lot of explaining to do. You have to admit that.lol By the otherside of the token, the prosecution would pulverize him. At this point all I can say is, that the defense really needs to beef it up and shake up the minds of the jurors by placing confusion and concrete doubt to possibly get a hung jury for their client, Murray.

If MJ were alive today, I wonder what he would have to say about all of this and how the public is lynching Murray? Would he show love and compassion for Murray and express his need for the public to do the same as well? I wonder, IF MJ had been found guilty on some charge back in the 2005 trial, if he would stil be alive today? I know his fans and family thought he was innocent, but now I wonder if they all stop to think that if he had been convicted and not acquitted that it would have been a blessing in disquise? Now of course that's provided if they had a way of knowing what was to come for MJ later down the road, which did come to pass, and they --the fans, couldn't and wouldn't think that such was on the horizon. However, you have the realistics who knew what would possibly come to pass as a result of MJ's lifestyle of drug abuse. No one can be absolutely certain what the future holds; we can only predict ...but I'm willing to bet that if they had crystal ball insight as to what was to happen to MJ, they would have thought things differently about the outcome of the 2005 trial. Yeah, the MJ fans would've been very upset and probably would have vowed to get him released by going off on some kind of crazied campaign to get him some way or another, lol, but at least he would have been ALIVE and not dead to the world; although he may not have withstood incarceration for very long. But oh I forgot, according to Jermaine, MJ was to have been fled from the country if he was convicted in any way. lol I personally don't think that would've happened because the judge would have most likely taken him into custody immediately before there was a chance of that happening. If he was incarceraed, there would still be those who thought he got what he deserved, and there would also be the massive MJ fan base that would have supported him; they wouldn't have gone anywhere. You see the proof now...even in death, MJ can still draw a massive crowd.

Lady C said...


To answer your question about what is was like to sit a a juror on a molestation trial...to be honest, it was very sad and down right disgusting. It was a case that involved a little 7 year old girl who was molested by her step father. This asshole was bold!! He went to the lengths of filming EVERY sexual ecounter they had by hiding a camcorder in his bedroom closet, and he also filmed them together in other locations of the house, such as the master bathroom. When the shit it the fan and the authorities were alerted to what was happening by the child's mother--after she took her daughter to the ER for an exam, the county sherrif's department got an arrest warrant/search warrant and found 'unknown' video tapes that were hidden in the house and exposed his ass! Sitting on the jury and looking at all the video contents was NAUSEATING!!! We were required to sit there and WATCH all the sickening filth that this man had done to this little girl, detail by detail by detail. The film itself was equivelant to an estimated 3 hrs. It was just like watching a hardcore porn movie, except that instead of two consenting adults, it was with a child. I sat there with soo many emotions I didn't know where to began to sort them out....I was very angry, enraged, sad, crying, disgusted, in disbelief --all at the same time, and you could sense that the rest of the jurors felt that at the same time as well. The tension in that court room was so intense and thick, it would have choked you. In my entire life, I have never seen anything like that before. It's one thing to read about it and visualize it in your mind, but to ACTUALLY see it with your own eyes is something entirely different! Throughout the entire trial, the accuser was absolutely silent and didn't utter a word, and he also held his head down the entire time in shame. The defense lawyer wasn't really defensive in his client's allegations, hardly at all. I'm sure he probably thought, "Why the hell am I here defending this creep? We have no absolute leg to stand on whatsoever". But as we all know, everyone, guilty or innocent have the right to representation/fair trial.

Although I, along with another individual, were alternate jurors and sat on the jury, we weren't involved in the verdict deliberations and sentencing. However, shortly after the jury was turned loose to deliberate, they came back within less of an hour with an unanimous guilty verdict. He was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole.

Lady C said...

Desiree (cont.)

This trial was about 4 years ago, and was the only jury I had ever served on. Prior to that I was always summoned to jury duty-- 5 times, but never a selected as a juror until that time.

I read the Aaron Carter entry that you wrote, and I must say that it was interesting....sounds convincing that what we've speculated about MJ could all too well be true. Especially considering the fact that Aaron said these things after his drug rehab. I think he was very sincere in what he said; he didn't bash MJ or sound as if he had any animosity towards him, but just pure concern about his behavior....that in itself speaks volumes to me.lol Although Aaron was not aware that everything said was not off the record and was being privately recorded, it tells the truth. I bet Daphne did the recording secretely just for plain old 'insurance' puposes. She wasn't about to he taken again as a fool...remember the interview with Grace; I don't think that went over too well, especially since there's been a lot of recants and the 'everyone's a liar' complexes. LOL It goes to show more that MJ had a drug/substance abuse problem.

Jessica said...

Lady C,

The time of death is based on the temperature of the body. The human body self-regulates its own temperature so once death happens, body temperature falls from the more or less standard 98.6 degrees in a relatively constant rate of change. All a medical examiner has to do is measure the body temperature of the corpse and via a mathematical formula, be able to estimate when the person died.

Also, the body's muscles relax after death, giving the corpse rather loose and fluid movement. Then, after several hours the body will tense up in rigor mortis, becoming relatively unmovable for an amount of time. There is also bloating of the body because of the build up of gases in the tissues; after death compounds break down and there is no gas exchange.

Basically there is tons of ways to determine the time of death, but temperature is usually the first way to go. If Mike was cold, and the paramedics say he felt cool, he would have had to be dead for a least several minutes.

About the propofol, he had enough still in his system so the coroner was able to find some. I wonder how fast the blood stops circulating once the heart stops. Did they find any pooling of the propofol in his vessels, signaling that maybe the propofol was still being pumped in after death making it look like more was in there than what killed him? How long was he dead when Murray found him? I ask this because I wonder if Murray had been in there, would he have still died? The prosecutors say Mike died because Murray pumped him with propofol and then left the room, which is why he died.

Maybe Mike's body had enough. I'm assuming that the amount of drug he was using was the standard general anesthesia dosage, so how could that possibly have killed him? He didn't have any food in his stomach; you're not supposed to eat for at least 6 hrs, so that couldn't have resulted in any interaction. He was hooked up to an oxygen tank and had one of those pulse monitors on. Besides not being in a hospital setting and having perhaps a nurse, he was pretty well prepared for an administration of propofol. So really, isn't it not Mike's own body that did him in? How could Murray have foreseen that Mike's heart would stop working? I believe that Mike's body was so drug ravaged that it was bound to give out on him. So really how is that Murray's fault? Mike had been using the drug before and most likely assured Murray that everything will be okay. Maybe complacency set in, who knows. Mike decided to play Russian roulette with his life... and lost.

I do agree with you that Murray has some explaining to do. Maybe Mike would have been alive had he called 911 earlier; I'm not so sure. It really does depend on the time between when he actually died and when he was found. I think people don't realize that not everyone is going to be cool, calm, and collected when shit hits the fan. I think Murray freaked, which is a normal human reaction. They're acting like it was willful.

Also I'm curious about the thing Cherilyn Lee said. She said that Mike called her and said one side of his body was hot and the other was cold. Was Murray in the room? Was it a result of something Mike took that was given to him by Murray or was it something that he self-administered, like perhaps another drug? I'm assuming Murray wasn't there because he called her; if Murray was there he wouldn't have called her, I assume. If this is something that happened because of what Mike did to himself, it could be used to show that he was again used to taking drug matters into his own hands bolstering Murray's defense about the fatal dose being self-administered outside of his watch. Murray did say Mike kept waking up, perhaps it was during one of these sessions that he gave it to himself.

Lady C said...


Are you and Desiree one and the same person? LOL! I say that because you both have a writing style that's very effective and well put together. You both know exactly how to put things in the right context while getting your point across effectively, good communication skills I have to say! LOL Unfortunately I wasn't that good of a writer; I always had trouble getting to the point with less words possible; but I tend to write how I talk; what can I say! lol

As far a Murray is concerned, I can't pin it down exactly, but I think there's a good chance that MJ may have given himself a little extra something along the way without Murray's knowledge...it may not have been extra propofol, but something else. Too me, that doesn't sound too far fetched. One has to remember that a drug addict/abuser has a need and will do whatever to satisfy that need; even at the expense of costing them their life. They worry about 'now' and not the consequences that could happen later. They become invincible thinking that all is okay, they get the 'I can handle it' mentality and push the envelope further and further; different drugs are added to the mix as well as higher dosages to achieve maximum effect....MJ had that mentality. You have a point about the pooling of the propofol in his vessels during the autopsy. But the concern there is...you have to ask yourself how accurate and legit that autopsy report is. Was the amount of propofol found in his system whats been reported or was it less? I wouldn't surprise me in the least that report made known to the public completely truthful; I believe somethings about MJ were left out intentionally, and this was probably done at the request of MJ's family. THEY know the real outcome of his autopsy and it's probably not pleasant sad to say. Repeated drug use over a duration of time will eventually kill you. The body can't handle it and shuts down. I believe on that day, MJ's body just said, "I quit".

It's a damn shame that half of the jurors are MJ fans. I know some of them have had issues of alcohol/substance abuse via family members or friends, but having favor of MJ makes it very difficult. Especially if you are a die-hard fan of his and can't see MJ for the true person he was...any negativity about him doesn't come to mind. A realist can stand back and see the human side of MJ and his flaws outside of his celebrity...flaws that none of us are immune to.

Desiree said...

Lady C:

You're trial experience... poor child, that's all I can say. Hopefully she's gotten good therapy since her abuse. Why did the guy not plead guilty, especially given the fact he'd been recorded? Had he not known that they'd found his tapes?

I've never been called for jury duty and it's always been something I'd wanted to do. I think you have to have voted for a number of years. I've never voted... shame.

What you've described makes me think about child molestation cases as a whole and that that child was fortunate that the man had videotaped them. Many abuse victims are not as lucky so it will end up as a s/he said-s/he said. No evidence does NOT mean innocent. Sometimes the best a DA has is a child witness and it sort of hurts your heart thinking the child was abused but it isn't enough to convince a jury.

All of what you described makes me think of the 2005 trial, as well, where the jurors said they wanted a so-called 'smoking gun', which is almost never there in a child molestation case, especially when the boy or girl alleged no penetration.

I suppose there is a reason for presumption of innocence--and thank God it is there--but it wears on your intellect to think that jurors like those in Jacko's case were looking for something that is statistically unlikely to be there. It's always important to have smart jurors in circumstantial cases.

Did you have dreams about that after seeing it? I know some things just cannot be 'unseen'!

This is tangential but I've never heard of getting life imprisonment for child sexual abuse/rape. It just seems like an incredibly long time to put someone in jail for not committing a murder. I know the US Supreme Court a few years back ruled that it was unconstitutional to execute someone convicted of child rape. The law they struck down was in Louisiana, I believe.

With regard to Aaron Carter, I believe the anecdotes given to Daphne Barak were not only believable but totally damning. It is extremely frustrating to me that that particular story was pushed to the side. I think what Barak did was secretly record the interviews that had no images but the others were more on the record. I could be wrong, though. Perhaps they were all secretly recorded, which makes them even more believable.

I truly believe that the media is now complicit in hiding Jacko's history of child sexual abuse because they perhaps would feel guilty if his own kids were to hear or read a report of it.

They are going to learn sooner or later... why do that to the victims? It's completely despicable.

Aaron Carter confirmed the alcohol giving. We know Jacko was a drug addict. Explosively, then you had Aaron Carter stating that Michael Jackson attempted to get into his bed while he was asleep, that he'd shrieked, "Oh, I didn't know!", and then slithered back into his own bed. I have to admit that I even felt sorry for Michael, seeing that he was obviously displaying his addiction to boys that evening with Aaron.

Desiree said...


"I know that his getting up on that stand is taking an enormous risk for his defense, but he has a lot of explaining to do. You have to admit that.lol"

Lady C, I understand what you mean but I don't think about it like that. To me, this is the death of an addict by the drugs he'd abused for years; it's very cut-and-dry.

I see it as solely being Michael Jackson's fault that he is dead. I realize some people believe addiction is a disease and I agree with that. However, drug addicts prepare their own coffins. I don't agree with people blaming Murray in this instance because is there any evidence that he was like Arnold Klein?

Is there any evidence that he'd done something unethical before being Jacko's propofol guy?

By all accounts, Murray was a spectacular doctor and a kind man, very attentive. I believe this is why Michael Jackson hired him (and he didn't just hire him to do the propofol!). But, the bottom line for me is that Jacko had done the propofol before and it is obvious he is the common denominator in his death, meaning you can move around or change all of the other players but Jacko would still be there wanting drugs, asking/paying for them, and abusing them.

If Murray wasn't hired, it would have been someone else. We know this! And how do we know if Jacko's body wasn't completely wrecked by the years of drug abuse that he would be unable to handle more of the propofol sleep sessions?

All of this is reasonable doubt and is extremely pertinent.

I said in the entry that laws can sometimes be wrong and that application of law is sometimes wrong. I think Dr. Conrad Murray should not be on trial. I don't think he murdered anyone. I don't even think he was necessarily 'grossly negligent' to have left the room. By the legal definition, that is. I'm not saying it was 'smart'.

I don't really buy the defense claim that Jacko drank propofol and that's how he'd died (but if they can argue it, more power to them). However, how do we know that Michael Jackson didn't come to and take more pills or hook up another bag of propofol to drip into his IV?

We really don't know!

Ultimately, the decision the jurors have to make is does Michael Jackson's death--as it happened in this instance given his years of drug abuse--warrant denying someone's freedom (especially a high quality physician's) for 4 years, including the permanent seizure of his medical license?

When that question is put to me, I can honestly say that I do not think so.

Does Murray have explaining to do?

It is not so much explaining as it is providing context. Do I think what he'd done was 'wrong'? Wrong designates morality, as does something like 'evil'. It designates a cosmic illegality. What Murray did was 'unethical'. We have no idea how seductive Jacko was (apparently the parents of many 'special friends' know, though!) and we have no idea how manipulative he was.

All of this is reasonable doubt.

As far as I am concerned, this is not a case of Murray shouldn't have done X, Y, and Z. This is simply the case of a drug addict who'd died of an overdose on one of the drugs he'd had a history of abusing.

I know people disagree with that but that, I think, is the unflinchingly cold and rational look at this situation. When you're looking to deny someone's liberty, that is often how you have to look at a case. At least, that is how you should.

All of this is a death occurring in the context of an unethical--but not illegal--situation. It was also an accident. As such, this has no place in a court of law.

Desiree said...

"Are you and Desiree one and the same person? LOL!"

Lady C, Jessica and I are not the same people. I am also not Frenchie, who is a very smart girl.

I've always said I would have no problem completely disallowing comments on this blog, as it would free me to just write and then abandon ship. I have no idea why anyone would ever want to don a multitude of sock-puppets on their own blog.

That would be far too much work!

I know detractors of this site seem to think I have the hypnotic swirl pattern in my eyes that would enable me to do such a nutso thing. No, it's silly and tedious, LOL.

Lady C said...


I must say that you impress with your straight forward logic, LOL.

This is my take on Conrad Murray just to be clear in case I wasn't before:

1. No, I don't think Murray should be on trial...

But unfortunately he is; as society sees it, 'someone has to pay' for killing the KOP. Yes, it truly has nothing to do with Murray killing MJ with propofol like you said--it's an ethical issue not a legal issue; unfortunately however, based on the circumstances it turned out that Murray was the wrong person, in the wrong place at the wrong time...society sees him as the 'guilty one' who killed the KOP and they demand vindication. Like you said, Murray's distribution of propofol to MJ was unethical, not illegal. With that said, lets call a spade a spade...Murray gave MJ propofol;it was unethical but not illegal. But here you have an anesthesiologist who used propofol to put MJ down nightly so he could sleep...what he did wasn't necessarily illegal, but it was unethical. The average person/insomniac doesn't go out and hire an anesthesiologist to put them down nightly to allow sleep. I mean who does that? Only MJ. Insomnia isn't a disease, it's a symptom with an underlying cause. For example, using a myriad of different drugs can cause insomnia; they can be illicit drugs, prescription drugs, or alcohol. They can be used singularly or a combination of, taken over a duration of time...from what we know of MJ's history, he dabbled in it all continuously...propofol was just the cherry on top.

2. 'Technically', Murray doesn't have to get on the stand to testify...

Technically all the defense has to do is show a reasonable amount of doubt to stub the jury; that's all. The hope in doing this is to hang the jury and the re-try the case. When I said earlier that 'Murray has to take the stand', I meant it in a way that I would like to know what he truly knows about what happened and how all this was set up between him and MJ. Curiosity has gotten the best of me I must say because it makes me angry that the media/public is portraying him as a cold-heartless killer, AND no one seems to be giving Murray any benefit of the doubt knowing that the person he was dealing with had a long history of drug abuse...something that was on going for decades. It just so happens that on that fateful night/day, it just all came crashing down. Murray seems like a very caring physican; he has plenty of patients to attest to this as well as him being very charitable. Like MJ, he too, has supporters outside the courtroom; maybe not as many as MJ, of course. I honestly believe that if MJ didn't feel comfortable in Murray treating one of his kids, then there's no way in hell that he would have chosen him for himself.

Lady C said...

Desiree (cont.)

3. If it wasn't Murray, it would've been someone else...

Like you said, we know this, lol. MJ was a drug addict with a very bad problem, and he was on the hunt. He had a ' need' and was willing to find whoever and do whatever it took to fill that need. If Murray was not to be that person, MJ would've found someone else; plain and simple. However, MJ seemed to have taken full advantage of Murray's generosity by seducing him and putting on the pressure. This case is not about Propofol;it's simply about a 'witch hunt' -- making someone pay for killing the precious KOP. Think about this...The truth be known, had MJ not died that night using the propofol, he'd still be using the stuff along with other drugs TO THIS VERY DAY....even way after the 'This Is It' tour had come to an end....addiction, addiction, addiction. AND Conrad Murray would be seen in an entirely differnt light!

4. Last but not least, since this did go to trial, they're trying the wrong person and refuse to see it...

KLIEN, KLIEN, KLIEN, KLIEN....now that is 'unethical and illegal'...need I say anymore? LOL!

No, I didn't have any bad dreams after the molestation trial, however; I have to admit that for a week or two after, I became some what depressed, and more protective of my child than usual....I cried, I'd hugged/ kissed him a lot. I'd tell him and reiterate not to let anyone touch him inappropriately, and not to be scared to tell me, his father, or any other adult he trusted. Yes, life in prison for something like that is very harsh. I can't remember all the logistics of it, but I think there was another charge added of some kind of aggravation?, which upped the sentence. I live in Texas, and I don't know if child molestation/rape carries a stiffer penalty compare to other states. It was a devastating trial I must say.

Btw Desiree, I hope I didn't offend you in any way when I asked if you and Jessica were one and the same. Actually I really meant it as a joke! LOL

Desiree said...

Lady C:

No, you didn't offend me. :-)

I know some people would think it was hypocritical for us--or anyone--to blame Arnold Klein for Jacko's addiction and, yet, believe Murray should not be on trial for Jacko's death.

But Arnold Klein has been involved in the illegal dispensary of drugs for at least 30 years. He himself claimed to have injected Jacko with Demerol 51 times in the last 3 months of his life.

If you read the image of the search sheet at the bottom of this post, we also know that other doctors had given him drugs for years, as well.

But there is no evidence (that we no of yet) that Murray was a pusher like the others. How Klein got away with giving drugs to Michael Jackson is beyond me. If we blame anyone outside of Jacko for his death (and really we are talking about for his addiction here), it would have to be those other doctors.

To me, it should be ALL or nothing.

I guess that is the best clarification. But since Murray is the only doctor being charged with the death of an addict who'd been given drugs over several years that most likely wrecked his body to the point death was imminent, I don't think the trial is right.

All or nothing.

"For example, using a myriad of different drugs can cause insomnia; they can be illicit drugs, prescription drugs, or alcohol. They can be used singularly or a combination of, taken over a duration of time...from what we know of MJ's history, he dabbled in it all continuously...propofol was just the cherry on top."

Yep, it was bound to happen. The more I learned of Jacko's drug use, the more I felt, "Why are we surprised?"

"it makes me angry that the media/public is portraying him as a cold-heartless killer, AND no one seems to be giving Murray any benefit of the doubt knowing that the person he was dealing with had a long history of drug abuse...something that was on going for decades."

Me, too. It seems cruel the way they are making Jacko out to be some kind of saint who just happened to have a little drug problem--here comes Big Bad Murray killing our Peter Pan; Murray is a higher quality human than Jacko (sounds heartless but it's just my opinion). As I said, his death was bound to happen. He would never have been able to do any of those shows.

Desiree said...

I don't know if someone in this thread already mentioned it but would we be going through all of this BS had Jacko OD'd on some substance following his trial? I don't think so. The media would say, "Good riddance," and that it showed a consciousness of guilt on his part. I think people want to get into an uproar just because he was supposed to be doing some comeback show. (Please.)

"The truth be known, had MJ not died that night using the propofol, he'd still be using the stuff along with other drugs TO THIS VERY DAY"

He would have been. Like many addicts, he wasn't ready to quit abusing drugs. It would have gone on until his death. I personally think the autopsy report was whitewashed; I'd heard that Lloyd's of London was going to sue AEG for the insurance policy AEG had taken out for Jacko. I believe they'd claimed they had been duped.

I know that seems to be going into the conspiracy territory but I'm not. When I stopped believing in the idea that Jacko wasn't an addict and that he was healthy, I started thinking that he wanted to do those concerts because he needed money ($500M in debt, remember) for more drugs, shopping, boys, etc. Michael Jackson was broke and he'd do anything for money.

I firmly believe this. He knew he couldn't do those shows. Witnesses differ in their accounts of his demeanor but those who were more close to him said that he should get a psych evaluation.

That is your mind on drugs, LOL. He was messed up. His death becomes very predictable when you look at everything.

About the case in Texas, I asked because it seems like a very Draconian punishment, to tell you the truth. That's not my being soft on that particular crime but it's pretty jarring. I've heard that laws are pretty 'out there' in Texas, like they haven't caught up with the rest of the country. No offense. Nevada is considered a no-man's land for lawyers; outside of Vegas, this whole state is a desolate hick-ville (Reno is a joke--it's a repulsive city). I remember being shocked freshman year to learn that if a man and a woman have sex--and both are equally drunk--the man can be charged with rape just because he has a penis that penetrates. I always said that if I were prosecutor in Nevada, I'd never charge cases like that. I'd throw them right in the trash.

Like I've said before, just like in Murray's case, sometimes laws are wrong or wrongly applied.

Lady C said...


Yes, unfortunately the sate of Texas is still in the 'backwoods' when it comes to justice; no offense taken... Hell, we execute/incarcerate more inmates than any other state in the country, and I'm appalled by that. But what can I say, it's a 'Bubba/Good'Ole Boys' state; where they'll throw the book at you for the most of any and everything.

"Nevada is considered a no-man's land for lawyers; outside of Vegas, this whole state is a desolate hick-ville (Reno is a joke--it's a repulsive city)".

I learned something new that I've never heard before, lol. The 'intoxicated couple who have sex' thing, is the most absurd and BS thing I've ever hear! LMAO!!! I'm assuming the sex between the equally intoxicated couple was consensual? I suppose in that case, if that were to happen, there better be hope that the man had a penectomy other wise he wouldn't stand chance; if he lacked a penis then they'd probably try to implicate him through the use of his fingers--not to be graphic. I too, would've thrown them in the trash! LOL I'm not familiar with the laws in Texas regarding a situation like the one you described, so I can't say how or if it would be prosecuted, but I do know that in a rape/molestation case, penetration is not just limited to the male appendage; it can be fingers, a hand, or any kind of object that can be used to penetrate an orifice. I just remember being told this on the trial that I sat on, lol.

Off topic, in your opinion, what do you think is MJ's net worth today? Someone asked me this question the other day, and I wasn't for certain. I believe I've read it that he was an estimated $500M. But depending on what/where you read, it's been said that his earnings had reached as high as a billion dollars; however, he was in about $500M debt of which included all the loans/bills he had outstanding, etc. so his net worth dropped to $500M. The money from his ownership in the ATV catalog is all tied up in these loans and who knows what else, lol. What about all the lawsuits that he was involved in; weren't there any going on at the time of his death; I though so? If so, would those still be active to recoup on? It seems as if MJ was the 'King of Everything"; Pop music, lies, debt, lawsuits, freakishness. lol I think I heard on t.v. earlier this week that he had an estimate of at least 1000 or more lawsuits in his entire career. Speaking of money, Jermaine--that liar, said that up until his death, he and MJ made big plans to do several big projects after the 'This Is It' tour ended; I'm not sure what they all were. He even said that MJ on the day of his death, went and put a fat down payment on a house that he was looking to buy. If it's the mansion that I've been told he was buying--one of the most expensive in the country,$60M?, then I question how the hell could he afford such a luxury when he was just struggling to pay his bills at home and feed his kids, yet alone do 50 concert shows in London? Was that something at AEG paid for as well?

MJ didn't have, never had, and never would have any common sense when in came to finances. Perhaps, had he played his cards right; stayed out of trouble--no molestation allegations, no courtroom trials, no hush-money pay offs, no drug use, no frivolous spending, he would've had enormous more amount of money and getting loans wouldn't have been an issue....When you piss away your money the way he did, fast approaching debt comes knocking at the door quick, lol.

J-M-H said...

About the "Draconian Laws" let's face it, in America, DO NOT be caught breaking the law in the South. And you better not be black either, or Latino. Anywhere there is a Republican/ conservative stranglehold on a state, good luck!

Lady C,

About Mike's net worth, I think the $1 billion thing is a crock. He may have amassed $1 billion in his total career, but that doesn't mean his assets and things he had to his name were worth that much. I think it's safe to say that it's more closer to the $500 million (or less) mark that we've heard about recently. he just had too much debt.

He had the ATV catalog but I think, I'm not sure, that he only own like 25% of the whole Beatles catalog. sure that's still a very lucrative investment, but by the end he was taking out massive amounts of loans and borrowing against its worth. Actually, that is the reason he was able to buy the expensive, crazy stuff that he bought: he just put the catalog up as collateral. Banks knew that they had him by the speckled balls if he failed to pay back every penny of the loan, plus interest; the banks could easily collect the catalogs and he'd be screwed.

I mean the catalog is worth easily in the $900 million range, probably more. Therefore, Mike could get them to loan him whatever he needed.

About the business ventures, he always was up to something but it never really panes out. I think Mike used to be a savvy businessman but the drugs ruined him. I think this article from Vanity Fair sums up a lot of Mike's business failures:


AEG probably foot the bill for some of his expenses in London, because they knew that could easily recoup their money. it is the King of Pop, after all. i remember a guy saying he bought the "This Is It" tickets for the sole reason of seeing if he'd do it or not. There was a curiosity surrounding his comeback so the tickets easily sold (of course the fans were major buyers).


To me, it should be ALL or nothing.

Exactly, that's what i think. If you're gonna go after Murray, you gotta point the finger at Klein as well, at least. And Klein has talked a lot of shit about Murray too, obviously as a way to get the glare of himself. This idiot said that Murray didn't know how to put in a catheter or IV; he said that Murray was probably falling asleep on the job because he was breathing in the propofol that Mike breathed out, which is IMPOSSIBLE. He was just spreading so much misinformation it was sick.

(Oh this is Jessica, BTW)

J-M-H said...

Oh, and as an example of not having the net worth and the total amassed profit be equal to each other, look at Lindsey Lohan. Her movies she did with Disney, like the "Confessions of a Teenage Drama Queen", "Herbie Fully Loaded", "Freaky Friday", "The Parent Trap", and then you have the mega hit "Mean Girls", amassed hundreds of millions of dollars. She should be filthy rich.

But allegedly her net worth is only $500,000. LMAO. Obviously she hasn't really invested or spent her money wisely, maybe some on drugs and partying. She says she's completely broke. But Lindsey Lohan is probably able to get a substantial loan, perhaps using her notable name and future earnings as collateral.

But she's not how she seems, financially. Mike could have been the same way. I think they discussed his finances in the 2005 trial.

Lady C said...


J-M-H...I haven't seen that one in a while, LOL!

Ask if MJ had any financial investments? ....Well yeah, prepubescent boys and star-struck families of those boys, LMAO! No really, it's a damn shame that MJ had so much debt compared to the enormous amount of money he had; such a waste. Yes, perhaps he gave away a lot to childrens' charities, world hunger, etc., but let's face it he pissed away a lot of it....unnecessarily, that is.

Yep, living in a conservative state such as mine, really sucks wind it comes to justice and the laws. I'm not certain, but I'm willing to bet that we've had more executions while under Republican/conservative rule, especially under the Bush administration, than any other time in history. Let's also not forget those who have been executed who were actually innocent of committing murder. People say that hasn't happened....but that's complete utter BS! I mean look around; more often than not, you hear in the news how someone was released because it was determined that they didn't commit the crime as believed, and they had spent X number of years on death row or behind bars. A lot of individuals who were incarcerated for a rape/sexual assault for example; a crime they didn't commit are seeing the same thing....DNA testing; something that wasn't always around, has changed a lot of that. As I told Desiree earlier, we also boast more prison inmates than any other state in the country--it's sad. What's worst is that those who are incarcerated and eventually released--they come back to re-incarceration all too soon--the system has failed them. But I'm sure this problem is nation wide, not just Texas.... It's sad and unfortunate.

Lady C said...

Jessica (cont.)

I was watching CNN News and just a few minutes ago DA, Holly Hughes was speaking about the Murray trial. She said that while the prosecution is doing what their supposed to do in the case, DA, Ed Chernoff is like 'Matlock'; the man is good and smart. The prosecution is building this mountain stacking evidence against Murray, but what little do they know, is that Chernoff is looking and taking notes looking for 'nuggets'; the little things that ppl don't think about and turning them into something big....it's something that has the possibility to really shake up a jury. She also said that Chernoff when cross examining MJ's security guard, Michael Amir Williams for example, noticed that he possibly is a memeber of the NOI; one of several men that MJ surrounded himself with. She mentioned that perhaps Chernoff is starting to think that there's something more going on MJ's death than what's believed and that the NOI could somehow possibly have a hand in what happened...although I don't think thats it at all. (whispering) ....MJ was an addict, hint hint, lol!) Now not to veer off onto the 'conspiracy' side--Whether it's true or not, all Chernoff needs to do is to try to polk holes in the prosection and instill doubt into the jurors, that's all. This I must say, has been the first and most positive that I've heard anyone talk about the defense side since the case started.

I hope Arnie Klein has nightmares when he sleeps at night...dreams of MJ sedating him while he's conscious, paralyzing him, and constantly injecting him with 50+ injections of demerol....Klein who's awake during all of this, can't believe what's happening to him--- he screams for dear life; but no one hears him.... While he does this, MJ says to Klein, "It's Torture". LMAO!!

STROKER said...

you ppl make me sick i'd like to see all of you in real life and line u all up and the pull out the drug addicts, pill poppers , drunks, coke users , homophobes, and yes pedo's and see who is left in the line to stand in judgement of michael joseph jackson. you all have some nerve to talk like you never got drunk and slurred a word come on now keep it real this is a public lynching and im here to say it sucks. take a look in the mirror like you arch nemesis says.

J-M-H said...


I don't drink, I've never ever been drunk nor have I slurred words as the result of taking any substances. The highest I've been is after receiving deep sedation from a tooth extraction, which, I'm told, is a very uncommon reaction. Do you really think that any of us on here is a coke user, pill popper, or drug addict? The fans are the homophobes, look how mad you people get when someone says they think Mike might have at the very least hit for both teams.

And what's with the religious language toward Wacko Jacko? Stand in judgment? LOL. If there is a God, Mike will not be immune from judgment either, don't you forget it.

Lady C,

LOL at Klein's nightmares. He's lucky that no one is putting him under the magnifying glass. Even at the end of the day it was Mike's decision to take drugs but Klein was an enabler, and I believe he did it because he likes to rub elbows with celebrities. he wants to stay in their good graces so he gives them whatever they as for. And he has the nerve to talk about the evils of heroin addiction. Seems to me he has one helluva blind spot if he doesn't view the prescriptions he doles out as just as addictive as an illegal street narcotic.

J-M-H said...

This is off topic, but I think I had been talking to Suzy about the Glenda tapes being fake and whatnot. I was looking in to them and it does in fake seem to be a lot of fans questioning the validity of the transcript portions of the tapes. There are the ones on Youtube and then there are transcripts that have not audiotape equivalent. and it's the transcripts that describe Mike talking about sex with someone named "S", and it's supposed to be all hot and revealing.

Anyways, I found this article about the tapes from March 30 2005, which is about a month into the child molestation trial.


What's curious to me is that these tapes came out at the perfect time, when he was facing yet another allegation, and it was in these tapes that supposedly show a hetero Mike. also, the article says that Mike is talking to a 9 year old boy about all of this stuff. Why would a grown man talk to a kid about his love life and that he was still a virgin at 32 (when the tapes were allegedly made)? It's seems inappropriate and reminiscent of Terry George's "phone sex" conversation with Mike when he was 12.

But about the alleged sexual prowess of Mike, it's interesting to me that the transcripts are the ones that detail it, not the tapes. Someone could have easily written those to either trick fangirls desperate to have evidence that Mike was straight, or Mike's people could have even had a hand in them, given the curious timing of their release. What's weird to me is that on the audio tapes, Mike seriously sounds like a closeted gay guy that desperately wants to "have a real relationship with a woman" because he's trying to run from his real sexuality. And he clings to that crush he had on Diana Ross, almost as if it was evidence of him being straight. He even says he'd never really had sex with some woman he's talking about (debate if that was Diana he's referring to). Then you have the transcripts saying he was having either oral or regular sex with some girl named "S", who was rich, Middle Eastern, in college, and 15-20 years his junior.

Those two don't go together. Sounds like fan fiction if you ask me. for some reason I think his people had a hand in these tapes becoming public, just like they had a hand in spreading all the secret girlfriend nonsense in the lead up to the trial (eg Joanna and Shana), to make him look normal. Both Wade and Brett said on the stand that they never say him with any woman, save Lisa Marie Presley in Wade's case and even then Wade had to coaxed to remember her by Tom Mesereau. Three weeks into the trial, Mike told Gordon Novel he didn't want to stop sleeping with kids and he didn't want to go with girls. So why all the contradictory information? if Mike was straight we'd know if by now and there would have been no pedo allegations in the first place.

S.U. said...


Excuse me?! The last time I saw the homophobes are you and other fanatic fans! You were these who shamefully threatened Jason with DEATH! you´re these who are ready to call other people or fans idol gay,but if someone say that Michael was gay you do not forgive! Don´t do to others what you don´t like they do to Michael!
I remember a disgusting fan saying that she didn´t blame Joe to be homophobic because it was disgusting...fuckers! That people, Michael Jackson fans?! They´re a bunch of hypocrites!! They even wish death to others! Are you that frustrated for Michael never had been seen with a woman?! LOL losers!!! You even call gay a boy who at least was seen kissing some girls! Justin Bieber!


Thanks girl,interesting! But I became wondered at Michael claim that he continue to sleep with boys and he didn´t want to go out with girls?! Did he really say it? If so, fans are dumb!! He said it himself!
btw, do you know about Liza Minnelli´s interview? I don´t know how reliable is this, it was published in a tabloid. She said that Michael dreamed to marry some girl in the 80´s.

J-M-H said...


I have never heard about the Liza Minelli interview. What tabloid was the in, and when was it done? It's almost laughable that you'd have a gay icon like her defending Mike's sexuality, LOL. Seems a bit ironic.

What I don't get is why do we have all these words that Mike supposedly liked women, but there is never any actions. Yeah, I get the argument in theory that if he was gay the media would have found out about it, but the bigger point is that if he was a lady killer we'd know by now. His whole career, no women, just boys. If he was straight he would have been okay to show it like his brothers or any other male celebrity. He was hiding something.

J-M-H said...

Lady C,

I think I'm going to try and avoid coverage of Murray's trial, from now on. I do not want to become emotionally invested in anything Wacko Jacko, at this point. I feel so bad for him because, truthfully, he was just following orders. Everyone is out trying to make this about the death of an "icon" and not about common sense. I was watching Dr. Drew and I was literally arguing with my television, LOL. he's of the opinion that addicts have a brain disorder and are therefore incapable of making their own decisions and choices. And it's the doctors who should know better. What a twisted world when we can blame others for our mistakes if we happen to be in the right tax bracket. So basically, you can shop around for doctors, pay one $150,000 a month to administer drugs, die, and still it's the doctor's fault because he should have known better.

It's not looking good for Murray, and I realize that. The law is pretty straightforward and I honestly expect[ed] that he'd be convicted, for more reasons than just negligence. But that doesn't make it the right thing to do.

They are analyzing his actions like he was deliberately trying to kill Mike. But what else can he argue, they won't let him just say "He wanted it--he begged, he pleaded, he cajoled--so what could I do?" That defense is too blunt for the viewing public.

The ER doctor did say something interesting to me, namely she said that Mike had no history of drug abuse, according to Murray. How is that possible? Then I think that he did have a physical for insurance purposes and it said he had clean blood, no drugs, etc. Could Murray have just been given that info? Even Cherilyn Lee said he wasn't a guy on drugs. But why then was he getting the 51 shots of Demerol in the last 3 months of his life? That doesn't sound like a drug-free person to me. Once again it makes me wonder how much Mike was doing outside of Murray's knowledge.

Frenchie said...

I think this is the Liza Minnelli interview that Suzy is referring to:

"Michael’s life was precisely the one dictated by his father. The family’s religion [the parents are Jehovah’s Witnesses] means the children weren’t even meant to be in show business. But, when they started making money for their father, that was it. Michael was used and abused almost from the time he was born.

‘Eventually, he distanced himself from his family, created this wonderful place — Neverland — for kids and supported different families. Then, one day, the father in one of those families called up Michael and said, “Unless you give me $30,000, I’m going to tell everyone you made a pass at my son.” And that’s when Michael called me.

‘When he’d finished his story, I remember pausing and then saying: “Michael, maybe you should tell your lawyer about this.” He said: “But it’s insane.” So I repeated my advice. “It’s blackmail, though,” he said. “It is,” I replied, “and that’s why you need to involve your lawyer.” But he wouldn’t.

‘What everyone forgets is that, when kids stayed at Neverland, their parents came, too. And they were treated grandly. But then other people jumped on the bandwagon.’

She sighs. ‘I remember he was going with this girl and he was so in love with her. He came to show me the ring he’d bought for her. I asked him what he was going to say and he didn’t know. So I said: “Let’s rehearse,” and that’s what we did.

‘But the girl turned him down. She said she wasn’t ready to commit right now. She told him to ask again in six months. And it all but killed him. He was heartbroken. I knew all his girlfriends including Lisa Marie who became his wife.’

Liza thinks she knows what killed her friend. ‘In the end, the scorn, the cruelty, the vicious meanness — these are the things that took his life. He was one of the best performers we’ve ever had. He changed everything. But he was only a king when he was on stage."


J-M-H said...

LMAO at that article, Frenchie. Excuse me, but I'm not buying a word of it. Especially about the father requesting $30,000 or else he'd label Mike a pedo. Please.

Is it just me or does this seem like a rewriting history moment from Liza Minelli? If she knew all his girlfriends, name them. No one is going to buy Jacko having girlfriends if they never ever appear, especially given his obviously gay disposition.

I can only remember Mike proposing to Brooke Shields, and his offer was enticing: no worries about sex, they'd just adopt kids together. LOL. Of course she "sweetly declined" according to Rolling Stone. She said he was a platonic asexual friend, nothing more, and that if he wanted her to pose as his girlfriend, she would, and that would be something between them that no one would understand. If that's not a gay man's beard, I don't what is.

Lady C said...


That article was news to me; I knew nothing about it. How interesting though how Minnelli casually adds in that 'juicy' tidbit about MJ having a girlfriend who he was so much in love with...but not only that, he wanted to marry her....Awwwww!!LOL I don't think there's any truth to that at all. IF that were true, and he was soo much in love with this so-called woman, why didn't he come back and re-propose to her in six months like she asked? Was his love for her not strong enough to wait for true love?, LOL! And I'm assuming, that since he was good friends with Liza as well as Liz Taylor, wouldn't Taylor have known about all of MJ's so-called girlfriends too, especially the one he had his heart set on marrying?? He and Taylor were supposed to be 'peas and carrots', LOL! Such Bull! If she was proposed to by MJ, where has she been all this time?...why didn't she step out and vouch for him during the 1990's and beyond when the gay rumors were taking the world by storm? I guess having certain friends in high places who are loyal will get you the 'privacy' that you need, regardless of the cost or maneuvers required.


Yes, when you're arguing with the television, it's time to back away, LMAO!! I know what you mean though. Over the last couple of days, my interest in the Murray trial has started to wan. No matter how you cut it, there are those; especially the MJ fans, who won't be able to see this trial for what it REALLY is about other than vindicating their precious icon MJ. His death has completely blind sided them to the realities, and there's no convincing them otherwise. But a couple of last things I will say about the trial however; is that one of the lawyers/reports on HLN, said something that I thought was kind of funny....they said for MJ to be the icon that he was and to have had many admirers--some of celebrity status, where are they? Where is Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Rev. Farrakhan, even Usher or Chris Tucker? How come these people who looked up to MJ and admired him before his death, not coming out to support him at his 'supposedly' murderer's trial? When they said that, I thought to myself, they're right; I hadn't really thought of that.

The other thing about the trial, is that the prosecution is trying their best to paint Murray as a womanizer/ladies man because of all his girlfriends. Who care?! At least Murray can say different from MJ...they are FEMALE, ADULTS, LEGAL, and can vouch to the validity of their relationship with Murray; MJ not so, lol.


Btw, I did get your email. Thank you for your response.

Desiree said...

Pretty humorous tall tales from Liza Minelli!

"wouldn't Taylor have known about all of MJ's so-called girlfriends too, especially the one he had his heart set on marrying??"

Lady C, yes, that's right. Liza's story of Jacko being in love with some female does not tally with everything else. According to an issue of Vanity Fair magazine a couple of months ago commemorating Elizabeth Taylor, a friend of Liz's said that Jacko asked her before the 1994 VMAs how does one go about kissing someone. Presumably by this question, Jacko had never really kissed any woman before. To that, Liz replied, "Like you want to take in their soul."

Also, the only bit provided by Liz about his sexuality was the thinly-veiled confirmation of Jacko's proclivity for males when she'd admonished Klein for blabbing about Jacko and Jason Pfeiffer being together.

Liz Taylor--a truly classy woman--would have known about her beloved Michael Jackson's plans to marry some woman. Liza Minelli's story is total garbage.

I'm sure fans do not notice that most of the women Jacko admired were so-called 'fag hags': Diana Ross, Cher, Liza Minelli, Liz Taylor, Jane Fonda...

Could it be any more obvious? LOL.

And the biggest question of all: why would a heterosexual man allow himself to not only be plagued with gay rumors but also not bring out any of his female sex partners when he was being accused of performing sex acts on BOYS?

There is usually no question about a heterosexual male's proclivities for women. What, is Jacko just unlucky? It makes little rational sense.

"the prosecution is trying their best to paint Murray as a womanizer/ladies man because of all his girlfriends. Who care?!"

Exactly. Who cares? The grand point of this whole thing is that a drug addict paid a doctor to do something unethical and got burned. If it wasn't the former King of Pop, no one would even care. Would it have made a difference if Jacko was with an anesthesiologist? What if he were in a clinic during his 'naps'?

I cannot focus on that trial. My blood starts to boil from the irrationality of the talking heads.

I bet this was exactly how Jacko fans felt in 2005. LOL.

Lady C said...


Yes, I agree...the court room 'circus' in L.A. has taken its toll; I no can do!LOL It's pathetic!

I see that MJ's kids are now abroad in Europe to partake in something having to do with an MJ celebration concert. Is Prince Michael now taking after his father with the frequent use of the sun glasses; I'm starting to see him do more and more of that lately? What will be next, a black fedora or white glove? If he chooses to go down that path, I hope he can find a style of all his own,lol. I must say all of MJ's kids look to be very happy now...I truly hope so. Regardless of the circumstances surrounding MJ's death, loosing a parent is never easy for a child. Perhaps with MJ gone and mamma Katherine taking over the reigns, they can all lead a normal life or at least close to it despite being in their father's shadow. Do you think that had MJ lived, he would've 'fathered' another child? If so, maybe he would have wanted another girl for Paris to be a big sister...who knows. MJ was still fond of kiddos up until his death...speaking of which,I do remember one of Murray's girlfriends--whom are all beautiful btw, Nicole Alvarez, mention in her testimony of how MJ wanted to schedule his visits with Murray in such a way where he could see their newborn baby at those visits....not surprising, is it? LOL

Desiree said...

A note on f'loonery:

Some Jacko fan from the 'Deep South', USA found this blog searching, and I quote: "conrad murray seems like such a stupid doctor. this nugger shouldnt have a med lisc"

I've always knew a substantial subset of Jacko fans were virulent racists (you can tell some of them by their avatars featuring a blindingly white Jacko, perhaps nose-to-artificial nose with lisa Marie Presley), but that took me aback.

I remember some fan right after The Bleached One's death saying that Jacko would still be alive if he'd had a 'Chinese doctor'. What the hell does race have to do with it?

The reality is that many of Jacko's Wackos have forgotten that Jacko was black. It's astounding.

Lady C:

No, I'm not surprised Jacko wanted to keep up with Nicole Alvarez's pregnancy; he was completely obsessed with kids. It also shows how much Jacko liked Murray, that he was interested in Murray's life.

I have a visceral reaction to Jacko's children. I have no idea why but when I see those three white and Latino kids, the word 'Farce' just flashes so bright to the point of obscuring their little faces.

It sounds horrible (remember, I don't have children) but I'm looking forward to the day they learn their father was a pedophile. Then, of course, I will feel sorry for them when they deny it and spend the rest of their lives dodging the stories and the rumors, living in blindness.

It's going to be hard for them.

By the way, I think Paris has been spray-tanned. And I'm starting to come to the side of Klein being Prince's father. He and his sister look nothing alike, even with having the same mother...

I think Jacko would have never had any more adoptive or lab-generated kids. He was accused of molestation too many times for comfort. Anyone who'd ever allow him to have a kid or help him have one should be locked in prison. I truly believe the three he had would be severely damaged if he'd continued to live.

No doubt about it: Jacko was nothing more than a nursery playmate; he was NOT a good father. Just loving them is no substitute for quality all-around parenting in my opinion.

Elena said...

I've just watched a TV talk show from my country where they were discussing about Dr Murray and the trial. They were divided in two sides, I'd say sane and insane but to be more acurate, there were some fanatics on the right and some rational people on the left. There was also a professional doctor who was obviously leaning on the non-fans side. The left side had pretty much the same opinion as any of us. I actually didn't comment on this entry because you all already said what I think about this and I would just repeat the same arguments all over again.

It was quite long and I wish you guys could watch it because the floons really got owned by the doctor lol

You can imagine what they were saying (they're the same no matter where they come from, I can tell you that). According to them, Michael was not an addict by any means. He just really needed something to sleep so he could give his fans a great show, because you know, he loved his fans...And there happened to be some greedy doctors who wanted Michael to become an addict and probably gave them more than necessary. Everyone took advantage of poor saint Michael. They even went on to say that Murray introduced Michael to propofol! That was one of the first "ownings" by the doctor, when he explained how it was proved in the trial that Michael already knew all about propofol when he met Murray and he actually had to offer him a lot of money to get him to accept the job.

So I do understand you arguing with the TV, it's just that frustrating.

On another note, after this was over, the host told an interesting story. He said to the co-host "Bet you didn't know I actually know Michael Jackson personally". Then he showed some pics from the Bad era with Michael and him (as a young boy) backstage at a concert he attended in 1988. He said he was 16 then and that he was (and still is) a huge fan. According to him, Michael acted really interested in him and even asked for his phone number, and he gave it to him. This guy said he was actually pretty interested too, at the time (He's gay). But apparently, he never got a call back. He said that really was heartbreaking for him lol Remember, this guy is actually a big fan of Michael, he has no reason to make this up. And judging by the pics, Michael looked interested indeed (This guy was very good-looking back then by the way).

Desiree said...


The TV coverage of this trial is so skewed against Murray it's sickening. There is no one on panels defending him, which is so insane to me because he is completely defendable. Last night on TV, one host--Dr. Drew--had a f'loon come on and she pretty much said that she'd already convicted Murray. The humorous thing about it was that Dr. Drew was almost 'giggling' at her being so definite. He'd said, "And you want Murray to go to jail for killing the man that you loved?" (Of course she answered, "Yes.")

I said, "Dr. Drew, you've never encountered a f'loon. They are completely irrational," so I can understand why he'd laughed in that moment.

He, by the way, has an incredibly stupid viewpoint about this whole thing (although he says he feels "sorry" for Murray): an addict is not 'responsible' for their addiction--you cannot blame the addict.

But, of course, you can blame any enabler.

It's completely irrational!

I wish I could watch your TV program, too. Fans never have the right information; they are too rabid and blind to ever consider the facts like sane individuals.

And, of course, when they do consider the facts rationally, they'd be forced to admit Jacko was a junkie and a pedophile.

About the male fan, the 1980s was Jacko's gayest era (although he seemed pretty gay in the 1970s, too). It wouldn't surprise me one bit he was interested in a young male fan. I've always wondered how Jacko felt as his fan base became more and more female. In the 1980s, it seemed as if he had more boys and kids; I bet he liked that much better.

J-M-H said...

What I don't get is why the fans are even being interviewed by the media. I think it's sick, especially given the fact the jury could potentially hear everything they say. Where is the interviews with the few Murray supporters? I've only seen one interview; funny, the Murray supporters seem infinitely smarter than any Jacko fans. i guess it's because they actually known Murray and the Jacko fans only think they know about who Mike was (and yet they like him like he's a relative which is in itself delusional, irrational behavior).

And as Lady C said, who cares if he has girlfriends? So what. Who cares if he has 7 children? So does Jermaine Jackson! and by all accounts the number of baby mamas has zero impact on how much both of them love their children. It's just character assasination. One smart defense attorney was actually defending Murray *shocker* and she said everything I was thinking. I guess I should go to law school, LOL. But she was like Murray was stocking up on the propofol most likely that's why he bought so much, and she also said that him going in an adjacent room to speak quietly on the phone after he believed Jacko was finally asleep is not an example of criminal negligence; it's him being a considerate doctor! if Mike was struggling to go to sleep that night like Murray said, and he finally was able to fall asleep, why would you stay in the room gabbing on the phone, disturbing his sleep? That would be counter-intuitive, right?

At any rate, Murray is being hammered in the press and all his good deeds will be forgotten once he (most likely) convicted. Sad. Ray Chandler once spoke about there being a curse of Michael Jackson that affects the people he comes in contact with. I'm starting to agree with him.


Thanks for the info, very interesting. At the risk of sounding like a broken record... of course Mike was gay, LOL. Another anecdote that proves the obvious, in my opinion. Also, since the guy was 16, and it's 1988, Mike was 29 going on 30. So this shows not only an interest in males but an interest in young males. Did the guy look young at 16 or was he the type that looked like an adult? Either way, he was gay. the semen proves it, let's not forget. I agree with Desiree, the 1980s was his gayest decade. I think up until Lisa Marie he had zero experience. She was his first; even she says that much. Funny how he never got into a relationship again after that one, Debbie doesn't count. can't go against his nature. Jacko preferred the "homies" over "hos" LOL.

S.U. said...


Interesting, do you know the guys name?

btw, believe it or not, some fans actually believe Michael was an addict.

S.U. said...

What a bunch of hypocrites...a f´loon called Murray a man whore because he had seven women and five children and he should had learned how to use a condom. --'
But if it was Michael´s case, he would be a player and a macho man,and he deserved all the children he could get!

Elena said...

Have you guys heard the complete recording from the trial? They showed a part on the first day, now they've played the whole tape.


Michael even falls asleep at the end. The whole thing is just so disturbing...Michael was completely delusional.

Desiree said...

That audio was disturbing; it's really so incredibly sick listening to him high. He was worthless by the end. Where were his children when he was rambling?

Amazing to me is how obsessed he was with kids! It's like he had some Messiah complex, thinking he could save all of the world's children, blah blah blah. He was truly a pedophile, enough said.

I know fans think pedophiles would never talk the way he does about children but that is WRONG! Pedophiles either view children as objects or as perfect, heavenly, innocent creatures. Jacko had the latter viewpoint. Normal people do not talk about kids that much.

I don't understand how his drug use is not relevant. What was the point of the Prosecution playing that tape anyway? Does anyone know?

S.U. said...

All is disturbing, his interest in her womb because of the baby,his druggie voice...the trial revealed much and will reveal more.

btw I´m on Dr Drew facebook page and I´m enjoying myself with an argument between a f´loon and a woman. The f´loon said she read the autopsy report so Michael wasn´t an addict, the woman sent her a report´s link which said Michael took xanax and other drugs and herself took xanax and she knew it gets someone high and the f´loon deny it. In the end the woman said her to check the facts before making a fool of herself (the f´loon) lmao

Lady C said...


The fanatics claim that people took advantage of MJ--well, fact be known, MJ took advantage of people...His constant lies and preying on people who thought they could trust him and would do no harm, only to get burned in the process. MJ was a user and played more games than the NBA itself, and he didn't care the outcome or repercussions, just as long as it met his agenda. I think that's as selfish as selfish can get. Personally, I think all the hardships that he endured through out his adult life is something that he deserved...he asked for it and brought it on himself. At the end of the day, each and every one of us is responsible for our own self...It's just too damned bad that MJ didn't learn that with all creativity and genius that was bestowed on him; tragic.


The media coverage on this trial is so sickening, it makes me want to vomit! LOL
What I think is funny about the fans and the media is this...Since the trial started, the fans have COMPLETELY forgotten that it wasn't too long ago that the same media talking heads who are lynching Murray now, are the VERY same ones that were crucifying their King Michael in 2005 for molestation. Both sides have become complete hypocrites of each other. It's beyond pathetic! Not only that, but the Jackson family, should be able to see that as well, but lets face it, when you're not on the receiving end, it's easy to forget where you once were, LOL.

The fact that the media is trying to paint Murray as a womanizer or ladies man, is in reality something that the fans can't seem to come to terms with...a sense of sexual frustration I might add. They're frustrated of the fact that Murray's male virility is something that they WISHED their beloved MJ was capable of having. MJ lacking in this area is something too difficult to handle, yet alone comprehend. It's become Conrad Murray, the Mack Daddy vs. Michael Jackson, the Drag Queen. LMAO!

The comment you made about Ray Chandler speaks volumes and it's one curse I wouldn't want any part of. Good thing I never came in contact with him, lol.

Desiree said...

Lady C:

I second everything you wrote! The Curse of Jacko is real.

I broke down and watched Dr. Drew on HLN last night and on the panel was Rabbi Shmuley Boteach. They played a bit of the taped conversations he'd had with Jacko back in 2000-2001 or so and Jacko said something really interesting!

He pretty much confirmed his pedophilia.

From the episode's transcript (LOOK what Jacko says!):

JACKSON: And every time I felt like I'm at the end of my rope, some kind of way, a kid would show up somewhere. That's the truth. Just when I can't take it anymore. And I really want to die. I really do. When I wanted to die, boom, it hits me. And I get on my knees, and I thank God whenever it happens. I do, Shmuley. And so, I believe in it. I really do.

BOTEACH: They've always been the source of your hope.

JACKSON: Completely.

(end snip)


I want everyone to really let this settle within them for just a moment; consider Michael Jackson's earnest and true words.

What he revealed there with Rabbi Shmuley was that his life was dependent upon children (read: 'boys'). As he said, "completely." On the show, the psychologists pointed out that what Jacko was describing were 'suicidal ideations', a hallmark of someone being severely depressed. And what did Jacko reveal--oops!--that could lift him out of his depression, when he felt so utterly hopeless?

Kids (read: 'boys').

And Michael Jackson himself said he would drop to his knees and thank God for bringing some child into his life, 'saving' him from going over the brink.

If it is not apparent, this is from the mind of a true blue boy-lover. Like normal (non-pedophiliac) heterosexual and homosexual persons, pedophiles also desire to have meaningful relationships with boys (or girls). They want to be 'happy', too.

And lest anyone be confused, Jacko does not actually mean 'kids'; he means boys. In the highly graphic so-called art book "Boys Will Be Boys", Jacko inscribed it saying, to the effect, "This is the true spirit of boyhood," and then followed that with the boyhood represented in the book was something he'd wanted for his children.

But girls cannot have 'boyhoods'. It is not hard to assume that when Jacko says 'children' or 'kid', he actually means the male-sexed child. This, of course, is corroborated by the fact the vast majority of kids he'd befriended and made 'special friends' were boys.

When I heard this bit of audio, I was astounded at its obviousness. It would tend to explain why he'd had 'special friends' in the first place, boys Norma Staikos allegedly referred to as Michael Jackson's 'little boyfriends'.

It seems apparent that Jacko was fostering relationships--like normal (non-pedophiliac) hetero- and homosexual persons would with their significant others--with these young boys. According to witness accounts, he was very possessive of these 'special friends', not to mention he seemed hellbent on having these boys share his bed.

Now, I know I rip Jacko pretty hard; it's true: he repulses me on many levels and I drift in and out of antipathy for him. But this bit of tape actually made me feel sorry for him.

Desiree said...


I guess most of us do not think about it because let's be honest: the actions of the pedophile child molester are sick; however, we should consider that these pedophiles are thinking about having 'relationships' with their underaged friends.

I know that for Michael Jackson, this sexuality--his homosexual pedophilia--had to tear him up inside because it was such a strong drive but it had to remain repressed for fear of going to jail if he lived out his fantasies with his 'loved boys'.

I've always maintained that Jacko abused drugs because of his pedophilia. I truly believe this; hell, Jacko stated in 1993 that, essentially, Jordie Chandler was the reason he went into drug rehab (although I believe that was a diversion tactic)!

But it's so sad to me that Jacko felt suicidal when he didn't have kids around and it was when a special boy came into his life that he cried, "Hallelujah!" to God.

Fans will never be able to see that testimony from the King of Pop himself for what it is: a boy-lover feeling ecstatic joy--joy so intense that it could pull him away from Death's precipice--over boys coming into his life. They will see it as Michael Jackson professing his love for the one true good in humanity, the innocence, blah blah blah, something we already know. No, it's more than that! How many people actually obsess over childhood, boyhood, kids, etc. like Jacko did? How many people?

Carl Toms' excellent book on Jacko, "Michael Jackson's Dangerous Liaisons", discusses the concept of 'maternal men': men who are loving and tender in a way that is similar to that of women when it comes to children. Toms--a pedophile--rejects the aforementioned entirely and says it's more simple: these men are just pedophiles, men like Jacko.

I'm sure when the molestation scandals broke--and I believe Jacko molested Jordie (obviously) and Gavin Arvizo--Jacko felt such a sense of betrayal. A few months back, I was told by a source that Jacko felt very betrayed by Gavin; I believe J. Randy Taraborrelli said something to the effect that Jacko hated Gavin Arvizo, so this seems to be corroborated (of course, the fans see that as some kind of proof he'd never molested the boy but it is not). It seems prudent to suggest that perhaps Michael felt betrayed by Gavin because Gavin went beyond their 'secret world', their 'bond', and spoke to police about their sexual relations.

Perhaps this explains all of the talk about special boxes and conditioning and all of that Jacko had told to Jordie Chandler about. Gavin must have broken the rules.

The audio was explosive; interesting how Jacko analogizes a boy coming into his life with an explosion--"boom"--and being "hit". Don't normal people describe being hit with something or seeing sparks, etc. when a new lover comes into their lives?

Again, I was amazed at Jacko's candor and how unintentionally revealing he'd been about his love for boys. On this front, his struggling with a largely inalienable sexuality invokes within me a sympathy for him. And we know that these psychological demons--even beyond merely fighting his obvious homosexual desires for adult men--led to his relentless abuse of drugs.

Epic tragedy.

Desiree said...

I should add:

Jacko always tells us if we want to learn about him, let's listen to his songs. If the above is not obvious enough, two songs Jacko wrote also admit his pedophilia.

In 1993 after the molestation scandal involving Jordie Chandler broke into the media, Jacko penned the lyrics to "Stranger in Moscow". Note these telling lines:

Here abandoned in my fame
Armageddon of the brain
KGB was stalkin' me
Take my name and just let me be
Then a begger boy called my name
Happy days will drown the pain


The bolded lines directly corroborate what Jacko went on to tell Rabbi Shmuley Boteach in 2000-2001: a boy comes into his life and the sadness and isolation he feels from his fame end.


Also, let's not forget that Jacko's entire HIStory album was his response, so to speak, against people pretty much criticizing his boy-loving lifestyle.

Then we have "Speechless", a very romantic song mentioned on this blog before, that Jacko himself admitted was inspired by a 14-year-old boy: Anton Schleiter.

Desiree said...

Remember everyone: there is more proof to Jacko's pedophilia than the child molestation accusations and payoffs. More than dirty phone chats with Terry George, or only agreeing to come over to 12-year-old Corey Feldman's house if he could bring porn, or wanting to install a private line so he could talk to 6-year-old Alex Manchester without going through the boy's parents.

Or Aaron Carter.

It's all about putting the puzzle pieces together in the right way.

Michael Jackson was his own worst enemy if he ever thought he ought to hide his penchant for boys. He was hardly successful.

S.U. said...

Lady C,

You´re so right,the fans talk so ill about Murray´s girlfriends! Slut, whores, "hooker time in court..." Thank God some fans asked for respect because the girls hadn´t any guilt. You think exactly like me, they seem so frustrated, I bet they wished Michael´s girls to testify instead! And I doubt also they would be called whores or Michael a man whore (like they call Murray --')


You know the fans always said that they only believe in Michael but surelly they can´t interpret well what he said. Or they can but don´t want to...

S.U. said...

I heard that Erin Jacobs gave an interview today and yelled to Murray´s defender LOL even some fans are embarrassed! She´s in her 40´s for God´s saké!

Lady C said...


I too watch Dr. Drew last night just to see what all Rabbi Schumley had to say about MJ, and just about everything he said was same thing that he says in his book. Earlier in the show was an attractive defense attorney, Lauren Lake, who seems to be the only one sticking up for Murray's defense, and she makes a lot of valid points--points that are common sense and don't require a lot of brains to figure out. My inner feeling tells me that she too, believes like you and I--all or nothing....Murray should no way be the only doctor on trial for MJ's death. She also believes that MJ was an enabler of himself as well as a drug addict. She also believes that part if not all of the reason that MJ was such an addict is because he surrounded himself with those who chose to sweep his 'secrete' under the carpet--this would also his fans and others who refuse to see that he obviously had a drug problem and was very addicted. Of all the attorneys speaking, she's the one I do like; she's gutsy and tells it like it is, lol. Dr. Drew's point that drug addiction is not the abuser's fault is complete BS! To me, that's just like saying child abuse is a valid reason to molest. MJ was a genuine high paid drug addict that got that way by his own doing! He wanted drugs and did whatever he needed to get them; hang the risk. Period. I might even add, that MJ probably thought that he was real knowledgeable/smart when it came to Propofol. Smart my ass! LOL Fact be known, Propofol, is not a 'sleeping' wonder drug like some think, and I'm willing to bet MJ thought the same. Yes, it can sedate one strong enough for painful procedures, but there is no REM sleep in using the drug. He wasn't getting any sleep--at all; what he thought was sleep, really wasn't sleep. I had neuro surgery a year ago and was given propofol, and no way after the surgery did I feel rested...a lot of my 'resting' came with sleep AFTER the surgery, not during, lol.

Lady C said...

Desiree (cont.)

It's funny how Propofol has become the main culprit in this trial. Like I said to you before, propofol was just the cherry on top in MJ's drug use. Even Dr. Drew said that he believes the two other drugs in MJ's system, Lorazepam and Midazolam, of which were in high dosages, are the one's that really did him in...The propofol was just the added 'push'. The amount of Lorazepam and Midazolam found in his system was enough to put you, me, and few ppl here on this blog out for at least 2 days. Fact be known, MJ was known for taking strong medications in MASSIVE doses; not the standard dose that you and I would take.lol

From what I heard earlier today, the forensic investigator stated to the prosecution that the IV bag wasn't milky with the propofol residue like it's been reported; it had clear liquid. Upon hearing that some one must have had a flash back to the OJ Simpson trial saying... If the bag ain't milky, then he's not guilty! ...If the glove don't fit, then you must acquit! lol

I can honestly say that I've not listened to all of MJ's songs; even the ones you mentioned. However from the ones that I have listened to, the lyrics are suggestive in a sense that there's an underlying message that he's trying to convey. All one has to do is really listen, lol. Even the songs by him that reference him having a romantic interest in the opposite sex, is telling....telling that what he wants us the listener to think, is not really his true feelings where the opposite sex is concerned. Just because he appeared in videos with attractive females, it had nothing to do with his so-called message of female romanticism....it had a lot to do with a more sinister matter--young boys. Very disturbing IMO. I must say however, that the HIStory album was the turning point in MJ's career where something snapped and didn't snap back...he went on this violent and revengeful tirade targeting those who he claimed were out to 'assassinate' him. It's like he completely cracked up....Poor, poor MJ. lol This 'melt down' in his career was proof that majority of ppl didn't think very much of that album and his fit-throwing songs and they still don't. If you notice when listening to the radio, there's a certain point that dj's will go in playing his music...nothing or not too much beyond Dangerous era.

MJ's relationship with boys was portrayed similar to the way that you and I portray a romantic relationship between a man and a woman. Just like how a man may feel scorned when his woman seeks another, he feels betrayed. MJ felt betrayed in same way when their 'secret' wasn't kept in the closet.lol I'm sure his hate for Gavin Arvizo stemmed from his--Gavin, reaching the point of no return, as far as Jackson was concerned...the ultimate betrayal.

Lady C said...


Nancy Grace...that woman is overkill to the max!!! Could she get anymore damn dramatic?! She needs to take a chill pill, please! LOL

Desiree said...

Lady C:

"If the bag ain't milky, then he's not guilty!"

LMAO! That is hilarious.

I'm usually at school when the trial is on television so I really have no clue about the glut of the evidence that is mentioned in court. I simply see everything from the talking heads.

What's the significance of the saline in the IV bag over the propofol? I'm sorry, Lady C, I tend to see you as the DSSL Murray trial correspondent. If this is true, that the IV had saline instead of some massive propofol dosage that the media is trying to insinuate, it could be that Murray actually did give him that small dose and Jacko's body was ready to just conk out since it was so ravaged from drug abuse.

Are we at all starting to get a clear picture of how Jacko died? How exactly did he get the propofol in his stomach? The only explanation would be that he'd drank it like the defense is claiming he had, and that the sedative was toxic. It also didn't help that he'd taken the pills.

Again, I am not well-versed on the trial evidence. I simply watch the TV and am filled with utmost anger at the injustice. The whole trial offends me morally and intellectually.

The most repulsive part is that these people lack the ability to be honest: all of this hullabaloo is because the guy was a celebrity. And since when are people not responsible for themselves? They constantly mention the fact no one intervened or no one was there, never thinking that a drug addict can make a person who tries to do those things disappear; for those people who try to do something or could potentially be in the position to 'help' know acutely that their proximity is precarious and they may not know what to do.

Hell, I even ask myself how did Grace Rwaramba allow Jacko to dangle Blanket Jackson when he was obviously high on drugs.

But is it really these people's problem? Is it not the addict's problem?

Dr. Drew Pinsky is completely skewed in his idea of 'addiction'. Yes, it is a disease but it also something one can overcome if they have the mental and emotional stamina to do so. No one can help an addict unless he wants to be helped. No one can force Michael Jackson--the King of Pop--into rehab.

I just worry that the jurors will watch this tripe on TV and, like sheep, follow it unquestioningly, never using any type of intellect to evaluate the crux of the matter: a rich and powerful celebrity drug addict was desperate and was willing to pay an inordinate amount of money to a doctor so he can cooperate in something unethical.

I know I'm like a broken record with that but that is it at the bare bones level.

"Nancy Grace...that woman is overkill to the max!!! Could she get anymore damn dramatic?! She needs to take a chill pill"

Nancy Grace has a low IQ. She is paid to be dramatically 'outraged' and it is ridiculous. I don't watch her show; I've never watched her show because I find her theatrics revolting. She is truly sleazy and plays only on emotion, never reason or intellect, which is something I do not respect.

I remember she was highlighting the Michael Vick dog abuse case and had videos of animal cruelty. Like, what the fuck, you know? What is the point of showing gratuitous violence--of any kind--on cable news? Being an animal lover, I promptly turned the channel. She does the same kind of thing with 'nannies caught on tape' abusing little babies, often re-looping the video over and over.

Again, she relies on shock and awe, things that appeal to a person's knees, not their brains. I cannot and do not respect that from ANYONE.

What she's doing now, I assume, is too much. I have no clue how the fans are reacting to her now. I'm sure they are very pleased they have a large, big-mouthed woman shouting in favor of their beloved Jacko.

Actually, Lady C, I feel sorry that you even watched her, LOL.

Desiree said...

"Fact be known, MJ was known for taking strong medications in MASSIVE doses; not the standard dose that you and I would take.lol"

I linked a document in the Aaron Carter post which featured the police interview with Chris Carter, and he told police that the Cascio father said people should be relieved that Jacko was down to 10 Xanax pills a day!

God, this trial is SUCH a travesty of justice! I cry in my heart for Conrad Murray.

As for Jacko admitting his boy-love in his own words, I think I may write a small post on it because my jaw was on the floor when I'd heard the audio. It should be an official part of the DSSL canon on Michael Jackson.


Who is Erin Jacobs?

Lady C:

If you can, can you provide highlights about the facts of the trial, if you watch on TV?

A.G. said...

Erin Jacobs is an MJ fan loon. What I just read is now, that Taj Maalik, a highly delusional MJ fan loon is going on to Dr. Drew today! well, the US IQ has dropped again to new levels;-)))))))

Another absolute hilarious thing is that some MJ fans want to compare MJ's achievements to those of Steve Jobs! ROTFL

Elena said...

I was just reading a fan forum and they were talking about how Gavin Arvizo was attenting a wedding a few days ago. Apparently, the groom was Ron Zonen, the prosecutor on the 2005 trial. And his brother and sister were also invited. They were saying things like: "Hey, don't you think it's strange that they have such a great relationship? blah blah blah..." According to them, there had to be some kind of conspiracy.

There are some pics here, but the text it's in Spanish. It basically says what I just wrote: http://goo.gl/AbDkS

Then they posted a screenshot from facebook. I'm kinda confused here, I think that some fan sent this guy a message and this is his answer. They were saying that's Gavin but the name that shows is "David Arvizo" (Wasn't that the father?). Anyway, the answer was interesting: http://goo.gl/ottHV

Sbibak said...

By the way, I think Paris has been spray-tanned. And I'm starting to come to the side of Klein being Prince's father. He and his sister look nothing alike, even with having the same mother...

I think Jacko would have never had any more adoptive or lab-generated kids. He was accused of molestation too many times for comfort. Anyone who'd ever allow him to have a kid or help him have one should be locked in prison. I truly believe the three he had would be severely damaged if he'd continued to live.

No doubt about it: Jacko was nothing more than a nursery playmate; he was NOT a good father. Just loving them is no substitute for quality all-around parenting in my opinion.

I think they are already damaged, even if everybody says they seem “normal”. After all we know and we are hearing in the trial, how living under the same roof with a creature like Mj as your father, could make you a “normal” person. No way.

This is very speculative, but I think Paris and Prince have “inherited” their father's ability to manipulate his public image... so different on/off camera. They grew up learning how, no matter what you do in private, in public you have to portray a certain image. Michael learnt it in Motown, as well as his family, and nothing have changed much since then.
Who the hell speaks in a dramatically different voice all of his life?

I remember Oprah interview with them... the bit about Mj being the best dad and the best cook in the world. She was so determined to change people's perception of MJ... like scolding Oprah, LOL. Obviously, she's conscious of her father controversial image and tries to manipulate us into thinking otherwise mentioning things people will interpret like examples of “normalcy” or good parenting. He cooked for them, went to museums with her because they both loved art... Too cunning for a 12 y/o girl. No matter how tasty his french toasts were, he do not make the cut as a father, LOL. Anyway, I do not blame her for that, poor girl. I also understand why they say they are mixed. My take is they know they aren't, but giving the circumstances (they have a bio mother who sold them and an adoptive father who is dead), they want to belong and feel they have a bond with their family beyond their legal last name. I really pity them. I'm sure they feel very insecure. Katherine said she barely knew them before June 25.

They have grown up surrounded by bodyguards, doctor dealers and MJ's under aged lovers in full make up, with little interaction with other kids or the smallest notion of a healthy upbringing. Remember what Grace said about their strange schedules or how sad their birthday celebrations were. Not to mention the isolation, the masks, Prince dyed hair, the way he purchased them, and that he treated them like experiments for his fantasies. It seems that he tried to make them look like the stupid idea “Hollywood” has of little European Aristocrats.

Apparently the have little interaction with children, except for their “little stepfathers”, and almost no relation with their extended family prior to this dead. I bet because children could make undesired revelations and Michael feared it.

Think for a moment in the pictures of their last Christmas with his father... Arnie Klein, Jason, another tacky old man, and Princess Leia from Star Wars... 30 years after... what a blast!

Sbibak said...

I really hope I'm wrong, but I am very pessimistic regarding these kids. If they aren't fully aware already (which I doubt), they will be crushed the day they discover what their dad really was like. I think Michael loved them, and all of he did as a parent wasn't wrong, but in general terms, it is obvious he shouldn't have been a father.

In the phone tapes revealed by Marc Schaffel, in the middle of a conversation he requested him to search for two boys for adoption. Right away he changed his mind and told him to search for a boy and a girl... like he was ordering a pizza... wait, wait, better without pepperoni. That's the way Jacko faced his paternity.

Regarding Paris colour... I agree, it seems she uses self tanning spray or towelettes. I have a hard time getting a tan, and I use them all the summer.

Prince sounds like Klein, but I'm not sure if he's the father. Debbie costed Mj millions and a lot of troubles and threats, but she was the necessary evil after the allegations. Adoption then, would have been very difficult. He needed a mother and a wife to make it look legit. Using the sperm of a friend, would have added unnecessary problems.

Sbibak said...

Regarding the recording made by Dr. Murray... I wonder how this conversation started. Maybe he was begging Murray not to abandoning him because he needed to sleep in order to complete the concerts, and this is why he was using his messianic repertoire of saving the children of the world... a classic.
It is curious how he pitied kids for not having a mother, yet he deprived his own of one. All of that coming from a junkie, single parent, who overdosed in front of his kids several times that we know of.

Now the floons are using this conversation as the proof of his humanitarianism and good intentions with kids. What Mj did for kids? He gave money to charities, but most of it came from the labels he endorsed, Pepsi, etc. Anyway, what if he gave money to charities as many other celebrities do, mostly for image purposes. His publicist Bob Jones said he never did things gratis.

Other than that, the only thing he did was spend huge amounts of money in plastic toys and electronic games for middle class boys, and invite them to share his ferris wheel and his bed.
Oh Jacko wasn't aware that possibly those toys and electronic games are made in some third world country by children in awful conditions... not to mention the environment damage LOL. I said all the former tongue-in-cheek, I know it sounds demagogic, LOL, but really it annoys me how those rabid fans buy Jacko was an humanitarian concerned for starving people. He failed to pay the salaries to his employees, while spending millions in tacky furniture and junk. What an humanitarian.

Someone exhibiting his lifestyle writing a song like Earth song is a joke, LOL. He himself was made of plastic.
A radio station prank called him pretending it was Akon. During the conversation with the fake Akon, he says he owns a diamond mine in Somalia and tells Jacko about his “little slaves” working there. Jacko said nothing!!! He wasn't shocked at all. Can you believe it?

I remember his statement to the press after the body search in 1993, saying he was innocent and how this was the worst ordeal in his life, blah, blah, blah, begging the public to believe in his innocence and good intentions toward children, etc. How a person telling the truth needs to speak, or is able to speak in a fake voice. That for me, is incompatible. Even the stress he appears to have seems theatrical. I'm sure he was stressed out because he was facing jail, etc., but what we saw was a farce. He looks like an anxious 7 y/o boy making faces of disgust to trick his mom, LOL.

Sbibak said...


I'm assuming that you are a Spaniard or you live in Spain. Who was the TV presenter Jacko was interested in, please? Me muero de la curiosidad, ja, ja.

The other day I saw the testimony of a woman who provided Murray with equipment like condom catheters and referred to the size Jacko used and it was medium size, LOL. I'm sure the fans are crushed after this revelation. Their dreams have been shattered.

I remember Jordie said he was average down there, though I think the references of a 13 years old boy on that subject may be not reliable and is not as important or objective as the blotches he mentioned, etc. but certainly it matches the information on the condom catheter size.

Frenchie said...

"I was just reading a fan forum and they were talking about how Gavin Arvizo was attending a wedding a few days ago. Apparently, the groom was Ron Zonen, the prosecutor on the 2005 trial."

Louise Palanker tagged Star and Gavin in some photos, f'loons got wind of it, and started harassing them on fb. Gavin now has dozens of f'loons subscribed to his page. I felt bad, so I sent him a message about this blog. Hopefully he won't assume it's more hate mail and delete it.

J-M-H said...


Oh my god about the Rabbi's tape of Mike. I totally agree, it shows his pedophilia, he basically admitted it. Mike never had any fulfilling relationships with any adult whether it was a man or a woman, and if this tape was in 2000, he still hadn't experienced anything akin to the emotional fulfillment he received from boys. Even from Lisa Marie Presley, LMAO. It's almost sad; we're talking about suicidal thoughts and he saying the only thing that makes him want to not die is being around a boy (let's face it he's talking about all the little special friends he had all of which were boys). So it's completely understandable now why he'd put so much energy into cultivating relationships with these boys and why he'd been "knocking on death's door" in 1993--not eating, etc--because he'd been betrayed by Jordie, opening their "secret box".

Mike probably turned to drugs because he wasn't able to have the access he used to have, or I should say he didn't have the "air of innocence" surrounding his interactions, with boys. That would make any pedo suicidal. Actually, I've read from real pedophiles that they feel like being a boy-lover is a curse because they will always be alone. Mike obviously felt the exact same way, that's why he was still depressed and still taking drugs to sooth the depression.

Amazing how "Stranger in Moscow" had that lyric that reflected his true feelings about boys. I knew that song was about his "trials" of begin a pedo. Some f'loon tried to argue with me about it, this one and "Speechless", but they are stupid and can't analyze anything right, LOL. "Speechless" expresses the joy he has when he's around a boy, and "Stranger in Moscow" is the other extreme. I wonder if there was a specific "beggar boy" he was referring to? Maybe Brett, maybe the Cascio boys? Both took Jordie's place on the Dangerous tour. Or maybe this is just a general idea of boys relieving his pain. Notice also how he didn't say "girl", he said "boy" in the song. I know to Shmuley he said kid, but given his history, we know who these "kids" were that showed up in his life: Omer, Brett, Jimmy, Jonathan, Mac. Especially Omer, that was right after the whole child molestation fiasco and he ended up having Omer live with him, under the guise of being a protege!

I sometimes think that it killed him having to live up to the ideal the fangirls put on him, always having to hid his true feelings from the world and always having to make an excuse about why he wasn't married or had a girlfriend. I think he made up the whole asexual thing both to sooth any parents' reservations they may of had about their son spending so much alone time with Mike, and as a way of explaining why the public would never see him with girls. It was so convenient a lie.

J-M-H said...

well, the US IQ has dropped again to new levels;-)))))))

Isn't Taj Malik from Germany? I didn't think she was American, she doesn't sound it. At any rate, don't include me in that category, please, LOL!I think the US media is simply following our country's capitalist guiding principle of "supply and demand". The fans are the main consumers of the Murray trial and they demand coverage that reflects their viewpoint. If they didn't see it, they wouldn't watch and then the companies would make any money. But I will say it's absolutely an embarrassment to American notions of presumption of innocence that the media would kowtow to the "profits over people" mentality. They are so skewed in their coverage and they consistently slander, IMO, Murray. It's disgusting. I know they are trying to influence the jury. Nancy Grace is egregious as usual but Dr. Drew... I've lost all respect for him. He is completely delusional in his "theory" about addiction. As Janet Jackson even said you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. She even knew that the drug addict has to want to change, so how is it anyone else fault that Mike was still getting high? SMDH.

I don't want to get emotional invested in Murray but I can't help wanting to cry angry tears at the injustice. Martin Luther King says "An injustice anywhere is an injustice everywhere" and this trial is an injustice based solely on the fact that Michael Jackson is a celebrity. If he was Joe Blow doing blow in the alleys of New York City, no one would give two squirrel shits.

They were saying things like: "Hey, don't you think it's strange that they have such a great relationship? blah blah blah..." According to them, there had to be some kind of conspiracy.

I think it shows that the prosecution cared a lot about these kids and really cared about putting Gavin's abuser in jail. Even Tom Mesereau said that Ron Zonen was an excellent and formidable attorney, and a decent man but that he was just "wrong" in this case. Yeah right. I think it was Steve Robel that house the Arvizo children and he had grown close to them say that the mom was a little off but that Star, Davellin, and Gavin were "damned good kids". Louise Palanker has always defended Gavin, saying if he said he was abused then it happened because she "knows" him. Jacko was guilty.


That condom catheter testimony shows that Mike was like most men on the planet: average. I guess he didn't fall into the stereotypical hung black guy category, LOL. i never thought Mike was well endowed, his pants were just tight and he was only 5'9". Not surprising to me. But also, it corroborates Star saying that Mike's penis was average sized (between 5 and 7 in) when they claimed to see him naked in his room when he walked by. I bet that was a sight to make eyes sore! LMAO

J-M-H said...

About the taped conversation between Mike and Dr. Murray, I don't see it as it shows his "good nature". I think ti shows, just like some of the Shmuley tapes show, that he has an obsession with boys. I've read stories from pedophiles and many of them have a savior/saving complex as well, that they want to save a boy from a perilous environment and give them everything that could want, love, shelter, just as Mike always talks about. It's just another confirmation of his boy-love. Mike collected rare films about boys, some of which them in bad environments, abusive situations, etc. I bet he watched them because he wanted to save them as well. He said to Shmuley that if he was a director he'd make a movie showing from the perspective of a child facing murder charges, "their little hearts beating in their chests". He has the pedo saving complex.

That's probably why he liked the "Devil's Backbone", according to Gavin, so much because it stared a really cute dark haired Spanish boy who was an orphan (the whole orphanage was filled with dark haired boys) and he was in a scary situation and needed help.

S.U. said...


A.G already answered

Jessica and sbibak,

So Lisa was busted, according to her Michael had 9 inches lmao. (If the rumor was true and she said really that)

Stacy Brown will be on Dr Drew tonight and the floo´s are already fuming.

Desiree said...


"Other than that, the only thing he did was spend huge amounts of money in plastic toys and electronic games for middle class boys, and invite them to share his ferris wheel and his bed.
Oh Jacko wasn't aware that possibly those toys and electronic games are made in some third world country by children in awful conditions... not to mention the environment damage LOL. I said all the former tongue-in-cheek, I know it sounds demagogic, LOL, but really it annoys me how those rabid fans buy Jacko was an humanitarian concerned for starving people. He failed to pay the salaries to his employees, while spending millions in tacky furniture and junk. What an humanitarian."


I seriously love you for this comment! It's spot on.

The fans love to say this guy gave a billion dollars to charity (yeah right) and all of his flunkies say he was such a great person, so loving...

I don't believe it for a second. Oh, I definitely believe Jacko wanted to be some great Mother Theresa type but his ego was far too big for it to be altruistic. First and foremost, Jacko was about image; with that in mind, you know everything else was an offshoot of that.

Jacko's 'Save the children' BS was a part of his own narcissism, a projection of his own childhood trauma onto other kids. While he definitely had a tragic upbringing (beatings, sexual abuse, over-worked), he clearly uses it as some kind of license for access to the world's children or some other junk.

The conversation he'd had with Murray in no way shows a great humanitarian. It merely shows the drug-fueled ramblings of a pedophile with a boy obsession. He's said the same thing for years--it's simply lip service. It's some guise to make him look as though he could never harm a child (same story with the Peter Pan-asexual angel BS, LOL).

I actually believe Jacko's personal charity donations were in the single digit millions.

Desiree said...


"I remember his statement to the press after the body search in 1993, saying he was innocent and how this was the worst ordeal in his life, blah, blah, blah, begging the public to believe in his innocence and good intentions toward children, etc. How a person telling the truth needs to speak, or is able to speak in a fake voice. That for me, is incompatible."

To me, it's quite interesting that Jacko would want to read an 'innocence statement' (from a pre-written cue card, of course) from the safety of a sound stage at Neverland Ranch but never want to proclaim his innocence in court.

Something to hide?

More interesting is that, if you look at the timeline regarding the body search and read Gary Spiegel's account of it in Diane Dimond's book (he says Jacko was fighting his doctors and they ended up being unable to get all of the photographs needed), it does not make sense. Jacko acts completely surprised according to Spiegel, saying, "What is this?" and "Why are you doing this?", but he'd known they wanted a body search for weeks before he even came back to the United States.

The theatrics and tantrums were diversion tactics. He just didn't want the police to get photos that would corroborate Jordie's description.

I'm writing about this, the "$25 Million Match", as we speak. The timeline between the start of the investigation of Jacko up until the settlement in late Jan. 1994 proves that Jordie was molested. Every time I think of the timeline, I cannot believe anyone who will consider it as well would continue to believe Jacko was innocent of molesting that young boy.

He was completely guilty.


"Gavin now has dozens of f'loons subscribed to his page. I felt bad, so I sent him a message about this blog."


What the hell do they want with these boys?! How dare these middle-aged nutjobs harass boys young enough to be their sons?

What do they expect to accomplish with harassing Michael Jackson's boy victims? Do they simply get their rocks off trying to tell Gavin he's a liar?

It's just so damned sad.

More evidence of the Curse of Jacko. I bet you have f'loons working tirelessly trying to harass and find Jordie Chandler, too.

The behavior of these fans is reprehensible. I'm sure you've seen the blog, "Atlanta Georgia's Anton Jackson", right? It is seriously incredibly vile.


Funny because I believe that blog's sidelinked at Vindicate MJ, which says that they promote the harassment of Jacko's alleged sex abuse victims, including pointing out their locations while they are in the witness protection program.

Fans will harass his victims and his detractors (unfortunately, I can now put myself into that latter category) into perpetuity. I believe it is less about 'vindicating Michael'--that's hard to do--and more about character assassination and wanting complete silence about things that can cause them to 'doubt' the angelic King of Pop.

Elena said...

Regarding the Murray recording I posted, it was very disturbing like I said. I’m not sure if Michael is telling all those stories about him saving kids, having no childhood, and building a hospital just to gain pity from Murray. I think he actually believes it, which is even worse. With Michael, I often wonder if he’s purposely lying and trying to manipulate people or if he thinks what he’s saying it’s true.


I'll take a screenshot when the program is posted on YouTube, but you can see the boy on that same year: http://goo.gl/nNH4G
By the way I thought that ugly hairstyle wasn't "in" until the 90s. I never liked it lol


Did you read the answer from Arvizo? "A person who snorts coke and manipulate young boys". I thought it was interesting that he mentioned the coke thing, just like Aaron Carter allegedly said.

Fans are saying that they wish death to the Arvizos as well as that lawyer. Along with Murray and all those evil people who wanted to ruin poor Michael’s life. I’m not even surprised anymore.

Lady C said...


When I watch the trial, it's not done piece by piece, and I have to admit that all this going back/forth about this and that is a little confusing, but I can try to tell you to the my best ability what's happening. It seems as if the defense is making some progress in chipping away at the prosecution. This started yesterday with the testimony of Elissa Fleak, the coroner investigator....it appears that she screwed up pretty big in collecting her evidence. According to Chernoff, she was down right sloppy and left her finger prints behind on a piece of the evidence. For example on the night stand next to MJ, there was a juice bottle that was not taken as evidence BUT was displayed in one of the photos that she took. She admits to this. Not only that but according to her original report, she doesn't mention that the propofol bottle was in the IV bag as reported, and the IV bag that was found contained remnants of clear liquid, not milky...she has some inconsistencies. All this was yesterday. On today, the defense recalled Fleak to the stand, and Chernoff went over some pictures that was taken on the scene. The one picture that seemed of real interest, was the picture of two empty pill bottles(Lorazepam & Diazepam) on the bathtub ledge in MJ's master bathroom. She had no idea how they got there, but I believe it was LAPD? that placed them there for a photo to be taken of them. The bottles were originally recovered from the medicine cabinet in the bathroom. But what got the defense was the toxicology expert who said that based on the amount of the Lorazepam found in MJ's stomach, it was determined that it was in a high amount-- he gave the actual calculations of the medication and its equivalency to make this point. So it seems as if the prosecution may now have a problem in laying out the 'actual' cause of MJ's death, and how it occured step by step. Maybe propofol was not the actual cause of MJ's death as they've laid out in their opening argument; maybe it was the Lorazepam. However, based on what has happened with Ms. Fleak, the defense can now hinge their argument that MJ 'may have' drank propofol as speculated to explain the excessive amount found in MJ's system, and he may have done this via the juice bottle. Since the juice container was not taken as evidence, could it be that MJ drank the propofol from this container? But of course, argument would be, if he did, then there would've been traces of fruit juice in his digestive tract. Yes, that may be true, BUT we all know that MJ was notorious for using empty Diet Coke cans to camouflage alcohol, don't we? LOL So that to me doesn't sound too far fetched.

Lady C said...

Desiree (cont.)

The defense will try hone in on the fact that it wasn't propofol that actually killed the KOP, but in fact that it was the Lorazepam instead. An empty container of Lorazepam was found next to MJ -- that's a fact...Lorazepam was found in high concentration amounts in MJ's stomach and urine compared to the rest of his body-- that's a fact....the Lorazepam amount was not tested at the time of the toxicology report --that too is a fact. IMO, I think that there could be a chance that MJ did play possum and took the Lorazepam in high amounts, perhaps when he first went to his bathroom to take a shower way before Murray gave him anything. I wouldn't put it past MJ to hide a medication from Murray so that he could take more when he wanted...lets' face it, the man was an addict and that's what addicts do. So yes, if the liquid in the IV bag was clear instead of milky, then it could suggest that Murray didn't give the extra propofol like speculated, but according to the prosecution, he would still be held liable because of his use of propofol out of a hospital setting is criminal. From what it looks like so far, there's a lot of confusion , and MAYBE the defense now has a shot at a reasonable argument--they're taking something very simple and making it complicated --a good job of it, I might add...something they can use to 'muddy' up the waters so to speak. It seems as if not too many days ago, everyone seemed to think that the prosecution had it made; an air-tight case...maybe now is a turning point for that. It may send the message to someone on the jury that Murray may not have necessary caused MJ's death, but that death is something that MJ actually wanted... Based on MJ's confession of children/suicidal thoughts, that may indeed be true. Could it be that since MJ was no longer able to have little boys at his disposal, that he decided to throw in the towel at this point? IDK.

Speaking of MJ and children, noticed from some of the photos taken from his bedroom, there was a big banner-like poster of baby with the words "sweet baby" written across it. There were other pictures of other babies as well, of all which looked to be male....what can I say?LOL MJ had not one, but two boys and one girl...was choosing Paris--a girl--his way of fooling the public of his true fondness for boys? Was she a 'beard' as well I wonder? lol My gut feeling tells me that if he wasn't being scrutinized under the magnifying glass, his preference for all of his children would've been all or mostly boys...just my hunch.

Now they'll be playing the entire taping of Murray's statement to police....I don't know how that will go.

Btw, I didn't watch Nancy Grace, but saw her little 'drama queen' snippet on Dr. Drew, but that in itself was too much for one to take, LOL!

Lady C said...


"I sometimes think that it killed him having to live up to the ideal the fangirls put on him, always having to hid his true feelings from the world and always having to make an excuse about why he wasn't married or had a girlfriend."

Yes, I bet it was very hard for MJ to live up to the expectations of his fangirls...he probably wanted to jump out of his skin! LOL.

"Nancy Grace is egregious as usual but Dr. Drew... I've lost all respect for him. He is completely delusional in his "theory" about addiction."

I too am very disappointed in Dr. Drew; I thought I was the only one. What a crock of s***! With that statement, what I want to know is, is Dr. Drew on drgus? LMAO! That's like saying a drunk driver who hits someone isn't responsible....let's not blame it on the driver but the alcohol.


Your summary of MJ's kids is quite interesting and I think you're pretty on point--well said. I feel very sorry for his children too...even to the extent that I think that they may eventually one day follow in their father's foot steps; as far as drugs and alcohol are concerned. Let's face it, that's a possibility, but I truly hope I'm wrong on this; I wouldn't want to wish that kind of problem on anyone. They're human with genuine feelings but as the saying goes, " pressure busts a pipe", I think that all the public pressure that they're facing on daily basis and one day finding out the true 'reality' behind their father could possibly push them over the edge....how sad and devastating. If I were in their shoes and found out such truth, it would be enough to drive me over the edge; even enough to want to turn to drugs and alcohol as a means of escape.

"This is very speculative, but I think Paris and Prince have “inherited” their father's ability to manipulate his public image... so different on/off camera. They grew up learning how, no matter what you do in private, in public you have to portray a certain image."

Let's face it, MJ was the teacher, and his children were the students....he taught them manipulation all too well and very early on.


"Another absolute hilarious thing is that some MJ fans want to compare MJ's achievements to those of Steve Jobs! "

I'd tell those MJ fans, "News Flash... MJ doesn't have s*** on Steve Jobs!" It was because of Jobs and his contribution(s) to the world that MJ was able to do what he did...let's not forget that he basically MADE the technological world.

Lady C said...


I hope the 'curse' of MJ hasn't completely taken over his own kids...I pray that there's time and way for them to recover before it's too late...I really do. I see that Stacey Brown will be on Dr. Drew tonight...wonder what he'll have to say, but Dr. Drew needs to get his head examined with all of his so-called 'addiction logic'...what such BS! Like I said to J-M-H, hell is he on drugs? How disappointing, he should know better than to say some off-the-wall crap like that. If I didn't know any better, I'd start to think the 'curse' of MJ has spread to the media and all talking heads involved...its taking them ALL by storm, LMAO!!

Frenchie said...

"What the hell do they want with these boys?! How dare these middle-aged nutjobs harass boys young enough to be their sons?"

It's disgusting, isn't it? I feel ill whenever I come across them bitching about the Arvizo boys. They wish for their deaths or for Gavin's cancer to return...it's just so vile. F'loons are truly a despicable lot.

"I think it shows that the prosecution cared a lot about these kids and really cared about putting Gavin's abuser in jail."

Zonen not only invited the boys to his wedding, but it appears they stayed in his home, and Gavin even made a speech at the rehearsal dinner. I find it all sort of touching. Anyone who thinks there is something sinister about it is a moron.

"Regarding Paris colour... I agree, it seems she uses self tanning spray or towelettes. I have a hard time getting a tan, and I use them all the summer."

I wouldn't be surprised if all three Jackson children are being doused in self-tanner. Their coloring fluctuates dramatically in photos taken just days apart, and they sometimes have a muddy appearance that I've seen with self-tanning products. The Jacksons seem intent on passing them off as MJ's biological children, so I really wouldn't put it past them to go that route.

Desiree said...


I saw the Facebook exchange between Star Arvizo and the Michael Jackson f'loon and have known about it since 2009. I'd already included it in the Aaron Carter post because it was a corroboration of the cocaine bit from the Aaron Carter OK! magazine story, yes, but also because it corroborated Jermaine Jackson saying his brother used cocaine.

And of course it corroborates the explosive finding of cocaine powders on Jacko's underwear back in 2003.

I believe Star and, if one thinks about it, even though Daphne Barak never provided the audio of Aaron Carter mentioning Jacko giving him cocaine, all of this corroboration--three times--is enough to show that Jacko'd actually used the drug and that it is certainly possible that Arron was given it as well.

So, yes, I'd already seen it. :-)

The picture of the boy from the Spanish program you mentioned definitely looks like someone Jacko would be interested in: the dark, olive skin, the dark hair, the sort of suave Mediterranean looks...

Maybe Jacko didn't give him the call back because he was intimidated by such a handsome, 'cool'-looking boy. But no doubt in my mind he'd want to hit that. LOL.

By the way, I always liked that haircut. It's way better than this, which is all the rage with white boys (Jacko's type) in my country:



Desiree said...

Here's a curly version of the hairstyle I'd just mentioned.


I hate this hair! Why you'd ever want to look like you live in a trash can, I have no idea.

Elena, like I said, I always liked that haircut and I think it makes a boy look 'sweet' and 'innocent' (Jacko operative words!), like a nice guy.

Good renditions of that 90s hair:


And here's Brett Barnes with the 90s style, which made him look 'sweet' and 'innocent':


That photo was during October 1993--in the midst of the molestation scandal--and I always wondered whether Brett cut his hair to look more like Jordie Chandler. We know Brett had the long shag before then.

Desiree said...


I thought Gavin and star Arvizo looked very respectable standing next to Louise Palanker. The conspiracy angle makes little sense; in fact, I find them more believable that they've kept this friendship going with the players in that trial.

We should all remember that the Arvizo kids were from humble means--a barrio in Los Angeles--but they were good kids. They were in the Young Cadets; they did a ton of activities. They were not out fighting or smoking weed or any of that.

Mesereau knew to go after Janet Arvizo because Janet had a history of abuse and emotional problems. Essentially, they were attempting to make her look more crazy than Jacko! Mesereau couldn't go after the children, besides trying to make them look like sex offenders.

I actually remember being on the IMDB Jacko forum and some Jacko's Wackos were trying to bring up the Rijo Jackson thing (Rijo had claimed Gavin and Star were masturbating to porn and wanted him to join them) to imply that they were the child molesters!

The defense did the same thing with Janet Arvizo, which is insane.

Fans are known for their psychosis but I cannot--for the life of me--understand why everyone who accuses Jacko of being a pedophile suddenly becomes a pedophile or pedophile sympathizer. How does that make any sense to them?

I give up: humans are stupid.

"It's disgusting, isn't it? I feel ill whenever I come across them bitching about the Arvizo boys. They wish for their deaths or for Gavin's cancer to return...it's just so vile. F'loons are truly a despicable lot."

Truly despicable! Instead of harassing these boys and wishing death upon them, if they believe Jacko to be so innocent, prove it. They ought to spend their energy proving his doubters wrong.

If the only way they can exalt Jacko is by bashing other people and engaging in harassment of his victims, Jacko was guilty as can be.

Desiree said...

Lady C:

Thanks a million for the trial write-up! It is much appreciated. I'm going to read through it a few more times.

I go back to what you'd said before, "If the bag ain't milky, then he's not guilty." LOL.

Let me correct you, though: it is not illegal to dispense propofol outside of a hospital! The media has used this as some kind of trump card to show Murray's culpability in Jacko's death, but that whole point is irrelevant.

This trial is not about propofol; if it were, we'd be dealing with the medical board, if even that.

At this point, the only thing the Murray defense team can do is raise reasonable doubt. If mistakes were made to the point how Jacko died is up in the air, the only thing a jury can really do is acquit. It would be against the constitution not to.

You just hope that they aren't watching Dr. Drew Pinsky on TV pontificate about liability and addiction. I should add that I believe, despite his position as addiction specialist, he is being irresponsible. Jurors could tune into his show and be misled about the truth of addiction. The truth about addiction is that ONLY THE ADDICT can heal himself; no one can ever force an addict to get help--it is a personal journey. Understanding this--and it's absolute truth--invalidates the tripe Dr. Drew is peddling.

Just like you said, using his logic, anyone can get away with anything. It's like if someone is a co-dependent spouse of a morbidly obese person and they've fed them fast food to the point the fat person dies of a heart attack, someone could have standing to sue the spouse for negligence or being complicit in 'killing' the fat person because they'd enabled the fat person's addiction. It just opens up a can of worms.

I truly believe Americans have a 'blame someone else' mentality. Dr. Drew is just an idiot. I have zero respect for him.

It's funny because I'd caught the end of Dr. Drew's show (I didn't get to catch the interview with Stacy Brown but, seeing that he's turn-coated, I'm sure it was a bunch of Jackson family PR spin) and a psychologist on the show essentially said that the Jacko fans who protest outside of the Murray trial and do all of the nonsense the Vindicate MJ crowd do are psychotic.

She said that Jacko only inflamed their already present psychosis.

Dr. Drew said she shouldn't call it 'psychosis' but 'worship'. LOL. She was only calling a spade a spade: these people are considered f'loons (fucking loons) for a reason.

But, of course, the stations cannot offend these f'loons too much; money could be lost! It's insane to me how much the f'loons appear on TV, as if they are a part of the Jackson family.

Please continue to give trial insights, Lady C. I really enjoy it.

Lady C said...


I'm glad I could give you some insight on the trial...I try although I'm not 100% sure if what I'm saying makes sense all the time. Hell, this 'circus' can be real confusing at times with the back and forth with times, drugs, drug names and amounts, etc. It gets confusing...maybe the confusion is something that will impact the jurors. But it would be good if the defense can somehow really shake up the jury and get Murray acquitted. Of course, MJ fans would hate that; it would really chap their ass!lol IF by chance that were to happen, then I would be greatly concerned for Murray and his welfare...the man would practically have to go into hiding just to save his life because the 'lynch mob of MJ', LOL, would have a bounty on his head. I had a crazy thought...there are the MJ fans within the MJ fans who still think that MJ is some where out there alive--crazy as that may sound, lol. I wonder what do they make of all this trial drama? I really feel sorry for them. I can only imagine the number of MJ 'sightings' claims that have emerged since his death... They are D-E-L-U-S-I-O-N-A-L, LOL! They said the same thing about Elvis and Tupac...and several years later we're still waiting for their debut.

Gavin Arvizo probably wishes, like Jordan Chandler, that he never set eyes on MJ. I saw on FB how the fans are lynching him too. They sound so hateful...It has really hit me how the MJ fans are so consumed by Jackson--to the point of condemning someone to burn in hell. Like wise with Murray, he's a monster, animal, cold-blooded killer who too deserves to burn in hell. WTH is wrong with these pp?! There is REALLY something wrong when you have ppl who are so consumed by a particular individual that they loose all sense rationality and reasoning...it's not healthy. The fans, especially the 'fanatics', treat this man/man-child like he's God. If I didn't know any better, you would've thought that a bible would have existed just for him, and that's repulsive. It's one thing to admire or be inspired by a person, but to take it to the point of extreme that they have--seeing him as an infallible saint or equivalency to God is sickening, and even dangerous, I might add. It was bad enough when he was alive, but now that he's dead, it's gotten a lot worst. It's almost like Hitler and his followers--how he had enormous influence over the Nazi regime and how they 'worshiped' him. Perhaps maybe that's why MJ was so fascinated by Hitler...he was so narcissistic that he probably saw a lot of himself in Hitler--he thought the world was his, and him being labeled the KOP just made the mindset more tangible.

Sbibak said...

Desiree and Lady C,

I agree with you both on the narcissism. I can't understand when the f'loons say he was humble and down to earth. Remember since the Victory Tour he loved to be escorted to the stadiums by police, the army, etc in a parade, like the President or a General commanding his troops, wearing his military style outfits. His fame went to his head, but really, the rest of the world contributed to it. I understand that when there is a big public event, the police is present to avoid problems and guarantee security, etc., that is their job, but when I pay my taxes I don't expect the government employees to be part of a performance with a pop star. It was ridiculous and I can't understand how the persons in charge authorized it.

In contrast, he was very insecure. I think the lack of formal education was one of the causes, self-hate and image problems aside. His fame put him in a very visible place, with people examining him, and he feared to be ridiculed, like happened when somebody in his camp handled to the press the original letter he wrote in an hotel in Japan, without proof-reading it before. I'm referring to the one where he said “animals don't strike out of malice”... or something to the effect.

I have observed that he acted sometimes like Tarzan fresh from the jungle. For example: in an interview with Andy Warhol in the early 80s, they were at a posh restaurant, and he asked what caviar is. I know that in Jermaine's lavish wedding there was caviar everywhere, so it wasn't the first time he saw it LOL. Also, he asked Quincy Jones (or some music collaborator) what masturbation is during a conversation about Prince's lyrics. I don't believe when he told Taraborrelli that he ignored who the President of the USA was, or when Latoya and him said they did not know what cocaine is. Michael grew up in the show business... many Motown artists were hooked up on drugs, so I cannot believe it. Somehow, he liked to play the role of a strange, pure creature untouched by “civilization”... maybe that was another manifestation of his narcissistic personality, presenting himself as someone unique, vulnerable... in Michael's vocabulary that translates as “the supreme victim” in all the circumstances LOL.

Sbibak said...


just after Thriller they came up with the asexuality theory as an excuse. Also they used the religion as a shield to justify his apathy regarding women. The religious thing is another farce. If he was so observant of his faith, why he did all the surgeries in the first place. He should have stayed with the face jehova gave to him, LOL. Also J witnesses are very apprehensive when blood is concerned... and surgeries aren't popular in their creed. I dare to say almost every Christian religion encourage marriage and a conventional family as a way to avoid sin, LOL. He could have married a JW, or the virginal hired girlfriend Brooke Shields... in his own words one of the loves of his life... but we know he was gay... err shy LOL.

Maybe his mysoginia is partially related with the pressures the public put on him to act like a heterosexual man. I say partially because I think is mostly fruit of his upbringing. Poor thing had to repel women sexual advances and make up excuses for the rejection. No wonder he did want to cast Latoya as his sexual interest in all his videos.

Regarding the episode with the Arvizos, remember he was wearing socks LOL. The horror!!


I doubt Lisa Marie saw his dick... let alone in full display LOL. The fans make up all those stories. Do you remember the pictures of MJ with 3T where one of them is dressed a la Jesus Christ in the cross? In f'loonky town they said the pics are photoshoped. They ignore that in the trial those pictures were discussed, in fact the whole set was confiscated in the raid. Obviously Tmez never objected them. When there is something that makes Jacko look bad, the fans make up a lie on the spot.

this year I read the second book of the telerabbi. It is an ode to paedophilia. Many things called my attention, but now I only remember what he said about babies or animals when they sleep in the same bed, they tend to huddle up together...Adults do the same, only that, if at least one of them is a male, there is a high possibility of noticing something hard against your behind, LOL. 365 nights sleeping with Brett Barnes...

Desiree said...

You've all mentioned the Gavin Arvizo Facebook harassment but what is his Facebook URL? I'd like to see these f'loons in action.

I searched for it in google and I came across this entry in the Urban Dictionary:


Read the last entry, especially. It's sickening, these f'loons. They are incredibly hateful. And Dr. Drew has the nerve to correct a psychologist who suggested that they are psychotic.

J-M-H said...


LOL, you make me giggle with your wit.

Also, he asked Quincy Jones (or some music collaborator) what masturbation is during a conversation about Prince's lyrics.

LOL, this is a crock. What grown ass man doesn't know what masturbation is? Even kids know what that is. He was pulling everyone's leg with that one, for sure. Interesting that we know of this anecdote, perhaps the media was there recording it or QJ got permission to relay this little story? At any rate, Mike was totally trying to cultivate the role of an innocent, for what reason, I have no idea. But he was teaching masturbation to little boys, perhaps even Emmanuel Lewis at this time, so why was he pretending? I'm not trying to harp on his abuse history but according to Johnny Jackson, he saw 12 year old Mike in a naked sexual situation with two adult men. Penis touching will be in the repertoire, I hate to say. And let's not forget that it was in 1979 he asked 12 year old Terry George if he ever "masturbated with cream" (lotion). Hmm, methinks he's a liar with the innocent act!! I'm just a little astounded at the media manipulation of this man. SMH. I think if any thing was unknown to him is was because he chose to be ignorant of it or because it was "dumbness" on his part. I remember a Vanity Fair article from I think July 2010 and John Landis and others on the set of the "Thriller" video said that Mike was so naive and innocent about sex, and he was 25 at the time. I think it was an act. He saw his brothers and his father romping around with groupies when he was still a wee bairn. Maybe he was trying to psychologically "right those wrongs" by acting as if they never happened and the "lessons" learned were never imprinted in his mind, hence the naivete. Like he wanted to return to tabula rasa.

To say something about those 3T photos, I always thought it was weird that he had them so close in his possession. I sometimes think that he liked to look at them, in a bad way. Jermaine said he held them on the bed "weird" after their mother died and that the family had been creeped out by it. And in that music video he was in with them, he was so freaking googly eyed! Did you notice this? The first time I saw the video, I was still a fan and I still thought he was normal, hetero, and not a pedo, BUT I got this instant gut feeling that the way he was acting with them was weird. Like he stared intently at them, especially the youngest with the eyebrows (TJ), and the way he put his leg over TJ's thigh. It was pretty creepy and I was a fan, LOL. And TJ was the one that was naked in those album pics and he was around 14 when his mom died; possibly he's Uncle Mike's favorite and he was holding him weird that one time Jermaine mentioned. And remember that note that Mike wrote about talking to TJ, Taj, and Taryll about molestation:

"Dee Dee Please read this article about child malestation [sic] and please read it to Taj, T.J. and Tarryl. It brings out how even your own reletives [sic] can be malesters [sic] of children, or even uncle or aunts malesting [sic] nephew or nieces. Please read."

I mean to me this is like a cry for help, him mentioning uncles, maybe he feels if some sympathetic person (Dee Dee) could intervene with his behavior, maybe it would help him stop having those pedophilic feelings. I'm also curious as to whether this note was written while he had a harem of special friends. Then that would mean the definitely was a cry for help or that he didn't think what he was doing to his special friends was molestation, but stuff done by relatives (which was what he experienced) was molestation.

J-M-H said...

he said about babies or animals when they sleep in the same bed, they tend to huddle up together...Adults do the same, only that, if at least one of them is a male, there is a high possibility of noticing something hard against your behind, LOL. 365 nights sleeping with Brett Barnes...

Wow look at that excuse. He obviously thinks that his behavior with boys is okay. Typical pedo. There is no way that Brett wasn't being molested in those "animal/baby" cuddling sessions. And apparently his sister Karlee said Brett insisted on those arrangements. Poor Brett was mind-fucked by a pedo, see how he stuttered profusely on the stand. Trying to hid the obviously sexual nature of his sleepovers with Mike at 19. Brett insists he's hetero but I insist that he's gay for Mike, LOL.


That Urban Dictionary entry is sick. They have no f***king I idea what is true and what is not, they were not there. And the fact that there was a complaining witness that never recanted says to me that it's better to air on the side of I don't know or guilty. They are incredibly hateful and psychotic. Especially about wondering if he really had cancer, insinuating that it was a scheme to get money from people. Um, even in Aphrodite Jones' book--the f'loon Bible--there is a picture of Gavin with no hair or eyelashes and eyebrows.

Frenchie said...

"You've all mentioned the Gavin Arvizo Facebook harassment but what is his Facebook URL? I'd like to see these f'loons in action."

http://goo.gl/KSAJT (log in to view)

There's not much to see. After his facebook was leaked, he made everything on his profile private and eventually disabled messaging.

I don't know what they expect to accomplish by subscribing to his page. All it does is give Gavin the identities of dozens of MJ fanatics with an abnormal interest in him. Not a smart move on their part.

"Brett insists he's hetero but I insist that he's gay for Mike, LOL."

I just think he's closeted.

Frenchie said...

Look at how miserable Blanket is at the Michael Jackson Forever concert:


He clearly doesn't want to be there. I wish they'd stop dragging him to so many public appearances.

Desiree said...

I just looked at the subscriber list and there are two f'loons I recognize: David Edwards (aka 'Blaine Edwards' from In Living Color's skit [gay] "Men on Films", as I call him, since he has a homosexual crush on Jacko and has a thing for exclamation points which destroy his masculinity) from Vindicate MJ and Isabelle Piot aka "Shelly" from Vindicate MJ (hover over her Gravatar and you'll see "ipiot").

How incredibly sick. So, I guess I was correct in the assertion that the Vindicate MJ crowd does support the harassment of Michael Jackson's sexual abuse victims.

I should mention Isabelle because I know she stalks this blog; matter of fact, she comes on multiple times a day. When Jason Pfeiffer started blogging (I was the impetus for that), he'd followed my blog, which was really no big deal because I'd told him I believed Jacko was a pedophile. Nevertheless, Jason asked me, "By the way, who is Isabelle Plot(sic)?" I told him I didn't know but why was he asking me who she was. He'd said he was getting some angry messages from an Isabelle asking why was he in association with me since I believe and write about Jacko being a pedophile, if Jason was supposedly Jacko's lover.

She stalks anyone and everyone and everything Jacko-related, including, like I've said, this blog. She even friend-requested a friend of mine because possibly she believed my friend had some connections in the World of Jacko.

And she was the one who'd linked Brett Barnes to this blog May 10th, which got Brett real upset *pouts*.

To her credit, she stalks in silence but I've never seen someone so obsessed. I often wonder why she even stalks this blog; she agrees with nothing I write and apparently the synapses in her brain do not allow her to read the articles and see the connections between 'Jacko' and 'pedophile'. And I've convinced numerous people, as per their emails to me.

I should note two mind-boggling incidents with regard to Isabelle/Shelly: The first, I went onto Vindicate MJ over a month ago and they'd been discussing the revolting pedophile books that I am planning to show in time. Isabelle has seen the photo I linked featuring the young boy from "Boys will Be Boys" with his legs spread open, gentials visible, a seductive look in his eyes (pure pedophile fodder), and her response was, "Oh, that photograph was taken by Hajo Ortil," and "Do you think we can get into contact with Mary Minnow?"

Minnow, as I am sure you know, was to be a book expert the defense wanted to bring in to testify about how many of Jacko's sleazy boy books were in libraries across the country. The Prosectution countered by requesting pedophile expert FBI agent Ken Lanning, which made the defense back off. LOL.

To these f'loons, if a book is in a library, that means it is not child pornography or pornography; it means it is 'art'. Their whole definition is skewed for they know nothing of intent behind a piece. For example, a book I'd picked up from my university library is a homoerotic novel called "Teleny", purportedly written by Oscar Wilde, which contains beautifully written albeit graphic scenes between male partners. Despite the fact that the book is in a library today does not change the fact the book was pornography in the 1800s, peddled by a French pornagrapher named Charles Hirsch.

The fans lack any ability to consider the whole instead of individual parts.

Desiree said...

For Isabelle/Shelly to have seen the image from "Boys Will Be Boys" (and, I should note, that was NOT the only graphic picture of its type in that book, let alone the images I'd obtained of "The Boy"--the less graphic of the two books--came from a pedophile website) and then think nothing of it is an exercise in stupidity, which is congenital.

It gives me great pause that human beings possessing intellect would neglect to see the flashing neon lights above Jacko's head reading "Pedophile!" after considering these books of nude young boys the age of his 'special friends'.

It is irrational. If it were any other man, thrice accused of the sexual abuse of young boys with whom he shared his bed over hundreds of nights, who had these books, they'd call it a circumstantial 'smoking gun' (forgive the oxymoron).

The second even that left me in utter shock with regards to Isabelle involved the Russian, Helena. The latter'd seen those disturbing photos of Jacko holding Jimmy Safechuck with that pedophile's lascivious glint in his eyes (from my "Notice: busy again" entry) and, obviously possessing some reasonableness in her brain, thought they, too, were unnerving. However, Helena went on to deny their validity, saying I'd cut out Jimmy from one picture and Jacko from another and put them together in a way that made Jacko look sinister.

Isabelle then comes in and says that the picture is available elsewhere (absolving me of putting the photos together to fit my 'agenda') but, no doubt, it was photoshopped.

How these f'loons can believe that the picture of Jacko holding Jimmy Safechuck is photoshopped--when it appeared in a NAMBLA newsletter back in the early 1990s when photoshop did not even exist--is beyond anything I can comprehend, especially when another shot from the same photoshoot was right above the photo in discussion.

I only mention this because these people are not mentally fit; there is something wrong. There worship of Jacko is part of a religion. Stalking child sexual abuse victims and calling them liars and wishing them to hell or hoping for their cancer to return--even questioning the severity of their cancer--must equal Brownie points in Michael Jackson heaven (or, the 8th circle of hell).

How dare they harass Gavin Arvizo? What is the goal of following him? What do they seek to accomplish?

Since Isabelle Piot stalks this blog, I would enjoy an explanation to such repulsive behaviors. It is my firm belief that there is a Curse of Jacko and, indeed, while I am not deeply superstitious, I believe his family brings about destruction and sorrow, as well. Therefore, it is of know surprise that someone who worships the Cursed One will behave in a despicable manner.

I am glad to hear that Gavin has disabled his Facebook to prevent more harassment. The conduct of f'loons alone has made many people question Jacko's innocence. It led me on my journey.

Thank you, f'loons. Thank you a million times.

Desiree said...

"I just think he's closeted."

Of course he is. There is no way a boy child could have endured a decade of sexual abuse--through the years he'd entered puberty--and not relate 'men' with 'sex'. It's all he really knows; he'd been sleeping in bed with Jacko since he was a 9-year-old and it's been confirmed that they did more than cuddle and sleep. I'd given him the benefit of the doubt in that he was simply gay for Michael Jackson--as J-M-H said--but I'd be interested to know about how successful he's been with the opposite sex.

It's tragic.

As for Blanket Jackson, I am trying to figure him out. He seems stunted in his growth and cries easily. I don't mean to offend in my political incorrectness but is it possible he's slightly retarded? Maybe a little delayed? Possessing some special needs?

It wouldn't surprise me. I think all of those kids are going to be wrecked.

And, I might add, Paris Jackson had a nice caramel glow about her. It's obvious she's been spray tanned or she spends 3 hours in the sun everyday. Prince Jackson is as white as can be.

What a farce it is to even suggest Jacko is their biological father. That is what I cannot understand: why did he have to have white children? Was black not good enough?

Lady C said...


"I only mention this because these people are not mentally fit; there is something wrong. There worship of Jacko is part of a religion."

It's like I said earlier, the way they act, MJ is God. Now all they need is to have a bible written after him. So I guess how it works, is that the fanatics who are the 'believers' are destined to go to MJ heaven, and the non-fanatics/non-fans are the 'unbelievers' and are destined to Hell...the 'Haves and Have-Nots'-- all this spoken from the heart of MJ's angels.

The whole thing is so sickening and repulsive to me...I think I just vomited in my mouth! LOL

Frenchie said...

Isabelle Piot unsubscribed after you pointed her out. I downloaded the list earlier, and she was between Greta and Reyna.

It looks like the newest subscribers go to the top, which means David was Gavin's very first. He's such an eager beaver!

"What a farce it is to even suggest Jacko is their biological father. That is what I cannot understand: why did he have to have white children? Was black not good enough?"

It would be one thing if they were adopted, but he had his children custom made and each time he rejected using any DNA from his own race. Now that I think about it, Jonathan, Omer, and Gavin were instructed to call MJ "daddy", but I don't believe Jordan ever was, and Brett was just allotted the role of "cousin." It seems MJ only fantasized about fathering his non-black special friends.

"As for Blanket Jackson, I am trying to figure him out. He seems stunted in his growth and cries easily."

Maybe he has reactive attachment disorder? I remember a social worker telling my mother that she saw symptoms of it all the time in young children who were neglected or abused...

Lady C said...


"What a farce it is to even suggest Jacko is their biological father. That is what I cannot understand: why did he have to have white children? Was black not good enough? "

MJ had to have white children because he didn't like being black. Black was not good enough for him for the same reason that black was not good enough for anyone directly connected to him...his so-called wives, 'Sham and Sham-lite', his lab-created children, and last but not least, his 'special' friends. MJ may have tolerated the black race, but it was something that he rejected all together. . He always boasted how he was an African-American and was proud of it, but his actions said otherwise. He didn't even come close to making his spill of 'militancy' seem believe able. As far as his children are concerned, perhaps if they were black or dark skinned, it would've been a bit more believable. Or better yet, if the beards, 'Sham and Sham-lite' were of a black/dark race, and they were 'supposed' to be the mother of his children, no matter how they were created, the race issue with
them would've been a bit more believable. The fact is, MJ's actions didn't seem to match up with a lot of the words that were coming out of his mouth. I call his struggle with blackness, something of an 'Oreo' complex...something that I think stems from the Jackson family unit itself. The apples don't fall far from the tree, do they?

Sadly, MJ seem to have lost sight of who he really was, inside and out. When a person lies so much, they eventually loose all sense of reality and began to 'live' through their lies...the lies the become their identity. MJ was notorious for this....his life was a big stage of 'smoke and mirrors'. I think the greatest of these that stands out in my mind is his so-called bout with vitiligo. IF MJ truly had the disease like he claimed to have had, then without a doubt, he should've gone down in the G. Book of World Records of having the most unique case of vitiligo ever known to man. I believe he holds such record for the most successful album ever, Thriller, and maybe for the most records ever sold by and artist? I've seen many ppl with vitiligo, and I can honestly say that I've never, ever, seen anything like his. I think if there ever was such another case like his any where in the world, the public would've known about it, and that particular individual would be sought after by medical research because of their extremely rare case. Who knows, perhaps MJ would've taken the time to extend them an invite to Neverland for a private tour and sleep over, since the two of them would have something very much in common, LOL.

S.U. said...

Lady C:

Lady C said...


"I only mention this because these people are not mentally fit; there is something wrong. There worship of Jacko is part of a religion."

"It's like I said earlier, the way they act, MJ is God. Now all they need is to have a bible written after him. So I guess how it works, is that the fanatics who are the 'believers' are destined to go to MJ heaven, and the non-fanatics/non-fans are the 'unbelievers' and are destined to Hell...the 'Haves and Have-Nots'-- all this spoken from the heart of MJ's angels."

xD I just thought about it:

There is no god but Michael Jackson and Mesereau is his Prophet.


(Hope I didn´t offend the Muslims)

A.G. said...


Considering Taj Maalik (who is not German BTW;-) a part of Dr. Drew interview with MJ fans and fan worship....

"LAWRENCE: You know, there actually are different levels of celebrity worship. Most of us worship celebrities in the way that we, you know, follow them on Twitter or we look to TMZ or we discuss it with our friends, and the whole purpose of that is just to be social. I mean, I don`t really care about Britney Spears, but if you and I have nothing in common, I go, look what Britney did.

All of a sudden, you and I have a basis for conversation. That`s most of the celebrity worshippers. But there is a small percentage that go into the area of unhealthy where it becomes more than obsession, it`s almost a sublimation for other things going on their lives.

They become like social outcasts because they`re only known for being somebody who follows that celebrity, not necessarily stalking, but that becomes their life. That becomes --

PINSKY: Their identity.

LAWRENCE: Their identity.

PINSKY: Michael cultivates a lot of those kinds of folks, does he not.

LAWRENCE: He absolutely does, and I think it`s because he shared so much of his life, because if you`re not connecting to the music as much, now you can connect to who he was as a person. So, it`s sort of combines it all.

PINSKY: There`s the ultimate sort of potential for worship in mythology if somebody is gone, is dead.

LAWRENCE: Right. That`s true.

PINSKY: And that really people mobilize about --

LAWRENCE: But that`s true for anybody that dies, because you start to have fantasies about who they might have been and that place into his well (ph). So, for the small percentage that are unhealthy, that are predisposed to it, he`s going to just add to their psychosis. I don`t know. You`re the psychologist.

PINSKY: Their worship. And Malik, my understanding as before we go, you actually are paying banners that are up there -- that the planes are flying over the courthouse. Can you tell me about that?

MALIK: Yes. I am one of the organizers. I have admins that work on the group, admins allocated from different parts of the world. We have various countries. We`ve appointed directors who have taken on the task of collecting donations from their own country which have been forwarded on to flysigns.com, whose aerial company responsible for flying the banners.

We`re flying 14 banners in total, so far, throughout the trial. More countries are coming on board. They would like to be represented as well. Their banners have image of Michael. The size of the image is 30 foot by 25 foot. We hope to fly three a week, though, that will be increasing towards the end of the trial. As I said, more countries are coming on board because they want to be represented."

Sbibak said...

I can't conclude Blanket is retarded, based on what we have seen of him. To my knowledge he cried “publicly” at the memorial and on this occasion. Isn't he 9 years old? I don't think is easy for a shy boy this age to confront a big audience in an event with his deceased father screaming (crazy) fans. He should not have been there.
He's very shy, but I don't consider this characteristic an indicative of abuse, emotional damage, or mental deficiency, per se. If so, ¾ of the humanity should be in a divan right now LOL. Though maybe he was abused, we don't know.
However, I speculate those children are unfailingly affected by the special circumstances of their family. Blanket lost his single parent at the age 7. At this age, children need unconditional love and guidance and the constant presence of the parents, not a nanny or a teacher.
I don't think Katherine, who is an old woman and probably is feed up looking after children (her own and part of her grandchildren), can provide Blanket with the affective assistance he needs, giving his circumstances.

His siblings at least know who their bio mom is. Poor Blanket is like a blank verse inside this family.
Psychologists say is it positive for adoptive children to know from the start that they are adopted. Those kids were lied by MJ pretending he was the biological father... and the only truth they know for sure, is their mother sold them... how edifying.

Desiree said...


I am not saying Blanket Jackson is retarded to the point that he can never amount to anything but he does seem delayed, in my opinion. I just don't think shyness quite covers it. There's something else the matter with him. I believe he--maybe more so than his unrelated siblings--is severely emotionally damaged.

Lady C said...


I saw that particular interview that evening with Dr. Drew....Fatal Attraction, these psychotic fans! LMAO! Speaking of Dr. Drew, did anyone see his interview with Stacy Brown? I don't know if I just missed it, or if it was and episode that wasn't shown? If it was shown, do you or anyone know what Brown had to say about MJ? I know see that Flo Anthony is due to be on Drew tonight. Wonder what all she has to say.

Sbibak said...

Elena said...
I’m not sure if Michael is telling all those stories about him saving kids, having no childhood, and building a hospital just to gain pity from Murray. I think he actually believes it, which is even worse. With Michael, I often wonder if he’s purposely lying and trying to manipulate people or if he thinks what he’s saying it’s true.

As I said in a previous message, we don't know how this conversation started, but my bet is Dr. Murray tried to lower the doses, as defence said, and Mj complained and started his save the world campaign to gain his sympathy and get the drugs as he pleased. It is the same old tale he had sold to the press for years.

Thank you for the picture. Sorry if I have mistaken you for a Spaniard. Who is this young man and where is he from?
The Cascios used to have a similar hairdo. Apparently, Michael loved it LOL.

Lady C,

I've been following the trial, except for the second day where Dan Anderson declared. Is a little early to draw conclusions and we have to wait until the defence witnesses declare and see if they can raise doubts regarding the possibility of Mj self injecting or taking drugs by himself, but Dr. Murray have reasons to be worried. Right now, I see it could be easy for the prosecution to convince the jury that he was negligent.

Those crazy fans harassing people... but you know they are inspired by their Messiah. It's all for L.O.V.E.

Sbibak said...

Priceless quote I found in an interview with MJ in 1979 for the magazine Blues and Soul:

That's what I like so much about travelling. You can see the systems that other countries adopt and you come to realise that America is not always right. We say we're right, they say they're right. You really don't get a clear picture until you leave the United States. You realise that there are other cultures than your own and you feel small and insignificant. Like in India. I was amazed to find out a thirty year old man could marry a ten year old girl.

We weren’t raised that way, so we look at it weirdly. But there, it’s been happening for centuries and the parents are quite willing to give up their child.

He's talking about the positive things other cultures than the american have and he comes up with that... interesting.

"I’ve always been totally crazy about children. I feel that they are more than just children; that they are all little geniuses and that they have a secret all of their own. A secret that they cannot always express. I studied child psychology because of my love for children – all over the world. If a kid doesn’t like you, he’ll tell you. But adults pretend and put on phoney ways. I wish the world could be full of children!"

So what about all those mysterious (non existent) girlfriends the fans claim he had? LOL Three kids accused him of sexual abuse and those saint women not even demanded the social recognition any woman expects from a man or vice-versa. At least one of them gave her child to never look back, as f'loons believe. I would call it bullet proof loyalty, LOL. And they still believing his stupid rhetoric about adults phoniness.

A young man with no plans of having children studying their psychology...

Sorry to write that much lately, Desiree.

S.U. said...


wow this is really interesting!
I believe the fans idealize all that girlfriends exactly because they never saw him with one! It´s like they have to force it!
I read an interesting thing in a forum, it was a discussion about Shana Mangatal. Someone said that a reason for not believing her was her silence when Klein came with his claim about Michael and Jason. Yeah a good point. And someone answered that so Lisa and Debbie weren´t really his wives because they didn´t do nothing, either. LOL
The fact alone that the so called girlfriends didn´t react with those rumors should be enough for them. Poor things they still hope. But instead who came was Murray´s girlfriends! LOL

J-M-H said...

Lady C,

I couldn't find anything on Stacy Brown on the Dr. Drew transcripts; maybe it was never aired. About Flo Anthony, she's a Jackson family apologist (Latoya's friend, it seems) so she will probably say something about the way the family couldn't get a hold of him and that their was shady people controlling him, etc, etc, conspiracy bullshit, basically anything to make Mike look like a victim.

Sbibak and Desiree,

I too don't think Blanket is retarded, but he does seem incredibly shy, almost to the point that it may be clinical. He is much more maladjusted, I think, than Paris and Prince. Is he 9 now? I would think that he would be more... better, LOL, by now. I think it has been said before, but he seemed "wild" in the interview with Oprah, he and Prince particularly. It was clear that they had little interaction with other people when Mike was still alive. I think the isolation from other kids took a toll on Blanket. Of course not all children are going to have problems but Blanket seems to be affected the most by their upbringing (so far as we can see), Paris and Prince seem to be more or less normal. When I was 9, I wasn't like Blanket, cowering and crying. Children usually grow out of that by 9, so it could be a signal of some underlying psychological issue. I'm not saying he has one, but the symptoms seem to fit. It's funny about Mike allegedly studying child psychology because clearly he skipped over the parts that speak about the importance of peer interactions, and the dangers of cloistering children from the outside world. To me, it shows that Mike was studying child psychology for other purposes (perhaps on how to understand children for "procurement" purposes). Remember what Debbie Rowe said, Mike viewed his children as "possessions", ie his things. That's not a healthy way to enter parenthood. Blanket perhaps is just more susceptible than his siblings to that type of limiting environment.

That quote for that magazine, Sbibak, was priceless. Can you say pedophile! This is from his own lips so no f'loon should even try to deny it. I think the thing that sticks out for me, besides the terribly obvious positive feeling he has for the Indian child bride system, is that he mentions how "the parents are quite willing to give up their child." curious, wasn't the parents of his special friends following this so-called "Indian model"? It's clear as well that Mike saw this aspect of Indian culture as desirable over the way we view it in the West; he wouldn't have used it as an example if he didn't.

"I’ve always been totally crazy about children." I think the we never have understood the why behind this statement. Why does Mike like them (boys in particular) so much? And can the answer be found in all those child molestation allegations.

Three kids accused him of sexual abuse and those saint women not even demanded the social recognition any woman expects from a man or vice-versa.

Great point. That's how we know all of the "girlfriends" are bullshit. Every woman with true love for her man would stick up for him. Yet no one in 1993 or 2005; they didn't even have any women testify to his heterosexuality in court... all they had is porn, LOL, and that's not saying much considering he left all of it out for the only people that stayed in his bedroom--boys--to see.

Lady C said...


"I’ve always been totally crazy about children."

...Um, that's an understatement! LMAO!

"You realize that there are other cultures than your own and you feel small and insignificant. Like in India. I was amazed to find out a thirty year old man could marry a ten year old girl. We weren’t raised that way, so we look at it weirdly."

It's strange how he points out that such behavior, the Indian child brides, is viewed as being weird and goes on to point out that (we) weren't raised that way....is that 'conditioning' calling? Remember, according to MJ, society's outlook on such behavior was considered to be weird and 'we' the levitators were tainted. He, a grown adult man didn't see anything wrong with sleeping in the bed with children, so why would a 30 year old man marrying a 10 year old girl be so amazing to him?

"But there, it’s been happening for centuries and the parents are quite willing to give up their child."

My only guess is that this was just the right excuse that MJ had been looking for...it was the perfect fit for him. It seems as if it would be his 'justification' to bring cultures abroad to fit his desires here at home..."Because they do it, it must be okay for me", I'm sure is something that went through his mind. lol

Of MJ's three children, Blanket does seem to stand out. I think that he's severely scarred from his life of living with MJ; a life that was not normal by any means, and it's taking its toll on him. When you completely isolate a person from society, that person eventually become some what 'barbaric' in a sense that they can't come to terms with socialization and in the process they become more and more introverted/withdrawn. I know it's not true to say that every child his age is a social butterfly, but he appears to be extremely shy to the extent that it's dysfunctional. I hope that grandma Katherine is getting him some help with that--because to not do so, would be a great injustice for him, not just now but later on down the road as well. My opinion about Blanket, has always been that he seems to come across as the 'third wheel' of the three--a lost boy, and his public interactions with his father--which were very very few compared to that of Prince and Paris, didn't seem to be in the best light versus the interactions (put mildly) that his father had with Prince and Paris. When ppl think of Blanket, the first and foremost thing that they think about is how his unstable father dangled him a balcony window. Although he was baby when that happened, I think that may have had some impact on him now. MJ's behavior that day was like someone showing off a toy, and that had to be traumatic for Blanket. I could be wrong, but I think that it's possible to repress negative feelings/images subconsciously early in life only to later have them emerge to the forefront; with that bringing isolation and withdrawal. The dangling incident is really the only thing that I can really think of, but who knows what may have happened behind closed doors that we don't know about. Remember how Grace Rawramba said how angry and loud voiced MJ would get, and how terrified the children would become....according to her, this was something that happened quite often. Let's not forget how MJ and his children were the masters of disguise when it came to the public.


I saw Flo Anthony on Dr. Drew tonight...what she said was to be expected. However, I was chuckling at the comments she made re: Debbie Rowe's relationship to MJ. According to Flo, MJ wrote the song,"Remember The Time" for Debbie and they both had sex with each other to conceive their children....This whole MJ being a red-blooded man thing is getting very old. LMAO!

Frenchie said...

When MJ's home videos were sold to media outlets following his death, there were several of him doting over Prince and Paris, but I don't recall seeing Blanket in too many of them. I am curious why Michael seemed to treat him differently than the other two...perhaps he was bought with different intentions.

I do have a soft spot for Blanket. He has such a somber disposition that, whenever I see him, my heart sinks. No 9-year-old should be so joyless. At his age, treatment would probably have an enormous impact, but I doubt Katherine Jackson will ever provide him with the assistance that he requires. She never bothered to protect her own children from their physically (and possibly sexually) abusive father, so why would she make an effort to help a troubled child now?

S.U. said...

Agh I just read a fan saying that she hoped that Murray was raped in prison...Good Lord. That people is SICK!

J-M-H said...

Lady C,

Flo Anthony is full of it. It's a real testament to her credibility that she'd say that (or maybe she was just repeating it); it's already been established that Debbie Rowe's pregnancies were achieved via artificial insemination. Even Mike said as much that he "used all his own sperm cells" for all his kids. Disregarding the dubious claim that he is the bio dad, he's obviously alluding to the fact that it was an artificial conception. i personally don't think that marriage was ever consummated. Debbie had to beg Mike to allow her to have children for him; she was a f'loon before after all. I think that was just a money for child situation and then they had to get married for publicity. Imagine how strange it would be to for Mike to have married LMP after the scandal, then divorce her 20 months later, and then suddenly have a white boy baby that he calls his son. I don't think that would fly with the public.

Funny that she said he wrote "Remember the Time" about Debbie... Ebony magazine said that "R.T.T" was written about Lisa Marie! LOL, what a tangled web we weave when we practice to deceive; either the mag was trying to make his sham marriage look legit or Mike was telling a lot of lies about the origin of that song. If he was so normal, why so many lies? I agree, quit trying to make him seem hetero, there is no evidence.


there were several of him doting over Prince and Paris, but I don't recall seeing Blanket in too many of them. I am curious why Michael seemed to treat him differently than the other two

maybe it's because he was in a different place when he decided to be a father with Paris and Prince. He had just come out of a marriage of convenience partially predicated on Lisa Marie "promising" to have kids with him. that never happened so he was probably ready to have a family. In come Prince and Paris. Blanket, on the other hand, appeared in 2002, when Mike's album bombed and he was getting sued left and right and no doubt taking lots of Rx drugs. Acquiring Blanket could have been just something to do, a manifestation of his view that children both restore him when he was feeling down and out (as he said in the quote Desiree pasted from the Shmuley book) and as "things" like Debbie Rowe mentioned. Basically he wasn't in an "I want to be a parent" mindset with Blanket.

I just find his demeanor so curious and sad, it's so different from the older kids.

Lady C said...


You have a valid point about Katherine not 'willing' to help Blanket in his desperate time of need...What you said was so true. I guess the human side of me was just hoping that there was a remote chance that she would try to make better choices this time around compared to where she as a mother failed with her own children. You would think that she would finally see after all these years how messed up her children had become in not being able to live a normal life and seeing the affect that it and the abuse had on them--MJ being the chief example. If she's not thinking along those lines, then those children, Blanket included, are already done for and will be predisposed to a difficult life here on out...and that's not fair at all. Outside of not having their father around anymore, I truly hope they are happy and feel that life has some kind purpose. Because they're already, weather they like it or not, are famous just because of the simple fact that they are the children of the KOP, the world's most famous entertainer of all time. Also, they're the 'catcher's mit' for all of the scandal that plagued their father. So with that said, for them life has already begun with the pressure of fame and the great possibility of trying to live up to the expectations that the 'fans' of them based on who their father was. The fans--especially the fanatics--will want to stay 'connected' to MJ any way they can by living through his kids. That to me is sad...but what's even sadder, is that their 'family support', will not only encourage this, but they will some how force their hand at it just to keep the money coming in...Exploitation. It's just like MJ's young life all over again. Can you say Deja vu?

Desiree said...

Looks like the Murray defense team is abandoning the “Jacko drank propofol” claim:


I always thought this was incredibly far-fetched and made the defense look incompetent. I have no idea how the propofol got into the Bleached One's stomach—perhaps it had something to do with osmosis, given the trace amount—but it is unlikely that, during the 'sleep sessions', Murray would give Jacko a dosage that was inefficient to keep him under, let alone that Jackson would be able to get up and give himself propofol.

It's just ridiculous. The pedo did not drink or inject himself with "milk". Didn't happen.

However, it needs to be noted that this judge—who's obviously either an activist or had a touch of f'loon in him—completely crippled the Murray defense by not allowing them to bring up the fact Jacko was a serious and long-time drug abuser. I suppose they had to make something up after that. The crux of this case is, again, very simple: a drug addict died from drugs he was misusing/abusing. Alert the media!

The document linked in this blog entry detailed the accounts of numerous witnesses to his long-term drug use, all of whom could show the jury that the decedent was heavily addicted (getting shots of Demerol until his dying day) and would cut people out of his life if they did not kowtow to his demands. This would tell the non-f'loons in that jury box that the Prosecution and media's tripe about Michael Jackson being some naïve innocent is complete bullshit. And it is.

Jason Pfeiffer was to submit highly relevant information: Jacko was seeking an anesthesiologist; Cherilynn Lee could have testified that the Bleached One wanted her to give him propofol. This is relevant testimony. It proves that, even without Murray in the picture, Jacko was looking to pay some medical professional—notice with Cherilynn Lee, given her status as a nurse, Jacko did not care who gave him propofol, as long as he got it—a ton of money to be unethical.

But we couldn't hear any of that.

Instead, the defense went in saying Jacko drank propofol. Stupid.

Desiree said...


It looks to me that Murray is on a fast-track to jail, and it is really sad. He made tons of mistakes and the Prosecution has made him out to be some terrible, incompetent doctor when, in fact, no one has came out and said he was unprofessional. They've harped on the hiding of vials; the delayed calling of 911; the fact he lied a couple of times with regard to giving propofol to Jacko... It is all just a mess for him.

In reality, it shows nothing more than a doctor knowing what he'd done was unethical; of course he'd want to keep it hidden. This is not a criminal issue. I cannot repeat that enough!

Had the doctor been an anesthesiologist instead of a cardiologist, what would be the argument? Harping on Murray being a cardiologist in all of this is stupid for the simple fact Jacko didn't give a damn; he would have had a nurse give him propofol if he could! Ask Cherilynn Lee!

Murray... I have no idea how he can save himself. It would start by just telling the truth, which would go something like, “Yes, I gave Mr. Jackson propofol but you know what? He wanted it. He was going to pay me to give him this stuff off the record because he knew it wasn't something a doctor normally gives to someone for sleep. Why did I do it? Because that's what Mr. Jackson wanted. I was only following orders.” And what about the Hippocratic Oath? “I see no point in saying anything more than I was only doing what I'd been paid to do; it is of little important to dwell in the past. Sure, I could have said no but I didn't. I am human.”

He needs to just tell the truth. He needs to take the stand; nothing can be worse than what's going on now. Overdosing a drug addict is not criminal. It happens everyday. It's more of an “Oopsies!” thing.

Murray is charged with involuntary manslaughter due to gross negligence; he gets 4 years tops. I don't know; it seems like such a travesty of justice and a slap in the face to reason to put someone in jail for the 'accidental' death of a drug addicted pedophile child molester. Maybe if Jacko had went to prison for the sexual abuse of Gavin Arvizo he'd still be alive. No amount of interventions would have worked as well as facing 19 years of sleeping in a cold cot at Corcoran.

Can't we just remember... the guy was a pedophile and used his fame and celebrity to seduce boys and their parents. AKA Total scum. Who cares. Seriously.

Desiree said...

And another thing: if Jacko was so healthy, as the coroner stated on stand, why did he need to take a surgical anesthetic just to rehearse for those concerts?

Had he made it to London, he would have died there. No doubt in my mind. We know Murray had been requesting higher quality medical equipment and a nurse, I believe, for the duration of the London shows but I think, even with that, Jacko would have still died.

It was coming. He was not healthy. Sure, maybe some crackheads roaming the alleys are 'healthy' but its more like 'healthier than expected'.

I personally think that autopsy report was sanitized. There's a great PBS documentary about the reality of Coroner's Offices. Many times these people simply do the paperwork, sometimes they aren't even qualified.


"Agh I just read a fan saying that she hoped that Murray was raped in prison...Good Lord. That people is SICK!"

It is sick. For giving a drug addict drugs, one should be assaulted and risk exposure to HIV/AIDS? Please! It's insane. It's as if these numbskulls have forgotten that Jacko wanted it. He played with fire and got burned.

These f'loons need straitjackets. Hoping for someone to be a victim of sexual abuse is reprehensible. We shouldn't be too surprised, though: these idiots stalk and harass sexual abuse victims all the time.

Sbibak said...

Don't you find a little “excessive” some of the Judge Pastor interventions? He sustains every objection of the prosecutors, most of the time rightly, in my opinion, but I've seen a couple of times he left out legitimate questions. I observed two minor details as well. The other day during the testimony of Dr. Rogers, he scolded Flanagan as if he was a little boy. I don't know if this is normal behaviour for a judge in America, but it called my attention. He said to him “go back to the podium” in a very humiliating fashion when he was trying to make a question near the jury area. Flanagan finally started to question once again (from the podium) and used Mr. Rogers instead of Dr. Rogers, and Pastor corrected him in the same derogatory manner. Since this is the first time I see a process in the US, I don't know if this is normal. I think there is a line between imposing authority and lacking respect to people. Maybe I'm a little sensitive, but he humiliated him in front of the jury... unnecessarily.

The defence has been wandering from a theory to another since the start. The prosecutors will prove easily he was negligent, but as we have commented previously, the question is if Dr. Murray should be in a criminal trial for that.
Michael not only was a drug addict. He was desperate. I'm sure the concerts would have never took place. He was done physically, mentally, financially, and as an artist. He knew it. Fans and other people forget that before his dead, Michael wasn't taken seriously any more and was on the verge of bankruptcy. A big portion of the fans said they would boycott the concerts if he dared to lip sync. He feared that and the backlash of the press. Obviously he couldn't sing. In This is it the vocals were pre-recorded. He could not even walk in a ramp, let alone sing and dance for two hours those 50 dates the way the fans expected him to do. There were rumours that he would be on stage for 5 or 10 minutes each concert, and the rest would be an spectacle recreating his performances without him, and fans weren't happy.

Now fans mistakenly judge his situation from the present, with the revival of love for MJ, with Branca and the others making huge money for the State, but prior to June 25, Michael was a pathetic figure who many (even fans) saw like a sinking ship. So, dead was the smallest of his problems. During this trial we have had proofs of his physical and mental state. The testimony of Kevin Ortega, the message DiLeo left to Dr. Murray or the recorded convo talking about hospitals, etc.

In their minds, Dr. Murray deprived them from a triumphant MJ, but the reality is before his passing, nobody gave two squirrel shits about him. Jessica, I loved this expression, LOL. If you read message forums in retrospect, they were conscious of his problems, even predicted he could die any time soon. Now they act like he was healthy and Murray killed him. Hypocrites. I wonder where were they and their L.O.V.E. when Invincible flopped, LOL.

I leave you the link to a blog written in 2008 and 2009 by a British journalist where he reveals information about the negociations for the concerts and Michael state at the time. All the entries pertaining to MJ are very, very interesting.


Sbibak said...

S.U., I've seen a British fan demanding dead penalty for Dr. Murray.
Sometimes I feel the whole world is a big mental home.
People is irrational, non fans included. I hate when I read racist comments against Michael or his family, paedophile or not. Humans, like chimpanzees, are the only animals who enjoy hurting others for pleasure, when basic survival isn't even compromised. Murray detractors wish him to be raped by the inmates, just like other people did with Michael.

Michael should have faced a trial in 93, go to jail if proven guilty (which I'm convinced he would) and got therapy. The rape wishes are pure animalistic behaviour in the post Enlightement era.

Dr. Murray shouldn't go to jail because he's not a murderer.

What I can't understand is how in America the controls over this kind of medications are so lax.

I agree with you Desiree. The autopsy report is “doctored” for the reasons you comment. No way he was healthy.
But also, why the depiction of his genitalia is omitted? They report the tatoos, the spots, etc. except for this area. I bet the family intervened.

If I remember correctly, there were some inconsistencies regarding the colour of his eyes or whether his teeth were natural or not. Different information in different pages. Maybe detective Latoya made the final report, LOL.

Desiree said...


I don't watch the trial and I've pretty much ceased and desisted watching any coverage of it. I didn't see the admonishment Pastor gave to the defense that you describe but I do remember finding it very strange he wouldn't allow anything about Jacko's drug abuse in. Most of my knowledge of our legal system is intuitive, based upon just living in our country, and, while I know judges are allowed to have their own personalities, it's odd a judge would go so far as to scold in the way you've mentioned.

It seems unnecessary.

Most unusual, though, is the fact he pretty much gutted the defense case. That is odd. I think most judges would have allowed a doctor fighting for his freedom to bring up the fact the decedent was a hardcore user. His decision seems abnormal.

Personally, I believe he didn't let the testimonies of Jason Pfeiffer and Nurse Lee in because he's an activist against so-called 'Dr. Feelgoods'--which Murray really was not one of those--and the fact that this is the death of a celebrity.

I also think it has something to do with the fact there are cameras in the courtroom. In the OJ Simpson case, the judge, Judge Ito, was completely dazzled by them and many believe it affected the outcome of the trial. I read he got autograph books for the jurors for OJ to sign.

Also, the Prosecution never offered a plea deal in this case, which tells you they want to be the ones to put 'Jacko's Murderer' in jail.

Most people lack the ability for deep contemplation. I don't believe most can fathom how star-struck people can be.

While the case in 2005 was not a winner (bringing up the conspiracy and imprisonment was a huge mistake; they should have focused on the alcohol charges--which the jurors believed even though they'd acquitted Jacko on those counts--and the molestation, with extra boost from the 1108 witnesses, and a conviction was sure), I doubt many would have wanted to throw Jacko in prison, even though he was without a doubt guilty.

The Murray case and people's reactions to it in our media are a product of Jacko being the guy who'd been cute in the Jackson Five and made Thriller, etc. It's complete retrospective worship, if you will.

Part of it is playing for the fans but part of it is real.

Murray is not being judged based on the facts of the case; if he were, the defense would be preparing to give a rousing case showing Jacko's drug addiction and propofol shopping. They would say as I'd said: Jacko didn't give a damn who gave him his 'milk' as long as he got it. He wasn't interested in expertise; he wanted it no matter what--from an anesthesiologist, a nurse, or a cardiologist. He didn't care. All of this shows a man who'd not only used/abused the drug before, but was flippant with regards to it's potential for death.

All of this could be backed up by Lee and Pfeiffer.

This would be a basic defense in this case, given the evidence in support of it. Bizarrely, Murray was not afforded the opportunity to lay out this case.

What is he supposed to do? This is why I said this is unusual, in my view. It's one thing to want to not dirty up the defendant but this is all relevant to the drug at the center of this case.

(I will write more later. More things to say...)

Desiree said...

"Sorry to write that much lately, Desiree."

Susana (Sbibak), please, don't worry about it. I really enjoy your posts. You bring a lot of wit and rationality to the table, not to mention good links to information.

J-M-H said...

Well it seems like Murray's defense has given up. They posited many theories that did not hold up to scrutiny: first he self injected, then he drank the propofol. I guess they forgot to look up whether propofol was toxic if taken orally.

Like everyone has said, it's pretty clear he will be convicted but should he, that's the real question.

I find it incredibly damaging that they'd even put forth a ridiculous theory if they'd had the autopsy for at least 2 years. It's even stated that based on Mike's position and the way he was hooked up, it would be highly unlikely that he'd be able to self-inject. So they went to the "fatal oral dose" defense, which could have worked if he could have shown that there was a deadly interaction between the benzodiazepines and the propofol. But obviously that has been debunked. So what's left... but to plead guilty and ask for leniency. So sad.

He should have just told the truth, like Desiree said, and then maybe it would have given him a leg to stand on, because the charge is easily provable, and the defense is not putting up much a fight in the reasonable doubt department. But Murray's lawyers seem disinterested and incompetent, which could be because they really have no defense against the negligence charge. It's not even an issue of him giving propofol, who cares about that; it's not even the delayed calling of 911, although that's definitely not good. I think it's the lying to police. Had he just said yes I gave it to him, this is how much etc, he could have at least retained some credibility in the eyes of the jury.

The sleep expert said of course propofol is not a sleep aid, which is a no-brainer. But is it just me or does it seem like they are trying to act like it was Murray's idea to administer it, like it was his "treatment plan"? Because the last time I checked, Mike had been doctor shopping for propofol before Murray was hired. I think everyone isn't seeing the reality of the situation, that he asked for it. Yes, it's like a broken record, but damn, are people forgetting this inconvenient truth? It's as if Murray was pinning poor, fragile MJ down and forcing a propofol-filled needle into his vein. That ain't reality!

Amanda S said...

A question that I've had for people living in California for some time is why hasn't there been an outcry about the circumstances that Michael Jackson came to acquire parental rights over Blanket.

In the case of Prince and Paris, Michael Jackson came to be their legal father by being the husband of Debbie Rowe. The law which assumes that children are the legal children of their mother's husband is old and long established. As I understand it, the presumption can be challenged but only in the first few months of a child's life. Debbie Rowe is clearly the one responsible for handing over her children to Michael Jackson. She is still their mother.

In the case of Blanket, he was born through a commercial surrogacy arrangement in California. His birth certificate only lists one parent; Michael Jackson. His mother, who carried him for nine months, gave birth to him and most likely is closely genetically related to him as well, doesn't get a mention.

I've tried to find out more about the Californian law that could allow children to be trafficked to unrelated persons like a commodity. I understand that certain legal arrangements would have been made for him prior to his birth and that these are secret (so no possibility of scrutinising them).

In adoptions, applicants have to go through certain vetting processes before and after a child is placed with them. There is also a gap between placement and full legalisation of the adoption. Sometimes these processes fail to properly protect children but at least there is the expectation that the state should be involved in process to protect children before just handing them over to unrelated people and giving them parental rights. Commercial surrogacy doesn't seem to have any protection for children built in at all.

If I was living in California, I'd be writing stiff letters to my legislators about this.

Amanda S said...

Incidentally, something I've sometimes wondered about is whether Debbie Rowe was lead to believe that she was going to be impregnated with Michael Jackson's sperm and thus her intention was to give Michael biological children to raise. If so, you'd think that she would have figured it out after Prince was born.

Lady C said...


Conrad Murray...Stick a fork in it, he's done. There's no hope for him at this point, and I'm not even sure if if makes any sense now for the defense to present their case...Really, what do they have to stand on? Majority have already depicted him as a severely incompetent fool and will probably soon, if not already, coin him Wacko Quacko. There's no coming back from that. It's almost like the same parody of MJ being labeled Wacko Jacko; a name he was branded for the remainder of his life...the same too will hold for Murray unfortunately. It wasn't Murray's idea to administer the propofol, but MJ's. He was a hard-core drug addict/abuser and was determined no matter who or what the cost to get what he wanted...and that was propofol and any other drugs he could get his hands on. Maybe Murray, lord help him for being only human, wanted to honor his client's request, got caught up in the celebrity awe/pressure which isn't unheard of and happens more than ppl think--especially where celebrity/professional relationships are concerned, and somehow lost sight of what was really in the best interest in helping a person like MJ. It wasn't done intentionally or maliciously, but was something that went aerie and wasn't expected. But to paint this man as a cold heartless killer, IMO is down right hateful and evil. People simply refuse to accept the fact that the world's greatest entertainer of all time had imperfections and accountability for his actions. For MJ to have flaws is unfathomable; something in their eyes that will never be tolerated. It's the religion of MJ, or 'curse' I should say, that has brain washed so many ppl, that not only is it not funny, it's beyond repulsive. If it were up to them, the 4 year sentence that Murray faces, would've never seen the light of day...by all means, it would've been life and even for some, death. So sad. MJ was a hard-core drug addict with very serious problems...problems that I'm not sure anyone could help him with, and his refusal to admittance and help for his drug addiction catapulted his doom. You can't force an addict's hand at help. I don't give a s*** what Dr. Drew says...You can't force them; it's something the addict has to come to on his/her own accord. Even Janet said to Oprah after his death, that it had come down to the fact that she might have to accept the sad fact that MJ may soon die as a result of his drug use as there was nothing that could be done. IMO, for most of MJ's adult life, watching him was like watching a car collision happening in slow motion, frame by frame. It's inevitable...you see it coming and you know what's going to happen, but there's nothing you or anyone can do to stop it. It's time that pple stop seeing him as a demigod, and see him as a human being who destined his life by the choices he made--many of which were troubling. For them to do that, is not, and should not, be any different from what you or I would hold someone else accountable in the same circumstance...We're all responsible for ourselves, and we have choices as to how our circumstances dictate our life...MJ made his.

J-M-H said...

Amanda S,

Good question about Blanket. I think Mike has parental rights over Blanket because he was the one to arrange the entire "process" of getting the surrogate, selecting the sperm, etc etc, he was in control and was the one paying for it. It would be akin to a sterile single woman selecting the reproductive materials to have a kid. I think that's who he was able to be on the birth certificate, because, legally, I'd think that he would be the father. It's much more intimate than adopting. there is a possibility as well that he is the bio dad of Blanket, although I highly doubt it (unless there was some gene manipulation). Usually sperm donors or egg donors never appear on the birth certificate of children. At any rate, he was pulling the strings and I'd assume that that would be enough legally to get his name on the birth certificate. It all seemed so secretive, his acquiring his third child, even he going so far as to lie about it in the Bashir documentary.

Of course adopting a child, especially a son, would be out of the question considering he had at that time 2 financial settlements with boys foe sex abuse... unless of course, he could waive that by paying a lot, which I personally think is possible. There are a whole set of rules just for the rich and famous.

I've sometimes wondered about is whether Debbie Rowe was lead to believe that she was going to be impregnated with Michael Jackson's sperm and thus her intention was to give Michael biological children to raise. If so, you'd think that she would have figured it out after Prince was born.

You know, I personally think that was the initial agreement, or rather, yes, that's what she thought when she offered to do it. and I think she always knew she was going to hand them over to him, as a "gift", like she said (yuck). I mean he did want to have kids with Lisa Marie, although he might have wanted white children with her as well (although Lisa probably would have been disgusted at that thought; Mike would have had to settle with mulatto children). But after the process started I think that she knew that it wasn't his sperm, I really do. I mean of course it's possible that she is in denial about Paris and Prince's paternity, having been thoroughly convinced by him that he's the father. it's pretty clear to anyone that those children are not his. Also I think this fact is one of the reasons why they got married in the first place, so the pregnancy could look legit and the legal issues would have worked more smoothly.

I always wonder why he wanted to bar her from speaking about paternity (among other things), enough so that the punishment would be to forfeit the financial payments she'd receive from the divorce settlement. To me it shows that he has something to hide regarding P & P's birth. If it was normal and kosher, he wouldn't care.

Here's a document about the divorce; it's 8 pages. Notice, too, how she is barred from talking about the drug use and sexual behavior of Michael Jackson.


Desiree said...

Off topic but sort of tangential to the issue of Blanket Jackson and bio kids, did anyone know that Omer Bhatti had a sister?


It's pretty funny because I know many fans bought into the whole Jacko's lovechild thing but, lo and behold, he not only has a sister who looks just like him, she also looks like their Middle Eastern father, Riz, who Omer also resembles.

So much for the "Omer's half-black and looks like Jacko" bit.

Not only is Pia Bhatti really unattractive compared to the other women Jacko allegedly liked or pretended to like (going from Diana Ross to Pia Bhatti is like jumping off the Empire State building), fans forget the little thing about Jacko being into males.

I should add that the dark-skinned woman in the second picture is or was Omer's girlfriend.

So, unlike Brett Barnes, we know that most of Jacko's known 'special friends' are heterosexual:

- Frank Cascio; a very jealous Jacko told him to 'Stop Fishing' in the album jacket to Invincible and Jesus Salas testified that Jacko didn't like him to bring people (women) to the house

-Jordie Chandler; he told Gardner he liked girls and that Jacko didn't like for Jordie to talk to them

-Jimmy Safechuck; he got married at Neverland although he and Jacko looked pretty emotionally/psychologically intimate during the HIStory teaser when Jacko was supposed to be on his 'honeymoon' with Lisa Marie (only a pedo would bring a boy on a honeymoon! LOL!)

-Mac Culkin; he's had rumors he was gay but he'd been with Mila Kunis for 8 years...

-Wade Robson; married to Prince's ex girlfriend--he invited Jacko but I doubt the Bleached One showed up; too high, maybe?

-Jonathan Spence; Victor Gutierrez mentioned in his book that he'd had a girlfriend

But what about Brett? Does he have a girlfriend? Did he finally strike up the courage to ask out a girl when the Neverland sleepovers ended? Now, he still seems in love, in my opinion. And he's 30.

By the way, here's a freaky picture of Omer wearing Jacko's jacket, circa 2001.


The Mini-me thing freaks me out. I'm sure it was a narcissistic fetish.

Frenchie said...

Jonathan Spence, Jimmy Safechuck, and Wade Robson have children, so yeah, they're probably straight. You know what's odd? It turns out Jimmy married three years after the trial ended, and there are no searchable public records indicating an earlier divorce. I don't think T-Mez would just make up the Neverland wedding, but how shady would it be if he did?

By the way, I looked up Karlee's testimony again after J-M-H mentioned it, and this is her full quote about Brett wanting to be with Michael...

"My brother really always wanted to be there. He wanted to spend every minute, and he still wants to spend all of his minute -- all his time with him."

LOL. She basically admitted that her brother was still obsessed with MJ.

Desiree said...

(cont'd from yesterday morning)


"Michael not only was a drug addict. He was desperate. I'm sure the concerts would have never took place. He was done physically, mentally, financially, and as an artist. He knew it."

I totally agree with you on this. From Jacko's drug-fueled ramblings played in court, it's not really a stretch of the imagination that he knew no one cared about him as an entertainer. He hadn't made a hit record since Dangerous and, let's face it, most people rightly believed he was a weirdo and a child molester.

I remember watching some documentary following his death where they were saying the 'fans' at the "This Is It" press conference weren't Jacko fans at all, but people waiting to get in to see the X-Factor, LOL. No one was interested in this guy--he was deemed a failure, a has-been, old news.

He was desperate because he needed money. How did he get into $500 million in debt? Lawsuits because he was a total flake (fans act like he was some poor Peter Pan being sued by money hungry meanies but he was horrible at keeping his contractual obligations); massive drug bills; surgeries and cosmetic procedures; giving gifts to his live-in boytoys like Frank Cascio and Omer Bhatti; I'm sure gifts and payouts cost him a lot over the years.

The only thing he had was that catalogue of songs, which he put up on the chopping block in the event he reneged on the contract. If he lost that, he would have been DONE--no bank in the country would give him a loan without the Beatles/ATV catalogue. What ever would he have done if he had absolutely no standing in the entertainment world or any collateral to put up?

I had no idea they'd been trying to do the TII concerts since 2007. His debt obviously goes way back, not to mention he probably knew how horrible the trial made him look.

Ultimately, that's how all of this propofol business started, even though he used it during the trial. He had to do everything he could to 'stay alive' for the shows and by any means necessary.

He was totally desperate.

And if Jacko was not physically capable of doing the shows, why even offer it? I don't believe in any conspiracy junk that he was 'forced' but something was off if he thought he could dance after a decade of failure and being in a constant drug haze. Maybe it was ego.

Desiree said...

Lady C:

Totally agree with your comment!

I am starting to not feel sorry for Murray any more. I mean, it is tragic because I just--personally--don't think anyone should have to go to jail for 'victimizing' Jacko. Because you know that fans just want everyone to be the people hurting innocent lil Jacko. But Murray's made so many stupid mistakes. He didn't keep any records of treatment for Jacko and it's been said if he didn't spill his guts to police--even if he did lie a bit--he wouldn't even be on trial.

I'm just not feeling particularly sympathetic anymore. Fans calling for him to be executed (fucking NUTS) or to be raped or beaten up should do to themselves what they suggest for him. It's not like these small brained losers would be missed.

The trial is a travesty of justice; the decedent was scum; the defendant has fallen under the weight of his natural and healthy interest for women (I'm sure the fans are jealous Jacko wasn't into pussy but ass-pussy, LOL). No winners. I just hope it doesn't lead to a white-washing of Jacko's history.

It should always be remembered that he was a pedophile; he really didn't make any good music after Thriller; and his dance moves are nothing special, regardless if I do believe he was an extremely gifted individual.

J-M-H said...


Interesting. He questioned I think Kiki Fournier about the alleged Neverland wedding. That's in 2005. So you're saying that he got married in 2008? she said she didn't remember a wedding or something like that, and I believe that she did work there off and on for about a decade. Perhaps it was when she wasn't working for Mike.

He may have lied, I wouldn't put it past him. Or perhaps he was stretching the truth, kind of like he did at that Harvard seminar saying that he had witnesses ready to rebut Jordie Chandler's claims of abuse, if he were to testify.

LOL about Karlee's quote. I agree with you, I think he's totally an in the closet gay guy. It has to be deep rooted if he was still feenin' for Mike at 25, and now 30, LOL.

Desiree said...


Wow! How did I miss that quote when I'd written the "Brett Barnes redux" entry? I poured over the transcripts of the Barneses!

So the revelations were that Brett not only continued to sleep with Jacko until he was at least 19, he also still wanted to be around him.

Wow! Explosive!

Putting everything together--including his bizarre Facebook love notes to a deceased Jacko--Brett Barnes was completely head-over-helium heels in love with Michael Jackson. Completely different than the other 'special friends'.

I know there was talk of jealousy between the boys Jacko befriended; I think at one point Wade Robson was upset Jacko was spending all of his time with Jordie and Jordie had been jealous of Brett. Ugh... it's like some dating show with catty women fighting over a bachelor!

"I don't think T-Mez would just make up the Neverland wedding, but how shady would it be if he did?"

That's an interesting find about Jimmy Safechuck. When did Mesereau first mention that Jimmy was married at Neverland? I hear this all the time from fans as a defense to the idea he was molested (not a good defense, by the way).

Fans say a lot of unverifiable things, such as one of Jacko's boy books--"The Boy"--was never opened. This was on Vindicate MJ. When I'd asked them for a link to this information, they linked to a post on their site. LOL. Of course it looked 'unopened'; Jacko'd stored it away quite lovingly in a locked filing cabinet, duh.

If Meseareau said it before 2008, then it's just weird, especially if no wedding took place.

I wouldn't put it past Meseareau to lie. He lied about having witnesses to refute Jordie Chandler. He insinuated that at the Harvard Law Q&A, as well as that Jordie emancipated himself to get away from his parents.

He's a defense lawyer. He's paid to tell tall tales.

What could that mean, though? I wonder...

Desiree said...

For anyone who wants to read the telling testimonies of Joy Robson, Karlee Barnes, and Lisbeth Barnes (the mother):


Desiree said...


"He may have lied, I wouldn't put it past him. Or perhaps he was stretching the truth, kind of like he did at that Harvard seminar saying that he had witnesses ready to rebut Jordie Chandler's claims of abuse, if he were to testify."

I said the same thing. LOL. Mesereau is not to be trusted. I think he's full of shit. He either is so in love with Jacko's being black that he can't see straight (likely, given his black fetish) or he really knows little about the Chandler case and his client's culpability in that (as likely).

So he'd said it to Kiki Fournier in 2005.

I still don't know what that could mean but I'll never forget Jolie Levine calling Jacko a 'chickenhawk' after constantly seeing him in bed with Jimmy Safechuck on the Bad Tour.

Jacko could've been his Best Man... doesn't matter. The intimacy of their body language--they were wearing each other's sunglasses while Lisa Marie was playing caboose--during the HIStory teaser is enough for me to know that was not a kosher 'friendship'.

What made it different for Brett, though? Why is the sexual abuse different for some boys and not others? Wade Robson seemed to want to get away from that and definitely has a sort of reluctance about Jacko. What made Brett stay and obviously want it for so long?

I make fun because Brett is really an idiot but it's really quite sad if you think about it... :-(

Desiree said...

About Omer Bhatti, I find his meet-up with Jacko so odd. Given that Omer has a sister who looks like him and Riz but not Jacko, the love-child story is BS. From reports, it's said that Omer met Jacko outside of Jacko's hotel when Jacko was on tour in Tunisia in 1996.

I found a video of him in concert in Tunisia and he pulls Omer to the forefront of the stage during 'Heal the World'.


Also footage from the same year ('96) in Asia:


Omer is already bedazzled in a Jacko-style jacket and eyeliner. I'm just so taken aback by how tiny the boy was. But if that's them in Tunisia--the same place he first met Omer--and Omer is wearing the Jacko garb (perhaps it was his own costume, who knows), I want to know how fast the process was that he became a 'special friend'.

It's like the Bhattis just gave him away, offered him up on a platter.

By the next year, Omer was traveling with Jacko in South Africa. We can all imagine who Jacko was sharing his bed with: Lisa Marie or Omer? I'm thinking the latter.

It makes me think of the quote he'd given Rabbi Shmuley Boteach (and what he'd written in 'Stranger in Moscow'): when he feels like there's no hope and he wants to die, in walks a boy who brings happiness. It's the right timing: he'd just freed himself from a sham marriage.

It's obvious Michael Jackson had a serious compulsion. You'd think he'd want to lay low with the boys after the Jordie scandal. He couldn't stop himself.

Lady C said...


"But Murray's made so many stupid mistakes."

You can say that again...Hate to say this, but seeing all of Murray's stupid carelessness is like watching a television airing of The World's Dumbest Criminals. He's guilty of plain stupidity. Now I heard tonight on HLN that there is some concern that even if Murray is found guilty, there's a chance that he may not do a single day in prison nor house arrest, but get probation instead. I'm not exactly sure how they came up with that.

"He didn't keep any records of treatment for Jacko and it's been said if he didn't spill his guts to police--even if he did lie a bit--he wouldn't even be on trial"

It's too damn bad that Murray didn't exercise his Fifth Amendment right--a huge mistake. After all, the Fifth was something that his friend MJ knew all too well, LOL. Murray should've followed suit. Obviously he hadn't heard of the saying, "lose lips sink ships."

"Fans calling for him to be executed (fucking NUTS) or to be raped or beaten up should do to themselves what they suggest for him. It's not like these small brained losers would be missed."

The "fans" are 'insane in the membrane', LOL!

"I just hope it doesn't lead to a white-washing of Jacko's history."

I hope not, but something tells me this trial will go down in history as, "Wacko Quacko Who Killed Jacko."

Lady C said...


"....and his dance moves are nothing special, regardless if I do believe he was an extremely gifted individual."

I recall when I first went to see "TII" with my sister, and at the end of it we both came to the very same conclusion....What happened to MJ's 'famous' dancing, where did it go? Hate to say it, but we were both disappointed--he didn't do anything and that's no exaggeration; I could be mistaken but we didn't even see the 'moonwalk'--something he's always been known for. I asked my self why that was, and knowing now what I know, it all makes sense....sadly, MJ was no longer functional; he no longer had 'it' anymore. It would be unrealistic to say that all things can last forever because they don't. It saddens me, but even more angers me that MJ, who basically had it all, lost it all...all unnecessarily! Take his finances for example; there will always be talk about how he was very shrewd and smart businessman, and maybe perhaps once upon a time he was, but when he died he really had nothing to show for it. Money, tons of it, spent at an alarming rate all those years. When he died, he was in so much debt;he was teetering on the edge of bankruptcy. About the only smart move he made financially in his career was perhaps the ATV Music Catalog....but that too in time, would eventually fall prey to his runaway spending and massive borrowing. IMO, I think that's one of the reasons that pushed him over the edge...He needed money, and he knew without it, he didn't exist. However, he was in no condition, mentally, physically, and emotionally to make it back--he would've failed miserably and that would've been like suicide for him. Now that he's gone, money has seem to have made him rise from the dead so to speak. I suppose there was some real truth when some said that MJ was worth more dead than alive.

Frenchie said...

"What made it different for Brett, though? Why is the sexual abuse different for some boys and not others? Wade Robson seemed to want to get away from that and definitely has a sort of reluctance about Jacko. What made Brett stay and obviously want it for so long? "

I hate to compliment them, but a lot of the more sophisticated predators seem to be remarkable profilers. Ted Bundy, for instance, knew how to gain trust from his victims, and which women were the easiest targets. Child predators analyze the psychology of children in that same way. They determine which ones are most pliable and identify their weaknesses to exploit.

Brett was soft-spoken and passive as a boy, so MJ could do pretty much anything to him without resistance. Jordan wasn't as passive as Brett but he seemed sensitive, so MJ put on the waterworks to manipulate him. Gavin showed a strong interest in girls, so MJ wooed him with pornography. Jonathan's father died when he was four and his stepfather was old, so MJ took on the role of the fun and youthful father figure that Jonathan lacked (and he became the first boy to call MJ "daddy").

We know that Wade was "boy of the year" at seven. At that age, he probably couldn't comprehend what was happening, but as he matured and his reluctance became apparent, MJ knew to back off and focus his attention on easier prey. It's no surprise that Wade would be less swayable than some of the others. He seems pretty self-possessed. I can't imagine big-name celebs putting up with some teenage choreographer if he was unsure of himself in any way.

I think Brett is still so attached to MJ because, unlike Jonathan and Jimmy, he wasn't discarded once he grew too old. After the Chandler scandal, MJ obviously couldn't risk turning him into an enemy, so he threw him a bone every now and then...Although, Omer doesn't come across as obsessed as Brett even though their circumstances were similar. Maybe Omer just has more going on in his life so he doesn't fixate on MJ as much?

Desiree said...

Lady C:

Too funny about "The Wacko Quacko who killed Jacko". I hate to say it... I do believe that will be Murray's taint. As I've said, he definitely shouldn't go to jail but he is stupid as hell. His lawyers are worse. They've given up. He's finished. At least it's only 4 years. I'm sure he'll get it if Judge Pastor is doing the sentencing. As for Jacko, he was done. I wonder, had he lived and failed miserably at those concerts, I wonder how the media would have reacted? I wonder how the fans would react when faced with the reality of their idol totally sucking eggs?


You know a weird amount of info about 'special friends' and fans, etc. It's...odd, in a good way. You'll have to let me know how you use search engines. LOL.

As for the boys, the way you break it down, it makes me feel really sad. Like I've said, Brett Barnes is definitely a legitimate target for derision--I cannot lie--but it had to be like sheep going into slaughter. Of course, it's all speculation, but I believe Brett is a closeted homosexual and I wonder if Jacko knew about it when Brett was there as a young boy.

I remember reading a gay website and they'd discussed the Jesse Dirkhising case--where he was killed by the two NAMBLA pedophiles--and they mentioned how gay and questioning youth can often be targets for male predators because they are curious about gay sexuality.

I wonder if Brett experienced a bit of that predation, assuming he is gay, which I think he is.

I mean, Jacko was sleeping with the boy at 9 to 19. Of course, fans think it's 'sweet' or they say someone was misquoted.

So, if Omer Bhatti is not Jacko's love child, which is confirmed by the fact he has a sister who looks like him and they both look like Riz Bhatti, then what do the fans make of the fact he had that little boy trailing him around all of a sudden?

They can't really believe a man accused of child molestation--who settled for millions--having a new boy only two tears later is doing something innocent?

Frenchie said...

Whoa, I can't believe I never heard of Jesse Dirkhising before. It's so awful what those men did to him. :-(

"They can't really believe a man accused of child molestation--who settled for millions--having a new boy only two tears later is doing something innocent?"

If owning a nude photo of his pubescent friend doesn't manage to raise any eyebrows among f'loons (not to mention those books MJ had of full-frontal child nudity), I don't think anything will. They're incapable of reason.

Do you have a link to that video of Jimmy on MJ's honeymoon?

Desiree said...


I don't have a link to a video of Jimmy Safechuck and Jacko together but there are photos during the HIStory teaser (which was during the time of he and Lisa Marie's honeymoon):


The second photo is pretty intimate, I think. But, of course, since Jimmy was 'married at Neverland', it doesn't mean a thing, right? LOL.

"If owning a nude photo of his pubescent friend doesn't manage to raise any eyebrows among f'loons (not to mention those books MJ had of full-frontal child nudity), I don't think anything will. They're incapable of reason."

Mesereau obviously thought the photo of a nude Jonathan Spence looked pretty bad for his client, so much so he wanted to keep the photo out of evidence.

Funny because he'd claimed that they were simply 'unknown photos' of an unknown origin. Hey, Mez, looky here: doesn't matter; you're guy had them in his home. A nude young boy who was identified as Jonathan Spence.


Jacko also had a photo of a boy with his bikini bottoms pulled down holding an umbrella. All of this was seized in 1993... I always thought it was particularly odd that he had a postcard that had little schoolboys lined up at a urinal. :-/

The fans are completely irrational. All of this seized from a man thrice-accused of pedophilia. It should be obvious by now.

Yes, the Jesse Dirkhising case was really sick. On the website I mentioned, it said that one of them wrote a letter to the other saying how they wanted to watch the letter-receiver have sex with a young girl who'd be drugged up. They were sexual deviants and sadists.

Desiree said...

Just noticed this by the way...

In the picture of Jacko wearing some tacky, glittery Americana-themed jacket (Omer wears the same jacket in the pic)--


--Jacko is actually wearing a very feminine diamond necklace, much like the necklace female royalty would wear. Perhaps he chose it to match his gently flipped wig. I guess he's the 'Drag Queen of Pop'. LOL.

S.U, said...


I noticed that once he came to stage LMAO.
Of course the f´loons say things like he can put a necklace like that or a tutu and still be a very straight man lol.

J-M-H said...

Jacko is actually wearing a very feminine diamond necklace, much like the necklace female royalty would wear

LOL, I noticed the necklace too, I was thinking "Is that Harry Winston?". Oh and don't forget that he wore women's perfume as well, that was in Taraborrelli's book. Stuff like Liz Claiborne, Gardenia, etc. So a dainty necklace to match his delicate lady scent, LOL. I bet he smelled like Liz Taylor or Diana Ross if you got real close to him... I guess that was the point, he did want to look like them.

Of course the f´loons say things like he can put a necklace like that or a tutu and still be a very straight man lol.

LOL, they don't believe anything. I don't know any "very straight man" that has even one book with naked gay men doing it (Man A Sexual Study of Man), let alone a couple (although a little less graphic than MASSOM) like Mike had.

By the way, does anyone know if Lisa Marie Presley ever said commented about Jason Pfeiffer's story, saying it wasn't true because Mike was straight? I thought she didn't, only saying that the fans need to put some sunflowers on Mike's grave, LOL. Maybe she knew she couldn't say anything because, like Liz Taylor's "denial", she knows that Mike was "different"?

S.U. said...


"By the way, does anyone know if Lisa Marie Presley ever said commented about Jason Pfeiffer's story, saying it wasn't true because Mike was straight? I thought she didn't, only saying that the fans need to put some sunflowers on Mike's grave, LOL. Maybe she knew she couldn't say anything because, like Liz Taylor's "denial", she knows that Mike was "different"?"

She never said anything about that story but it´s said she denied he was gay before, or did she just said they had sex? It´s a different thing,gay men can have sex with women.

I recall reading in a fan board that if Shana had been Mike´s girlfriend she would refute Jason´s story. But Lisa and Debbie, who were married with Michael, said nothing either.

S.U, said...

Oh wait,there was a notice about Lisa during that period.

Lisa Marie Presley is said to be so fed up with Los Angeles that she's ready to pack up and move her family to England!

She has reportedly put up her two homes for sale in California and she and her husband are scoping out stately homes in London.

A source reveals, "During an extended stay there last year she made friends with the likes of Prince Andrew and Fergie, the Duchess of York, and she's excited about recording her first album since 2005 over there."

Supposedly Lisa Marie was so upset by the Michael Jackson gay rumors that she wants to leave LA for good and she has said:

"I can honestly say that I am the only person who came to England for the weather. I love the cold and the rain. We have fallen in love with the UK and it is our hope to live here some day.

"We have found the quality of life so much more enriching and fulfilling. The civility, the culture, the people and its beauty have reawakened me and have smoothed out some of my bleak and jagged views about people and life."

I don´t believe she moved for England just because of it. Besides if she was upset why didn´t she deny the rumors, if their marriage was so real?

Frenchie said...

"Oh and don't forget that he wore women's perfume as well, that was in Taraborrelli's book. Stuff like Liz Claiborne, Gardenia, etc. So a dainty necklace to match his delicate lady scent, LOL. I bet he smelled like Liz Taylor or Diana Ross if you got real close to him... I guess that was the point, he did want to look like them."

I was just thinking about that. JRT's book claims that prior to the raid, MJ's staff scurried to get rid of his make-up, ladies' fragrances, and his photos of Macaulay Culkin and other children in their underwear: http://goo.gl/f2oBr

It's comical when fans suggest that Michael was some virile ladies man. C'mon now, he spackled make-up on his face, he wore women's wigs, he deliberately spoke in a high feminine voice, he had eyeliner and pink lipstick permanently tattooed, and his two "relationships" with women only occurred after he was accused of same-sex child molestation. The guy made Clay Aiken look butch. Deal with it, fangirls.

A.G. said...


IMO this doctor puts it very clearly what exactly was all wrong with MJ and apart from some small mistakes (the hyperbaric chamber story was, after all just a R stunt) it is interesting to read.

J-M-H said...


Thanks for the Lisa Marie info. Yea, that's what I assumed that she had never made any formal statement regarding the accuracy of Jason's story. The part you posted hardly even seems like Lisa was referring to the gay rumors, it seems like something the article writer added in

She never said anything about that story but it´s said she denied he was gay before, or did she just said they had sex? It´s a different thing,gay men can have sex with women.

That's a good question, I think she only said that it was consummated, which I tend to believe anyways. I personally know of no such statement defending Mike being straight; do you know anything?

I recall reading in a fan board that if Shana had been Mike´s girlfriend she would refute Jason´s story. But Lisa and Debbie, who were married with Michael, said nothing either.

Well, I think the fan has a point. If Shana was his girlfriend, she would defend his sexuality. So her not doing it speaks volumes. Since she's spoken out before you'd think she would have said something. But she was put out for publicity, in my opinion.

Also, Lisa and Debbie didn't say anything, that is true, but they were "married" to him and thus probably have a deeper understanding of his behavior. Remember that Mike barred Debbie from speaking about sexual behavior in the divorce agreement, so it's possible Debbie could have certain "proclivities" about Mike and will never reveal. She could have sensed that Jason story was true because of what she knows. That was never a real marriage. As for Lisa, I think it applies to her as well, that she may have suspected he could have at least "hit for both teams" and thus Jason's story didn't need to be refuted.

J-M-H said...


Interesting link. I agree with a lot of her conclusions and I like the way she stayed neutral.

Some parts of note:

"At this event, Jermaine was also asked, "Did Michael really have a relationship with women?" Jermaine responded, "Oh yes, he loved girls..." and named Lisa Marie (Presley), Debbie Rowe and Brooke Shields. Then he recounted a story - presumably to back up his point: He (Jermaine) was in bed with some woman after a gig (as the older boys often did), and Michael reached up from the floor where he was, onto the bed and over the girl." Jermaine smiled, telling this story as if it were proof of Michael`s interest in girls. I had heard this story recounted before, and wondered how it proved Michael`s heteros(e)xuality."

I agree with her. How does this show that he's interested in girls? Flo Anthony once recounted a similar story told to her by Enid Jackson. All BS. Two things stand out: 1. that Jermaine clearly has little if any personal relationship with Mike after a certain period in Mike's life. He seems to be getting everything from reports, just like he did in his interview with Piers Morgan, talking about Mike's physical state. 2. Mike clearly had no women around him that could be identifiable as a love interest which is suggestive of him not being hetero-normative.

"Also exposed is the dangerous practice of doctors succumbing to becoming seduced and co-dependent on famous, high-paying patients - as happened in the Anna Nicole Smith death - leading to unprofessional and unethical "dual relationships" (being friend and attending physician) and indulgent prescription-writing.... Doctors like Murray in this situation are prey to what`s called "counter-transference" (a dynamic I described in my website posting on any female psychiatrist treating Casey Anthony, www.DrJudy.com). This means health professionals who should maintain objectivity and distance with patients instead project past experiences onto the patient relationship."

This is the real point, that Murray should not take the label as a rogue doctor. He did if fact like Mike very much, and was therefore easy prey to submit to Mike's demands for drugs. I also think this applies to all the other doctors that Mike had, especially Arnold Klein, who achieves self-actualization by being with celebrities and having them as friends.

J-M-H said...


"At Murray`s trial, a tape was played of Michael`s slurred voice saying, about children, "I love them because I never had a childhood... I feel their pain." This is consistent with my hypothesis that Michael lived vicariously through children, and that activity with them - s(e)xual or otherwise-was of a childlike nature (e.g. where touching is a part of young children`s playing doctor and exploring their bodies). In my view, Michael was in a state of "delayed adolescence" and "arrested development," feeling no older than the children he adored, despite his chronological age."

I disagree with this point. I think Mike was absolutely aware of his chronological age, I don't think he was arrested mentally. In fact, he acted like an adult all the time. It was a form of manipulation, the "lost childhood" thing. Even Lisa said that was not how he acted with her, that he drank, swore, and told jokes. I think he liked children and child like things because he was a fixated pedophile, who tend to related to their child victims in a child to child way. And the tape she refers to is to me clear evidence that he sees that children are distinct and separate from himself and his own identity. I think the notion that he was "exploring" like a child when he abused his special friends is just a way of trying to make the abuse "less serious". From what Jordie explained, it sounded like manipulation with the crying, etc. And Wade Robeson saying Mike used to have conversations with him about the propriety of kids and adults sharing a bed. That's not child-like.

Rebekah said...


"I think Mike was absolutely aware of his chronological age, I don't think he was arrested mentally."

I agree. And I think that if prepubescent kids are playing doctor, their goal is curiosity and information rather than gratification/orgasm.

Desiree said...


Excellent point. I was going to leave a comment tangential to yours a few days ago... Michael Jackson was not a man-child or regressed when he was around boys. We know this simply because if you compare his 'anything goes' manner with regard to the boys who came into Neverland with the way he treated his own children (not too much candy, couldn't get on the rides all the time, etc.) shows that he was differentiating between groups of kids, an adult thing to do.

He was--dare I say--parenting?

Saying that Jacko was 'regressed' is minimizing his alleged sexual abusiveness. And they only do it because he is a celebrity.

How many pedophiles are simply 'big kids' who don't know what they do?

'their goal is curiosity and information rather than gratification/orgasm."

Although I personally believe--given his weird behavior with 5-year-old alex Manchester--that he would also predate upon very young boys, too, I think the reason why Jacko messed around with older pubescent boys was because they would be more likely than younger boys to want to continue on in that sexual exploration to orgasm.

By Jordie Chandler's declaration and civil suit, he was interested in the semen in a sexual way, like adults. Gavin even said Jacko allegedly asked him about semen.

None of his behaviors with boys supports the nonsense idea that he was a 'big kid' or a regressed 10-year-old 'jacking off' with peers.

Also, what 'man-child' would make a song like "Childhood" after being accused of child molestation? "Childhood" was total PR spin, a slick attempt to make it seem as though there was nothing wrong with sleeping with boys or having them around all the time.

What 'kid' overthinks their actions in that way? They don't. Let's not forget the 'perfect timing' marriage to Lisa Marie that didn't even last (he went and got Omer Bhatti--and called the boy his 'son'!).

And I am not fully buying that he was some multiple (although I sometimes wonder). The simplest explanation at this point, since we have no further information, is that he was your run of the mill pedophile and his 'explorations' with boys was just child sexual abuse...

No more excuses. No one else would be granted that much wiggle room for their deviant predilections. No one else.

Sbibak said...

Rebbekah and Desiree, I agree with you both.

I don't buy Mj was regressed mentally. I have the impression that this circumstance (to the degree Mj is said to be) is only possible in people with a very low IQ or severe brain damage.
He was an adult. At the age 12 was more experienced than most people in their 30s. Time and experience build maturity.

Regarding gratification/orgasm, for a male an orgasm could be a physiological response not more gratifying than farting, lol. I mean, ejaculation can be very “automatic”, specially at the age most of his special friends have. Men can ejaculate at night without even having a dream of sexual nature.

Jacko exploited the boys natural curiosity about sex.
They ejaculated when Mj touched them, but that doesn't equate physical and mental pleasure the way adults under normal circumstances experiment.

I make this patently obvious consideration because I hate when molesters say boys "enjoy" the abuse, trying to make acceptable their crimes.

Jordie said he refused to fellate him or engage in some of the "games" Jacko was trying on him. I doubt a young boy, de motu proprio, could have been sexually interested in a 35 years old man with the face of a clown and a dick looking like a guide from Pantone. By now, we all know what kind of manipulations and weapons he used to overcome the resistance of those kids.

One of the most devastating things I read in the trial transcriptions was the part of the testimony where June said how Jordie's behaviour changed after he engaged in the sleepovers with Michael. He withdrew, looked sad and depressed, avoided contact with his peers or family adults... the symptoms of a person who is being abused, not someone enjoying sex.

I recently saw the Brett's facebook. The only interests he has are the same MJ claimed: Peter Pan, the Three Stooges... so pathetic. The poor guy is a prime example of what a victim becomes when the abuse is perpetuated for years. I really feel sorry for him.

Rebekah said...


"Jacko exploited the boys natural curiosity about sex.
They ejaculated when Mj touched them, but that doesn't equate physical and mental pleasure the way adults under normal circumstances experiment."

This is exactly why it seems to me that MJ was acting as an adult, and not as a boy. (And let's not forget MJ had a man's body, too, and he and a boy were not physical peers.)

Lady C said...


"One of the most devastating things I read in the trial transcriptions was the part of the testimony where June said how Jordie's behaviour changed after he engaged in the sleepovers with Michael. He withdrew, looked sad and depressed, avoided contact with his peers or family adults... the symptoms of a person who is being abused, not someone enjoying sex."

I agree with you...it's absolutely tragic. The way she described Jordie's drastic change in behavior was exactly the same in comparison to one of the boy students that was sexually molested by the lady Ohio teacher that's been in the news lately. The boy's father described his son's odd behavior just the way that June Chandler did, and as result of the abuse, his son has been ruined and his spirit completely broken....Such a ad and sick world we live in.

There was no way that MJ was naive and unaware as to what he was doing to those young boys. He knew how to 'manipulate' to get whatever it was that he was after...And we all know that it wasn't something that just stopped with his special friends. It permeated so many other areas and people in his life as well....He lied, manipulated, and used--even to his very own fans! But of course, you'll never be able to convince them of that...never. The curse of MJ is like contracting a terrible deadly disease; once you're exposed to it, there's no getting rid of it.

Lady C said...


This is a bit off the subject, but it was something that I wanted to mention...Isn't funny how after all these years MJ was still trying not only to break concert records, but also trying to out do Prince? LOL! It hit me just the other day, when the guy from AEG mentioned it in trial of how determined MJ was to do just that. People have often asked me if there was some bad blood between MJ and Prince, and I've always said hell yeah. LOL! Let's face it, MJ was always green with envy of the 'Purple Rain' man, and I believe it was mainly because he managed to pull off something that MJ was never able to do--that was winning an Oscar for musical score of his own movie. Don't get me wrong, Jacko had MANY awards out the yang-yang, but he was never able to get his hands on an Oscar to add to his collection; whereas Prince did and that caused a lot of resentment. Although during that time period, the 80's, MJ was at the pinnacle of his career, basically ruled the decade, and had the greatest selling album of all time, it apparently wasn't enough....No one was to steal his thunder, and Prince was doing just that. I must say that I'm a Prince fan myself and would prefer him over MJ any day, LOL! One thing I have noticed since the mention of Prince in MJ's trial, are some of the comments of MJ's competition with Prince. And now that I look back on it, MJ was more competitive Prince than most people think. There was a blog that I stumbled upon a long while back, and it was comparing Prince and MJ; how they were different and parallel...And the one thing that kind of grabbed my attention was the fact that MJ followed suit with Prince by getting a female blonde bombshell guitarist, Jennifer Batten; whereas Prince already had Wendy and Lisa as his guitarists. At that time, having a female guitarist was seen as hip and MJ got wind of this and felt the need to step up his game, lol. They also compared the performance arena between them; MJ concerts were excellent and well put together, but Prince's concerts were off the chain had a different 'energy' about them, and he also personally interacted with the audience in his performances--his leaving the stage and performing/singing among them, whereas MJ was more a far at his concerts. I've never been to a Prince concert, but I know several ppl who have, and they said his performances were unbelievable; you left the concert in a entirely different state than before you came--there aren't words to describe it. Prince also had the talent to interact with not only the audience, but also with his own band--he was able to actually play instruments, several of them--most if not all, the very same ones that his band members played. He was self efficient as far that went. MJ on the other hand, really didn't play any instruments--he always hired outside musicians for his craft. If anything, he may have only played the piano?? I have heard ppl say that MJ could play instruments, but I've never seen it. Prince also wrote most of his own songs himself; MJ not so. There was quite a bit that the blog talked about...it was interesting. I'll give credit where credit is due--MJ had his particular talent as well; singing and dancing; perhaps better than the average person, but it's a fact that there will always be an entertainer who others like better...A stage platform that MJ didn't want to share, IMO.

Lady C said...

Desiree (cont.)

It's just sad that MJ still had to find it in himself to 'keep up with the Joneses' after all these years...even to the point of killing himself over it; knowing that the concerts were never going to happen in the first place. If it's one crucial thing that MJ forgot, it was that he hadn't performed yet alone done a concert tour in over ten years...Prince on the other hand has still been performing all this time. In the end, MJ knew what he was really facing and it wasn't pretty.

Speaking of Prince, I mentioned this to Jessica earlier in the blog a good while back that there was a website where Prince's actions implied that he didn't think too highly of MJ during his 2005 trial. Although he didn't verbalize what his thoughts were toward MJ, he did express his love and concern for children who are abused.

So MJ shouldn't have been so concerned about trying to out do Prince, but instead should've been more concerned about getting his drug addicted self some help.

Frenchie said...

"I recently saw the Brett's facebook. The only interests he has are the same MJ claimed: Peter Pan, the Three Stooges... so pathetic. The poor guy is a prime example of what a victim becomes when the abuse is perpetuated for years. I really feel sorry for him."

His real facebook lists "The Boondock Saints" as his favorite film which is a violent, blood-splattering, ode to vigilantism ...nothing like those wholesome cartoons he put on his fan page. The phony childlike persona he's attempting with that fan page kind of creeps me out, actually.

Frenchie said...

Did anyone watch the trial today? Walgren really has his fangs out for Dr. White. In a very juvenile manner, he taunted nearly every reply that White gave. The talking heads make Walgren out to be a brilliant prosecutor, but if I were on the jury, I would be completely turned off by the way he demeans witnesses during cross-examination. You can still be an effective attorney without treating others like dirt.

Also today the judge charged Dr. White with contempt of court for a second time. This poor guy must regret having anything to do with the trial. :-/

J-M-H said...

No I didn't see the trial, as a matter of fact, I've just given up on Murray, LOL... he's a lost cause. Besides, the media seems to have switched gears focusing on missing baby Lisa. I was wondering why, seems like perfect timing too, right when the defense was slated to put on their case. Maybe the media has it out for Murray, like I suspected. But at any rate, it sounds unsurprising that the judge would allow the prosecutor a lot of leeway to hound defense witnesses.

Do you think Murray still has a fighting chance or is he a dead man walking?

Lady C,

I think Mike might have been jealous of Prince because, in my opinion, Prince is more talented overall (singing, writing, instruments), as you said. Mike didn't even like competition from his own siblings (Janet, Jermaine, Latoya)! If Latoya is to be believed she said Mike sabotaged her when he decided to change the composition of one of her singles (I think it was a song called "Night Lover" or something)or he released it at the wrong time... it was something he did, LOL, but it illustrated that he wanted to be the only famous Jackson. And I finally read Margaret Maldonado's book, and remember the part where she mentions how Jermaine was working with LA Reid and Babyface, and he told Mike about it and then Mike totally booked to work with them at the same time, kicking Jermaine's musical efforts to the curb. And he didn't even use the songs for his Dangerous album. Cold-blooded. Mike was a typical narcissist that didn't want anyone to top him.

And I also think he was mad that Prince never got shit for wearing flamboyant clothes and being slightly feminine. But what Mike clearly wasn't understanding was that even though Prince wore eyeliner and heeled boots and tight clothes, he was still 100% male and liked the ladies--the flamboyancy was a stage act. Mike's femme qualities were not an act and they ran deeper than just the androgyny/"gender bending" "stage act" that Karen Faye said he was into.

Lady C said...


I saw very little of the trial today...I missed the judge charging Dr. White with contempt. I must say that's not surprising at all; especially with the judge that's presiding over this particular trial. It seems to me that he's had it out for the defense ever since the trial began--very biased IMO. I too find Walgren's approach to be very irritating and even petty at times. If I had to be the judge, I would think that Walgren has fallen in love with his case; the one thing that a good trial lawyer should never do. With him it's extreme overkill and he can't seem to let it rest. It's one thing to make your point, but it's entirely another thing to constantly pick at each and every answer that is given especially when it's something that has already been made clear...This is not good lawyering on his part, IMO, as it would start to break down any momentum that he and the prosecution has made thus far; of which may in turn work for the defense. Although I'm not on the jury and I don't know absolutely for sure, this unnecessary game of tit-for-tat has to be taking it's toll on a few, if not some of the jurors--they have to be getting tired and are probably starting to acquire 'brain cell depletion' right about now...or at least that's how I would be if I were on the jury. LOL But perhaps all this going back and forth with the prosecution and defense is what's needed to just stir up some of the minds of the jurors with some shred of doubt. So with that said, while Walgren is thinking that he's all that and taking the defense witness expert to the cleaners, in reality he could be really doing himself in and taking himself along for the ride....He should be more careful. Btw, what did Dr. White do to get contempt this time? The real truth about this trial is that it's something that should've never seen the light of day in a court room. Had what happened to MJ happened to you or I, it would've never made it to court, but would've been seen simply as medical malpractice. I say that because of all the hoopla about the weight of extreme negligence there was that makes what Murray did criminal. I could be wrong, but up until now has there ever been any kind of 'wager' system in place that has determined medical negligence as malpractice versus it being criminal behavior, or is this a first all because it's MJ? I still hold out hope that perhaps someone on that jury has enough sense to realize what this case really is about versus what case the public wants it to be.

Lady C said...


So what did you think about the book, JFV? Personally, I thought it was a good read; I couldn't put it down and read it in two days. How she portrays the Jackson men is quite telling, and it's believable, especially about Jermaine. What a dog! However, when it came to MJ, I think she was definitely misguided about his behavior. It really creeped me out when she describes how one evening MJ showed up at Hayvenhurst unannounced to get an intense stare of her new born baby boy and then to just leave without saying a word...Weird. It seems that some the men except Marlon, had a very difficult time of keeping the pants on....babies and baby mama's everywhere. LOL What you said in reference to the MJ and Babyface thing is believable for sure--it sounds like MJ...

MJ's envy of Prince was something that I think was too hard for him to come to grips with. I think even think that in a twisted kind of way, it was a hard pill for him to swallow and he had to resort to throwing his other competition, Madonna for example, under the bus by saying that she was very jealous of him because he gets all the screams and adoration at concerts from both sides; guys and girls, whereas she doesn't; as he put in Schumley's book, TMJT. Poor MJ. His making such claims was probably his way of coping with the fact that Prince had the admiration from fans that only he wished he could get without all the scandal attached but couldn't...Prince was mesmerizing and intriguing with his stage persona; something he could pull off with hardly any effort at all, and he looked good doing it too. MJ on the other hand wasn't as successful. As hard as he tried to replicate Prince, it was a mold that he wanted to fit but couldn't.

Elena said...

Lady C/J-M-H,

Regarding Prince, I never liked him. I’ve tried to get into his songs and stuff but, with a few exceptions, I don’t understand why people say he’s so amazing. It may be the fact that he was never very successful in my country. I can assure you that, if you asked anyone from my generation (I was born in ’92) about Prince, they probably don’t even know him. The name may sound familiar but that’s all. And if you asked someone older, if anything, they know “Purple rain”. It’s not like Madonna or MJ. Everyone knows them, even if they don’t like them. I watched Purple Rain (the movie) for the first time this summer and I found it quite boring. I liked some songs though. Sure the movie and his acting were better than MJ’s attempts at films (if you can call “Moonwalker” a film…) but MJ sucked in that department LOL.

Even If I don’t personally like him in general, I guess you could say he’s better overall (As a composer/musician). But I don’t know why people are so fixated on the instruments thing (always comes up in a MJ vs Prince debate). I definitely admire someone who can excel at playing so many instruments, like Prince. But that doesn’t make him a musical genius. It requires some talent to excel but anyone, with practice, could learn to play instruments. MJ didn’t play instruments and I consider him a genius in his field. Justin Bieber can play multiple instruments and I don’t think I need to say what I consider him LOL. Anyway, just making that point because everyone seems think it’s a crucial skill.

And regarding Michael being jealous of Prince, I’m sure he was. Michael was jealous of anyone who could be the slightest threat to him being on top. If he really took the time to sabotage Latoya’s career it just shows how important it was to him. I mean Latoya pretty much sabotaged herself LOL. And he obviously wanted to be the most successful Jackson. Like Bob Jones said in his book, it was very convenient to him to have his whole family depending (economically) on him. I don’t think any member of his family would have surpassed him anyway though, not even Janet.

Looking at things from Michael’s point of view, I can kind of understand it. If I had dedicated literally my whole life to show business, putting lots of hard work and pretty much selling myself to get famous and successful. Once I got my goal I would sure be super protective of it. I’d be totally pissed off if suddenly someone who has just “begun” took my crown. Not saying that Michael wasn’t a selfish narcissistic (he definitely was) but you know, if you put yourself in that situation, you’d see things differently.

J-M-H said...


Prince is no Justin Beiber, LOL. And even with Justin Bieber, if the guy can pick drums at an early age and not need any instruction whatsoever, that's genius knowledge of the instrument. I could never ever do that, so I will give props to Justin even if I can't stand his kiddie pop, LOL. But that goes for any musician, Prince, Bieber, Jacko, if a person doesn't like the artists' songs or the genre of music they sing, it will be difficult to appreciate any skill they may possess. Perfect example: rap. Everyone always downplays the importance of rappers' skill, but many of these men (and woman) are genius lyricists. Many talk about the real ugly side of American gang life, so it's ugly and it's violent. Of course Tipper Gore hates it, LOL. But they are speaking to their experiences, their truth, and they are storytellers. (Not all of course,; the commercial ones suck). Examples are Bone Thugs N Harmony, NWA, (old) Snoop Dogg, the incomparable Tupac Shakur and Biggie Smalls. I personally love Eminem's skill, he's brilliant, even if his content is a little out there, but he's a master storyteller and writer.

What I'm saying is that just because you don't like his songs or her songs, doesn't make them any less talented. I bet many people think Mike was crap because of the lyrics to his bubblegum pop, but he was very talented--genius--and a master showman. So was Prince (my mom and dad are Prince fans so I heard him a lot growing up), and his music is unique and so is his compositions and arrangements, and his voice. They both have their merits.

I have a hard time, personally, seeing the greatness of the Beatles or any rock artist, because I can't stand rock or rock pop. But I know they are brilliant in their fields (not of all time), and I won't deny them that.

About wanting to stay on top, absolutely, I would. I think that's the natural reaction of any animal... you have to do a lot to stay at the top (male hippos are a perfect example of this, fighting off any challenger day in and day out to protect their harem, LOL). But I wonder how low do you have to sink to keep that place. I'm sorry, I think what he did to Jermaine was messed up, and even what he did to Paul McCartney... they were friends! It's one think to protect your turf but it's another to be so paranoid as to engage in sabotage. But that's just me. Like you said, none of them were gonna surpass him musically, sales, etc. so he didn't have to be like that. They just admired him and wanted to do what he did. You've seen that 1983 interview with Latoya and Mike, she was in awe of him and even said she wanted to have his success. But he couldn't even take a compliment, apparently. It just shows where his head is, and many other celebrities are the same way, that's why you have "past their prime" musicians trying to still make albums. It would be embarrassing to hear a guy like Stevie Wonder sing with T-Pain, LMAO. Look at Mike trying to be with Will.I.Am and Akon and Ne-yo, it's ridiculous.

Frenchie said...

"I too find Walgren's approach to be very irritating and even petty at times. If I had to be the judge, I would think that Walgren has fallen in love with his case; the one thing that a good trial lawyer should never do. With him it's extreme overkill and he can't seem to let it rest. It's one thing to make your point, but it's entirely another thing to constantly pick at each and every answer that is given especially when it's something that has already been made clear...This is not good lawyering on his part, IMO"

Exactly! Everyone on television raves about Walgren--calling him masterful, brilliant, etc., but he comes off as such a tool. He seems to enjoy belittling witnesses; I actually find it pretty repulsive.

"Btw, what did Dr. White do to get contempt this time?"

From what I understand, Dr. White mentioned a couple of details from his conversation with Murray, and the judge gave him a verbal spanking for it. Then later, White was asked a question by the prosecution and he responded with, "I'd like to talk to you about this, but the judge told me I couldn't". This made the judge cranky, and he charged him with contempt of court again.

There was a clip of Dr. White being verbally harassed by f'loons outside of court today. Why am I not surprised? LOL.

Lady C said...


You both made some good points. I believe that in order to appreciate different kinds of music you have to think outside of the box to get a better understanding of an artist. It's like you said, J-M-H, that a lot of the lyrics that an artist sings in his/her songs is just like telling a story or an experience....Just like MJ telling us his story in "Childhood"...Prince telling us his story in "When Doves Cry". Now I have to admit though, while I do like Prince, his lyrics could sometimes be very raunchy, and some ppl found it offensive. However, I do think that since his transformation to JW, Prince has toned it down a lot.LOL Gifted artist are geniuses in their own right, IMO. For some it's singing and dancing, and for others it's instrumental and song writing. Even some of those talents extend themselves off the stage...Drawing/painting. MJ was a good example of this--although I haven't seen a lot of his drawings, MJ apparently could 'rock' a drawing pad and pencil...Good for him. Some artists have been known to acquire the greatness of their talent through either their gift at birth w/o having any instruction while others have enhanced their talent through other ppl. Stevie Wonder's ability to play the harmonica/piano naturally...MJ's ability to sing at a very early age naturally and his ability to learn his riveting dance moves through the influence of James Brown. Artists come in different 'flavors' and will be appreciated by different ppl at different times. It's always been that way and will always continue to be that way. For example, Elena, I can understand your thinking about Prince, especially taking in consideration of your era of birth. I was born in the late 60's, so for someone coming up in the 90's, I can say that I've listened and been exposed a little more to the different colors of the rainbow when it comes to music. But the way I see it, is to each his own. I don't care for Justin Beiber or Lady Gaga my self, however I have a niece who LOVES them. While growing up, I did find some music genres that I particularly didn't like...for example, country music, I can tolerate some of it; not a whole lot--I try and try but I just can't get completely all the way there...And if that's not bad enough, living in the state that I do, country is played all the time just about everywhere you go. LMAO! Hard Rock is another form of music that I definitely can't do...Can't stand loud head banging music where I can't understand a damn thing they're saying. But like I said before, to each his own. Every once in a while I catch myself listening to music that my parents danced to when they were dating in college before I was born, and I like it.

Lady C said...

Elena/J-M-H (cont.)

MJ wanting to be on top exclusively is understanding. From a humanistic point of view we like to some extent to be 'front and center' with the world revolving around us....it varies in degrees; some want it more than others. But the fact of the matter is, no matter good an artist is or how much of a genius they are, there will always be someone who's a bit better or will come up from behind and steal the lime light. It happens all the time in the music business--every star has it's peak, and MJ's star peaked a long time ago; once it passed it was over.. I think the sad thing about that is that many artist get caught up in the 'hey day' and when it's gone, they don't know how to recover--they can't live for the future for trying to chase what was in the past. That was MJ. Although Prince may not be as popular as he once was, he's still likable in the public eye, and I think a lot of that has to do with the simple fact that he didn't 'f***k it up like MJ...People remember that and it stays with them. lol MJ definitely put in blood, sweat and tears in all of his music and career, and maybe perhaps he should've had the mentality that he did because he literally earned it. However walking all over other ppl while climbing the ladder isn't the way it should've been done. The way I see it, is that those who helped and paved the way for you to get where you are, and MJ definitely had those that did, should be inspiring enough for you to return the favor for others...But he was one who believed there was only enough room at the top for just one--him. It's like the saying, it's lonely at the top. lol It's just too bad that Jackson couldn't realize and appreciate the impact that he had on so many artists who wanted to be just like him...That in itself is the greatest compliment one could ever wish for.

The bottom line, I think that MJ was a musical genius and had a lot of great attributes, but he was just one of many.

J-M-H said...

Lady C,

What did I think of Jackson Family Values: Memories of Madness? I thought it was awesomely juicy! It took me like 3 1/2 hours to read 80% of the book. It was really very good, although I totally agree with you about Margaret and her view of Mike; I think she was pissed about Jermaine and downplayed some bad behavior (i.e. the producer fiasco) on his part. the Jackson men are some man-whores most definitely and what was really sick was the way that Joe Jackson slept with the same woman Jermaine was seeing (that African woman). I immediately thought that was some sick power-play that Joe has probably did their whole lives, and in my opinion, it just totally underscores the type of abusive environment the Jackson children lived under. Remember how Joe Jackson was known to sleep with groupies before the groupies slept with Jermaine and Jackie? He was/is a monster and an abuser, no wonder the brothers, including Mike, are all screwed up.

Also, the image of Latoya she painted really made me feel sorry for her. She was so weak and fragile, and the story about Katherine giving her diuretics is totally believable; I think Mama Jackson had a firm grip on Latoya, as she even said in her own book.

The real truth about this trial is that it's something that should've never seen the light of day in a court room. Had what happened to MJ happened to you or I, it would've never made it to court, but would've been seen simply as medical malpractice.

That reminds me, when Cherilyn Lee testified she said Mike asked her 2 months before he died about propofol. I think she did say that he had told her it was safe and that he'd used it before, and she said that she hadn't heard about it before he mentioned it to her. Well, basically, doesn't that show that he was indeed willing to get the drug from someone with no experience whatsoever with handling it? He didn't even care! Also, didn't Murray start administering propofol 6 weeks before his death? So if that's the case, he had in fact been "doctor shopping" prior to finally getting someone to agree to give it to him.

So yeah... why is this in court again? Rich, powerful junkie getting the drug he craved. It takes two to tango, it ain't all Murray's fault.

J-M-H said...

I'm sorry I'm not up to snuff on this case but can someone tell me who's Dr. White and why is he important?

Lady C said...


That book was juicy alright! The Jackson brothers sleeping around with Joe's sloppy seconds kind of reminds me of the day time soap operas. Not to be too graphic or anything, but it's like all of them trading off wearing each others dirty drawls, LMAO!! Yes, that whole issue about the African woman and her daughter was completely bizarre. It's all very twisted, and I personally can't see how Margaret Maldonado stayed in that house with all the craziness going on as long as she did. Luckily for her, she managed to escape without too much injury. But I do give her props for that book; telling all that went on behind closed doors.

As for Dr. White, all I know is that he is greatly known for his research and studies of propofol. Some have coined him as the 'Father of Propofol'. He's done a lot of research on the stuff and also worked closely with the anesthesiologist expert for the prosecution side, Dr. Steven Shafer. The two of them basically 'introduced' propofol to the medicine world back in the late 80's, and are very well respected. I think Dr. White believes for the most part that the amount of propofol that Murray gave MJ wasn't really enough to kill him, but that he thought that MJ possibly awoke after the medicine wore off and gave himself an extra boost of the stuff through a syringe that could've been left at MJ's bedside...The amount of propofol used wasn't enough to deeply sedate MJ.

It was interesting though to hear the comments and opinions of the talking heads after the defense had rested it's case. Surprisingly some of them even said that although the prosecution staged a good and strong case against the defense, they're not out of the woods just yet....They believe that the defense didn't do too shabby of a job of possibly causing some reasonable doubt among the jurors; they managed to do their job. So we shall see very soon how all this will play out; although I kind of already have an inkling how it will end...But I still hold out hope for Murray even it's a very slim chance, lol. I hope now that the defense can play their cards right and give a convincing closing argument--it'll make it or break it for them.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 208   Newer› Newest»