Latest on MJJC

Book: Remember the Time: Protecting Michael Jackson in His Final Days / Review @pg8

Just finished the book and thought it was really good and respectful. To the people that have reservations of people writing these sort of books about Michael and it being an invasion of privacy... just remember Michael is a historical figure. There has been much written about him that is completely false that doesn't tell the true story of who he really was and this will continue in the future whether we like it or not. That is why books like Remember The Time are important and need to come out. People should know the real Michael as he really was. The truth. If books like this are not produced all that the current and future generations will have are lies and inaccuracies.
 
WildStyle, I am glad you enjoyed these tales. I did not.

I believe those who do enjoy these tales remember that it is not Michael's truth. Many found Taborelli's tales to be Michael's truth and Cascio's tales after him to be Michael's truth and now some believe these authors' tales are Michael's truth.

If one finds any of these peddled tales acceptable or not, it is their choice. Regardless, it does not automatically make any one of them Michael's truth or even his children's truth.

The Kindle version of this book currently ranks # 15,917 on Amazon (the hard copy is lower). What is trending is that such books about this particular historical figure are becoming less and less valuable to the public which includes Michael Jackson fans which is a positive in my view.
 
But, what is Michael's truth? We are fortunate to have primary sources (interviews, commentary, his autobiography, film footage, the music from Michael himself) but I think it's also acceptable to have and appreciate candid perspectives from those who knew him well and worked closely with him. (Jermaine, Frank, Bill/Javon) Their perspectives are their reality about their relationships with Michael. In my opinion, it's possible to formulate a fair, unbiased, and surprisingly accurate portrayal of Michael with all of this material.
 
Nobody can tell me that Michael Jackson would appreciate ANY book being written about him without his input. I keep having the thought of Michael actually having to censor himself whether by words or actions during his lifetime all because he had to be consious of the fact that people around him could possibly betray him by making his private moments public.

How can the bodyguards book be okay and Rabbi Shmuley's is not? Everybody is putting Michael's business out there not for Michael, but for their own self serving selves.
 
ExoticPrincess said:
Nobody can tell me that Michael Jackson would appreciate ANY book being written about him without his input. I keep having the thought of Michael actually having to censor himself whether by words or actions during his lifetime all because he had to be consious of the fact that people around him could possibly betray him by making his private moments public.

How can the bodyguards book be okay and Rabbi Shmuley's is not? Everybody is putting Michael's business out there not for Michael, but for their own self serving selves.
Click to expand...


You make some good points.

This is an interesting thread because we have pointed out all the arguments--pro & con--why this book is or is not of value & what we think Michael would feel about it and books like it. All that remains now is for people to buy or not buy this book, based on their own personal feelings about these issues.
 
Msdeweydiva, no one deserves Michael’s truth except for those he willingly gave that truth to.

If anyone wants to believe he gave that truth (and his children’s) to these particular ex-employees who then in turn disgraced the code of their profession and disrespected their employer (and children) by publicizing and eventually selling that truth for their own financial gain after the employer’s passing, so be it.

I do not believe their version of Michael’s truth because they do not have any logical beginnings or endings. Why did Michael not receive the Las Vegas, U.S. condos that he was paying for? Why could Michael not afford mobile phones for himself and his mother but, could afford such phone for his employee’s daughter? Why did Michael teach his daughter to deny him as her father in dangerous situation but, did not teach his daughter to not reveal his identity causing the dangerous situation? Why did such a well-read, business man who understood his need for increasingly complicated and expensive loans believe that authorizing a credit card meant simply stating I authorize such and such to use this card when the authorizing sticker on the card clearly stated otherwise?

Unfortunately, there are so many more conflicting tales I could list. The truth is usually not this difficult and I do not believe Michael would give his truth to these employees.
 
Retweetet von Bill Whitfield
Neysa Smith @Wiserlemming · July25th

@MJBODYGUARDS Remember this note?
BtZBTlhCAAEwx9w.jpg:large
 
8701girl said:
What does that note say? i cant understand it
Click to expand...

Bill, I would very much like it if you could get more canned tuna(?) for Kaitie (sounds like Kaitie is Paris cat) because I have only 1 can left.

Thank you so much, I appreciate it very much.

From Paris
 
Last edited:
Justthefacts said:
Unless you were his Mother spendt countless hours with him or his best friend you have no idea what type of person Michael was.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't believe any of such types of books which are made to make money. Not even if it was from his mother or best friend. If it was MJ's diary I would like to read it, but Janet has taken it away forever I guess. They mentioned something about it if it was true.
 
Magicgirl said:
I wouldn't believe any of such types of books which are made to make money. Not even if it was from his mother or best friend. If it was MJ's diary I would like to read it, but Janet has taken it away forever I guess. They mentioned something about it if it was true.
Click to expand...

Dear Lord NO - just No. No offense but I would never want to read Michael's diary. Something like that is too personal and never meant to be shared with anyone. To me, that would be the ultimate betrayal of someone's thoughts - not for general consumption.
 
So all people who are for money will write no matter what – lies mixed with lies and people who knew Michael and can write something real should keep silence?! IDK what to think about it.

Sure Michael’s legacy is in his talent, music … but he also was a beautiful person. Why people who can say this should not?
IMO it can be protection and support.
Yes, Michael didn’t like when something from his privet life got public but IMO he also liked when people gave him complements and accepted him without prejudgments …
If to compare Rabbi Shmuley’s book with this one… it is a complement against prejudgments, prejudgments without paying any attention to what Michael actually said and who he was. I can’t appreciate disrespect.
Of course we can say there’s no true here or there or we don’t know … But it is also unkind to label something wrong just because it is about Michael Jackson.

I just still believe that not everything in this world is about money. I believe that some do care.
 
I just finished reading the book and liked it as well. It was nice learning about MJ as a father rather than as a celebrity.

I found it interesting when one of the bodyguards was approached by a man who was offering money in exchange for information on where and when MJ would be. The bodyguard never called the guy and soon learned that MJ had actually set this up to test his loyalty to him. It seems MJ definitely wasn't as naive as people make him out to be. It makes me wonder if he 'tested' other people in his life.

Also, I found it interesting to learn that MJ had read the Wall Street Journal a lot. With this, I would think he had extensive knowledge on business and finance, especially since he also had a large book collection and was an avid reader. It surprises me that he didn't have more control over finances.
 
Magicgirl said:
I wouldn't believe any of such types of books which are made to make money. Not even if it was from his mother or best friend. If it was MJ's diary I would like to read it, but Janet has taken it away forever I guess. They mentioned something about it if it was true.
Click to expand...

Wait, what? Janet is in posession of Michael's diary? Or what are you saying here?
 
I couldn't put the book down. I think it was well done and clearly painted a picture of MJ being a genuinely good but broken person who was literally trapped in his own life. A fishbowl, as MJ often called it. The narrative was very honest and for the most part tried not to make things into something they were not. I commend them for that.

When I have time I'll speak more about this because I too was a skeptic about reading it.

But I wonder, for people who've read it, what do you guys think of the part towards the end where MJ kinda shrugged off the fact that Bill/Javon didn't get paid (especially after being on such a mission to right that wrong earlier in the book)? You know, when MJ just kinda went "oh" and Javon wanted to hit him? I have my own theories but I wanted to know what everyone else thought.
 
^^^ I dunno. I would be able to answer if I had hung out with MJ enough. Maybe the bodyguard (I can't remember which one) was right about Michael's social skills. OR the "oh" was actually an embarassed "oops/oh sh*t why did I say that ?". You know like when you say something without using a filter. Anyway, it's hard to tell from here without a friendship + footage. I feel sorry for the bodyguard but I kinda find it funny. Nice set up and all.
 
Last edited:
^^ yeah. I thought part of it was being embarrassed too. I also think MJ had a tendency of conflict avoidance depending on his mood. I think that was just one of those moments where he didn't want to get into it because it was negative. Or he was compartmentalizing. He wasn't going to let that problem in when he was...I believe he was shopping for his kids? I think in order to function on a daily basis, that was somewhat necessary for him. Or maybe your right, social norms weren't really his thing (also understandable).

I too did NOT want to read this because I too thought its kinda shady that folks would put MJ's stuff all out there just to make a bit of money. But I too had to give in for curiosity's sake and there was a blog post by someone (not here) that got me intrigued. So I took the plunge. Now I cant speak on how ethical what they did is, but I know that fans have no problem about people writing books about MJ if the book was 100% positive. And I know that Michael (to my shock) didn't really have intense animosity to those that have written books about him (like in one phone conversation he was referencing in causal terms Latoya's and Randy Taraborrelli book, both of which I detest). But I also believe it depends on the situation and who's writing it (for instance in a twist of irony, they said that they believed that MJ never forgave Jermaine for attempting to write a book during the trial). It, again, lends to the complexity of Michael Jackson. The guy who is desperately protective of his privacy is the same guy who documented everything and wanted to capture his mark in history in as many angles as possible. There is also the factor that yes, unfortunately, he is gone - so I believe for that reason there is merit in their intention to try and counteract all these bogus books people put out about him that try to paint him in an outrageous light. As they said, if MJ was alive, we wouldn't be reading it. But because it has been a free for all since his death, I see how they might want to use their knowledge to try to bring a different perspective on the man in the mist of these outrageous claims.

Plus all the clips I WAS worried about, that had came out in the media about the book, was in no way near as bad as I thought it would be. For instance, Flower and Friend - the way it was written in the book gave me the impression taht MJ was the best boyfriend ever lol. But from what I've read from some articles in this thread, they made it seem like MJ was a two-timing dog and that was definitely NOT what they were getting across. All I saw was MJ dating. Maybe it wasn't a completely committed relationship with Friend (i mean he knew her for a hot minute), so I think if they both understood that, its completely ok for MJ to have seen Flower and test the waters for a bit. I didn't get the sense that he was using either just for sex though, the story about them at Washington DC was a testament to that. I thought that was so romantic.

I think there's a certain way you gotta read stuff like this. After actually reading the book, I DO think that it is accurate to THEIR experience (and memory, and memory can sometimes be faulty), but as they admitted many times in the book, they had no clue what was going on half the time lol. They didn't TALK to MJ all THAT much because they were focusing on doing their jobs and mostly they tried to leave him alone to give him some privacy. They only got one piece of the puzzle that was Michael Jackson. I think the little stories they told were consistent to how I always imagined MJ would be in person. The good and the bad. Plus the MJ that they met had just "recovered" from the trial. And unfortunately, I think that fact explained a LOT of what might be considered 'contradictory' things in the book. Also, a lot of what they told...I don't think was too...I dunno, intrusive? Like I didn't have a bad taste in my mouth reading some of the stuff they talked about because you didn't really get a lot of details. And the private stuff MJ wanted to keep private (minus the financial situation, but I'm pretty sure that whistle was blown anyway due to the trials after his death) - they often didn't even know about.

You got to read this keeping in mind that this is one angle of the whole situation, not the full situation. You gotta read this keeping in mind that they were out of the loop when it came to a lot of important stuff. And you gotta keep in mind that MJ was probably...not in a completely good place at the time. You also gotta keep in mind that MJ is a complex person. Like you or me, he's not the same way ALL the time. He has good days and bad days. Sometimes he's in a mood, sometimes he's not. Sometimes he feels like being nice and letting things go, sometimes he doesn't. Sometimes he's on top of his stuff, sometimes he isn't. But the way I see it, the overarching THEME that I saw in all of these stories was the immense toll that the trial had taken on MJ's spirit. This is just my personal opinion, but I believe MJ had mentally...'checked out' in a lot of ways. Not saying that he was psychologically loopy or lacked motivation to do stuff or that he was completely and utterly depressed to the point of no return. But I think he lacked desire to DEAL with a lot of stuff because he was TIRED of dealing with stuff. I think he wanted to just move on to something positive and he couldn't, because his LIFE wasn't positive really (as the bodyguards said, they didn't envy him evne if at one point they might have, and overall their experience being in MJ's world was 'not fun.') But he tried to force it. He tried to force it to work the way he wanted it to, but in essence, it just wasn't really working. And to me it was ALL relatable and understandable. And I also think that mentally, he lost his sense of control, and not in a psychological way but in a way that had been backed up by his life experiences. The trail was just the final bit of 'proof' that although he THOUGHT he had control, he really didn't. So I think he just kinda went into 'F**k it" mode.

So for instance, if you or I looked at his situation, of course we'd be like 'WAKE UP DO SOMETHING' - kinda like Javon and Bill often wanted to tell him. They went back and forth between "its not his fault" to wanting to shake him and say "why don't you take control?" And I think at one time he DID have control (he wouldn't have gotten to where he was without being extremely on top of things), but I think he got let down by people too many times and it crushed his overall SENSE of control. That feeling when you think you have control of the car but its steering you in the wrong direction. ANd thats happened constantly. And I think partially, mentally, he resigned to that feeling. Also after all the trauma I think he just simply lacked interest in anything that DIDN'T have to do with making his children happy. Thats the sense I got. He was done playing politics. Done handling lawsuits. Done with family drama. Done dealing with the vultures surrounding him. As he said, he wanted to be left alone to just raise his kids and do what was his 'perogative.' But he couldn't. More and more he realized that he couldn't. Like they said, he couldn't go back to the life he lived before the trial.

Therefore, its understandable that he was in a perpetual state of anxiety and frustration. I would be too. I have no clue what it is like living the way he lived for over 40 years of my life. And given the fact that in between 2003 and 2005 he had discovered that those that he THOUGHT were his friends really werent? When he had discovered that clearing his name from the allegations really didn't do anything when it came to changing people's minds about him? When he got more death threats than any other time (most likely)? When his suspicions about people and their intent to harm him were usually proven right? Yeah, I'd be paranoid. I'd be freakin out sometimes (like the incident with the camera at the pool).

Likewise, if from the age of 10 you've been thrusted into this world where you are pretty much filthy rich for MOST of your adult life (honestly, ALL), and you always have people to do things for you - its hard to judge someone and be like 'wtf is he thinking'. All he knows is what he knows. All he has experienced really is him asking for something to happen and people making it happen. But at the SAME TIME (and here is the complexity of who MJ is)...MJ has had an innate understanding and empathy with the outside world. He was compassionate. He WANTS to be a normal person so bad, and he has such a worldly view that he is ABLE to be humble and kind and down-to-earth. But at the same time, he also lacks....(and he's admitted this too) certain social cues and experience when it comes to handling certain situations that you or I would be completely familiar with.

I just want to address Tygger's concerns since those are the first I saw.

I do not believe their version of Michael’s truth because they do not have any logical beginnings or endings.
Click to expand...

That's because for them, I don't think there were logical beginnings or endings lol. Like they said, they were just doing what they were told. They didn't know the ends and outs of a lot of it. They didn't know the progression of deals MJ was making. They didn't know if stuff fell through or got postponed or what. They were just going with the flow. ANd even if they got resolution to some of these things, it probably wasn't on their mind and felt it wasn't really worth mentioning. Like they said a lot in the book, sometimes you heard about things, whispers of stuff, and then you don't. They didn't ask questions.

Why could Michael not afford mobile phones for himself and his mother but, could afford such phone for his employee’s daughter?
Click to expand...

Because, based on the book, I don't think MJ had a solid grasp of his accounts at that time. I stress "at that time" because like I said above, MJ was in a much different place. I don't think he wanted to worry about it. That was for his people to handle. So if his people put an account/card on a phone and it maxes out, well to MJ that just means his people didn't use the right account or they just mucked up. Or you can take what the bodyguards had gathered from this and say that MJ really only cared, again just at that time, about tangible money (cash). The money he could hold and had with him. Everything else was kind of other people's problem. Thats why when he was approached about not being able to afford something, of course he's like 'thats an idiotic thing to say' - because he was thinking about all the CASH he has, pretty much falling out of every thing he has on him lol. He didn't know or he kept his distance from (which is what I believe) the intangible financial situation he was in, because it probably made his head hurt, not in the sense of that he couldn't understand it, but in the sense that it was just more stress. He had to deal with people who only cared about money, he had to deal with whatever mess he had been pushed in because of the trial (no doubt) and other people's betrayals (no doubt). So I think if some one said that he couldn't afford something, like a lot of the times in the book, he just pull out a 1000 or so from his pocket and is just like 'here, go get it.' No problem.

Why did Michael teach his daughter to deny him as her father in dangerous situation but, did not teach his daughter to not reveal his identity causing the dangerous situation?
Click to expand...

Because Paris was a little kid who didn't know any better? At first of course, she got excited and was like 'daddy daddy' thinking no one would pay attention at the time, probably because he was in disguise and covered up, but once it got out of control, Paris was quick on her feet. And who said MJ had specifically taught her to say that? She could have came up with that slick move on her own to correct her initial mistake. I wouldn't be surprised if she did.

Why did such a well-read, business man who understood his need for increasingly complicated and expensive loans believe that authorizing a credit card meant simply stating I authorize such and such to use this card when the authorizing sticker on the card clearly stated otherwise?
Click to expand...

The same reason someone could read all there is to read about how to drive a car and fail to be a natural pro when getting behind the wheel. I always believed that MJ was a 'businessman' in the sense that he was a brilliant strategic thinker. Like he knew when it was the right time to do something and the right time to take a risk and be bold (kinda like his comment in the book when he bought something outrageous and said that in 20 years it'll probably be worth a ton). He also knew what was 'in' and what wasn't and what would get him a profit later. Hence, he bought the ATV catalogue, hence he can run all these companies and non profits, etc etc. But he hires financial advisors for a reason. I don't think he was as skilled with 1) the lingo and 2) the nitty gritty underhanded tactics of a lot of the financial world. Or just the simple things that he often has PEOPLE to do for him, like authorize a credit card lol. I don't see a reason why he would have had to do that himself, tbh. Like when he says that he'll go 'change his number' - I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't know the process of doing that, because HIS process of 'changing his number' is telling the manager/assistant to make sure his number is changed by the end of the day lol.

Though at the same time anything that he would be naturally interested in learning to do himself, like laundry (in the book), he'd know how to do of course. Or driving.

Unfortunately, there are so many more conflicting tales I could list. The truth is usually not this difficult and I do not believe Michael would give his truth to these employees.
Click to expand...

Actually, the truth might be that difficult, especially in this case when it is a limited view of the truth. All the conflicting stories I think is simply MJ being a human being. Like, this is the same guy who is ridiculously shy that he'd want to wear sunglasses so that people don't see into his 'soul' and at the same time, enjoys the spotlight and the cameras and is perfectly ok baring his soul in his music. That is technically a contradiction. Or this is the same guy who doesn't want to be seen in public when he's doing normal things, but FAILS to realize (like time and time again, even Steve Harvey talked about it lol) that as long as he's got high water pants, white socks and loafers - he's gonna be recognized. That's a contradiction. It shows him being naive/oblivious just a bit. And speaking of naivety, yes, this is the same guy who is SO paranoid about people using him and being vultures, and yet time and time again is taken advantage of, and time and time again he still TRUSTS people. Often the WRONG people. And thats the biggest contradiction of his LIFE, I think.

But that's life in general I think. That's being human. Sometimes people AREN'T logical all the time. Sometimes things DON'T make a lick of sense in their lives. Just like these bodyguards sticking in this situation for as long as they did while their lights were being cut off and they were away from their families for an undetermined amount of time with little to show for it. If that was any other job (not Michael Jackson), I'd be gone. And I think most would be too if they were really honest. But humans have EMOTIONS. They have ATTACHMENTS. And thats why they stayed. They felt a loyalty to MJ and his kids, even if logically it didn't make any sense that they stayed. Same goes for MJ and his life situation.
 
Awww nice interview! I loved how they talked about MJ messing up the laundry and trying to deal with paris' hair cuz it reminds me of my family. LOL Again, they honestly didn't tell anything about MJ that fans didn't already know...that he was SO relatable at the root of it all.
 
J5master, I am glad you appreciated the book and took time to address the questions I listed in a previous post.

While you may feel you cannot speak on the ethical issues of this book, I can and I have.

Books about Michael that are 100% positive are rare indeed and in those cases, fans may have aversion to such books if they do not find the author acceptable. Example: I prefer Latoya’s first book while you did not. Katherine’s book was acceptable to me as was Jermaine’s.

Had these same tales came from someone related to Michael, would they still be acceptable by some? It happens quite often that tales by those not related to Michael become more acceptable whether the tale is positive or not. As you stated, Michael was upset about Jermaine’s pending book more because of the negative slant (the situation), not simply because Jermaine was writing a book about his brother (his brother being the author).

J5master;4039380 said:
The guy who is desperately protective of his privacy is the same guy who documented everything and wanted to capture his mark in history in as many angles as possible.
Click to expand...

Michael never wanted his private life documented; that happened and continues to without his support. I am sure he did not want his children’s private life documented either particularly by ex-employees he should have been able to trust due to the nature and code of their profession.

For me, there is no other way to read the book than to read the book. There are some tales that are highly questionable to me and I appreciate that you attempted to bring reason to those tales. In some of my previous post, I mentioned that is exactly what these authors want readers to do; fill in the gaping holes they deliver purposefully. I am simply not interested in doing such.

Example: it is illogical that Michael could not afford a phone for his mother and himself but, could for his ex-employee’s daughter. The purchase of the phone for the ex-employee’s daughter is a one-time purchase however; the phones for himself and his mother had monthly bills attached.

As with other tales, there is no beginning or ending. With this tale, the reader is eventually told, the phone accounts were cancelled. Should I assume they were cancelled because the ex-employee did not pay the bills? Was this because the ex-employee did not receive salary or was he not reimbursed monthly for the bill from Bain or whoever controlled the monies?

It would logically have to be the former because anyone controlling the monies would question why they would have to transfer monies to an employee for Michael and his mother’s monthly phone bill. That is a red flag as most controlling the monies were seeking such monies for themselves and would not be willing to reimburse this ex-employee willing, every month.

How did Michael and his mother handle the phone service being cancelled? Could it be they never even noticed as they already had other phones they were using? How did they get those phones? We have no detail.

The truth is not this difficult because it has only one answer - the truth - so, why would the truth be omitted? Going further, if this is the truth, why was this tale even publicized? Having an Iphone does not truly speak to who anyone is as a human being so that does not humanize him. Stating Michael could not afford the phones and their monthly service does dampens Michael’s pride and the ex-employee becomes a hero of sorts in his own view and, if he is lucky, to some readers.

J5master;4039380 said:
If that was any other job (not Michael Jackson), I'd be gone. And I think most would be too if they were really honest. But humans have EMOTIONS. They have ATTACHMENTS. And thats why they stayed.
Click to expand...

Indeed, if they are honest. As with many others, the relationship with Michael - personal, professional, etc. - can and has been used for financial gain. If I am receiving a tale from those who were not honest in how they related to Michael, it is fairly easy for me to be wary of a tale from such a person.

Question please and I understand this may be off-topic: why did you detest Latoya’s first book? I enjoyed her tales regarding her and Michael at Hayvenhurst. Some were quite hilarious and were not mean spirited to Michael. By the way, what phone conversation was this? I hope it was not any of the “Glenda” conversations.
 
Last edited:
I don't know, I think there's a grey area here as far as if he wanted his life (private is debatable because...what constitutes as his private life?) documented. I personally don't think what they wrote about necessarily is his private life. THinking of it like many have already pointed out...looking at MJ like a historical figure: If someone wrote a book about what it was like being Marilyn Monroe's house maid or something...would those experiences constitute as them revealing her 'private life'? I don't think many would view it that way. I think people would take it for what it was, a book about how it was like to work for Marilyn Monroe. I think that's what this book does.

And I think he did document his private life (or just his life in general), it may be for personal reasons sure, but I think some of that is up to interpretation because a lot of the times when I saw him directing the camera when he was out and about, he did it and instructed in a way as if he were going to show it TO somebody, or as if someone else besides himself and his family would eventually see it. But thats just my opinion, I don't claim to know what his filming was for.

Either way, him being a celebrity, I think he accepted the fact that people would write about him. And depending on who, what and when - he'd be more inclined to personally endorse it. There are a lot of things that he was not in control of due to his fame but that all celebrities probably had to accept sometime in their lives sometime or another, I think this is one of those things.

In some of my previous post, I mentioned that is exactly what these authors want readers to do; fill in the gaping holes they deliver purposefully. I am simply not interested in doing such.
Click to expand...

Well I personally believe thats what any book calls the readers to do, unless its a dry academic book lol. But unlike the way you put it, I don't think these people did it intentionally, I think the did it because they admittedly didn't have the whole picture and they were just telling their side of it. And it naturally had gaping holes of all the MANY things they didn't know. I think it allowed for the reader to draw their own conclusions based on the stories they told, just like anything else. And i'd rather people do that then hear blatant lies that make him out to be a crazy insane criminal, in books in which they claim to KNOW everything and "feed" their version of the truth down the reader's throats.

And I don't see any conclusion you can draw from their book other than 1) MJ was a GOOD person 2) MJ was a DEVOTED father 3) MJ was a human being, with his own ups and downs, just like everyone else and 4) he was used, constantly.

All of those things have always been truth to me, even before I read the book.

it is illogical that Michael could not afford a phone for his mother and himself but, could for his ex-employee’s daughter. The purchase of the phone for the ex-employee’s daughter is a one-time purchase however; the phones for himself and his mother had monthly bills attached.
Click to expand...


Well like I said above, I don't think it was as simple as 'he couldn't afford this.' I think he COULD afford it, and the people in charge of taking care of his accounts *cough*Bain*cough* did a horrific job at it. He obviously had money (getting checked at an airport with a mysterious suitcase full of cash anyone? LOL). I think that the other piece that we weren't seeing though is the lack of cash flow in his accounts (that and shady people around him just taking whatever they wanted from said accounts). That's where the 'crisis' was, and as we've seen in court documents...all of the outstanding loans he had out and unpaid debts. But the problem was he had all these people in his ear telling him to do this and that and it was just a messy situation. So I don't think it was a matter of affording it. It was OTHER PEOPLE telling THEM (the bodyguards) that he couldn't afford this and that. Thats' what THEY heard. The stuff we should be debating is if those people were telling the truth to THEM.

And I think they made it pretty clear what they thought about it (no, the truth was not being told to them).

As with other tales, there is no beginning or ending. With this tale, the reader is eventually told, the phone accounts were cancelled. Should I assume they were cancelled because the ex-employee did not pay the bills? Was this because the ex-employee did not receive salary or was he not reimbursed monthly for the bill from Bain or whoever controlled the monies?
Click to expand...


From my understanding they put up the money just to GET the phone. The bill, I think it was understated that he couldn't and didn't pay, so they were cancelled. And i think it was a bit of both of what you stated, but moreover that MJ's inner team that was supposed to be handling this stuff with him (the guard) just wasn't. So it just went up in the air and left behind like many other things in MJ's world at the time. No, he didn't go into the ins and outs of the agreement (if there was one) between him and Bain about the phones, but I don't think that was important for me to know to get the point of the situation. Stuff wasn't being handled. And it was disorganized.

How did Michael and his mother handle the phone service being cancelled? Could it be they never even noticed as they already had other phones they were using? How did they get those phones? We have no detail.
Click to expand...


These questions, especially, you don't have the answers to because they simply didn't know. And I think they were extremely transparent about this fact - that they simply didn't know a lot. A whole hell of a lot lol. They didn't ask questions, they just did what they were told. When the phones got cancelled, they didn't ask MJ 'what are you gonna do about the phones?' or 'does your mother already have a phone?' or 'did you already have a phone?' Yeah, none of that. lol They made it pretty clear that they tried to not do that sort of things which is why these stories are only coming in fragments. Because they are, again, only getting a piece of the puzzle. They sat in garages and security trailers all day taking orders for the most part.

The truth is not this difficult because it has only one answer - the truth - so, why would the truth be omitted? Going further, if this is the truth, why was this tale even publicized? Having an Iphone does not truly speak to who anyone is as a human being so that does not humanize him. Stating Michael could not afford the phones and their monthly service does dampens Michael’s pride and the ex-employee becomes a hero of sorts in his own view and, if he is lucky, to some readers.
Click to expand...


Well to your first part, I believe truth can be that difficult because in this case, we only got bits and pieces. This is a short amount of time during one small period of MJ's life through a lens with a very limited view. You're not going to get the whole truth with that. Plus the whole truth...I think, is a complicated truth. Not simple. Not straight-forward.

As far as the second part, I think it does actually humanize him. Not the isolated event of the iphones, but the overall big picture of it. That he had issues going on behind the scenes just like anyone else would. Its just that his are a bit more on the grand scale cuz of his wealth and fame. It didn't make him crazy or weird or psycho. By not leaving things like that out, we can get an unbiased look at his life - not through the lense of a fan or a hater, but just a person trying to do a job. And just like for everyone, there negative things that need to be dealt with. That was one of them.

That and, to be honest, if it wasn't for the financial stuff, there would have been nothing negative about him in the book. Just this fact alone is astonishing.

But sure, I accept the view of taking it to mean that the bodyguards want to paint themselves as MJ's saviors, but I think by the end of it, the big picture and the overall take-away....I just didn't get that sense from them or the book. I think the did what they had to do to get the job done for MJ despite the circumstances they were under and they did it in a way that they hoped would make him happy and give him one less thing to worry about. But I didn't get the sense that they were the heroes of the story (besides, they weren't the only ones who offered MJ favors, etc). Instead, I got the sense of who the villains were, thats for sure. And I think that's exactly what they wanted to make sure they got across just based on the ending.


Question please and I understand this may be off-topic: why did you detest Latoya’s first book? I enjoyed her tales regarding her and Michael at Hayvenhurst. Some were quite hilarious and were not mean spirited to Michael. By the way, what phone conversation was this? I hope it was not any of the “Glenda” conversations.
Click to expand...


Because she insinuated he was a child molester? Maybe we're not talking about the same book lol

And yes, pretty sure they were the Glenda tapes. (prepares for the onslaught of reprimanding lol)
 
Last edited:
J5master;4039458 said:
private is debatable because...what constitutes as his private life?
Click to expand...

That is an interesting response.

I would say that anything that one considers to be their private matters would most likely be considered private matters to Michael and any other celebrity for that matter. To simplify and generalize, anything happening outside of the public would be private. However, anything the bodyguards witness from their client and the client’s children was considered a private matter that they were not to publicize even if, what they witnessed, was in the public arena. That is the code of their profession.

What is true for Michael and other celebrities is there is not a large audience for books that details Michael’s public life such as tours he completed, his discography, etc. There is a much larger audience for any tale of what happened when Michael was not in public view which would be a large part of his private life. Michael did endorse Lisa D. Campbell’s books, however; those books have the former description - accurate detailing of the public events in his life.

His video documentation of events in his own life would be very similar to home movies anyone would film in my view. It was up to Michael if he decided to publicize those films. While the public saw the television special containing the home videos he chose, I am sure there are tons of footage the public will never see and have not earned the right to.

From my understanding they put up the money just to GET the phone. The bill, I think it was understated that he couldn't and didn't pay, so they were cancelled.
Click to expand...

The authors state the phones were paid for (the one time purchase I will assume Michael made as credit is only given when the ex-employees pay) but, for the phones to be activated – a.k.a, the monthly bill to the hosting phone company AT&T – one of the ex-employees placed the phone accounts in his name.

This means, the ex-employee knows exactly how that bill was to be paid; either reimbursement or through his own salary that they profess they did not receive consistently. The ex-employee knows exactly when the account was cancelled as it was his name unless it was transferred and there is no discussion in the book about such a transfer. The ex-employee should also know how Michael and his mother accepted the news they could not use these particular phones because the service was cancelled and he would most likely have to be the one to tell them.

In this instance, the truth - provided this is the truth - was omitted because the ex-employee knows the details. This begs the question, why was this tale told? Who does it benefit? Not Michael because he is portrayed as an adult male who could not afford phones for himself and his mother. That may not seem negative for some however; others, like myself, view that as an unnecessary wound to male pride. The ex-employee places himself in the position of hero.

Regarding Latoya’s first book: I did not read anything where she said her brother did anything he was falsely accused of or insinuated such and I read it cover to cover.

I cannot say I believe most of the Glenda tape conversations although I understand some do.
 
Last edited:
It's late where I am and I think I'm too tired to respond properly lol...but I will say this: with the iphone, as to why it was told...thats basically asking "why tell a negative story about Michael Jackson?" ....sometimes negative stories happen. And its not told to make anyone look bad, but to give a complete picture about what had happened. The book obviously wasn't done in a manner that aimed to sugarcoat their time there. Like I pointed out before, if you took ALL mention of financial troubles out of the book, you would be left with a completely positive book about Michael Jackson. I pointed this out because that is truly, truly rare - especially if it is in relation to people who are only telling their story to get attention/money etc. They will pack in any story they can, anything they can twist or distort or simply fabricate in order to make Michael look as weird, strange, and sometimes as criminal as possible. Sometimes stories aren't told to benefit ANYONE, but just simply to paint a picture. To provide an example. Financial troubles don't just happen to Michael Jackson. And he's certainly not the only celebrity that went through it. So the last thing that came to my mind is it being a 'wound to male pride' - I'm not even sure how to comment on that since that's the furthest of what I was thinking lol. If they really wanted to make an attack on his male pride there are SO many other ways to do it - many more effective ways that, trust me, most who have already written books about MJ have used a few of those tactics already. If anything they boosted MJ's 'masculinity' with the adventures of Flower and Friend :p Not to mention his devoted efforts to take care of his kids above all else. If that's not manly, i don't know what is.

Besides, Michael being in a financial bind is not far fetched to me at all. Considering all the stuff that has come out about his finances just in court documents, its kind of already out there. Also, Michael's internal organization of people managing his finances being a mess is also not far fetched. And the bodyguards make it crystal clear that the real blame belongs to the people who constantly took from Michael, and also the blame is on those who put him through a (multi)million dollar trial just to clear his name of something he absolutely didn't do. If I were to read a book about bodyguards working with Michael Jackson, and expected it to be HONEST? Especially at that point in MJ's life? I wouldn't expect it to be all sunshine and rainbows, unfortunately.

I think we obviously have a different opinion as to what is a natural expression of telling a story of their own personal experiences working for a client...and writing a tell-all book about someone's private life. I think Michael being a historic figure - as a writer myself - I think I sympathize and understand the reasoning behind telling such a story. I don't think much of what they said was all that intrusive.
 
J5master said:
I think we obviously have a different opinion as to what is a natural expression of telling a story of their own personal experiences working for a client...and writing a tell-all book about someone's private life.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

In my view, to tell the tales goes against the code of their profession first and foremost. The tales are told for the authors' benefit and what they believed would be financial gain when published. The client's and the client's children's right to privacy had to be dismissed for these tales to be publicized. I am glad this book was not financially successful and I am glad Michael's children have made no contact with these authors and have not attempted to confirm or deny any of their tales. Better to let readers believe what they wish as it has no bearing on what is true.

When you said the only negative tale included financials, my first thought was Friend/Flower. laughs. Needless to say, I do not agree with your assessment that it boosted Michael's masculinity. That tale is more conflicting than the phone tale.

I would also say, ask any male friend you may have if you were to tell the world they could not afford some item for themselves and their family how it would make them feel. That would speak to male pride. If not, simply remember the scenes of Michael in LWMJ where he went on a shopping spree and told Bashir an estimate of what he was worth financially before the spree.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top