Latest on MJJC

I need some help.

Staffordshire Bullterrier

Proud Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2004
Messages
5,603
Points
113
I am talking to this person and he was making stupid remarks about Michael, so i asked him what more than 100% aquittal does it take for people to believe in MJ? I then told him about how the media has kept quiet about so many important things. That there's no evidence of any wrongdoing on MJ's part and alot on the prosecution's.

He then said this :

yeah MJ has never made out of court settlements to children he allegedly abused. Never.
If by Never you mean deffinately.


So i showed him this video


[youtube]c0k08tiQF-8[/youtube]


What else can i tell him about the settlement? Important cold hard facts, i need to keep this short but sweet, i need to let him see things different.
 
Thanks , i will post that link. Right now...all these people (its on another site where you can comment all the time) keep asking why he decided to settle...cause like they say

“An innocent man doesnt pay people off its as simple as that.”



It’s pretty simple. You’re innocent – Someone takes you to court – Why would you choose not to face those charges?


The media attention would’ve turned towards his glorious acquittal if he’d faced trial, which probably would’ve saved his career. Instead he chose to act like a person with everything to hide. He chose to pay rather than have the case come before a judge.
I’m asking – Why?


If I’m innocent, then I have everything to win in a trial. If I’m guilty, then I have everything to lose in a trial.
If I’m innocent and I pay millions of dollars to avoid being acquitted in a trial, I’m paying to have my only chance of justice taken away.
If I’m guilty and I pay millions of dollars to avoid being found guilty in a trial, I’m paying to stay out of jail.
Which is the more likely motive? You decide.




And this is all after where i have explained why MJ decided to settle, all the reasons. And still they say that its not a answer....wtf?


If interested..look at the comments here, under the article.


http://www.vg247.com/2010/07/28/mic...-zombie-in-pvz/comment-page-1/#comment-200015
 
Michael's public statementson settling do sound silly.

But I don't believe they were his REAL reasons - he said those to direct emotions towards himself instead of Jordy all the while knowing he didn't pay anyone off. His insurance carrier, Trans America, despite MJ protesting. A notice of protestation from MJ wasincluded in the settlement, judge stated it implied no guilt and the Chandlers agreed with allowing MJ to re-state his innocence in the settlement itself.

Nothing prevented them from co-operating with the LAPD/SBPD afterwards since it's illegal to enter such a clause in a settlement! LOL! And MJ didn't try either. They could have taken the money and continued trying to help the police put MJ through a court trial via the criminal process - they knew they'd fail that.

MJ couldn't find it in himself to allow people to turn on Jordy and he forgave him too.

However, acquittal doesn't and never has meant innocent. Check any law text book or credible lawsite.

Verdicts don't change everyone'sviews, so we can't go around trying to change everyone either. Just ignore and move on.
 
Make this person or any person who can't understand read this and this will not only open their eyes but prove to them how these extortionists together with some unscruplous lawyers and the evil media framed and ultimately killed an innocent man.

This is the GQ article written by Mary Fisher, an investigative journalist-

http://www.buttonmonkey.com/misc/maryfischer.html


As for those who don't want to understand, well, we can just feel sorry for them and pray that someday soon they will.
And pl.remember I'm with you and would love to help you ANY way I can. All the best!
 
The settlement was about negligence and had nothing to do with childmolester or abuse.
Chandlers could go to the criminal court and accuse him after the settlement but they didn´t.

You can´t be sure to be acquitted in a trial even if you are innocent.
There are people who have been killed in the name of the law for murders they didn´t commit.
 
Please also go to this webpage-
http://mjtruthnow.com/extortion/why-extortion-demand-was-paid/

An excerpt-
“Plaintiff cannot establish the source of the funds utilized
to settle the claims involved, and
because insurance policies permitting
the insurer to settle
over the wishes of the insured were involved,
introduction of settlement agreements
will deprive Mr. Jackson of due process of law.”

True copy of “Mr. Jackson’s Memorandum in Support of Objection to Subpoena to Larry Feldman for Settlement Documents” filed in the Superior Court of California, County of Santa Barbara
The settlement agreement between Evan Chandler (not Jordan Chandler, who was a minor at the time) and Michael Jackson was for global claims of negligence—which Jackson firmly denied—and the lawsuit was defended by Jackson’s insurance carrier. The insurance carrier negotiated and paid the settlement, over the protests of Jackson and his personal legal counsel.
Under the majority of contracts for liability insurance, it is general practice for the insurer to be entitled to absolute control of the defense of the matter and the insured is excluded from any interference in any negotiation for settlement or other legal proceedings. An insurance carrier has the right to settle claims covered by insurance when it decides settlement is expedient, and the insured may not interfere with nor prevent such settlements.​
 
Thanks for that, but it's no use anymore for this person. I have the last reply there, and i have yet to receive an answer to it. To me this is a sign that they don't know what to say anymore but simply cannot admit that they are wrong. This one dude there keeps saying this (even after i have explained everything about why the settlement happened, all of it) This -->



If I’m innocent, then I have everything to win in a trial. If I’m guilty, then I have everything to lose in a trial. If I’m innocent and I pay millions of dollars to avoid being acquitted in a trial, I’m paying to have my only chance of justice taken away.
If I’m guilty and I pay millions of dollars to avoid being found guilty in a trial, I’m paying to stay out of jail.
Which is the more likely motive? You decide.


So i'm sure even if i had posted the GQ article..the idiot would have said "Look at my basic logic" As hell called it....sigh. About 2003 though, could Michael have settled that or not at all?
 
for a start off the insurance paid the settlement. mj had no choice and did not agree to it. secondly any settlement did not stop the chandlers from testifying in a criminal case so those two arugments alone makes the haters argument totally redundant. thirdly mj asked for the civil case to be stopped until the crim case was over. you dont do that when hiding.posts the quotes from ray chandler where he admits they blackmailed mj for 20 mill .post evans tapes. post the info on ray from 2005 trial

About 2003 though, could Michael have settled that or not at all?
Click to expand...
no civil case was ever filed so there was nothing to settle. you cannot settle criminal cases.

and at the end of the day some pl are just haters and will never believe the facts. i worry about these ppl and their desire for someone to be an abuser. most cases they turn out to be them themselves! as the guy from canada that dimond got to accuse mj proved

all the arguments the haters use can be shown to be false but even when such evidence like the insurance settlement are shown to them they are still in denial. they have no answer. and even if there were no insurance settlement. the courts would have left mj in no position but to settle. the judge refused to stop the civil case from continuing until after the crim case was over. that left mj totally open for sneddon to sit in on the court case and see all mj defence and then build a crim case around it. years later the law was changed to where the D.A can stop a civil case until after the crim case is over. they blamed mj for this law change saying it was done to stop payoffs. yet mj was asking for this law change all along. this is what we are dealing with. white sheets!
 
Last edited:
elusive moonwalker said:
for a start off the insurance paid the settlement. mj had no choice and did not agree to it. secondly any settlement did not stop the chandlers from testifying in a criminal case so those two arugments alone makes the haters argument totally redundant. thirdly mj asked for the civil case to be stopped until the crim case was over. you dont do that when hiding.posts the quotes from ray chandler where he admits they blackmailed mj for 20 mill .post evans tapes. post the info on ray from 2005 trial

no civil case was ever filed so there was nothing to settle. you cannot settle criminal cases.

and at the end of the day some pl are just haters and will never believe the facts. i worry about these ppl and their desire for someone to be an abuser. most cases they turn out to be them themselves! as the guy from canada that dimond got to accuse mj proved

all the arguments the haters use can be shown to be false but even when such evidence like the insurance settlement are shown to them they are still in denial. they have no answer. and even if there were no insurance settlement. the courts would have left mj in no position but to settle. the judge refused to stop the civil case from continuing until after the crim case was over. that left mj totally open for sneddon to sit in on the court case and see all mj defence and then build a crim case around it. years later the law was changed to where the D.A can stop a civil case until after the crim case is over. they blamed mj for this law change saying it was done to stop payoffs. yet mj was asking for this law change all along. this is what we are dealing with. white sheets!
Click to expand...
...tears rolling down again :(...
I'm so ashamed of this ugly world. ..Sorry Mike...we did our best to protect you...but seems like our best wasn't good enough...and please help me survive and fight the evil here, be victorious and quickly come to you...
 
Last edited:
Thanks alot Elusive, that was very informative, for me. Cause i stopped talking to the person. Right from the start i gave that video of Chandler, but it didn't mean anything to them. They kept saying 'An innocent man doesn't settle' sigh.
 
Before the Bashir documentary, nobody was calling Michael a child molester.
 
I don't know where you live, but Michael's been called a child molestor since the 1993 allegations in the UK and many other places.
 
dannyboy72 said:
Before the Bashir documentary, nobody was calling Michael a child molester.
Click to expand...

i dont know if you've been living under a rock but Michael has never been able to shed the image of being labeled a child molester. no matter what he did or said no one ever stopped calling him that all over the world. ever since 1993 he was never able to ever shed that label.
 
Very true! Even when there was a 10yr gap from 93 unto 03 allegations! Yet they labeled him a serial you know what! Dumb a$$ haters/media make no sense!
 
They kept saying 'An innocent man doesn't settle' sigh.
Click to expand...

well if u pointed out to them that the insurance settled the case as i know u did then that makes what they say redundant.if they keep coming out with that same quote they are either thick or a hater or probably both! as jermaine said and the only decent thing hes prob ever said "u cant reason with stupidity"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top