Hi guys,
I randomly came across an interview on youtube with Ian Halperin talking to Howard Stern about his awful book - and decided to listen to what he had to say about himself and that piece of trash he wrote.
(in case you want reference, here's the link, but you don't have to click on it really, it's a piece of s**t interview with a lot of the usual junk: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CivcSHkaEc8&feature=related)
BUT, I had a few thoughts.
First off, he always introduces this book by saying he started off wanting to "nail" MJ, because he was convinced he was guilty. He then briefly states that he is 100% certain that he was in fact innocent. Ok, fair enough, we knew that but whatever.
Stern asks him how he knew that - and Ian states something I have never heard from anyone on the media before - that Michael's insurance was forcing him to settle in 1994. I knew that, many of you knew that, but it has never been mentioned before! I was so pleasantly surprised, which is why i kept listening.
But after that, a whole lot of bs started flowing in, that i'm not even going to repeat.
Here and there he has some valid information though - scattered amongst the lies. He also claimed that he worked on this book for 4 years. I don't think it takes 4 years to come up with lies. I think the man did work.
Here is what i think happened; his publishing house gave him and advance for a book that would prove that Michael was guilty (because we all know that such a book would unfortunately sell). Ian went ahead and tried to prove it, but the evidence was pointing to Michael's innocence. Here is where the trash comes in; you guys remember how Aphrodite Jones went around trying to get her book published, and no one would publish a pro-MJ book, right? Her decision was to self publish, which is the honorable road.
I think Ian turned his book into the piece of trash it is, in order to get it published. We KNOW for a fact that publishing houses would not publish a book similar to Aphrodite's.
So, if my assumption is right, and I think it is because Ian always states that his primary thesis for the book was Michael's guilt or innocence, and the book instead ended up being a compilation of science fiction tabloid sensationalism, Ian had to compensate for Michael's innocence by adding all the absurd "facts" about his life. (or self publish, but the man wanted money, clearly)
So maybe there is a little silver lining in this god awful book: Ian could have lied about his findings about MJ's "guilt", and portrayed him as guilty instead in order to publish the book. He did not do that, but instead filled the book with claims that are so outlandish, I don't think that many people could believe them.
What do you think?
I randomly came across an interview on youtube with Ian Halperin talking to Howard Stern about his awful book - and decided to listen to what he had to say about himself and that piece of trash he wrote.
(in case you want reference, here's the link, but you don't have to click on it really, it's a piece of s**t interview with a lot of the usual junk: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CivcSHkaEc8&feature=related)
BUT, I had a few thoughts.
First off, he always introduces this book by saying he started off wanting to "nail" MJ, because he was convinced he was guilty. He then briefly states that he is 100% certain that he was in fact innocent. Ok, fair enough, we knew that but whatever.
Stern asks him how he knew that - and Ian states something I have never heard from anyone on the media before - that Michael's insurance was forcing him to settle in 1994. I knew that, many of you knew that, but it has never been mentioned before! I was so pleasantly surprised, which is why i kept listening.
But after that, a whole lot of bs started flowing in, that i'm not even going to repeat.
Here and there he has some valid information though - scattered amongst the lies. He also claimed that he worked on this book for 4 years. I don't think it takes 4 years to come up with lies. I think the man did work.
Here is what i think happened; his publishing house gave him and advance for a book that would prove that Michael was guilty (because we all know that such a book would unfortunately sell). Ian went ahead and tried to prove it, but the evidence was pointing to Michael's innocence. Here is where the trash comes in; you guys remember how Aphrodite Jones went around trying to get her book published, and no one would publish a pro-MJ book, right? Her decision was to self publish, which is the honorable road.
I think Ian turned his book into the piece of trash it is, in order to get it published. We KNOW for a fact that publishing houses would not publish a book similar to Aphrodite's.
So, if my assumption is right, and I think it is because Ian always states that his primary thesis for the book was Michael's guilt or innocence, and the book instead ended up being a compilation of science fiction tabloid sensationalism, Ian had to compensate for Michael's innocence by adding all the absurd "facts" about his life. (or self publish, but the man wanted money, clearly)
So maybe there is a little silver lining in this god awful book: Ian could have lied about his findings about MJ's "guilt", and portrayed him as guilty instead in order to publish the book. He did not do that, but instead filled the book with claims that are so outlandish, I don't think that many people could believe them.
What do you think?
h34r: