As regards the kidnap theory, I am struggling with the concept of a God who sees someone held for two years against their will, and when it is decided to guide someone to be in a position to discover helpful information, will only permit it to be released in vague terms over an extended period of time, so that the information is neither concrete nor usable (in the sense of leading to the kidnappee's release). I am finding it hard to see either love or justice in that.
this. I also had a hard time understanding when Sharon said she "recieved an email saying Michael could be in danger for this truth to come out.". Why would Michael go on to Larry King to give us an message and then be in danger if that message gets out?
In my opinion in this "alive" situation there can be 2 options
1. he faked his death because his life is in danger - in this scenario he wouldn't be leaving messages, clues as it would defeat the purpose and knowing that he's alive would again put him danger
2. the kidnap theory - if that's the case if he can he'll be dropping clues to be found and freed but that wouldn't be putting up him in danger
* For the man to have lied someone is covering something up.
Sharon perhaps the most important question are you sure that you aren't mixing up people?. That day there was at least 2 drivers , one the paramedic driver and second the fire truck driver.
Now I'm assuming you are talking about Paramedic Blount as the one that has lied. As I told you before all the transcripts were posted and I read all of them close to thousand pages. In that testimony Blount says that he knew it was Michael , yes. He also explains how they arrived to the hospital. He says they took Michael into the hospital and all that time he was bagging Michael. In other words his testimony shows that he didn't stay behind to chat with people. So again are you sure that you aren't mixing up people? could you have talked to some other paramedic, first response team member that didn't go into the house to start with?
Then you need to add other paramedics testimony - Senneff. He said that sometime when they are in the room they were told that it was Michael and that they refused to announce him dead at the scene and that they told UCLA that they are coming in with a VIP. So there's collaborative testimony and events happened in the room that shows that they knew it was Michael and therefore he's not lying at court when he says he knew it was Michael.
* He lied about knowing it was Michael in the ambulance, hence the cover up involves Michael being in the ambulance.
a very huge gap in conclusion. how can you equal lying about knowing it was Michael to cover up in the ambulance? For example even if we assume that he lied about knowing it was Michael why couldn't it be because he just realized that he wasn't able to recognize the most famous man in the world and thought that he was an idiot and therefore he came up with "yeah I knew it was Michael the minute I saw him". See what I'm saying? Lies can be white lies as well and they do not necessarily have to point to a cover up.
* Since that was the wholeness of the lie two questions arise
1. was he lying about knowing?
or
2 was Michael in the ambulance?
Since I spoke with him and absolutely nothing in his demeanor indicated he was lying it is logical to accept his question as a legitimate one
You are basing your opinion here to be able to read a person that you never met before. Logically you can be wrong in evaluating his demeanor.
Since he had no reason to ask me a question in which he already knew the answer to again it is logical to acceot his question as a legitimate one
Since after my informing he he replied by reinforcing his being un aware with "I was wondering who that was" again makes it logical to accept as a legitimate question.
Doctor - patient privilege was suggested before. Even if that was him he could have been making small talk with you without breaking the patient -doctor privilege by getting you say the name and not him.
Furthermore while he was on the witness stand he seemed uncomfortable answering this question, the person asking it repeated it as if directing him to agree with them and if I recall correctly the judge indicated it was okay for him to proceed. He seemed as though he was lying.
again personal interpretation.
Hence my conclusion of his lie.
* If (which he did) lie about knowing Michael was in the ambulance - the question arises- was Michael in the ambulance.
* If he could not tell it was Michael then it likely was not (Michael has has the most famous face in the world).
* If Michael was not in the ambulance then where was he?
actually you will see that I used your points before and came up with an alternate explanation of "he could have been lying because he wasn't able to realize it was Michael and therefore not to be seen stupid he says he realized him".
and honestly looking back to the full testimonies I still think that you are mixing up people.
----- If it were murder, logic suggests only Murray would have been neccessary whether it was carelessnes or a setup.
----- Others were involved, I have mentioned the driver's lie and we are aware of Murray
----- Logically if others were involved a coverup took place.
----- If Michael was not in the ambulance where was?
-----Hence the question could he have been kidnapped.
Some people may think that is an irrational thought but as I said before I heard Michael saying he was not "allowed" to talk on the phone- with my own ears.
It's not irrational but you cannot stop your explaining with the driver and ambulance. For a moment let's assume that you are right and that Michael was kidnapped and that he wasn't in the ambulance. So
1. who is the person that they took in?
2. Who is the person that the emergency personnel worked on? If it wasn't Michael why wouldn't they realize it wasn't him?
3. Who is the person that Michael's kids went to see for the last time and spent 30 minutes with? If it wasn't Michael why didn't they realize it wasn't him? (see below for quote from Latoya)
4. Who is the person that they did 2 autopsies on ? If it wasn't Michael how not only coroner but the family hired private doctor didn't realize?
5. Who is the person that Latoya saw, Who is the person several people saw the night before the funeral? and how come they weren't able to realize it wasn't Michael?
In the interview, La Toya also revealed how she led Michael's children Michael's side to say goodbye to him just after he died.
"It was Paris who said she wanted to see her daddy 'one last time'. So I took them into the room. There was a towel over his face. I lifted it and Paris said, 'Oh Daddy, I love you'.
We hugged, and I kissed him on the forehead and the children lifted up his hands. He just didn't look like he was gone. His eyes were half open, it was as if he was resting.
The kids had been screaming - but once they were in that room and saw Michael they stopped and became calm.
I asked them, 'What do you want to say to Daddy?' and they said private things to him.
Paris was holding his hand. We were all sitting around the bed.
His chest was very red from the attempts to revive him but he was wearing no make-up and looked fine. He was NOT bald as some reports have said. Everything looked fine.
We all said prayers out loud over him. We did that quite a few times over half an hour. When we walked out that room the kids didn't cry. They were silent. They had closure."
La Toya reveals how Paris paid a secret final farewell to Michael Jackson's open casket at Forest Lawn Cemetery on the night before the glittering star-studded memorial service. The boys didn't want to go. Paris produced a cheap metallic split-heart mood pendant. The pendants come in pairs. Friends or lovers each wear one half of the heart - which changes colour when it touches the skin - as a symbol of their devotion to each other. Paris was wearing her half-heart at the memorial service.
"Paris had bought the pendant as a farewell gift for her daddy. At first she tried to put it around his neck, but it didn't tie up, so she wrapped it around his arms.
Then she connected her half heart and his together, said, 'Daddy this is for you', and pulled them apart again.
She told me, 'I want one half to go to Daddy and I will wear the other half forever. On Daddy it will be blue because he is cold. On me it's purple'.
She then pulled out a bag of children's play gemstones and put them on Michael's chest and around his body. It was very moving."
--- As for him being away I know Michael has received death threats all his life but perhaps it is only now that he could have been in fear of the safety of his children. Previously when he would tour he only had himself to look out for.
If someone threatened to bomb the arena how could he say to his kids no you can't come- there may be a bomb -but I have to perform?
I am not saying that happened but those types of threats have existed for him and many others. How would you deal with it?
Like I said in the very beginning logically I can see that happening. But if he was protecting his kids and he was in danger he wouldn't be giving out messages and dropping clues. It would have defeat the whole purpose, he wouldn't go away for the sake of his children's safety but then making appearances that would put them into danger.
If he were kidnapped you'd ask how could he release video footage etc. but if he were in disguise either
a. people who could have kidnapped him may have been else where when he did the recordings etc. and not been aware.
sorry but that's not a kidnapping then. If he can get away from them in disguise to make an appearance at Larry King he could have simply escaped.
b. people who kidnapped him thought no one would notice and bargained with him for something they wanted to attain.
and what could it be? and why are they still holding him what's the benefit? I mean he's legally dead it's not like he can give them money or assets. The logical thing at a kidnapping would be ransom request , wouldn't it?
c. people who kidnapped him had someone watching over him who aided him in his efforts secretly.
again the questions comes if he had someone aided him why not just escape?
I appreciate your efforts of understanding me and wish you the best of luck. I must warn you, I'm pretty complex.
I'm good with complex. and I'm a highly rational and logical person fyi.
