Latest on MJJC

sorry but i have to ask

Oh please don't get me started on Diane Sawyer!:evil:......her, Barbara Walters and Oprah need to all be locked away in a room, talk about backstabbers! When those three wanna be venomous nobody beats them!

Thats why when I hear some fans talking about who MJ should do an interview with, I just go crazy at the mention of either of these broads!
 
omg ur siggy is divine! Lol

okrah is a traitor, diane has no journalistic substance, and babs is too old and has lost her edge. i'd prefer ellen or tyra! them two clowns is the best to do interviews with u find out all sorts of new things about people after they've been on their shows
 
<<<what proves ur point? he'll 'give the money back' to the insurance company BUT will be sued by his father, his ex lawyer and the shrink. so ????-->>>>>> LIke I said, so what. Get sued. If the settlement was NOT about abuse, why can't Jordan come out and say, "I was not abused". Michael ALWAYs said "I did NOT abuse no child", so what is the difference in what Michael is saying and what Jordan can say? I understand EVERYTHING you are saying but I still say suck it up and do what is right NO MATTER what comes your way. Believe me, MOST people with brains and who wants to know the truth will be pissed to finally hear Jordan was put up to lie on Michael. Even if these fools sued, who to say they get it? ANd if Jordan does not have the money to pay these idoits, they will never get no matter what (you cant get blood from a apple). Sorry but this kind of mess pisses me off. This does not just happen to celebs. There are cases here simular to this. A simular case just was drop when two girls falsely accused a guy for abuse over the fact that he did not like them do what they want to do. SO to get back at him, these heffer LIEd on him. Later, after he served 8 months in jails, they told the truth due to guilt of their souls. I loved the fact that this man and the community was able to show him support and was outrage over this. Fieldman, the psyo, and his father can sue, but I believe there will be a far more punishment than getting money (IF they will get it).
 
soso deaf said:
omg ur siggy is divine! Lol

okrah is a traitor, diane has no journalistic substance, and babs is too old and has lost her edge. i'd prefer ellen or tyra! them two clowns is the best to do interviews with u find out all sorts of new things about people after they've been on their shows
Click to expand...
To me Larry King would be the best.
 
all he would ask is why do u sleep with little boys. hes going insenile and asks stupid questions
 
i'm still holding on to the hope that jordan chandler would admit publicly mj never did anything to him. words from the "victim"'s mouth is more powerful. MJ can say anything to defend himself and proven not guilty in trial but people still dont believe in his innocence. )=
 
I think at this point Michael should never do any more "personal" interviews; As for JOrdan, that is up to him.
Click to expand...
yeah

'm still holding on to the hope that jordan chandler would admit publicly mj never did anything to him. words from the "victim"'s mouth is more powerful. MJ can say anything to defend himself and proven not guilty in trial but people still dont believe in his innocence. )=
Click to expand...
i wouldnt hold your breath he had his chance in 05 but wasnt intrested.
 
ilovemjj4ever said:
i'm still holding on to the hope that jordan chandler would admit publicly mj never did anything to him. words from the "victim"'s mouth is more powerful. MJ can say anything to defend himself and proven not guilty in trial but people still dont believe in his innocence. )=
Click to expand...
I agree. I agree though that MOST good thinking people who want to know the truth will listen and believe MIchael innocence. I think people people believe him now however I think the other people who want to believe in his innocence but they can not get over the settlement.
 
terrell said:
I think at this point Michael should never do any more "personal" interviews; As for JOrdan, that is up to him.
Click to expand...
I agree. To me Michael makes it worst when it tries to explain himself. To me, he leaves thing un-answered.... Even with that video that was posted with him and LisaMarie and the fact that dizzy ass Diane Sawyer interviewed them, I was more frustrated then before he did the interview. And you can tell in the interview, LisaMarie missed spoked. You can see it on her face. (The part about the kids jumping in the bed when she gets out).

But I know he is innocent. He should do the interview on PBS and with someone who will let him explain himself without interuptions.
 
soso deaf said:
not true...he wasn't called. he was interested
Click to expand...
HOw do you know Jordan was interested? Why was Jason called though he got 2 million-and his lie was pretty much revealed on the stand and the reason why the media does not even talk about him even after the trial? Like folks said, Jordan could have been came. Heck the 2005 trial seem like the 1993 case. People believed those other guys including Mac (I do not care about the few media idoits to try to slander these guys. Those people were mostly people like DD, Nancy Grace, etc who had their own agendas planned out if Michael went to jail). Jordan could have came and told his side no matter if anyone would have believed him or not (personally I think MOSt folks would have believe him if he defended Michael especially since he was the one many wanted to hear from and he is a grown man able to tell his side).
 
b/c jason never knew his mother got themoney? i was there when the dude was confused as hell like 'what money'? he got money from a victim's fund n went to therapy and he knew his mother went on hard copy but didn't know she was paid for it. he didn't know about the money! lol

people didn'tbelieve mac. three people on the jury didn'tbelieve brett (he was cute but horrible on the stand) sorry but when a dude says he slept in a bed w/ a man every day for a yr....not so good for the jury. so the three that wanted to initially write books didn't believe him and that testimony was the reason they went through everything cuz the three b elieved mj did something to brett or that it was very suspicious

jason was a STATE witness. he was a LIAR. so why would mez want jordan? you're totally missing my point.

everyonewho testified for the state lied on the stand, got their stories mixed up, or had lied in the past. no one on the defense had that problem. adding jordanwould've made it a problem.

mez said he didn't need him. go find the transcripts from what he said with dan abrams at the university. im tired of going aruond and around.

people acting like they know thelaw and they understand the courts but can't even remember information from back during the trial. it's a big ass circle we're going around in. nothing will ever be ok for mj fans. no 'confession' will ever take b ack the damage it did. nothing so y whine about it and say 'someone didn't do enough' for this or that?


u know who could'vetestified? MICHAEL...guess what? they d idn'tneed his ass either.
 
people didn'tbelieve mac. three people on the jury didn'tbelieve brett (he was cute but horrible on the stand) sorry but when a dude says he slept in a bed w/ a man every day for a yr....not so good for the jury. so the three that wanted to initially write books didn't believe him and that testimony was the reason they went through everything cuz the three b elieved mj did something to brett or that it was very suspicious------- I think MOST people did believe Mac (again, I am not talking about fools who want to believe the worst nor any jury who wanted to say something after the fact in order to get book deals. Beside, so called 3 people believing is still less than all 9 who did believe them. I still say MOST peoplel will believe a GROWN person who say they were not abused because that person did not have to say nothing or they can degrade the person. If Mac was abused, he could have said it on the stand and NOt defend Jackson. Anyone who want to believe otherwise is only hoping a person was abused or they are dealing with "something" within themselves). But thank you soso.
 
u know who could'vetestified? MICHAEL...guess what? they d idn'tneed his ass either. --- No one wants to hear Michael. We know what he say and that is "I did not abuse no child" and he is the accused. Most people want to hear the person who is claiming to be the victim. As for the law, I think many folks do not give a @#$% about the law (heck the law can wrong, believe me), just do what is right and tell the truth. Like I said, and you have not answered it yet, if the settlement was NOT for abuse, why can Jordan just say, "I was not abused by Michael" just like Michael say "I did not abuse no child". That is not taking about the agreement (which was for neglience).
 
nothing will ever be ok for mj fans. no 'confession' will ever take b ack the damage it did. nothing so y whine about it-- NO it wont take back the damage however it won't be the only thing out there either and it CAN NOT hurt either. SO I do not buy that mess of not talking about it. DD book is out her however Ms. Aphaphodite's book is out there as well which counters DD book. That helps in many ways to people who are following this case.
 
um the confidentiality pertains to all of it. while they didn't ultimately sue and settle for abuse, they initially did and that's tied to the amended claim of negligence and the ultimate settlement.

so neither party can talk about it unless their in a court of law. how is that so hard to understand?

if mj's own lawyer didn't want to call the guy yet he was willing, what more can he do that will be the least damaging to mj? cuz going on tv right now will steal the thunder of the london shows, right? people will question his motives and timing...why now? did mj pay him to do it? then he'll be sued and that'llmake news and they'll air that instead of mj breaking history.

we can go on and on for days
 
terrell said:
nothing will ever be ok for mj fans. no 'confession' will ever take b ack the damage it did. nothing so y whine about it-- NO it wont take back the damage however it won't be the only thing out there either and it CAN NOT hurt either. SO I do not buy that mess of not talking about it. DD book is out her however Ms. Aphaphodite's book is out there as well which counters DD book. That helps in many ways to people who are following this case.
Click to expand...

The truth is that only true Michael Jackson fans follow the case. Other people really don't care.:no:
 
soso deaf said:
um the confidentiality pertains to all of it. while they didn't ultimately sue and settle for abuse, they initially did and that's tied to the amended claim of negligence and the ultimate settlement.

so neither party can talk about it unless their in a court of law. how is that so hard to understand?

if mj's own lawyer didn't want to call the guy yet he was willing, what more can he do that will be the least damaging to mj? cuz going on tv right now will steal the thunder of the london shows, right? people will question his motives and timing...why now? did mj pay him to do it? then he'll be sued and that'llmake news and they'll air that instead of mj breaking history.

we can go on and on for days
Click to expand...

I asked someone who is a lawyer and he told me that they can talk about the case, but a stipulation must be put in place. So if JC does wanted to talk about the case publicly and apologize, then his lawyers would have to contact Michael lawyers and they would to stipulate what would be said and how it would be said. JC, could apologize, but he could still say something that leave doubts in the minds of whoever is listening...
 
pamarella said:
I asked someone who is a lawyer and he told me that they can talk about the case, but a stipulation must be put in place. So if JC does wanted to talk about the case publicly and apologize, then his lawyers would have to contact Michael lawyers and they would to stipulate what would be said and how it would be said. JC, could apologize, but he could still say something that leave doubts in the minds of whoever is listening...
Click to expand...
Thank you. Just want I thought. As for leaving doubts, as long as he say, I was NOT abused, that would be good. I do not care if there are a FEW people who do not believe him (I think MOST people will believe him because he is grown and can speak for HIMSELF. We know parents put children up to do things). Soso, no one is asking JOrdan to do it now but it can be done in the future and he should tell the truth so we can finally hear it from HIM, no one else. I am going to let the topic go. Pamarella just gave me what I thought.
 
pamarella said:
The truth is that only true Michael Jackson fans follow the case. Other people really don't care.:no:
Click to expand...
True, but others do listen and there are people who a fans who still have questions about 1993, they do not care about 2005.
 
pamarella said:
I asked someone who is a lawyer and he told me that they can talk about the case, but a stipulation must be put in place. So if JC does wanted to talk about the case publicly and apologize, then his lawyers would have to contact Michael lawyers and they would to stipulate what would be said and how it would be said. JC, could apologize, but he could still say something that leave doubts in the minds of whoever is listening...
Click to expand...
wow EVERYONE is missing the point....

MICHAEL is not teh one to worry about. evan, larry, and stan are so the stipulation would have to be made with them.....so let's try this again guys....when u ask someone w/ experience, tell them teh whole story and who all is involved

y the hell would mj sue jordan? he's not the one we're talking about here.
 
terrell said:
Thank you. Just want I thought. As for leaving doubts, as long as he say, I was NOT abused, that would be good. I do not care if there are a FEW people who do not believe him (I think MOST people will believe him because he is grown and can speak for HIMSELF. We know parents put children up to do things). Soso, no one is asking JOrdan to do it now but it can be done in the future and he should tell the truth so we can finally hear it from HIM, no one else. I am going to let the topic go. Pamarella just gave me what I thought.
Click to expand...
glad to hear that much...

he wasn't put up to do anything.where did he testify? everyone is acting like he did so much. it was the adults who took it and ran w/it.

maybe pamrella can go and ask her friend if the 'stipulation' has to include the OTHERS who signed the confidentiality agreement and what the likelihood of an agreement being made would happen if it shows that three of the main parties were crooks and broke th elaw
 
I don't know why people didn't believe Mac. I read the painfully long transcript from when he testified, and he was clearly truthful - he was just very irritated during the cross examination when he was being asked to remember insanely tiny details about things from 10+ years ago.
 
soso deaf said:
wow EVERYONE is missing the point....

MICHAEL is not teh one to worry about. evan, larry, and stan are so the stipulation would have to be made with them.....so let's try this again guys....when u ask someone w/ experience, tell them teh whole story and who all is involved

y the hell would mj sue jordan? he's not the one we're talking about here.
Click to expand...

In order to have a settlement, both sides have to agree. Michael's lawyers had to protect his interest in the matter when the case was settled, so Michael does have a say so up to a point. Larry Feldman represented Jordan Chandler not the father. Jordan Chandler got the $20 million, not the father. The father was not the one claiming to have been molested. He is the one that hired the lawyers for his under aged son to bring the law suit. And the lawyer that I asked knows somthing about the 1993 case. He may not know all of the details like you, I and everyone else don't know. But he told me that stipulations can be made. And he told me that Sony music or I should say the insurance company is the one that paid the $20 million to settle the case. It didn't come out of Michael's pocket.

An example of the stipulation could be that Jordan only talks about himself and Michael's involvement and no one else. He would not talk about his father's role or anyone else in the matter.
 
Last edited:
i thought the same too, love butsince jordan's 'admission' would imply guilt and illegal actions on the part of his father, his lawyer, and the shrink, it would still be prevented unless ALL parties agree. the ramafications are severe if anyone tries to investigate, not so much for evan but for feldman and katz b/c they just recently tried to do the same thing again and their conduct in teh arvizo case could come under scrutiny.

i hope i explained it thoroughly
 
soso deaf said:
i thought the same too, love butsince jordan's 'admission' would imply guilt and illegal actions on the part of his father, his lawyer, and the shrink, it would still be prevented unless ALL parties agree. the ramafications are severe if anyone tries to investigate, not so much for evan but for feldman and katz b/c they just recently tried to do the same thing again and their conduct in teh arvizo case could come under scrutiny.

i hope i explained it thoroughly
Click to expand...

Well the father can say that his son lied or he was confused about what happen and that he was only protecting his son. Feldman and Katz are hired by the Chandlers. The only thing that they can really do is give them legal advice. And I don't think the Chandlers would say that their lawyer or Doctor told them to lie. In the Arvizo case, the lawyers were trying to use evidence that didn't have anything to do with 2005. I think for that reason they couldn't use the information. And whoever wants to investigate can do just that, but nothing will happen to Michael. He can't be tried twice, he was found Not Guilty 2005. And the 1993 criminal investigation was closed because there was no evidence to press charges. The distrct attorney knew he didn't have a case.
 
ur not understanding....the father signed an affidavit that was sworn. the lawyer engaged in illegal conduct and manipulation to force mj into a settlement. the shrink lied and manipulated the boy.

feldman and katz can lose their license over allegations like that. evan can't be touched b/c statute of limitations has passed.

the father will not simply say his son is lying. not when he can sue and make money. he sued mj for something so simple and plain. u don't think he'll sue jordan? after all, he hit him in the head w/ a 12lb weight....loyalty isn't high on his scale
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top