Latest on MJJC
- Latest Michael Jackson News
- Click Here to Join Our Community
- Follow us on X
- Wanna talk Michael? Come join the chat rooms
- The Michael Jackson Chart Watch
- Become an MJJC Patron
- Join the Premium Member Group and Get Lot's of Extra's
- Major Love Prayer - Worldwide Monthly Prayer Every 25th
- MJJC Exclusive Q&A - We talk to the family and those in and around Michael
- Join us in the Chat Rooms
- Find us on Facebook
The 1993 case. [Threads merged, All discussion in this one thread]
- Thread starter MichaelMySoul
- Start date
Sophielo
Proud Member
Re: Recent news reporting on 1993 allegation
We can't let this article go. I wonder if they actually allowed my comment on there. I highly doubt it. Questioning their ability as journalists probably didn't help!
We can't let this article go. I wonder if they actually allowed my comment on there. I highly doubt it. Questioning their ability as journalists probably didn't help!
Rockin.
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 4,589
- Points
- 0
Re: Recent news reporting on 1993 allegation
What can we do though? We complained to the PCC for the Guardian one but its still there.. nothing happened. The PCC told me its for the Jackson Family to complain if they want to, so maybe someone should contact the lawyers for the estate. The journalist is probably on here reading everything we say.
What can we do though? We complained to the PCC for the Guardian one but its still there.. nothing happened. The PCC told me its for the Jackson Family to complain if they want to, so maybe someone should contact the lawyers for the estate. The journalist is probably on here reading everything we say.
Nivea
Proud Member
Re: I have some questions about the 1993 case.
I dunno if this has already been answered here.. but I didn't see any post about it (or perhaps I didn't search thoroughly enough) so.. here goes: I heard that chandler contacted mj and asked him to negotiate three scriptwriting deals on his behalf. If mj didn't agree, he said, he would accuse him of molesting his son. Mj didn't agree and so chandler went ahead with the accusations.
What I'm wondering about is; if this is true, why didn't mj just charge them with extortion?
I dunno if this has already been answered here.. but I didn't see any post about it (or perhaps I didn't search thoroughly enough) so.. here goes: I heard that chandler contacted mj and asked him to negotiate three scriptwriting deals on his behalf. If mj didn't agree, he said, he would accuse him of molesting his son. Mj didn't agree and so chandler went ahead with the accusations.
What I'm wondering about is; if this is true, why didn't mj just charge them with extortion?
D.Electric
Proud Member
Re: 1993 settlement documents
Yes, if there are people who want to discuss it, I dont see why they shouldnt. There are people on this forum who were perhaps too young 16 years ago who now want to research it... I do not mean ANY offence to you, or anyone who agrees with you, all with love as MJ would say... but if you dont want to be see or be involved in a discussion... just ignore the thread
Yes, if there are people who want to discuss it, I dont see why they shouldnt. There are people on this forum who were perhaps too young 16 years ago who now want to research it... I do not mean ANY offence to you, or anyone who agrees with you, all with love as MJ would say... but if you dont want to be see or be involved in a discussion... just ignore the thread
Autumn II
Proud Member
Re: Recent news reporting on 1993 allegation
This will be my first post after leaving staff, but I want to respond to this? (I'm doing my personal work, now, and can't be online that much. . . ) MJJC is a VERY large board. Check out the number of members at the bottom of the page? Some journalists troll here routinely, and have done so since the trial. What may seem like private conversations are actually extremely public, and anything said in any of the threads can migrate as far as CNN or Fox, or. . . tabloids. There is really not much to be done for it except for everyone who posts here to conduct him or herself with decorum as befitting Michael's legacy, and with the understanding that anything you say CAN go very, very public.
Carry on,
Vic
This will be my first post after leaving staff, but I want to respond to this? (I'm doing my personal work, now, and can't be online that much. . . ) MJJC is a VERY large board. Check out the number of members at the bottom of the page? Some journalists troll here routinely, and have done so since the trial. What may seem like private conversations are actually extremely public, and anything said in any of the threads can migrate as far as CNN or Fox, or. . . tabloids. There is really not much to be done for it except for everyone who posts here to conduct him or herself with decorum as befitting Michael's legacy, and with the understanding that anything you say CAN go very, very public.
Carry on,
Vic
Re: Recent news reporting on 1993 allegation
I hate to ask this... I really don't intend to open that tabloid. But I do want to know what kind of comments from this site they're looking for, so we can be more aware of what kind of thing they're after. Rockin, would you be willing to paste just the parts here that may have been taken from fan sites?
I hate to ask this... I really don't intend to open that tabloid. But I do want to know what kind of comments from this site they're looking for, so we can be more aware of what kind of thing they're after. Rockin, would you be willing to paste just the parts here that may have been taken from fan sites?
Re: 1993 settlement documents
And you were forced to read this thread... how again???
Dannilee, that's very true. I was not following this in 1993, I had other things on my plate. All I really want are simple statements with documents to back them up so I can post corrections on the news stories everywhere right now (some of you are obviously not paying attention). And since this commenter and others who did follow this are not responding to our requests for this simple information (the most important reason for this site, IMO) and prefer to snipe at us... we're having to fend for ourselves and drag this out more than anyone would like.
And you were forced to read this thread... how again???
Dannilee, that's very true. I was not following this in 1993, I had other things on my plate. All I really want are simple statements with documents to back them up so I can post corrections on the news stories everywhere right now (some of you are obviously not paying attention). And since this commenter and others who did follow this are not responding to our requests for this simple information (the most important reason for this site, IMO) and prefer to snipe at us... we're having to fend for ourselves and drag this out more than anyone would like.
Last edited:
Autumn II
Proud Member
Re: Recent news reporting on 1993 allegation
Unfortunately, I did open it. I just skimmed it, but what I saw were some of the more. . . . raw? comments from "an Evan Chandler thread." Didn't see any quotes attributed, though. Tabloids are after the extreme, so probably won't quote the more reasonable remarks even if the reasonable, thoughtful, quotes are in the majority, here or at any fan-site.
Unfortunately, I did open it. I just skimmed it, but what I saw were some of the more. . . . raw? comments from "an Evan Chandler thread." Didn't see any quotes attributed, though. Tabloids are after the extreme, so probably won't quote the more reasonable remarks even if the reasonable, thoughtful, quotes are in the majority, here or at any fan-site.
Sophielo
Proud Member
Re: Recent news reporting on 1993 allegation
He went on fansites and posted comments the very small minority of fans wrote celebrating Evan Chandler's death, throwing in the word 'karma' a lot. He also said we were 'blinded to the truth about Jackson.'
He went on fansites and posted comments the very small minority of fans wrote celebrating Evan Chandler's death, throwing in the word 'karma' a lot. He also said we were 'blinded to the truth about Jackson.'
Beachlover
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 1,573
- Points
- 0
Re: Recent news reporting on 1993 allegation
Here is what I saw:
Suddenly, the reason for his death became the subject of worldwide speculation, and the internet chat-rooms where Michael Jackson's hero-worshipping fans exchange gossip were deluged by an outpouring of schadenfreude. 'Good riddance, you piece of ****. Hope you rot in hell! Things that go around come around - karma is a bitch,' one hate-filled message read.
'He was a very, very evil man. He should have been punished. This seems the easy way,' another responded.
Among the Jackson faithful, Evan Chandler is the devil incarnate. For in 1993, it was he who first exposed the King of Pop as a common paedophile by revealing how Jackson had sexually abused his son, Jordan, then aged 13.
Here is what I saw:
Suddenly, the reason for his death became the subject of worldwide speculation, and the internet chat-rooms where Michael Jackson's hero-worshipping fans exchange gossip were deluged by an outpouring of schadenfreude. 'Good riddance, you piece of ****. Hope you rot in hell! Things that go around come around - karma is a bitch,' one hate-filled message read.
'He was a very, very evil man. He should have been punished. This seems the easy way,' another responded.
Among the Jackson faithful, Evan Chandler is the devil incarnate. For in 1993, it was he who first exposed the King of Pop as a common paedophile by revealing how Jackson had sexually abused his son, Jordan, then aged 13.
Sophielo
Proud Member
Re: Recent news reporting on 1993 allegation
This is the quote that got me really angry:
"Even after 16 years, during which time many more children have told how Jackson inveigled them into his bed, many fans remain blinded to the truth."
This is the quote that got me really angry:
"Even after 16 years, during which time many more children have told how Jackson inveigled them into his bed, many fans remain blinded to the truth."
Beachlover
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 1,573
- Points
- 0
Re: Recent news reporting on 1993 allegation
Here is the whole opening saga:
Even after 16 years, during which time many more children have told how Jackson inveigled them into his bed, many fans remain blinded to the truth.
They prefer to believe that Mr Chandler, then a respectable and affluent Los Angeles dentist, invented a lurid story of sexual abuse (and persuaded his son to corroborate it) as part of a lucrative blackmail plot.
When it emerged that Jackson had bought the Chandlers' silence by paying Jordy a reported $20 million and his parents $1m each, this travesty only gained more credence.
It is still widely accepted by many Jackson fans, even though Jordan's harrowing police statement has since been published in full.
Here is the whole opening saga:
Even after 16 years, during which time many more children have told how Jackson inveigled them into his bed, many fans remain blinded to the truth.
They prefer to believe that Mr Chandler, then a respectable and affluent Los Angeles dentist, invented a lurid story of sexual abuse (and persuaded his son to corroborate it) as part of a lucrative blackmail plot.
When it emerged that Jackson had bought the Chandlers' silence by paying Jordy a reported $20 million and his parents $1m each, this travesty only gained more credence.
It is still widely accepted by many Jackson fans, even though Jordan's harrowing police statement has since been published in full.
bluetopez
Proud Member
Re: Recent news reporting on 1993 allegation
Media...tabloid whatever u wanna call it, their all the same to me, Responsible! Their afraid people will know the truth and expose their lying faces! How Pathetic! Their spinning hard what Evan only did to himself and it's so obvious and it's to funny! lol
Media...tabloid whatever u wanna call it, their all the same to me, Responsible! Their afraid people will know the truth and expose their lying faces! How Pathetic! Their spinning hard what Evan only did to himself and it's so obvious and it's to funny! lol
Rockin.
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 4,589
- Points
- 0
Re: Recent news reporting on 1993 allegation
That and another sentence which I don't want to even write. Actually... there are a few.
That and another sentence which I don't want to even write. Actually... there are a few.
Last edited:
Autumn II
Proud Member
Re: Recent news reporting on 1993 allegation
Here's the thing. Tabloid trolls read here and at the other fan-sites. Of COURSE they do! They look for the lurid, the extreme, the "heat-of-the moment" remarks, and then take them out of context. Is that fair? Of course not, just as they were not fair to Michael.
It's very hard to tell, if not impossible, who might be a journo on this or other fan-boards. I'm sure they don't post, but just read and get lost in a sea of names. See how many people have read here in the past 24 hours? Listed at the bottom of the screen? It's a HUGE number, and if they don't post, there's really no way to know who they are. . . . . . fans? Journalists? No way to know.
Here's the thing. Tabloid trolls read here and at the other fan-sites. Of COURSE they do! They look for the lurid, the extreme, the "heat-of-the moment" remarks, and then take them out of context. Is that fair? Of course not, just as they were not fair to Michael.
It's very hard to tell, if not impossible, who might be a journo on this or other fan-boards. I'm sure they don't post, but just read and get lost in a sea of names. See how many people have read here in the past 24 hours? Listed at the bottom of the screen? It's a HUGE number, and if they don't post, there's really no way to know who they are. . . . . . fans? Journalists? No way to know.
Beachlover
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 1,573
- Points
- 0
Re: Recent news reporting on 1993 allegation
These stories are nothing new and this is part of the reason Michael wrote "SCREAM" and other songs. Its frustrating to them and they have no control over what the papers write. Sometimes you can sue if you can prove it is wrong but with so many stories coming out rapid fire it is hard to shield yourself.
The thing of it is that they can quote the forum by saying what the fans said and it is actually 'true' to some extent but then they add their own nasty little snickering comments which just adds fuel to the fire.
Anyone with any writing talent can twist words and turn stories completely around and even using quotes can make someone look foolish. This is what Bashir did to Michael and it was wrong and we know it, but there is no conscience in these people. If it sells a story they write it.
The only way to prevent them from doing this is to not discuss things here. In any open forum like this, or Facebook, Twitter, etc....there is the possiblity of being quoted. They will look for the quotes that suit their purpose and take them out of context. Its extremely easy to do so if you have any writing skills.
They are pond slime.
These stories are nothing new and this is part of the reason Michael wrote "SCREAM" and other songs. Its frustrating to them and they have no control over what the papers write. Sometimes you can sue if you can prove it is wrong but with so many stories coming out rapid fire it is hard to shield yourself.
The thing of it is that they can quote the forum by saying what the fans said and it is actually 'true' to some extent but then they add their own nasty little snickering comments which just adds fuel to the fire.
Anyone with any writing talent can twist words and turn stories completely around and even using quotes can make someone look foolish. This is what Bashir did to Michael and it was wrong and we know it, but there is no conscience in these people. If it sells a story they write it.
The only way to prevent them from doing this is to not discuss things here. In any open forum like this, or Facebook, Twitter, etc....there is the possiblity of being quoted. They will look for the quotes that suit their purpose and take them out of context. Its extremely easy to do so if you have any writing skills.
They are pond slime.
.Butterflies.
Proud Member
Re: 1993 settlement documents
I still don't understand if the insurance co. negotiated and paid it, why then are they not remotely mentioned in the contract on the smoking gun? Why is it Michael signing and not the insurance co? That's basically what my personal confusion boils down to. It really makes absolutely zero sense to me.
I still don't understand if the insurance co. negotiated and paid it, why then are they not remotely mentioned in the contract on the smoking gun? Why is it Michael signing and not the insurance co? That's basically what my personal confusion boils down to. It really makes absolutely zero sense to me.
bluetopez
Proud Member
Re: 1993 settlement documents
I think the smoking gun website is unfair because they have the redacted docs that Diane Dimond like to parade around! They blocked out the most Impotanrt parts....all I ask is why? I think u know though!? lol
But, anyways I don't get why it's so hard to understand that his insurance paid the out of court settlement it's LEGAL DOCUMENTS that speak LOUDER then any words that came out of others in the last 16yrs, including words that came out of MJ himself that some are hung up on!! lol
I think the smoking gun website is unfair because they have the redacted docs that Diane Dimond like to parade around! They blocked out the most Impotanrt parts....all I ask is why? I think u know though!? lol
But, anyways I don't get why it's so hard to understand that his insurance paid the out of court settlement it's LEGAL DOCUMENTS that speak LOUDER then any words that came out of others in the last 16yrs, including words that came out of MJ himself that some are hung up on!! lol
Re: Recent news reporting on 1993 allegation
Oh, please, don't post more here. I know you're trying to prod us into action, but...
Tabloids are not considered mainstream media because they're not "newspapers." They're not journalism, and don't claim to be. They're entertainment. Sick entertainment, but entertainment. Like dogfighting.
We should be angry at that site. But I do hope people keep the bigger perspective also in their hearts and emotions, and that is that MJ's reputation HAS IN FACT been restored to the world. MJ had a FINAL VICTORY. He left us with a TRIUMPH. And the world KNOWS IT. Some will snipe at the edges, hating that they were wrong all along, but they are now viewed as the foolish ones who still don't get it.
MJ has triumphed. Let's not ever forget that.
Oh, please, don't post more here. I know you're trying to prod us into action, but...
Tabloids are not considered mainstream media because they're not "newspapers." They're not journalism, and don't claim to be. They're entertainment. Sick entertainment, but entertainment. Like dogfighting.
We should be angry at that site. But I do hope people keep the bigger perspective also in their hearts and emotions, and that is that MJ's reputation HAS IN FACT been restored to the world. MJ had a FINAL VICTORY. He left us with a TRIUMPH. And the world KNOWS IT. Some will snipe at the edges, hating that they were wrong all along, but they are now viewed as the foolish ones who still don't get it.
MJ has triumphed. Let's not ever forget that.
Re: 1993 settlement documents
Butterflies, I don't get it either. We're not getting much help, though, are we? We're getting a) documents without explanation, b) explanations without documents, and c) an attitude, as of there's something wrong with wanting to defend MJ armed with facts. I see you're on the Project Legacy Team, so you understand, no doubt, that you can't just send a complaining letter without a short, simple explanation with supporting documents.
Personally, I'm throwing in the towel on this one.
Butterflies, I don't get it either. We're not getting much help, though, are we? We're getting a) documents without explanation, b) explanations without documents, and c) an attitude, as of there's something wrong with wanting to defend MJ armed with facts. I see you're on the Project Legacy Team, so you understand, no doubt, that you can't just send a complaining letter without a short, simple explanation with supporting documents.
Personally, I'm throwing in the towel on this one.
MarielovesMJ
Proud Member
Re: Recent news reporting on 1993 allegation
They do this on every fansite in every fandom everytime there's a scandal when a fanbase is well known. It was about 2 years ago that I posted something doing a celeb scandal on a another celeb fanboard and was horrified that one of my quotes was on the news. I was so embarrassed and still am. They twisted it.
I should have known that my quotes were not safe. There are plenty of journalist trolling the board looking for the , loud, reactionary, angry comments because calm reasonable comments are too boring for them.
They do this on every fansite in every fandom everytime there's a scandal when a fanbase is well known. It was about 2 years ago that I posted something doing a celeb scandal on a another celeb fanboard and was horrified that one of my quotes was on the news. I was so embarrassed and still am. They twisted it.
I should have known that my quotes were not safe. There are plenty of journalist trolling the board looking for the , loud, reactionary, angry comments because calm reasonable comments are too boring for them.dancemasterman
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 1,035
- Points
- 0
Re: 1993 settlement documents
I actually did sit and read through almost the whole thing. I don't remember which page it says it, but it does say that MJ will be paying them.
I don't hold the settlement against Michael Jackson, I just prefer that when people talk about it they do so accurately.
I actually did sit and read through almost the whole thing. I don't remember which page it says it, but it does say that MJ will be paying them.
I don't hold the settlement against Michael Jackson, I just prefer that when people talk about it they do so accurately.
Re: 1993 settlement documents
Well, I've read countless times on this site that it was all against his will and he objected. If that's not true, and it sounds like it might not be, I've been posting wrong information on the "recent news coverage" thread, and misleading a lot of people, some of whom are using my information to write to newspapers. That pisses me off. I'm glad you drew my attention to this.
Until I get a clear, documented answer to this, I'm going to go put a caveat on the news thread that I withdraw my comments on this with apologies and don't have the answer.
Well, I've read countless times on this site that it was all against his will and he objected. If that's not true, and it sounds like it might not be, I've been posting wrong information on the "recent news coverage" thread, and misleading a lot of people, some of whom are using my information to write to newspapers. That pisses me off. I'm glad you drew my attention to this.
Until I get a clear, documented answer to this, I'm going to go put a caveat on the news thread that I withdraw my comments on this with apologies and don't have the answer.
Last edited:
KingOfPop1
Proud Member
Re: Recent news reporting on 1993 allegation
Hey all,
I suggest that this offending article is posted in Enough is Enough. You can then organize a letter writing campaign to the editor. We've slayed many dragons by doing just that.
Hey all,
I suggest that this offending article is posted in Enough is Enough. You can then organize a letter writing campaign to the editor. We've slayed many dragons by doing just that.
AnnieRUOkay89
Proud Member
Re: Recent news reporting on 1993 allegation
Ugh, The media continues to disgust me, they're trying to make us seem stupid, and blinded by love. As if we're incapable of researching facts and finding out things ourselves.
Ugh, The media continues to disgust me, they're trying to make us seem stupid, and blinded by love. As if we're incapable of researching facts and finding out things ourselves.
Re: Recent news reporting on 1993 allegation
UPDATE
I've made some comments here about the media being wrong on the insurance settlement. I was following common wisdom routinely posted on this site without correction. It's been brought to my attention that this "wisdom" may be wrong. We're trying to get this sorted out on the "1993 documents" thread I linked to upthread. It remains unclear to me. Until it's more clear, I withdraw all comments I've made on this thread about media errors about whether MJ authorized the insurance settlement. I apologize.
Important -- either way, it does not reflect badly on MJ, to be clear. It was critical he get through the ordeal to be able to do his work.
UPDATE 2
It's also being discussed at I have some questions about the 1993 case .
UPDATE
I've made some comments here about the media being wrong on the insurance settlement. I was following common wisdom routinely posted on this site without correction. It's been brought to my attention that this "wisdom" may be wrong. We're trying to get this sorted out on the "1993 documents" thread I linked to upthread. It remains unclear to me. Until it's more clear, I withdraw all comments I've made on this thread about media errors about whether MJ authorized the insurance settlement. I apologize.
Important -- either way, it does not reflect badly on MJ, to be clear. It was critical he get through the ordeal to be able to do his work.
UPDATE 2
It's also being discussed at I have some questions about the 1993 case .
Last edited: