legends are worth more dead than alive... it also not all about gains.... it can also be about what certain people would have lost if mike was still around, financially speaking here. and how much more money they would make... it doesn't have to be now but as years passed that they wouldn't have made if mike was still here.
I just don't understand the way you think and you thought IU was made of tacky glue. last time i check people even kill people just because they don't like the person.... not to mention if money was involved.
your reasons are all pretty much based on your own opinion which are not all that factual.... logical? maybe so in some level that i can not relate to based on my own personal life experiences.
Where did I put my own opinions? Most of the things I put down are facts of the situation mix with common sense.
Concerts promoters or record companies don't just go away killing stars just cause they are worth more dead in the long run. If that was the case, there would be alot more dead musicians than just Michael. Michael was also about to do a big concert. If they really murder him because his records would skyrocket, then why didn't they kill him after he did the concerts? Even if he dropped dead on stage, they would had made far more money that way. Especially with "Michael Jackson's Final Concert", instead of just rehearsals.
Also, everyone made money around Michael. The city of London would had mad money, Sony would had money, his family would get money because those J5 albums would had went up, everyone who worked around Michael would had been paid, but they are now fire and looking for a new line of work. So, who gained anything short or long run? Even Brance would had made more money off a living Michael since he was working for him again before he died.
On your point that they kill Michael because they were mad at him, lets think about that for a second. They somehow knew Murray was going to be hire to be Michael's doctor. He then poison him with a drug that Michael couldn't possibly take himself. He tries to leave evidences that he OD himself on another drug by leaving pill bottles everywhere, but no pills are found in his stomach. So even if the drug that was name didn't kill him, Murray is still at fault because he gave him the contributor drug. Not to mention Murray admitted himself to given all these drugs and leaving the damn room. If he was hire to kill Michael, why would he do it in such a stupid way that leaves his hand in the cookie jar? And why is he acting like a deer in the headlights if this was all plan? And why did he changed his story several times if he knew he was going to kill someone? And why did he make phone calls of all things that could be track because he used a cell phone? Not to mention his disappearing act he did after Michael was announce dead. So, for a well thought out master plan to kill the biggest star in the world, Murray made some huge mistakes that boarders on stupidity.
If he was set up let some people like to push and Murray is too scare to talk, then tell me who went upstairs? Michael's house was surrounded by fans and cameramen nearly 24/7, so it is not like some random car can just drive in, even if the supposedly took the security tapes. They also somehow knew Michael would be knocked out and on a drug that can be fatal. How would they gain that kind of information exactly? I doubt Michael and Murray told many people about this. And, how would they know Murray was going to leave the room in such or such of time on this day? Also, no one except Murray, Michael, and his kids were allowed upstairs. So unless all the body guards in the house were in on the plot, no one could go upstairs if they were not one of the people above and not get notice. I also find it hard to believe that Murray would remind silent about being frame since he threw everyone under the bus to save himself. Not to mention all the lies he told which is odd for someone who is being frame. The whole "Michael was killed for vengeance theory" would work better if Michael was gun down by so loony.
Finally, the reason why I said the IU is made out of tacky glue is because alot of their speculation are base on no facts. Most are news articles are from July when Michael's death was still a mystery and people thought he was a druggie and some people are named as suspects for murder mostly because certain members don't like them or see them as shady with no real facts to back these claims. They also take people quotes out of context to fit their ideas and believe anyone who supports their theories. Even if that person has a proven record of lying. I have seen some members use the National Enquirer as a valid research material. If they took the stuff from the IU to court or the LAPD, it would be thrown out. If they wrote a research paper for college using their 'facts', that sucker would get a F without question.
To be blunt, the material on the IU is constructed in a similar manner as Sneddon's conspiracy charge. Mainly, it is a bunch of facts and speculation blended together to make a point about someone's suppose guilt, but it is full of holes. Sneddon's case against Michael boiled down to "he is weird, he sleeps with kids, so he much be a pedo." The IU is line of thinking is "we don't like these people, they are shady, so they much be murders." Which is why I said common sense flew away on that forum.
PS: Spreading the truth about something does not equal research. Mez does the samething when he talks to the media and so does other people who know Michael. So what fans are doing is not super special. If you know the facts about something, you are suppose to spread it, so I don't see it as making someone extra special by doing the decent thing.
Also, I think it is kind of arrogant to say you are a fan because you did this and that for the case. Not everyone has 10 to 12 hours to spend following a man they don't even know. If you want to do it, then more power to you, but don't look down you nose at others because they didn't do the same.
