The Jacksons' relationship with Michael

[InvincibleMJ]

I don't think so, but there is doubt whether the Glenda tapes are real because the way MJ spoke of his family in few occasion, and seemingly Stein family letter are fake too

But what is the purpose of the Glenda tapes discussion in this thread?

 

[Bubs]

^^"Tight-knit my ass" and whether Michael would say something like that of his family. To some it seems to be sore spot as it has caused and argument whether tapes are real or not.

 

[Soundmind]

If MJ ever mentioned his ribs be broken and does not reflect on autopsy there is always the factor people would have to consider that Michael COULD have exaggerated or mis-spoke He could have had bruised ribs for example..

The autopsy did not talk at all about the burns on his scale. Does that mean he did not suffer any or exaggerated his injury? :smilerolleyes:

 

[LastTear]

The autopsy did not talk at all about the burns on his scale. Does that mean he did not suffer any or exaggerated his injury? :smilerolleyes:

Correct me if I'm wrong but haven't some of the family downplayed the burns, LaToyas first book perhaps? Can't check it as I threw it out years ago. Just as Tito has said that Michael didn't get it bad from Joe, in fact he got it the easiest.

ETA To clarify, I believe Michael.

 

[Snow White luvs Peter Pan]

Michael expressed pretty unfavorably of the family in private and particularly of Joe in public, it's not so different of what some of us found out from others sources. To each their own if you want to believe the Glenda tapes are fake. There aren't proves supporting your claim either way.

It's quite frustrating some of his own fans are downplaying the bad things his parents and siblings did to him.

 

[barbee0715]

I don't think so, but there is doubt whether the Glenda tapes are real because the way MJ spoke of his family in few occasion, and seemingly Stein family letter are fake too

I think they were all abused, and all definitely controlled-hence the reason they dropped their dad as a manager and ran off and got married as soon as it was legally possible. (Tito had a real wedding that everyone went to-but he was super young too).

They can downplay it now, or maybe see it differently looking back, but they've all talked about it through the years-all the kids have and so have Katherine and Joseph.

Who's handwriting is that on those letters? Maybe Michael's secretary?

 

[Bubs]

Correct me if I'm wrong but haven't some of the family downplayed the burns, LaToyas first book perhaps? Can't check it as I threw it out years ago. Just as Tito has said that Michael didn't get it bad from Joe, in fact he got it the easiest.

ETA To clarify, I believe Michael.

Do you meant the recent interview with Tito and Jackie?

They were saying they had childhood and how American Dream portrayed Joe is not correct! Funny thing, American Dream was based on KJ's book?
I can understand that other brothers can say they had normal childhood and it wasn't hard for them, but that because when they were with Motown, they only had to sign chorus parts and get out of the studio to play basketball, whereas Michael stayed in the studio doing whole lot of work + he recorded solo songs to Motown too.

They should be thankful that because MJ, they were able to have some sort of free time when they were kids.

 

[HIStory]

Do you meant the recent interview with Tito and Jackie?

They were saying they had childhood and how American Dream portrayed Joe is not correct! Funny thing, American Dream was based on KJ's book?
I can understand that other brothers can say they had normal childhood and it wasn't hard for them, but that because when they were with Motown, they only had to sign chorus parts and get out of the studio to play basketball, whereas Michael stayed in the studio doing whole lot of work + he recorded solo songs to Motown too.

They should be thankful that because MJ, they were able to have some sort of free time when they were kids.

I think the family was flip-flopping on how bad their childhood was. They downplay it but then sometimes some of them do admit to things.

[h=1]Jackson's dad admits whippings[/h]
[h=5][/h]


Drawing a befuddling distinction, Michael Jackson's father tells BBC TV that he never beat his son, but he whipped him.
In the interview with Louis Theroux to be broadcast tomorrow in England, Joe Jackson says: "I whipped him with a switch and a belt. I never beat him. You beat someone with a stick." Michael has consistently accused his father of beating him as a child.

The interview was conducted in a U.S. hotel room and overseen by Majestik Magnificent, who described himself as Michael's personal magician. Pere Jackson says Michael is not crazy and hates being called "***** *****."



Asked about Michael's comments that he's so nervous when he sees his father that he regurgitates, Joe Jackson says, "He regurgitates all the way to the bank."

http://articles.philly.com/2003-11-...363_1_joe-jackson-*****-*****-michael-jackson

 

[LastTear]

Do you meant the recent interview with Tito and Jackie?

They were saying they had childhood and how American Dream portrayed Joe is not correct! Funny thing, American Dream was based on KJ's book?
I can understand that other brothers can say they had normal childhood and it wasn't hard for them, but that because when they were with Motown, they only had to sign chorus parts and get out of the studio to play basketball, whereas Michael stayed in the studio doing whole lot of work + he recorded solo songs to Motown too.

They should be thankful that because MJ, they were able to have some sort of free time when they were kids.

I first read it in a Sunday supplement, it was an interview just with Tito, he also talked about TJ being upset that Michael didn't attend his wedding. I want to say it was not long after Michael passed but that time is such a blur it's hard to say exactly when.

 

[Autumn II]

But what is the purpose of the Glenda tapes discussion in this thread?

The thread is about Michael's relationship with his family, and part of that relationship was influenced by physical and emotional abuse by his father when he was a child. I have NO doubt that he was abused, given that he's written and spoken about it many times on-the-record. The Glenda tapes echo what Michael said about his father's abuse. I have heard the tapes, and personally, think they are genuine -- I haven't seen any credible evidence that they are NOT genuine. And so, they are consistent with other statements about his father.

 

[InvincibleMJ]

The thread is about Michael's relationship with his family, and part of that relationship was influenced by physical and emotional abuse by his father when he was a child. I have NO doubt that he was abused, given that he's written and spoken about it many times on-the-record. The Glenda tapes echo what Michael said about his father's abuse. I have heard the tapes, and personally, think they are genuine -- I haven't seen any credible evidence that they are NOT genuine. And so, they are consistent with other statements about his father.

I agree and I think the tapes are genuine too but I also think we don't have to cling to these tapes when there are so many other sources that prove Michael was abused. So even if some people think the tapes aren't real, what's the point? It's not like it's the only time Michael talked about it.

 

[Autumn II]

I agree and I think the tapes are genuine too but I also think we don't have to cling to these tapes when there are so many other sources that prove Michael was abused. So even if some people think the tapes aren't real, what's the point? It's not like it's the only time Michael talked about it.

Because the tapes are interesting? Especially, the "spotted dick" remark (it was a DESSERT!)

 

[InvincibleMJ]

Because the tapes are interesting? Especially, the "spotted dick" remark (it was a DESSERT!)

by 'clinging to the tapes' I mean on this particular topic not in general :lol: Dessert?

 

[Snow White luvs Peter Pan]

Even when Michael is not the main subject in the book Margaret Maldonado's Jackson gives the reader an idea how the family dynamics was, thinking it's not far fetched at all what Michael told Glenda. I also think Latoya was sincere in her first book (I haven't read the second) at least in the mistreatment Joe gave to the siblings. It's also very telling to me he preferred going with his various adoptive families' or his friends' homes to stay with them over staying with his siblings' houses or his parents.

 

[Tygger]

I get it that you do not believe these tapes to be authentic, moreover you do not even believe the letters presented by Damion Stein authentic. That's your opinion. Others simply see it differently and have a different opinion about it. I guess it's time to agree to disagree.

Respect77, I find it surprising that you would not attempt to seek out the truth yourself regarding these tapes. It is not a matter of opinion if it is Michael’s voice or Michael’s handwriting as it is quite clear it is neither. It is matter of opinion if one is willing to accept these items as authentic and ignore the obvious signs they are not.

As per the folklore of these tapes, fans purchased them and shared the tales with other fans. There is no account of any of those fans authenticating the tapes beforehand. It is not surprising that in all of the years that some fans simply stated these tapes were authentic, not one has ever stated how they were authenticated. Some would state therein lays the agenda.

From the Say, Say, Say thread, it is quite clear that some fans are not able to discern the sound of Michael’s voice in comparison to another who imitates those sounds. There is no shame in that; it is problematic however when fans who can discern Michael’s voice from another are conveniently dismissed in an effort to support the party presenting something clearly fabricated. Putting the voice aside, a simple and brief Google search of Michael’s handwritten notes would confirm Stein letters were not written by Michael and that should be enough to question the Stein family's claims.

For the purpose of this thread it was brought up by Snow White as part of a bigger argument about how Michael felt about his family, his father etc. But even if you refuse to believe in the authenticity of the Glenda tapes there is plenty of evidence - including first count, public accounts by Michael - about the brutality of Joseph. So what purpose does it serve to be in denial about it and act like Joseph is a victim of "myths"?

Recounting personal accounts by Michael is not an acceptable method to authenticate the tapes.

I cannot speak to Snow’s post as I have not read it and I am not part of the discussion. I have always been very clear I do NOT participate in discussion whose only purpose is to express distaste for the Jackson family. I know what I posted in the 3T thread, I know it was transferred to this thread, and I am responding to posts that questioned my post.

What you misunderstood about my statement you bolded in your response is this:

- it is a disservice to Michael that fans will accept these tapes as his truth without any authentication whatsoever and

- it is a disservice to Michael’s father that some fans believe he would be capable of fracturing any child’s rib(s) only because these tapes that were not authenticated stated so.

So in which way then do these tapes show an obsessive relationship between MJ and young boys?

You are mistaken the connections. I repeated the agenda of the documentary which was stated in the documentary's first five minutes. Stein was a part of the documentary because he was one of several male minors who befriended Michael. Stein was not part of the documentary because he had these tapes. It seems Stein or a family member knew these tapes and letters would support their claims. How interesting they were kept hidden from the public until 2005 despite supposedly existing during the Dangerous era.

But what is the purpose of the Glenda tapes discussion in this thread?

One can ask what the purpose of this thread is. Who can truthfully speak on the relationship of Michael and his family members? Fans can only discuss their views on what they heard and what they read as they have not privy to the relationships. I have no issue with such a discussion; I simply do not participate in them for the reason I stated.

To your question, I believe you are aware of members here who quote the Glenda tapes in discussions about Michael’s private life that included his relationship with certain family members. While I do not believe in the authenticity of these tapes or the letters Respect77 posted, others obviously (and unfortunately) do without any proof those tapes/letters are true. I am actually quite shock that some fans relied on these tapes to shape a character of Michael when the tapes were never authenticated. Hopefully some fans will do some research and discover the truth about these tapes (and letters).

The autopsy did not talk at all about the burns on his scale. Does that mean he did not suffer any or exaggerated his injury? :smilerolleyes:

sigh

His autopsy DOES refer to the burn marks on his scalp.

 

[Autumn II]

No, actually the autopsy report makes NO mention of any scars on his scalp. If that's actually an issue, read it again (that's sad and painful, though.) The burns were severe, but the autopsy report didn't mention scarring -- doesn't mean it wasn't real, though.

There is no proof that the Glenda tapes are NOT real, either, but regardless, they are not needed to prove beatings Michael received as a child. His recounting of beatings by his father are on-the-record in his own words/statements in tv interviews (especially, Oprah and Bashir). Was a rib broken? No way to know for sure, but several of his ribs were fractured during CPR, so that might not have shown up on the autopsy anyway. A rib could have re-fractured on the site of an older and healed fracture, and wouldn't have shown up. The POINT is, the childhood beatings were severe enough to have affected Michael as an adult, to the point of him vomiting at the sight of his father. That should be enough proof, for anyone. Sometimes in a family, one child is a primary target for abuse, and that may be what happened to Michael, and other siblings had different experiences? What no one can know for certain is what was in Michael's heart in terms of making peace with his father after a rocky childhood. . . . . .

(edit) I still have the autopsy report in a folder on my desktop (unfortunately. . .) from when I was following the trial, and I remember noting at the time that it was strange there was no mention of a burn scar. Probably covered by his hair, though.

 

[krikzil]

The autopsy did not talk at all about the burns on his scale. Does that mean he did not suffer any or exaggerated his injury? :smilerolleyes:

Exactly. He also had 5 resuscitation rib fractures that could obscure an older fracture. I read autopsy reports daily and they don't always catch everything as their aim is cause of death specifically. They also contain mistakes. My own brother was autopsied at the same facility in the same month as MJ and I found several errors in his report.

He is saying "And he knocked me down so hard, I lost the wind, I lost my wind, right? And I was just little."

Yes. I listened to those tapes and he's not saying "broke".

 

[Tygger]

AutumnII, correct, I re-read the autopsy (unfortunately) and it did not mention the burn scars. No one has ever questioned that event not happening that I am aware of and that event was not a factor in his passing.

As for a past fractured rib(s), I disagree. It would be noticed because several of Michael’s ribs were fractured and the reasoning for that had to be discovered and documented. If I am not mistaken, ribs that are fractured and eventually heal calcify. Even if a rib(s) was fractured again, the calcification of the previous healed fracture would be present.

I cannot discuss your point for the reason I previously stated. My point is some online fans do believe Michael’s rib was fractured by his father only because of these unauthenticated tapes and his autopsy proved that to be incorrect. If some have gone back to listen to the tapes and now believe whoever is speaking (it is not Michael) did not mention a fractured rib, I believe that is grand!

I agree with InvincibleTal that some fans should not cling to these tapes especially since they have not been authenticated.

Do the research; it is worth it. As I said, the easiest thing to do is seek samples of Michael's handwriting and compare to Stein's notes and that is enough to question this families' tales. Michael's voice is clearly on Boteach's tapes. Compare that to Stein's.

I do not believe any fan should blindly accept any tale regarding Michael.

 

[Autumn II]

As for a past fractured rib(s), I disagree. It would be noticed because several of Michael’s ribs were fractured and the reasoning for that had to be discovered and documented. If I am not mistaken, ribs that are fractured and eventually heal calcify. Even if a rib(s) was fractured again, the calcification of the previous healed fracture would be present.

Whether or not he had a fractured and healed rib doesn't disprove that he was severely beaten by his father. We have heard him say that he was -- on taped tv interviews. It was pointed out that FIVE ribs were fractured during CPR, and it's entirely possible that a long-healed fracture broke again, and the original fracture wouldn't be identified. That wasn't the cause of death, and not something they were even looking for, just as they overlooked the burn scar on his scalp.

I cannot discuss your point for the reason I previously stated. My point is some online fans do believe Michael’s rib was fractured by his father only because of these unauthenticated tapes and his autopsy proved that to be incorrect. If some have gone back to listen to the tapes and now believe whoever is speaking (it is not Michael) did not mention a fractured rib, I believe that is grand!

I don't think whether or not the Glenda tapes were real matters, one way or another. What he said on the Bashir (so-called) documentary was enough to form negative opinions of his father's parenting. Not having a childhood was also a form of abuse, and the child labor laws should have helped him. He was just making too much MONEY for anyone to step in and try to give him a more normal life.

Do the research; it is worth it. As I said, the easiest thing to do is seek samples of Michael's handwriting and compare to Stein's notes and that is enough to question this families' tales. Michael's voice is clearly on Boteach's tapes. Compare that to Stein's.

I have no interest in doing this, or particularly care if the Glenda tapes are real, or not real.

I do not believe any fan should blindly accept any tale regarding Michael.

Michael's own words are the primary source of knowledge. He wrote about his father's abuse in his autobiography, and said it on the Oprah interview, and the Bashir interview. I have an opinion that the Glenda tapes are real -- but ONLY an opinion, not actual knowledge one way or another.

 

[Tygger]

Whether or not he had a fractured and healed rib doesn't disprove that he was severely beaten by his father. We have heard him say that he was -- on taped tv interviews. It was pointed out that FIVE ribs were fractured during CPR, and it's entirely possible that a long-healed fracture broke again, and the original fracture wouldn't be identified. That wasn't the cause of death, and not something they were even looking for, just as they overlooked the burn scar on his scalp.

AutumnII, I do not participate in discussions about Michael and his family members here so, I cannot respond to the comments made in your post. The status of the tapes authenticity may not matter to you however; it matters to me and many other fans who do not appreciate Michael’s history being rewritten by others for their own gain; even if those who gain are other fans.

Again, I disagree as I believe a rib that has healed would be calcified and would be noticed in this particular autopsy because the reasoning for Michael’s fractured ribs had to be discovered and documented.

 

[HIStory]

@Tygger

You are free to believe whatever you want to believe about the tapes and the letters. Your beliefs about them do not affect me. Obviously we will not agree about that so like I said, let's agree to disagree and move on. This thread is not about the Glenda tapes' authenticity but about MJ's relationship with his family. The only reason the tapes were brought up because they say certain things about that relationship. But that was only one point among several others in that post by Snow White. But even if you do not accept those tapes as authentic, there are plenty of other platforms where MJ and other family members talked about those relations - yes, including Joseph's brutality. So it's not like the tapes' content is a far cry from the things that we heard from other sources, including Michael's public interviews.

- it is a disservice to Michael’s father that some fans believe he would be capable of fracturing any child’s rib(s) only because these tapes that were not authenticated stated so.

Except the tapes do not state so as it was already shown.

Do you also think it is a "disservice to Michael's father" when Michael publicly said about him that he regurgitated - even as an adult - when he saw him?
Or when Joseph's "empathic" reply to that is "he regurgitates all the way to the bank"? Or when only a couple of days after his son's death Joseph's main concern is to promote his record label in an interview? Those are the things which shape people's opinion of Joseph, not the Glenda tapes, about which only some fans know, the bigger public doesn't. So if I was so concerned about Joseph image as you are I'd be more worried about Joseph's own behaviour in interviews than the Glenda tapes.

You are mistaken the connections. I repeated the agenda of the documentary which was stated in the documentary's first five minutes. Stein was a part of the documentary because he was one of several male minors who befriended Michael. Stein was not part of the documentary because he had these tapes. It seems Stein or a family member knew these tapes and letters would support their claims. How interesting they were kept hidden from the public until 2005 despite supposedly existing during the Dangerous era.

Sam Stein, who probably recorded these tapes, died in the early 2000s (I think in 2004), so that may have to do with why his son chose to sell them in 2004-2005, not before.

I have no idea what Damion's motives were in appearing in that documentary. We know from the Bashir interview that it happens that documentarists with an agenda tell the people one thing about the purpose of the documentary to the people they interview then it turns out to be something completely different, through such things as suggestive narration.

I only wanted to clarify it to people who may come away with the wrong conclusions based on your post that there is NOTHING on these tapes that portrays Michael as a man obsessed with young boys. NOTHING. I felt the need to emphasize that because I felt just reading your post may give the impression to some who are unfamiliar with the content of these tapes that the tapes portray MJ as someone obsessed with young boys. They DO NOT. The tapes content has nothing to do with young boys. If it had then the documentary would have played such parts, not parts where MJ just says things about his family ("tight-knit my ass" etc.).

One can ask what the purpose of this thread is.

Simple. The purpose of this thread is that other threads do not get ruined with this discussion. Because it seems that every time there was a discussion about MJ's family or Janet (eg. the 3T reality show, Janet's new album etc.) complaints and discussions came up about their relationship with Michael and it went off topic. Now this topic is for that discussion alone and I think it is good so because that way the other topics can stay on topic and whoever feels like discussing this relationship can come here and discuss it here. And whoever doesn't feel like discussing it, but only the reality show or Janet's album or whatever, can go in those topics and discuss those things and can ignore this one. It's a good solution IMO.

 

[krikzil]

Whether or not he had a fractured and healed rib doesn't disprove that he was severely beaten by his father. We have heard him say that he was -- on taped tv interviews. It was pointed out that FIVE ribs were fractured during CPR, and it's entirely possible that a long-healed fracture broke again, and the original fracture wouldn't be identified. That wasn't the cause of death, and not something they were even looking for, just as they overlooked the burn scar on his scalp.

Didn't MJ say he broke his foot? Don't remember that being mentioned in the autopsy report.

I don't think whether or not the Glenda tapes were real matters, one way or another. What he said on the Bashir (so-called) documentary was enough to form negative opinions of his father's parenting. Not having a childhood was also a form of abuse, and the child labor laws should have helped him. He was just making too much MONEY for anyone to step in and try to give him a more normal life.

I have no interest in doing this, or particularly care if the Glenda tapes are real, or not real.

Michael's own words are the primary source of knowledge. He wrote about his father's abuse in his autobiography, and said it on the Oprah interview, and the Bashir interview. I have an opinion that the Glenda tapes are real -- but ONLY an opinion, not actual knowledge one way or another.

Yes, his own words are more than enough.

As to the tapes, I too think they are legit. I'm just not clear how the fact some fans misunderstood what he said on the tape, somehow proves the tapes fake but whatever.

 

[InvincibleMJ]

To your question, I believe you are aware of members here who quote the Glenda tapes in discussions about Michael’s private life that included his relationship with certain family members. While I do not believe in the authenticity of these tapes or the letters Respect77 posted, others obviously (and unfortunately) do without any proof those tapes/letters are true. I am actually quite shock that some fans relied on these tapes to shape a character of Michael when the tapes were never authenticated. Hopefully some fans will do some research and discover the truth about these tapes (and letters).

There are many interviews, books and movies made by Michael and the Jacksons out there and I believe people have already formed their own opinions without the tapes. So Tygger let me I ask you this - fake tapes or not, do you acknowledge that Joe physically and emotionally abused Michael and his siblings?

 

[Autumn II]

AutumnII, I do not participate in discussions about Michael and his family members here so, I cannot respond to the comments made in your post. The status of the tapes authenticity may not matter to you however; it matters to me and many other fans who do not appreciate Michael’s history being rewritten by others for their own gain; even if those who gain are other fans.

Again, I disagree as I believe a rib that has healed would be calcified and would be noticed in this particular autopsy because the reasoning for Michael’s fractured ribs had to be discovered and documented.

This section of the board is 2300 Jackson Street and this is the proper thread to be discussing Michael's relationship with his family. Nobody has to do that if they don't want to, of course.

If Michael had a previously fractured rib, then I'm sorry that that happened to him, but the fact that it wasn't found in the autopsy doesn't mean it didn't happen. They also didn't find signs of a previously fractured foot, or burn scarring on his scalp.

My (negative) opinions about Joseph are not based on the Glenda tapes, anyway. What about the Boteach (rabbi) tapes? The child-abuse mentioned on those was truly horrific. So, either Michael had made peace with that aspect of his childhood, or not, and nobody here can know what was in his heart about his father.

 

[Annita]

I think the family was flip-flopping on how bad their childhood was. They downplay it but then sometimes some of them do admit to things.

http://articles.philly.com/2003-11-...363_1_joe-jackson-*****-*****-michael-jackson

Yes they really downplayed it in the last years and now he was the perfekt father. This IV with borthers with Morgan is from 2012 and a few days later Katrhine did the same. Joe, just a perferct husband and father.


MORGAN: Yes, because I can tell you now, I've done an interview with your mother, which is airing on Monday, which is an extraordinary interview.

M. JACKSON: Yes.

MORGAN: She's an extraordinary woman but of the many things she said, which I found extraordinary it was her defense of her husband, your father, which I found one of the most moving. She was like, when you guys grew up, where you grew up, you had a choice as parents. You let your kids run riot, go out on the streets and get into Trouble, and end up maybe getting shot or jailed or whatever it may be, or you got a grip of your children and you disciplined them and you gave them another life.

JA. JACKSON: Gave us chores to do. Yeah.

MORGAN: How do you honestly feel? Do you feel your father went too far on occasion? Or do you now -- now that you are older and you have had kids, some of you yourselves, do you get it?

JA. JACKSON: I get it totally. When you are a kid, sometimes you feel your father has gone too far, because you are a kid. But now when you look back, he's done a wonderful job. Look where we are.

M. JACKSON: I think when you have so many kids in the family. I mean we were -- have -- what was it, 11 of us in the home in Gary, Indiana. So somewhere along the way, you have to have a grip on the family. And he saw something in -- let me rephrase that. I'm going to put it, my mom saw something in her kids that my father did not see, which was they have some type of talent.

After convincing him over a few months that their ids do have talent, and once she did that and convinced them, then it was on for us.

MORGAN: When you say that -- as you sit here now, you're all in your late 50s, 60 in one -- you are the oldest right?

JA. JACKSON: I'm the oldest.

MORGAN: You are weathering well. How old are you, 60, 61?

JA. JACKSON: Sixty one.

MORGAN: All of you. Give me all your ages, come on.

T. JACKSON: 58.

M. JACKSON: Fifty five.

JE. JACKSON: Fifty seven.

MORGAN: You are all -- I've got to say, guys, you are aging well, like a fine bottle of Chattletour (ph). You get -- exactly. Exactly what I'm thinking. Again, I come back to your upbringing, because we can come to what happened next a little later. But do you think that -- when you see your father now, because he's such an extraordinary iconic figure I think in American entertainment.

He's the guy who has always had the mean tough guy reputation. Brutalizing his children, driving them to fame and fortune. The more I talk to people around your family, the less I feel that. The more I feel like he just wanted you guys to come out of life well.

JE. JACKSON: He got behind us. He supported us.

MORGAN: How do you get along with him now?

JE. JACKSON: Very well.

M. JACKSON: He kept us busy. He used to work two jobs. When he was away, we had cylinder blocks in our backyard. He made us move them -- I mean, we had hundreds of them. We had to move them from one side of the yard to the other side. That took all day.

After you get older and you realize what he was doing, just keeping you out of the streets.

MORGAN: What are the values he instilled in you, do you think?

(CROSS TALK)

JE. JACKSON: Respect other people.

M. JACKSON: Respect other people is the main one.

JE. JACKSON: Be honest and doing what you're told to do exactly how you're told to do it. And just be -- just the discipline.

MORGAN: Your mother said to me -- again, this is not airing until Monday, so it's slightly in reverse. But I think it's relevant. She said to me that she despairs in modern America in terms of parental control of children. That now you can't do anything to discipline your kids without sometimes kids ringing up and complaining about their own parents.

She said unfairly. Obviously sometimes there is fairly. And there is abuse out there and so on. But she felt strongly that there isn't enough discipline.

M. JACKSON: I don't think kids today respect adults the way they did when we were coming up as kids. I think that's important. I see kids today, they don't step aside and let their older -- elderly go in front of them or pass them, open doors for them.

They have no sense of that. That comes from in our house. Your parents instilling values and things of that nature in the kids. It's not happening, because sometimes the parents are too busy trying to be kids themselves.


http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1205/10/pmt.01.html

 

[Bubs]

They are flip flopping in every interview. Same went with granny-napping. Marlon cries on telly that he doesn't know where is KJ and is going to get bottom of it, and a week later, Marlon+ other brothers were in UK giving interview and said "it was all kids messing around". Yeah, these seniors put the whole blame on kids - classy.

 

[Snow White luvs Peter Pan]

Indeed Tal, most of the the fans discovered the tapes after Michael left us and already had an idea how dysfunctional and abusive the family was towards Michael mainly thanks to the man himself. The Moonwalk book, (he even regreted he was way too honest and revealed a lot of the family dynamics that he didn't want it to be published but he changed his mind in the last minute and allowed it to come out) Latoya's book, The Jacksons An American Dream (according to wiki, based on Katherine's first biography) and his interviews to Oprah and Bashir and I've always believed Michael.

So, if you want to ignore and turn a blind eye over the physical and psychological abuse Joseph inflicted on Michael, how most of his immidate family member took advantage of him most of his life and continue to do so in his death, it's your choice Tygger. It's already tiring and frustrating you give the impression that you don't believe him.

To add, also the Things I Do For You lyrics are an excellent account how he felt used and abused in his early 20s.

Always wanting something for nothing
Especially what they don't deserve
Reaching in my pocket
I just got to stop it​

Even though they got a lot of nerve​

 

[TinnyandOdd]

I do not participate in discussions about Michael and his family members here.

Thread Title: "The Jackson's Relationship with Michael."

 

[Autumn II]

Loving Michael doesn't automatically mean supporting his family, especially since Michael has said, many times and on-the-record, how abusive his childhood really was. There is strict parenting, and there is abuse. I see little or no doubt that this was abuse. One either believes Michael, or one does not (and that has NOTHING to do with the Glenda tapes and whether or not they were authentic). I DO believe him. Because Michael was such a money-maker, even as a child, he was sacrificial to the greater cause of family wealth. The pain of a lost childhood was something he talked about and wrote music about, throughout his adult life. NOBODY was looking out for him. Nobody, at all.

What I see continuing to happen here is PR spin on the part of the family, for the sake of marketing themselves to gain wealth, as possible, and even to survive financially. To do this, the sanitized American Dream becomes an altered reality, for the sake of financial gain. This was an obvious strategy, beginning almost immediately after Michael died. Especially Jermaine, who was literally everywhere on tv with his "product," which was the entire Jackson family as a loving unit that was very close to Michael and worthy of Michael's fans' support. But, they weren't "close to Michael". . . . . I find Jermaine's statement, "I was Michael's backbone," to be particularly offensive. This was a clear and obvious attempt to scoop up Michael's fans and claim them for himself. That did not happen. The compassion that nearly everyone felt at the family's bereavement quickly faded, due to their own actions. The ill-fated Tribute show and inclusion of Kiss. The Howard Mann contact attempting to bind Michael's children to a lifetime of servitude. Joe on tv marketing his Michael-related products, and using Michael's children to hawk those products. Then there was the Taser incident and DCS's involvement in investigating the family setting for Michael's children. There was Katherine's refusal to go for reparations following Murray's conviction. Reparations would have prevented Murray from EVER profiting from the crime. The DA, Walgren, seemed SHOCKED (and rightly so) that the family didn't seek the reparations that were due to them. The reason they did not? Murray had no MONEY, and there was nothing financial to gain. They thought their "reparations" would come from a civil suit against AEG? That did not happen, and they got nothing at all, and did not bring Murray to the justice he deserved. I find that deplorable. There was the children's unsupervised use of social media, which actually presented some risk to them. There was the granny napping, that terrified the children in their not knowing where there guardian was, and being unable to reach her. And more, and more.

What is troubling is what will happen in this family when Katherine passes! She is the only conduit now for Michael's money to the rest of them, and that potential conduit will transfer to his children. I'm sure they are being groomed to feel that obligation. That is a pressure that these children do not deserve, and I see no way around it. . . . .

 

[Tygger]

Respect77, I maintain the tapes are not authentic because it is NOT Michael’s voice. I maintain the letters you posted are not authentic because it is NOT Michael’s handwriting. If you or anyone would like to prove me incorrect, I encourage you to. I have even made suggestions on how to do so: compare Michael’s voice on Shmuley’s tapes to Stein’s and compare any handwritten note by Michael through a simple and brief Google search to Stein’s letters. The laziest action would be to simply compare Michael’s signature on Stein’s autograph picture you posted to Michael’s signature on Stein’s letters. No one can truthfully say those signatures are a match. I know such tasks will not be discussed publicly because I know what the results are with confidence.

It is quite obvious that despite these tapes being fabricated without anyone being able to authenticate them in the years they have been circulated - quite narrowly through online fan forums - there are those who choose to believe in them. Those who choose to believe in Steins’ tapes and letters that have been quite easily debunked but extremely difficult to prove authenticity have very difficult questions to ask themselves. Those personal answers are difficult to come to terms with so it is very understandable why some prefer to publicly support the fabrication by the Stein family. Personal feelings have and can outweigh any disservice to Michael and his truth; happens every day.

I already stated to you how I arrived at this thread and it was not Snow’s post. I also stated I do not participate in discussions whose only intent is to express distaste for the Jackson family. Again, if my comments caused several to question and – quite clearly - distance themselves from the authenticity of these tapes and those letters you posted as you are and have done with each of your responses to me, then it is a proud moment for what is Michael’s truth against the fabrications of another for their own gain.

Remember, many online fans DID believe Michael’s rib was fractured by Joseph because of these tapes and the transcriptions that accompany them. Some here had to review that section of the tapes to realize the audio does not match the transcription for that section because my statement that his rib could not have previously fractured by Joseph due to his autopsy. Result: one fabricated fan folklore tale based on these fabricated tapes has been proven incorrect! While some myths take time and effort to be debunked, they all are eventually debunked. Truth always comes to light; sometimes through indirect methods.

I only wanted to clarify it to people who may come away with the wrong conclusions based on your post that there is NOTHING on these tapes that portrays Michael as a man obsessed with young boys. NOTHING. I felt the need to emphasize that because I felt just reading your post may give the impression to some who are unfamiliar with the content of these tapes that the tapes portray MJ as someone obsessed with young boys. They DO NOT. The tapes content has nothing to do with young boys. If it had then the documentary would have played such parts, not parts where MJ just says things about his family ("tight-knit my ass" etc.).

You were incorrect about the agenda of this tasteless documentary and I corrected that. Unfortunately, you continue to be incorrect about Stein's connection to the documentary. My section of the post you requoted corrected the leap you took about the tapes and the agenda of the documentary. I will repost it below so no one is confused by your continued confusion about the connection of Stein to the documentary and how he used the tapes to support his claims that Michael had a friendship for a duration of time with the Stein family.

Stein was a part of the documentary because he was one of several male minors who befriended Michael. Stein was not part of the documentary because he had these tapes. It seems Stein or a family member knew these tapes and letters would support their claims.

Simple. The purpose of this thread is that other threads do not get ruined with this discussion. Because it seems that every time there was a discussion about MJ's family or Janet (eg. the 3T reality show, Janet's new album etc.) complaints and discussions came up about their relationship with Michael and it went off topic.

Indeed such derailing comments ruined discussions. I agree those views should be contained here. Hopefully those derailments can continue to be contained here.

Krizkil, AutumnII, foot injuries and scalp burns were not mentioned in these tapes. A fractured rib was mentioned as per the transcription and what many online fans thought they heard on these tapes. The fact that it is not Michael’s voice (and not Michael’s handwritten on the letters) is the telltale signs these tapes are not authentic. It is Michael’s voice on the Shmuley tapes and his words in the resulting book. Michael’s views there are not quoted quite as often as the comments made in these fabricated tapes that cannot accurately be attributed to Michael.

So, if you want to ignore and turn a blind eye over the physical and psychological abuse Joseph inflicted on Michael, how most of his immidate family member took advantage of him most of his life and continue to do so in his death, it's your choice Tygger. It's already tiring and frustrating you give the impression that you don't believe him.

Snow, as I already stated and am now stating again in response to InvincibleTal’s question: I will not participate in this discussion here. I do not participate in discussion whose only purpose is to express distaste for the Jacksons. I am not the only member here who refrains from such discussions; the majority do. It is foolish that you prefer to assume my views and beliefs and attribute them to me only because I have not and will not state them.

Thread Title: "The Jackson's Relationship with Michael."

You clearly missed what my posts have referred to. No worries; the unauthentic tape discussion resulting from my post that was transferred to this thread has served its purpose and run its course.