I used to think he did it. Molest kids, I mean. You know the saying on smoke and fire, and where the former is?
But then a Jackson fan told me that one of the 2 accusing boys now admits to lying. It sounded like a hoax story, so I looked it up. It was a hoax- a factually incorrect little piece that even gets the names of Jordan and his father wrong, and has only old photos of him, claimed that Jordan Chandler recently admitted his father made him lie about Jackson. That hoax tale was, rightfully, not carried by any major media source.
But those same articles I googled to see if it’s a hoax, also contained other facts. Facts that made me look deeper:
Two boys, both 13 at the time, accused Michael Jackson of molestation. Jordan Chandler did so in 1993, and Gavin Arvizo in 2003.
Jordan Chandler
Jordan‘s mother allowed him to share a bed with Michael, at both Jacko’s place and hers. She never believed he would molest her child. Jordy only accused Jackson after moving in with his divorced father. The father allegedly came to Michael for money to fund a film project. After Michael refused, he accused Michael for allegedly abusing his son. The father, Evan, on a tape recording, was heard to say:
“If I go through with this, I win big-time. There’s no way I lose. I will get everything I want and they will be destroyed forever…Michael’s career will be over”.
In the same recording, he was asked how this will affect his son. He answered
“That’s irrelevant to me…It will be a massacre if I don’t get what I want. It’s going to be bigger than all us put together…This man [Jackson] is going to be humiliated beyond belief…He will not sell one more record”.
But was Evan Chandler selfishly using molestation that did happen as a way to blackmail his son’s molester, or were they making it up? His son started making the allegations after his father, a dentist, gave him sodium amytal. Admissions made under the influence of the drug is highly controversial. Still , a significant anti-Jackson fact is that the boy described MJ’s buttocks and pubic area, and, according to the prosecution, it matched photos they took in their investigation:
With Los Angeles Police Department detectives weighing his claims, Chandler gave them a roadmap to Jackson’s below-the-waist geography, which, he said, includes distinctive “splotches” on his buttocks and one on his penis, “which is a light color similar to the color of his face.” The boy’s information was so precise, he even pinpointed where the splotch fell while Jackson’s penis was erect, the length of the performer’s pubic hair, and that he was circumcised.
It wasn’t long after law enforcement’s photo session that Jackson agreed to settle Chandler’s civil claim for north of $20 million.
In a recent sealed affidavit, Tom Sneddon is quoted as saying that Chandler’s pre-search description (and a drawing) “corroborated” photos taken of Jackson and observations made by officers who examined the body of evidence.
Jacko chose to settle out of court with the family, for an amount reported as between $15 million and $22 million. The criminal case against Michael for allegedly molesting Jordan was dropped after that, since the young accuser refused to continue with criminal proceedings. The settlement contract spelled out that charges against Michael (called “the Action” in the document) had to be dropped after the pay-out. Jordan broke contact with his mother in 1994, and later got a court order against his father Evan for hitting him with a heavy object, macing him and choking him .
Gavin Arvizo
The second case is even more suspect. I’ll start with a story from years before the Jackson allegations: Young Gavin Arvizo, who later accused Jacko of molesting him, stole clothing from a JC Penney store in 1998. The security guards got involved in a scuffle with the family, and the mother claimed the guards assaulted her. (This article claims differently) JC Penney chose to settle, rather than drag a high-profile case to court. Michael’s lawyers used this evidence later, among others, to show the mother’s willingness to extort money.
People first got suspicious of the friendship between Jackson and Gavin Arvizo about at the time when Jackson admitted, in a BBC documentary on its “20/20” program, that he has shared his bed with children who were not related to him. Explained Jackson: “When you say bed, you’re thinking sexual. It’s not sexual, we’re going to sleep. I tuck them in It’s very charming. It’s very sweet.” He was holding Gavin Arvizo’s hand in said documentary, with the boy resting his head on Jackson’s shoulder. The suspicions were reported, but the boy denied allegations of abuse to an experienced social worker. (It is unclear if the later-alleged incidents was claimed to happen before or after the denial.) The Department of Child and Family Services did not suspect MJ of sexual abuse. Nor did they suspect the mother of neglect as also claimed by the informant.
The molestation allegations came out some months later, after the mother, Janet, contacted the same lawyer who helped in the Jordan Chandler case. The lawyer had a psychologist interview Gavin and his brother. The brother told how he saw Michael fondling Gavin, and Gavin himself testified to two occasions of alleged sexual abuse. They claimed that Michael made Gavin, a cancer survivor with his spleen and a kidney removed, drunk to facilitate the abuse. The psychologist believed them, but others witnessed that the boys’ mother taught them to lie when it would benefit them.
Several people witnessed that the Arvizo’s previously used the boy’s cancer to grift money from well-known people.(See here for one example.) George Lopez and others testified how the Arvizo’s cheated and lied to get what they want, and others told how the children were taught to lie. Gavin’s mother was found guilty of cheating on welfare some years before. Neverland employees (whom, it should be admitted, has a simple practical reason to lie on Michael’s behalf) testified that Gavin Arvizo and his brother was “out-of-control youngsters” who roamed Neverland stealing wine and getting drunk . In the week the mother and sons was allegedly kept prisoners at Jackson’s Neverland Ranch, the mother ran up $7 K in shopping bills. Her captivity story was obviously untrue.
On the other hand, the alleged victim testified that Michael would give him clean briefs to put on after each sexual encounter. Boys briefs like the alleged victim wore was found in Jackson’s home.
Gavin and his brother, among other stories, told that Jackson showed them nude photos prior to starting to molest Gavin, and they saw pornography in his room. The police investigation did reveal that there were loads of pornography and books of nude photos all over Neverland , mostly not locked away, and his young guests most certainly would have had access to them.
Gavin and his brother contradicted themselves in the trail. Their mother was obviously dishonest. Macauley Culkin gave a glowing testimony , claiming that he often slept in Michael’s bed as a child, but there was no molestation. In the end, the jury had no choice but to find Jackson innocent on all charges. (Found “innocent” really only means that it is impossible to find someone guilty beyond reasonable doubt, but in this case there is good reason to believe the Arvizo family was dishonest.)
Conclusion
There is some change that the first, and a very good chance that the second, Michael Jackson molestation allegation was fake, both made up to extort money from the singer. Aphrodite Jones’ book “The Michael Jackson Conspiracy” apparently gives a very believable account of the second trail, by a journalist who started out believing he is guilty, but was convinced otherwise by the court evidence.) Yet I still dislike Michael. I find his strange relationships with children, motivated so much by his own needs and not theirs, unjustifiable.
13-year old boys do not need to sleep in bed with adult males. His habit of taking boys to bed was clearly motivated by his own needs- even if those were emotional and not sexual needs. He definitely left loads of pornography and nude photo books where his young guests could easily find them. A heavy drinker and prescription drug user himself, he apparently left alcohol within their reach too. And a “friendship” in which his little friend can even describe the splotch on his penis is highly suspicious, regardless of the terms you try to coax it in.
His own children were purposefully kept away from their mothers. Children need mothers, but he was apparently not concerned with their needs. Right now, his kids lost, for all practical purposes, the only parent they knew. And it could have been different. They could have still had motherly support in their lives now.
——
My second post on the topic is here: http://christianrethinker.wordpress.com/2009/08/31/michael-jackson-not-a-pedophile-the-most-misleading-statement-made-by-michael-jackson-fans/
Om te probeer verstaan 