Today on Blogcritics
Home » Books » Michael Jackson Trial: Hell Hath No Fury Like a Publicist Scorned

Michael Jackson Trial: Hell Hath No Fury Like a Publicist Scorned

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Originally, Michael Jackson: The Man Behind the Mask, An Insider’s Story of the King of Pop, by 30-year Jackson PR man Bob Jones (who was fired unceremoniously last year by Michael’s brother Rand) and journalist Stacy Brown, was scheduled to be published in April.

It now appears that the King of Pop&#8212a sobriquet Jones himself concocted&#8212can thank his lucky stars for the publication delay. According to Fox News’s Roger Friedman, who has spent much of the trial belittling the charges against Jackson, the Jones book will be a devastating blow to Jacko and those who hold out for his “childlike innocence.”

“Michael had a sinister gift for identifying these boys; it was as if he had some sort of radar. I was continually amazed by how he could determine which of the many children he came into contact with might be ‘woo-able,’ whose parents could be bought off and counted on to keep quiet about what was going on. I came to understand that Michael manipulated people and events with a great deal of finesse,” Friedman quotes the book, which also “details Jackson’s trips abroad in the late ’80s and early ’90s, before the famous Chandler family settlement, with boys who were essentially his dates.”

More: “One kid [name changed], with whom Michael managed to carry on a clandestine relationship for years… Michael and [the boy] spent nearly all of their time together.”

Another boy described is Brett Barnes, who denied any wrongdoing by Jackson in the trial. “All of us, including the State Department official and Jet magazine Publisher Bob Johnson, saw the boy enter Michael’s private bedroom numerous times and remain for a long time. Characteristically, Michael did whatever he wanted to — hang the risk.”

Friedman also writes, “while Jones’ book may be discounted by Jackson’s current PR people as the work of a disgruntled employee, I got this reaction today from an insider who took a look at Jones’ copy: ‘He’s telling the truth,’ my source said, shaking their head.”

The distributor, Midpoint Trade, describes the book thusly: “‘Michael Jackson: The Man behind the Mask’ is the INSIDE STORY of the truth behind the rumors, ugliness and mystery surrounding Michael Jackson.

“Is Jackson just a confused person who got too much fame too soon or is he a cold and calculating villain who will stop at nothing to have his bizarre appetites satisfied? Now you can read about it for the first time from the man who knows everything!

“The author, Bob Jones, is not a journalist conducting interviews but somebody who has known and been with Jackson for 34 years as his chief of Public Relations; by his side since Michael was 11 years old. Bob Jones is the one person with this unique inside view of Michael Jackson’s world. To a certain degree, Bob Jones CREATED Michael Jackson. He created his image. For example, Bob Jones created Michael Jackson’s famous nickname ‘The King of Pop.’

“This book is explosive and will make any other book about Michael Jackson instantly forgotten. You won’t find this inside information anywhere else.”

Incidentally, both Jones and Brown testified for the prosecution in the trial.

Powered by

About Eric Olsen

  • Spencer

    Man, not being a fan myself I am growing more and more tired of ppl using this man’s name to make money… They should really get a job and earn their moeny decently

  • reeya

    If this guy knew oh so much, for so many years, and has evidence that prooves MJ molested these kids then why didn’t he go to the authorities from the start? I think all these people, adults – who claim to have witnessed MJ commiting crimes should take responsibility too. I don’t buy a word of his crap -America is a sick society who read too much into an innocent action.

  • Eric Olsen

    or it’s a nation willing to look the other way while the rich, famous and powerful get away with, if not murder, then certainly actions we mere mortals would not get away with

  • pex

    Sick liers.
    “The king of Pop” title comes from Elisabet Tyler.

  • Eric Olsen

    Does Taylor claim this?

  • Peter

    In fact, he isn’t telling anything new, just adding a “sinister” here and a “bizarre” there. We already knew that Jackson prefers to socialize with youngsters. Everything else is interpretation, exaggeration and innuendo by Jones.

  • P

    The ‘King Of Pop’ title came from Elizabeth Taylor. And why if this man is telling the truth, did he feel guilty and say that Michael DID NOT lick the boy on the head at the trial??? It wasn’t until he was confronted with an email that he agreed to it. This book, and all the nonsense inside it, were created to make money off MJ, that’s it. Only a gullible idiot would believe it.

  • Peter

    I feel Jackson is so charismatic that when he cuts ties with people they feel betrayed and get to actually hate him. They do anything to gain his attention again even if it is smearing his name…. Something in this line has happened to Friedman. He flips from pro-Jackson to anti-jackson in an abvious attempt to socialize with him.

  • Peter

    BTW, it was Jones who admitted on the stand that he would embellish things for the book just to make more money with it…. I am sure that someone has the transcripts here.

  • Wes

    so the question is then, why did he remain silent for all those years fully aware of criminal behavior potentially going on? by standing by and doing nothing was he not enabling his own allegations to take place? ex-employees writing slanderous stories about michael jackson after getting cut from the payroll is nothing new if you’ve followed jackson’s life. and nothing about this is any different, no matter how long jones has known jackson. in fact, the longer he knew him, the closer he was, the more chances he had to stop him from doing what he now alleges or to report it to authorities. and it’d be easier to take any allegation seriously if every time someone made one they didn’t go running to a publisher or tabloid to sell those allegations to the highest bidder. are any of these “heroes” brave enough to tell the truth when the crime allegedly takes place and not try to seek some kind of profit it from it? doesn’t appear so thus far

  • Jose

    “or it’s a nation willing to look the other way while the rich, famous and powerful get away with, if not murder, then certainly actions we mere mortals would not get away with”

    I don’t think you are right here, Jose. I have followed the trial closely and truth is the accusations don’t make sense, the timeline of the alleged molestation is more than absurd, it is almost imposssible, and the family is highly dubious.

    What you may not be considering is that if he wasn’t michael jackson and there wasn’t the possibility to win millions with them, these allegations probably wouldn’t have been made in the first place.

  • Nick

    I am glad to see that, unlike Eric, a few people here have enough common sense not to give too much credit to the latest dodgy story published by one of the prosecution’s dodgy witnesses !

    As Mesereau pointed out during the trial “When Jones had financial trouble, there was head licking and as soon as he did not have any financial trouble anymore, the head-licking disappeared”.

  • Eric Olsen

    good points all: clearly all who saw these things and didn’t report them didn’t want to be cut out of the action, but this certainly calls into question their reliability after the fact.

    I don’t know what the book says beyond the quotes, so I don’t see how it can be judged in advance either way. Dismissing the book out of hand because Jones is a former employee is no more logical than dismissing the molestation charges made by Gavin Arviso just because his mother is a con artist and liar: they both can be true.

    My main point was that Friedman, who has been in MJ’s corner for most of the trial, now suddenly sits up and takes notice about this particular book – why?

  • Nick

    Because he does not want to be cornered as a Jackson supporter. He is like politicians : He tries to get attention from a broad clientele !

  • Peter

    “is no more logical than dismissing the molestation charges made by Gavin Arviso just because his mother is a con artist and liar: they both can be true.”

    You are purposedly avoiding to mention the facts that the timeline doesn’t make sense and that not only the mother but the three siblings have been caught lying on the stand repeatedly and have admitted lying in previous legal proceedings.

  • jarboy

    Jose wrote: I don’t think you are right here, Jose. (#11)

    What’s up, bro, you having an argument wit your own damn self?

  • Eric Olsen

    I was a bit perplexed by that myself

  • td

    The way I look at it, his motivation for writing the book is the same movtivation for not saying anything.

    Money.

    He doesn’t care about the kids, all he cares about is the money. That’s why he turned a blind eye when he was with MJ, and MJ was no doubt paying him a nice six figure salary. Now that he’s been fired, he’s willing to tell his story to make more money.

    Of course, he might embelish his story to sell a few more books, but if he tells lies that can be proven untrue then he CAN be sued.

    And this is why I don’t buy all the BS about the people who testified against MJ. What is their motivation for lying? The only explanation for most would be spite over being fired. Other than the family, and a few high profile people like this guy, most are not going to write books. And at most they might get a few thousand from tabloids. In exchange they are risking being charged with contempt and going to jail. I honestly don’t see the motivation.

    So basically, you are left with Gavin’s word vs. MJ’s word. And the fact is, either could be lying. Gavin might lie because he want’s the money. And MJ might be lying because he doesn’t want to be caught for molesting kids.

    Except only Gavin had the balls to take the stand and face the scrutiny of lawyers. So even if the testimony of a 15 year old was not perfect, it was still better than MJ’s lack of testimony.

    If MJ isn’t lying, and he’s completely innocent as he protests, then why didn’t he take the stand? What does he have to hide?

  • Eric Olsen

    pretty good analysis, although it is very common for defendants to not take the stand, and in this case it was entirely predictable since Jackson is so unpredictable. I’m sure Mesereau had visions of the legal equivalent of the “baby dangle” dancing in his head every time he considered putting MJ on the stand.

  • http://blogcritics.org/author.php?author=Cerulean Cerulean

    Eric, it’s not ok to print the last name of a child molestation victim. If a child close to you got molested, I’m sure you’d appreciate that there are laws and customs in place to protect victims of sex crimes.

    If this guy saw all of this I wish that he would have gone to the authorities and also quit. There’s a surprising number of people who will just keep working in an environment where children are being molested. They are missing some pieces for sure.

  • Eric Olsen

    Cerulean, there are no laws about printing the names, just custom. The names are all over the media outside the U.S., are used in open court, are used by some U.S. media, are all over the Internet of course, AND the boy appeared and was named in “Living With Michael Jackson,” which a few-hundred million people saw across the earth.

    So, I don’t use the names willy nilly, but I don’t pretend I don’t know them either.

    My final decision is based upon the names being used openly in court – if they weren’t used in open court I wouldn’t print them.

  • http://www.abm-enterprises.net/wallpaper.html Vicky

    It seems like Jackson surrounded himself with people who could be bought, including Jones.

    The most conclusive evidence is that of the earlier victim who testified, whose mother was Jackson’s maid. That, and common sense. It’s not just that Jackson slept with little boys. It’s that he didn’t sleep with anybody else. As prosecutor Zonen said in his closing argument, “We’re being asked to believe that Jackson is non-sexual.”

  • Eric Olsen

    excellent last point Vicky

  • michele

    While I’m disheartened that so many who witnessed Jackson’s behavior with boys never intervened, as long as they were making a good living, I still believe where there’s a lot of smoke, there’s a big fire.

    The one credible person in the mix with Bob Jones is Stacy Brown, who is quite responsible, and seems to be very credible. While he still is sympathetic to Michael and his family, he also seems to verify Jones’s accounts, and helped with the collaboration in this book.

    I don’t blame people for not wanting to believe Michael is doing these things, but, not everyone is lying. He’s never had a normal adult relationship, and that would be okay if he really were a child-man, and truly innocent soul. But, a christ-like man, who was that pure, wouldn’t be drowning in pornography of every ilk. That, alone, breaks the spell, and takes the mask of purity away for me. I had believed Michael was innocent of the 93 allegations, and continued to think he was wrongfully accused, but, the revelation of his prolific porn collection has dispelled these myths.

    We may be witnessing one of the most corrupt individuals alive, and I don’t think this trial scratched the surface of his depravity. I think he has slavish devotees and a nearly cult-like obedient following of those who would virtually kill for him. I think there are many other boys who were terrified of him, and their families would not offer their children back to Michael, even in pursuit of justice, because, they would never be free of him.

    No matter what the outcome of this trial, the boy in question, will never be free. That’s who this book should be dedicated to. The real victims. When we saw Michael turn into a monster in “Thriller” it is chilling to realize he was prophesising his evolution into a beast. I think he is demonic and evil. I hope he is stopped.

    Even though Bob Jones has financial motives, his contribution to finally putting an end to Michael Jackson’s evil empire, is well worth the price to read what he has to say. I will definitely buy his book.

  • Joe

    While I’m disheartened that so many who witnessed Jackson’s behavior with boys never intervened, as long as they were making a good living, I still believe where there’s a lot of smoke, there’s a big fire.

    ==========================

    Not always, especially when the ‘smoke’ is predicated on callous innuendos. This trial is all about conjecture. It has not proven that Michael Jackson is a molestor; neither has it shown that he is not one. It is as if things are back to square one. The man has an interest in children but is it all innocent? We may never know.

    What the prosecution have tried to do -without DNA evidence- is to try and paint Michael Jackson as a calculating and piranhic paedophile. However, there is a problem with this. If he were as calculating and piranhic as they want us to believe, then he would have had more victims by now. Not only that, there was a hotline set up by Sneddon last year or so (I do not know if people remember that) and nobody came forward, not one kid. All we had in the court were the ‘usual suspects’. Disgruntled employees, thieves and gold-diggers. That is all.

    Nonetheless, we heard from Jason though. Who could forget him? This is a guy who did not know he was molested until 1993 when the Jordy Chandler issue arose. This was a kid who said he was being over-tickled. Since when was tickling illegal? Who witnessed the tickling? Did he report the tickling to anyone? There are so many questions this case has not answered.

    Star Arvizo claimed that there were no clocks at neverland, which is untrue. Bear in mind, he was the only one who witnessed the alleged molestation.

    Firstly, he lied on the stand by saying the alarm didn’t go off. The DA played it off saying that the alarm was not loud or something along those lines. However, when the tape of the raid was played, you could hear the alarm blaring.

    Secondly, these are street smart kids. If you messed with them, they would tell you where to go. I am disturbed by the fact that the kid did not at least yell or something. He said he just watched. Was he trying to take notes? Why would he watch something like that for so long? I mean, if I saw my brother was being molested, I would do something about it. However, they did not. These are street smart kids, not choir boys.

    Not until 4 months (after they had denied any foul play) and only after they had met Larry Feldman (the civil lawyer, I believe, from the Jordy case) did they go to the police. I know that kids might not want to talk about something like this, but the mother was shopping around for lawyers, which was why Michael broke ties with them. Their history of frivolous allegations (ala JC penny) was brought to his attention and he had to stay away from them. It was at this point that they then went to the police.

    Another thing that amused me was the elusive pattern the prosecution tried to create?

    Grooming? Mac, Brett and Wade were allegedly groomed and the prosecution witnesses said that the kids were molested. All three guys denied this, on the stand.
    What did Zonen do? He bombarded them with magazines and books asking them if they would be concerned if young children slept in the same bed with a man who owned such magazines. Now, owning those magazines are not illegal otherwise Michael would have been charged. The claim was that the boys were molested not that it would be wrong or immoral for a kid to sleep in the same with a man who owned such material. That was a bad attempt at a patch up job, by the prosecution.

    In 10 years, are you saying that a calculative and piranhic pedo would only molest one child? Even though he CONSTANTLY surrounds himself with children? I find that to be quite problematic.

    Moreover, the pattern could be that this is a confused and careless paedophile. One who cannot contain his impulses, one who takes risks. The problem with this is, if that were the case, he would have been caught a long time ago. If the sleepovers are the ‘smoke’, then he would have ‘slipped’ a long time ago.

    Nonetheless, we have the rather bewildering timeline.

    Michael Jackson was going through the toughest test of his career (at the time) after the Bashir interview. This kid had been seen with him in the interview and Bashir suspected something was up between them. If they proved that he molested the boy back then, Michael Jackson would be a goner but wait, the prosecution claim that Michael Jackson started molesting the boy after the show had aired, after the media circus began, after the authorities were on his back. That is just ridiculous.

    Is Michael Jackson a calculative or careless paedophile? This case has not proven that beyond a reasonable doubt.

    Did Michael Jackson abuse Gavin?
    This case has not proven that beyond a reasonable doubt. There are too many inconsistencies. There is enough doubt to legally acquit.

    Now to Bob Jones, if this man saw such things for so long then it says a lot about his character, as to why he is only coming out with this book during a time like this. This is a man who shot himself in the foot during his testimony. A man who basically agreed that his book was not 100 per cent factual or actual.

    Michelle, I find it strange that you would readily believe that this boy is a ‘real victim’. A street wise kid who would be molested and wait four months until he goes to the authorities, with his mother. A ‘real victim’ who seemed, on the stand, to be more irate about Michael deserting his family than with the molestation. One thing people are not even considering is this, if the boy was supposedly drunk and out of it then how could he remember the molestation in such graphic detail? This kid was obviously coached to say all the things he said and I am appalled that people would jump on the ‘victim’ bandwagon when so many kids are being molested and victimised daily and yet Paedophiles are not even prosecuted.

    If Michael Jackson was John Doe, this case would not make the court. No DNA, inconsistent testimonies in the grand jury, what a recipe for a “Trial of the Century”.

  • Nick

    Hey Michele,
    Just a few porn magazines are enough to convince you that somebody is evil ?
    What is it with you and porn magazines Michele ? You kind of sound like a Bree to me, Michele.
    There is nothing wrong with having porn magazines and wank twice a day (or even more). What else would you expect from a man who, as you pointed it, “never had a normal adult relationship”. Is it forbidden to fantasize over a porn magazine ? Is it illegal to have a wank ?
    Michele darling, be serious, will you ?

  • http://www.priscilla.j.taylor@yahoo MsTay58

    If these people all knew this before hand and said nothing they are just as guilty, its all about the money. The parents are the ones behind this. But the biggest reason is the fact that Micheal owes 50% of the publishing catalog that has the Beatles records and for years Paul McCarthy is behind this, its to force the hand of micheal so he can get them back. I truly believe he has a hand in this just like he is a big investor in K-earth 101 which plays and talk beatles all the time. come on people use the Brain GOD gave you and read between the lines. Paul has a tour in Sept. of this year and he WANTS those records,NOW!!!

    He is guilty just like the rest, there is not human love about this only the MONEY AND BEATLES RECORDS. The Rumors that I have heard about Paul McCarthy and the underhanded things he do to get what he wants, I’m begging to believe it.

  • Eric Olsen

    the “Beatles catalog” conspiracy is utter nonsense perpetuated by the Jackson camp to further obfuscate and divert attention

    And whether or not this case “is all about money” has virtually nothing to do with whether or not Jackson molested the boy

  • Nick

    you would know Eric wouldn’t you ?

  • Eric Olsen

    I guess

  • salmoncatchingbear

    michele, you made excellent points that i wholeheartedly agree with my dear. well said.

  • td

    The Beatles idea is just silly.

    Jackson owns 50% of 100 songs. The other half is owned by Sony and they’re the ones that makes decisions about what to do with the catalog.

    MJ’s 50% is worth approx. 200-250 million. More then McCartney can afford. So even if MJ has to sell the catalog to pay back the 270 million+ he owes to people, McCartney is not going to get the catalog back. It will be bought up by one of the major music publishers, and most likely this will be Sony. And even if Sir Paul could gather up enough cash to compete in the bidding, do you really think MJ is going to sell them back to him?

    Therefore, Sir Paul has nothing to gain from your so-called conspiracy.

    Also, your conspiracy theory would probably carry more weight if actually spelt his name right.

  • Eric Olsen

    it’s actually about 200 Beatles songs, and quite a few other songs as well; but the Beatles songs are approx 75% of the catalog value

  • Eric Olsen

    actually, the more I think about what a lying, manipulative fucking asshole Jackson is, the more I want to se him convicted of SOMETHING, which is really what the jury is trying to figure out. All the charges are relatively weak individually because of lack of evidence, but I think the jury also knows that Jackson is a serial pedophile and is hesitant to let him off completely

  • p

    “actually, the more I think about what a lying, manipulative fucking asshole Jackson is”

    I just KNEW you were a biased idiot. But yet you try to come across as if you’re impartial. You do NOT need to be writing editorials in any way shape or form. Who do I need to contact to make this happen?

  • p

    Also you hardly know anything about the shit you type. 75% of the Beatles songs are owned by Jackson’s side of the company. Jackson’s 50% of the company is worth $400 million, not $200 million. Sony is the one that’s trying to get the other half of the catalog not McCartney. Sony sabotaged the promotion of the Invincible album so that Jackson couldn’t pay back his loans, and they also might be “encouraging” the DA in this current case with these allegations. This entire thing is about the MONEY whether you choose to believe it or not.

  • p

    Also, GREAT POST JOE. :-)

  • jarboy

    p — editorials, by nature and definition, are supposed to take a position and defend it.

    as for “great post joe”: joe should write his own blog, no hijack someone elses. comments, by nature and definition, are brief.

  • Eric Olsen

    hey p, you can contact me to “make it happen” – I am the publisher

  • Eric Olsen

    the catalog is worth what someone is willing to pay for it, and I believe the catalog is owned 50/50

    The bottom line of Jackson is that, whether the prosecution proved its case on any of these charges, Jacko has had a series of inappropriate, dating-like, relationships with boys for almost 20 years. Do you approve of this? I think it makes him a manipulative fucking asshole.

  • jarboy

    eric, p does not need to be posting to this blog in any way shape or form. Who do I need to contact to make this happen?

  • Eric Olsen

    Thomas Sneddon

  • Nick

    Eric where does this anger come from ? And why are you so eager to see MJ convicted of something ? Did he molest you ?

  • Nick

    or do you wish he had ?

  • Nick

    whatever it is I think you owe us (Your fans) an explanation because now your credibility is in tatters, my dear !

  • http://www.shortstrangetrip.org Joe

    Just to clarify, “King of Pop” is actually a registered trademark owned by Johnson and Johnson, the makers of Vaseline.

  • Nick

    Well documented. Are you a consumer yourself ?

  • http://www.shortstrangetrip.org Joe

    No, just a stockholder, but your contributions to my fortune are appreciated.

  • p

    “Jacko has had a series of inappropriate, dating-like, relationships with boys for almost 20 years. Do you approve of this?”

    He’s slept in the same bed as kids. You call that “dating-like” relationships? That doesn’t mean he’s guilty of Molestation. If he really was doing something, and was so “manipulative” do you think he would have admitted that on national television??! Obviously he has nothing to hide. And when you were a kid did you not have sleep overs with your friends? I know I did, and we would all sleep in the same bed or on the floor. Jackson still views himself as a kid. He doesn’t look at it from the same angle as you. He was born in a poor family, with 9 siblings who all had to sleep in a 2 bedroom house. They had to all share beds together, so for him it just seems natural. Just because the man’s weird doesn’t mean he’s a pedophile. And I hope the Jury can see this.

  • Mark Harrington

    Eric,

    You do not seek to back up your conviction against MJ. You even say that the charges are hard to prove because they are weak. You read the posts which tell you that MJ has not molested Brett Barnes, Mac Culkin etc following their own support of MJ. You hear about the riduculous prosecution witnesses, you hear about the lies, you are even aware of the charity work that Michael has been commited to for so long. Yet you show your true colours as somebody that has sold out his reasoning a long time ago.
    I am frankly shocked after having read your blogs for some time in which you seemed to have a wise head on your shoulders. LETS HOPE YOU ARE MOLESTED!

  • Mark Harrington

    Scrap that last comment.

    What I should have said was, Lets hope you are wrongfully accused of being a molestor.

  • James Mclafferty

    Eric:-),what’s the matter mate?,you having a bad day or something?,it’s not like you to lash out like that.A lot of people have looked up to you don’t let them down now,i’m not criticising i’m just a bit taken aback.

  • Mark Harrington

    Below are some passages of things that Michael Jackson has said and written down in his life. It is these kinds of passages that should make us look at him and say, Pedofile? There just isn’t a chance.

    _______________________________________
    “This Christmas I came back from (touring in) Japan and Elizabeth (Taylor) had decorated the whole house. It was wonderful. I’d never celebrated birthdays or Christmases before. Not one. It was always, Work! That’s why I believe in Neverland. My fondest memory here was one night (when) we had a houseful of bald-headed children. They all had cancer. And one little boy turned to me and said, ‘This is the best day of my life.’ You had to just hold back the tears.”
    _______________________________________
    “You know, when I was going through that bad period with my skin and my adolescent growth spurts, it was kids who never let me down. They were the only ones who accepted the fact that I was no longer little Michael and that I was the same person inside. I’ve never forgotten that.”
    ________________________________________
    “We have to heal our wounded world. The chaos, despair, and senseless destruction we see today are the result of the alienation that people feel from each other and their environment. Often this alienation has its roots in an emotionally deprived childhood. Children have had their childhood stolen from them. A child’s mind needs the nourishment of mystery, magic, wonder, and excitement. I want my work to help people rediscover the child that’s hiding in them.”
    ________________________________________
    “Children are God’s gift to us. No — they are more than that — they are the very form of God’s energy and creativity and love. He is to be found in their innocence, experienced in their playfulness.”

    _______________________________________
    “And that’s why I love children so much from being around them. I realize that many of the world’s problems today, from the inner city crime to large scale wars and terrorism, and our over crowded prisons are a result of the fact that children have had their childhoods stolen away from them. The magic, the wonder, the mystery and the innocence of a child’s heart are the seeds of creativity that will heal the world. I really believe that. What we need to learn from children isn’t childish. Being with them connects us to the deeper wisdom of life which is ever-present and only asks to be lived. They know the way to solutions that lie waiting to be recognized within our hearts.”
    ______________________________________
    Lets just hope that MJ reaps the message from his song, Keep the Faith:

    “Straighten out yourself, and get your mind on track. Dust off your butt and get your self-respect back. You’ve known me long enough to know that I don’t play. Take it like you want it, but you got to keep the faith. Don’t let nobody take you down. Just keep your eyes on the prize, and get your feet back on the ground. Keep the faith, baby, yea. Because it’s just a matter of time before your confidence will win out. But till that day I said you’ve got to keep the faith.”

    Keep the faith because he will be vindicated.

  • Joe

    P, thanks for being appreciative of my effort. I am not sitting on the fence with this one. My personal feelings about Michael Jackson aside, this case does not hold any ground whatsoever and should have been thrown out.

    It is funny how Eric could make such a statement like “I think the jury also knows that Jackson is a serial pedophile and is hesitant to let him off completely”. Two ALLEGED victims in 10 years? A whole decade? A serial pedophile? That is the funniest thing I have seen here.

    (the more I think about what a lying, manipulative fucking asshole Jackson is,)

    For someone you do not know, that statement seems logical – if you were somewhat neurotic.

    +==Comment 46 posted by Joe on June 8, 2005 02:56 PM:
    Just to clarify, “King of Pop” is actually a registered trademark owned by Johnson and Johnson, the makers of Vaseline.==+

    Even though I have no problem with you, I just have to make it known that you and I are two different people.

  • Eric Olsen

    bad day? perhaps

    But what this stems from, I believe, is that over the course of the trial, in trying to cover the news more or less impartially (unless otherwise stated) I have been lulled into the minutiae of the trial itself — evidence, testimony, he said-she said — and I agree with all who say the prosecution case is relatively weak and Jackson could very well be found not guilty on all counts.

    Most of the witnesses have possible ulterior motives, the Arvisos are scummy, etc.

    This is all true, but it also loses sight of what is extremely obvious if one takes a step back and looks at the big picture: he has been commandeering boys and sleeping with them almost nightly for almost 20 years. There is no evidence he has ever had a sexual relationship with a woman. He has been having inapproriate relationships — even if it is only emotional — with boys for 20 years. Hence my contempt.

  • James Mclafferty

    Eric,:-),fair enough as i’ve said before i’m not going to judge somebody by their opinion,because opinions are usually tottally removed from the personality of the person to a certain degree.And i still think your site is cool but i just thought you went a bit over the top with your reply mate,bet you’ll be glad when the case is over, i do still believe he is innocent though(sorry).

  • Eric Olsen

    my irritation is directed at Jackson, not those who believe he is innocent

  • Eric Olsen

    although, I think you have to admit the 100 in Santa Maria are somewhat unhinged

  • James Mclafferty

    Eric,i must admit giving your livelihood up to move to america from england for a trial(which some of them have done),is a bit over the top and slightly uneeded.But different strokes for different folks i suppose.We will know the outcome soon and will be able to put it all behind us which ever way it goes.Ever thought of doing blog on the upcoming superman film i’m a massive fan of them and would be interested to see if anybody knows how it’s progressing.Keep up the good work.

  • HW Saxton

    Joe,Just why in the name of God would MJ
    pay out an over $20 Million settlement
    to quash one allegation (Jordy Chandler)
    and several $Million in another to (the
    housekeepers kid)keep that case out of
    court as well? These are do not sound
    like the actions of an innocent man I’m
    sorry to say.

    If he were “Innocent”, then he could’ve
    spent about 1/10th of the Jordy Chandler
    settlement on an attorney to blast those
    charges right out of court.Then,not only
    would he have saved untold Millions in
    hush money,he would also have gained the
    public’s sympathy by being someone who
    had been unsucessfully victimized by con
    artists out to take advantage of him.

    In fighting and beating the charges, not
    only would he have saved his reputation
    but he also would have gained in record
    sales and subsequent tours in support of
    his new releases. At the least,he would
    not have lost anything.He had everything
    in the world to gain by doing this but
    he chose not to. WHY? Innocent men don’t
    roll over and hand out $20 Mil like it’s
    nothing for NO reason at all.Then,he did
    it AGAIN shortly thereafter. If you or
    anyone else can give me just one logical
    f**king answer to this I’ll be so damned
    happy that I might just lay down on the
    living room floor and piss all the way
    up to the ceiling.One logical answer is
    all I ask.Nothing more and nothing less.

  • Eric Olsen

    piss to ceiling, eh HW? Very impressive. But remember: what goes up, must come down.

  • p

    Here’s your logical answer HW. At the time of the allegations, MJ was at the height of his career. It was believed and consulted to him by his lawyers and friend Elizabeth Taylor, that doing a public trial could do more harm for his reputation than anything, and to just pay off the accusor because he could ‘easily’ make it back with record sales. Also one little known fact: Michael DID NOT pay this money out of pocket. His insurance company had to pay the 20 million dollars under a clause for “child endangerment”, MJ never admited to molestation however. So basically he had a choice of being himiliated at trial and ruining his reputation(plus record sales) or letting his insurance company pay off the accuser. I think in hindsight he made the incorrect choice, but at the time can you blame him? He just didn’t want to deal with it all. There is a clause that they couldn’t discuss the details of the settlement. But I know he hates he did it, now that it’s coming to bite him in the ass.

  • Joe

    HW, you make good points. However, I am commenting on this case and how the prosecution have handled it.

    When you look at the Jordy thing, you think to yourself “why would he pay them out?” and that is a very valid thing to say. However, let us take a few steps back to the Jordy case. Why didnt it make the trial? People will have you believe that MJ settled it out of court. Fair enough, but let us look at it closely. A civil case and a criminal case are not the same thing.

    Firstly, the criminal case collapsed because there was insufficient evidence. All they had to go by was the drug-induced “comments” the boy allegedly made. Now, there is a GQ article that practically blows the 1993 case out of the water and it will take too much time to analyse it.

    To the settlement issue which is the point of contention here. Michael Jackson, at that time, was embarking on a tour of some sort and wanted to get back to his music. After the criminal case crashed, they went for a civil case which was settled out of court. It was during this time that Jason Francia first appeared and even though I am bemused as to why Michael settled, I can understand it. He wanted to place the emphasis back on his career and thought it would be slick PR, bad thinking. Those ghosts have come back to haunt him a decade later.

    The media will have you believe that Jordy described Michael’s private parts accurately but the cops think differently. Even though they had a warrant to take DNA samples of Michael, as well as pictures of him in the nude, the boy’s image just did not correspond with those pictures.

    I can now see where Eric is coming from, by the way.

  • Mickey

    Hehehe…looks like things are really hot in here….Mr.Eric , you knew what you were getting into when you took on the MJ case right ? I mean ..the Jackson fans can sometimes be as mentally unhinged as their idol…I just hope you got proper security at home ;)

  • Nick

    no need to be rude Mickey tut tut !

  • Eric Olsen

    thanks for not overreacting – going over the whole thing in my head yesterday I had a very strong wave of outrage about the things I stated and responded accordingly. I was also in a very crappy mood.

  • james mclafferty

    Had a feeling you were Eric,but everbody has off days and today’s another day:)

  • td

    Concerning MJ’s finances…

    I did a bit more checking and confirmed most of what I originally thought.

    Jackson owns 50% of the Sony/ATV catalog. The catalog is worth an estimated 400 million TOTAL. Therefore, Jackson’s half is approx 200 million.

    I was wrong about the number of songs, it is 250. And Sony doesn’t control the publishing rights as I thought, Jackson sold control of the publishing to EMI for 50 million.

    Along with Jacksons other catalog’s his estimated worth is approx. 500 million. His estimated debt, is 400 million. This debt includes two loans amounting to 270 million that he secured using his Sony/ATV shares as colateral.

    One of these loans, 200 million, is due in December and while MJ has significant assets, he does not have much in the way of liquid cash, therefore he will most likely have to sell some of his Catalogs in order to pay back the loan.

    However, the chances of him selling them to Sony are slim. As I already stated, and supporters agree, he doesn’t like Sony because he believes they underpromoted Invincible. Also, when his current deal with Sony/ATV is up he will most likely sign with another publisher. When this happens, he will take his share of the profits, and Sony/ATV as a company will suffer a bad financial years as a result, which will all but make it impossible for it to afford buying back his 50% share.

    So in my opinion, I don’t see any concrete reasoning for a Sony sabotage.

    More likely is that after shelling out millions of dollars for MJ to make his album, they didn’t want to waste anymore money. Sure they could have spent a few million more and maybe his album would have sold another million or so. But would it have sold 10 million? Not a chance.

    Why? Because the music isn’t cutting edge anymore, and MJ is not nearly as marketable as a personality. And that’s without taking into consideration the current trial.

    Earlier this year, indie artist Bright Eyes occupied the top 2 spots on the billboard singles chart. Without any help from a major label. The moral of the story….If the music is great, it will succeed regardless.

    I’m not saying that the music is garbage. But it takes so much money to produce, promote, and put on tour, that it in the end, it’s not profitable in comparison to other artists. And when Sony realised this, they pulled the plug.

    How does this really effect the trial?

    Well, regardless of whether you agree with how all this ^^^ unfolded or not, the pressure and stress it placed on MJ was enormous. This stress led him to further recluse himself at neverland, and IMO, pushed him once again to find sexual release with one of his younger companions.

  • p

    “Sure they could have spent a few million more and maybe his album would have sold another million or so. But would it have sold 10 million? Not a chance.

    Why? Because the music isn’t cutting edge anymore, and MJ is not nearly as marketable as a personality. And that’s without taking into consideration the current trial.”

    Michael Jackson’s album sold FIVE million worldwide and TWO million in the U.S. off ONE single. If that’s not incredible, I don’t know what is. All his previous albums he would release about 5 singles and videos. Invincible didn’t sell as well, because it was under promoted. Period.

  • Eric Olsen

    p, that would only make sense if people didn’t know who Michael Jackson was, and I believe they do. It didn’t sell because it didn’t capture the imagination of the public, for the reasons td stated quite well

  • jarboy

    all you avid mj supporters should read today’s article in the ny daily news by stanley crouch (who happens to be an african-american), called the descent of michael jackson, in which he says:

    This trial brought up questions about all this, but it seems to me that illusions of the man have been on trail along with Jackson himself. These illusions are grounded in what people assumed their relationship to Jackson was during periods of being enthralled by his music and videos. The amount of emotion we heap on our pop celebrities is suspect. People are not good guys just because they have ability.

  • p

    Uhhh, what’s your point? I think he’s a good guy for because of all the charities he’s supported and the messages he sends through his music. He’s got a guiness book of World Records for the most money given to charity by a music artist or something like that. Over 50 Million… Someone like this deserves the benefit of the doubt. And not to mention, in this country you are innocent until proven guilty. Although that ideal is going down the drown more and more as the days go by.

  • jarboy

    it ain’t my point, sugar, it’s stanley crouch’s point. read his article and if you have any questions, ask him.
    besides, people do good works don’t always have good motives behind it.

  • jarboy

    people like michael jackson have to give huge ammounts to charity or get eaten up by income tax. and by appearing to be a great humanitarian, he buys himself cover for his pedaphilia. the hope is that people like little naive p will think, “Someone like this deserves the benefit of the doubt” grow up, p. there’s lots of sickness in this world. mj dates and fucks little boys. get it?

  • td

    I’m not saying that 5 million albums sold is not a lot of sales.

    What I am saying is that further promotion wouldn’t have significantly increased those figures. And that’s why Sony decided to stop promoting the album.

    It’s just basic math. Jackson sells 5 million records, but it costs 100 million to make the album.

    Justin Timberlake also sold 5 million albums, but his only cost 10 million to make.

    For Sony to have made a profit on the album it would have had to sell more than 6 million albums. When they saw that they weren’t going to break even on the album, they stopped promoting it.

    As I said, they could have spent another 10 million in promotion on the album, but then it would have had to sell 7 million to break even. Why take the chance.

    And if you think that Invincible had the musical firepower to dominate like Thriller, or Bad, then you are crazy. The reviews were ok, but no way is MJ going to outsell artists in their primes like Eminem and Coldplay who were releasing critically acclaimed, grammy winning albums.

    As far as giving someone the benefit of the doubt…..Are you saying that MJ should be treated diferently than the average Joe because he donates more money to charity? Bill Gates donates 10 times the money MJ donates, does that mean Microsoft should not be charged for using unfair business practices.

    There are plenty of people who donate a greater percentage of their incomes to charity than MJ, but it doesn’t mean they are absolved from criminal activity. The term “justice is blind” works both ways. An ex-con isn’t presumed guilty when accused of a crime, and MJ isn’t presumed innocent.

  • jarboy

    in the american system, mj IS assumed innocent. doh

  • http://paperfrigate.blogspot.com DrPat

    Oh, jarboy – in the American s, MJ is presumed innocent, no matter how many of us assume he is a serial molester.

    td, MJ may be assumed guilty of this crime, but the system still presumes him innocent he comes to trial. Otherwise, he’s got plenty of grounds to win an appeal.

    What’s the difference? Presume: To take for granted as being true in the absence of proof to the contrary; to constitute reasonable evidence for assuming.

    Assume: To take for granted; suppose.

  • jarboy

    sorry, phdpat, i meant to say presumed, just didn’t proofread. don’t need an english lesson.

  • td

    yeah, yeah, yeah…

    I was just responding to P’s “should be given the benefit of the doubt’ line. P seemed to insinuate that MJ should be presumed inocent despite proof to the contrary.

    Anyways, it doesn’t really matter. Presumption time is over. I’ve heard the evidence. It’s time for judgement, and there’s no reasonable doubt in my mind that MJ holds sexual affections for younger boys.

    Hopefully the jury see’s it the same way.

  • http://kabbalah4women.blogspot.com/ Josia

    The titles of these MJ posts just keep getting better and better …

    Who do I contact about that? :)

    J.

  • james mclafferty

    Some of you may/may not find this interesting.
    http://WWW.vh1news
    Michael Jackson’s life is on the line in front a California judge. But no matter the outcome of his trial on child molestation charges, the gap between how the world views Michael and how he sees himself has never been wider. In this special, VH1 News explains how the beloved child entertainer became such a bizarre public figure.

    The answers lie in Michael Jackson’s Secret Childhood. VH1 News has examined the singer’s upbringing and found a life filled with abuse, hard labor, relentless ambition, and conflict between his religious upbringing and growing fame. Beginning with Jackson’s birth in 1958 to the record-breaking success of his Thriller album in 1984, the special delves deep into Jackson’s past, such as the mental and physical abuse he endured from his father, Joe Jackson (e.g., incessant rehearsals, whippings, calling Michael “big nose”); Joe exorcised his frustrations over his own failed musical career by exploiting his musically gifted children – especially Michael – by forcing them to perform in seedy bars and strip joints from Indiana to Ohio. At the same time, the proselytizing of his mother Katherine – a devout Jehovah’s Witness – confused Michael about singing, sex and family secrets.

    This show opens the doors to the Jackson family homes in Gary, Indiana and Encino, CA, to uncover bizarre, never-before-seen home movies of Michael dancing with Emmanuel Lewis and cavorting with Snow White and the Seven Dwarves. In exclusive interviews, viewers are introduced to Michael’s first “little friend” the child actor Rodney Allen Rippey. Other interviews include former CBS Records music mogul Walter Yetnikoff, the man responsible for Michael pursuing a solo music career, but knew him since his childhood years as a member of the Jackson 5, Tatiana Thumbtzen, Michael’s co-star from “The Way you Make Me Feel” video who tells her tale of unrequited love for the shy pop star, and Teresa J. Gonsalves, a childhood pen pal who got to see a side of Michael that very few were privileged to see. These people, along with celebrity family therapists, biographers and religion experts, all offer their theories about the man whose public antics have become a national obsession.

  • Eric Olsen

    sounds interesting to me, though explanation is not absolution

    Josia, who do you think writes the titles?

  • http://www.yahoo.com Steve

    For those who are interested, Vanity Fair has done an excellent series of articles on MJ from ex-staffers and other sources.

    I have already ordered this book.

    First of all, for those of you who feel that MJ is getting a rough deal, nothing could be further from the truth. Never has a defendant been given the red carpet treatment in so obvious and obsequious a manner. The partitioned off walkways, “special” passes to the courtroom for his entourage and body guards?? Why the hell would anyone need bodyguards in a court of law?? To intimidate witnesses, that’s why. The same reason they had gang members flown into Neverland to work during the ’93 Jordy episode. To remind people who might have thought about saying something just how rich, powerful, and ruthless a man they were up against.

    Common sense tell you this tale. 40 year old men do NOT have 8 year old special friends that sleep with them. And what about that little “mini-me” kid that hung out with him all during the 80’s? If the MJ fans look past their adoration of the singer, you will see that this is WRONG. If this guy lived in your neighborhood you’d ride him out of town on a rail. Just because he is rich and talented doesn’t mean he’s “innocent”. Just because he can sing doesn’t mean he lives in another world. Just because he is an artist doesn’t mean that all his motivations are beautiful.

    This man is a veteran of the entertainment industry. My sister is a filmmaker, and I know a little about this. If he were a true lil shrinking flower he would have been crushed by it LONG ago. It is a brutal, cutthroat world, and being talented makes others strive harder to take advantage of you. You have to be tough as hell to survive – and to thrive you have to be ruthless.

    As to those who feel that the victim in this case should have been more assertive?? You obviously know nothing about sexual abuse. I was abused as a child. I did tell someone – two years after it started. Sexual abuse is so hard to deal with as a child. You have all these conflicting feelings. This boy was fished out of the LA slums and showed a dream life by an man he idolized. He was also introduced to sex by this man. Sex, even if it is wrong, is exciting. Just because it wrong doesn’t make it less so. So you have all this hero-worship, excitement, feelings you don’t understand, and a life of wealth to give up. You have to turn in your hero to the police. You have to distance yourself from the emotional manipulation of a 45 year old man. Do you have any idea how hard that is for a kid? Try to imagine it.

    Also, keep in mind that after the Bashir video, MJ and his people had the entire family investigated. Do you think someone as rich as MJ couldn’t find out that the mother would be very easy to discredit on the stand? As a rich and powerful molester, it must have been like a dinner bell ringing.

  • Nick

    Steve, your story is a very sad one but don’t think it gives you sufficient credit to pronounce a verdict on whether MJ is innocent or not. On the contrary, your history and patiality is exactly the reason why a person like you would never make it in a jury, and that is a very good thing to preserve the assumption of innocence.

    If you have been molested, condemn the people who are responsible for it and don’t go fantasizing on a man who has been completely denied the presumption of innocence by the media, the prosecution AND the clueless public (That includes YOU).

  • http://darkeroticism.blogspot.com swingingpuss

    “The lion on the Serengeti doesn’t go after the strongest antelope,” Zonen said. “The predator goes after the weakest.”

  • http://www.yahoo.com Steve

    Why would ALL these people lie? The ex-staffers, the victims, the security guards? OK one or two might lie for money. One or two might lie for vengance, although risking a slander suit and/or harassment campaign from the gloved one and his minions makes that sound pretty stupid, not to mention the possible prosecution for purgery. So either there is an international conspiracy involving the media, the court system, and law enforcement – OR – this is exactly what it looks like. Unplug the Thriller album for a few minutes, straighten out that geri-curl and go outside to clear the fumes from your brain. The answer will come to you. I am not the clueless one here.

  • Nick

    Read the court transcript nd get back to me. Clueless.

  • Nick

    And by the way, it is spelt perjury and not purgery. Clueless…

  • http://www.yahoo.com Steve

    Nick,

    How many 10 year olds are in your bed?

    Clueless.

  • http://www.yahoo.com Steve

    Which parts of the transcripts have the wonderful proof of innocence? The part where he showed children pornographic websites in his bed? The fact that some were able to get away before he got his paws on them? If you have proofs other than your blind worship of this celebrity, I would love to hear it. Or just direct me to the parts of this magical transcript upon which you are basing this enless devotion.

    It all comes back to common sense. Either the whole world is lying, or this is exactly what it appears to be.

    It walks, it quacks, it has a big ole bill and swims. Wake up and smell the duckness.

  • http://www.yahoo.com Steve

    PS: Have fun with the mis-keys and spelling errors, but they won’t hide your lack backup for your position.sgs

  • http://www.yahoo.com Steve

    And it’s spelled “spelled”, not spelt

    LOL

  • Nick

    boring

  • Joe

    Before I go any further, this is mere conjecture so I do not want to anger any of the Michael Jackson fans here.

    I have tried to be an objective viewer and the prosecution seem to have failed to discharge the burden of proof (beyond reasonable doubt). However, my feelings about Michael Jackson still seem to be all up in the air – that his love for children could be sinister.

    Now, I discounted Michelle’s earlier post for being nonsensical but maybe my reaction was a bit premature.

    Let us assume that Michael Jackson is a pedo and being the star he was, Sony would have tried everything possible to keep his habit under wraps – take a look at how Ray Charles’s habit was kept a secret for so long. Everyone around knew Ray was hitting the needle but no one came forward. I know that child molestation and drug addiction may not be the same thing here but there is a common denominator – money. The people around Ray either loved him and did not want to hurt him by ‘squealing’ or had to milk the cash cow for as long as it lasted.

    Now, as soon as he started to ruffle a few feathers then he started to get into trouble with the law. Those people who were in his circle now freely went to the law enforcers.

    Back to Michael Jackson, if Michael was a pedo and Sony et al knew about this, there is no way they would have come forward because they were making so much money off of him.

    Up until 1993, with the dangerous album, Michael Jackson was hitting double platinum consistently. Why would anyone dare come forward about his secret life? Why would they jeopardise their futures, their finances?

    However, then came the 1993 molestation allegations. Even though it appeared to fail in the courts, there could have been more to it than meets the eye. Who knows whether there was undue pressure placed on the kid or his parents? These big companies are able to buy off the law enforcers, so I am sure they could have made ‘evidence’ evaporate if they truly wanted it to happen.

    Yes, the parents may have been shady but it is very possible to have a shady parent or shady parents trying to profit off of their children’s misery. That is possible. It is possible that Michael did molest the kid but that the parents did not adhere to their duties as parents.

    So Sony asked Michael to come back with a new album and to tour, to recoup some more money, to go back to being the ‘cash cow’ but that is when the meltdown slowly began. History was no ‘Bad’ or ‘Dangerous’, it did not recoup as much as the company wanted. This is a business after all and their job is to profit.

  • Joe

    They released Blood on the dance floor, they released re-mastered songs, they tried to recoup their money and they probably could not. The History phase saw the end of the big budget videos –‘Ghosts’. Ghosts was meant to be amazing, it was. However, it was also very expensive and just did not recoup the money they thought it would recoup.

    Sony wanted something big from Michael, something to ‘bring him back’ to being that ‘cash cow’. They wanted a ‘hip’ producer; they wanted something that would capture a new audience. They invested a lot to make Invincible a success and even though they produced the CD in different colours (To buff up sales) it still failed. The execs must have thought (through their market research) that if ten million hardcore fans around the world wanted to buy all four (was it four? can’t remember) it would prop up the sales of the record to 40 million and beyond. That plan failed and Sony came to realise that this was no longer a cash cow, but a liability.

    The public feud did not help both parties and it was no surprise that the allegations were brought a few years later. Even though there might be a few people behind it, even if the Jackson fans’ conspiracy is accurate, does it mean that Michael Jackson did not molest Gavin? Does it mean that he is not a pedo? When the cops raided Ray Charles and arrested him, I am sure his fans may have felt it was a conspiracy but even if it was a racist agenda to ‘bring down a black man’, Ray Charles was a drug addict. So, it is possible that even though there is a conspiracy behind this case, Michael Jackson may be what he is being accused of being and doing. The only thing here is that Sony is no longer in his corner, no longer willing to invest in big time lawyers, no longer willing to waste any money on this “liability”.

    Whether or not he will do time is another thing, because the case has not been strong enough. However, this is the ‘other side’ that I must learn to tolerate and I think it makes sense – it is not nonsensical at all.

    Yes, the parents may be shady and yes the kids may have inconsistent accounts. This could merely be a case of them trying to ‘colour’ the facts a bit, trying to exaggerate a little. Kids can get their facts wrong but that does not mean they are liars.

    Should a kid be victimised just because he is a troublesome youth? No way.

    The family may have a ‘past’ but does that mean they should be victimised? No.

    It is easy for a good lawyer to make someone who is telling the truth look like a cold-hearted liar. This is something we need to bear in mind.

    The next time we call someone a Jackson ‘hater’ or ‘nut’, we should look at what they are saying, consider it and then if it does not make sense, present your arguments in a civilised manner. There is no shame in that; it would not make you less of a person for agreeing with something that goes against your initial stance. The bottom line is, Michael Jackson is a public figure and we will all have our different views about him.

  • Eric Olsen

    word

  • james mclafferty

    18 million copies of history have been sold to date i wouldn’t say that was a flop would you?.Why is it,a band like travis(not sure if you all know who they are),can sell one million albums get a grammy and people say “oh my god they are so cool”,when one million is all they’ll sell and mj sells five million and they say “ah well he’s had it now”,for a start 5 million is 5x that figure so how can they say travis (i only used them for an example) is selling so much better? something odd there if you ask me.

  • james mclafferty

    Here are the figures of albums sold.

    Off The Wall: 19 million*
    Thriller: 59 million*
    Bad: 28 million*
    Dangerous: 29 million*
    HIStory: 18 million double albums (36 million disks).
    Blood On The Dance Floor: 6 million
    Invincible: 8 million
    Number Ones: 6 million
    Here are the estimated earnings of mj over his career.
    Off the Wall: $37 million
    Thriller: $115 million
    Bad: $57.5 million
    Dangerous: $57.5 million
    HIStory: $35 million
    Blood on the Dance Floor: $10 million
    Invincible: $15 million

    OTHER INCOME SOURCES:
    Tour earnings: $100 million
    Endorsements: $30 million
    Videos/films: $20 million
    Merchandise: $25 million
    Cumulative earnings: $502 million
    Assets: $100 million (Neverland ranch; Encino and Las Vegas homes; other properties); $450 million (50% stake in Sony ATV and other music publishing)
    Debt: $200 million
    Net worth: $350 million

  • jarboy

    hmm, and all i got was this stupid t-shirt

  • td

    The thing is James, you just aren’t seeing the math.

    Sure other bands sell less records, but they also cost a lot less too.

    Lets say the average record sells for $10 US. That means Travis sales of 1 million equal 10 million in revenue. There production and marketing cost propably come to 1 million or less. Therefore they have made 9 million profit for them and the record company.

    Invincible has sold 5 million copies worldwide. That represents 50 million in revenue. However, production and marketing costs for Invincible were 100 million. Therefore, Invincible has lost Sony 50 million.

    It’s the same as a Big Budget movie that flops. WaterWorld made more money at the box office than Sideways, but it cost 100 times more money to make. Therefore, financially it was a flop.

    As far as your figures concerning MJ’s assets, the actual figures are closer to 600 million in assets, and 415 million in liabilities. Included in the liabilities is a 200 million dollar loan that is due to be paid in full by december.

    The problem for MJ is that the asset evaluations are not absolute. They are only as valuable as someone is willing to pay for them. Obviously the Beatles catalog is, and will always be very valuable. MJs catalogue on the other hand, Mijac worth 75 million, may decrease significantly in value if he’s found guilty.

    In order to pay off the loan, he has to sell assets, because he does not have 200 million in cash lying around. Most likely this means he will have to sell his Sony/ATV share, including the Beatles catalogue.

    This will leave him with 400 million assets and 214 million debt. But MJ is still going to have to sell more assets, because he is losing 20-30 million a year by spending more than he’s earning. Since people know he needs to sell, he probably won’t get the best price for his assets. And really, who is going to spend 25 million for neverland if it’s the notorious location of child abuse.

    So where this is going, is that if MJ doesn’t get the best deals on his assets, and his remaining assets begin to depreciate in value, he could soo find himself owing more that he can pay.

  • http://www.yahoo.com Steve

    I don’t think he will be convicted. The American justice system is geared so the guy with the best lawyer wins. With the excellent fodder they have had for putting the victim (and his family) on trial instead of MJ, and with all the money he had to spend, aquittal is all but assured. The justice system is affected by color, but not black or white. The color of the American justice system is Green. Look at OJ’s latest golf photos if you doubt that.

  • HW Saxton

    The Verdict in this case will be read at
    1:30 PM PST. Big News!!!!!

  • Eric Olsen

    wow, thanks HW

  • HW Saxton

    It’s all over but the crying now.This is
    an agonizingly long half an hour to go.

  • http://HIM Jake

    The majority of you blogheads seem quick to defend someone who has shelled out over 25 million dollars just to make betrayed children go away. MJ’s reputation should have meant more to him than a billion dollars. He obviously has a penchant for little boys and has gone by for far too many years stealing innocence. If they don’t get him this time, they will the next time he molests…which he will surely do again.

  • http://www.yahoo.com Steve

    And the rich and guilty walk free. All hail the American Judicial System.

  • sandra smallson

    Take your medicine like a good boy Eric. Blah blah blah di blah!

    You were biased from the start. You have a closed, narrow mind when it comes to anything about MJ. You find him abnormal and you think there is more to his relatoonship with young boys than just friendship. OKAY. We heard ya the first time but guess what? That’s your own private demon. It’s YOUR palava.

    Listen carefully..NOT GUILTY on all TEN counts and the even ridiculous lesser 4 counts they added to desperately try and pin something on the man, especially that ridiculous one by the judge about furnishing alcohol to children which by law only applies to businesses. It’s no wonder the family feel like it was a vendetta…everyone seemed to be going to extraordinary lengths to find this man guilty of something…anything.

    Eric..go back to what you were posting about before( can’t remember what) because this whole MJ trial has made you look so bad, your sometimes clouded, biased reporting style which I remember I have accused you of before in other topics has come out in this case, loud and clear.

  • nick

    And now a treat for all of you bitter twats

    Told me that you’re doin’ wrong
    Word out shockin’ all alone
    Cryin’ wolf ain’t like a man
    Throwin’ rocks to hide your hands
    You ain’t done enough for me
    You ain’t done enough for me
    You are disgustin’ me
    You’re aiming just for me
    You are disgustin’ me
    Just want your cut from me
    But too bad, too bad
    Look who just walked in the place
    Dead and stuffy in the face
    Look who’s standing if you please
    Though you tried to bring me to my knees
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don’t you scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don’t you just scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don’t you scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don’t you just scream and shout it
    Hell all up in Hollywood
    Sayin’ that you got it good
    Creepin’ from a dusty hole
    Tales of what somebody told
    What do you want from me?
    What do you want from me?
    Tired of you haunting me, yeah yeah
    You’re aiming just for me
    You are disgustin’ me
    You got blood lust for me
    But too bad , too bad
    Look who got slapped in the face
    It’s dead and stuffy in the place
    Right back where I wanna be
    I’m standin’ though you’re kickin’ me
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don’t you scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don’t you just scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don’t you scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don’t you just scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don’t you scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don’t you just scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don’t you scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don’t you just scream and shout it
    (Rap: Shaquille O’Neal)
    Life’s about a dream
    I’m really undefeated when MJ is on my team, theme
    Reality brings forth realizm
    It’s the man of steel organizm
    Twizm
    Not from the prizm, take charge like manilla
    Nine five shaq represent with the Thrilla
    Grab my crotch, twist my knee, then I’m through
    Mike’s bad, I’m bad
    Who are you
    (Michael)
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don’t you scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don’t you just scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don’t you scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don’t you just scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don’t you scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don’t you just scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don’t you scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don’t you just scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it

  • Eric Olsen

    oh good, more lyrics

    Sandra, whatever you say, babe. I am quite proud of my coverage of the trial. I gave the facts as neutrally as I could, and gave my opinion when I felt strongly about something and made it very clear that it was my opinion.

    I think he is a serial pedophile – I don’t know if he did anything to/with Gavin Arviso, and if he didnt’ he should have been found “not guilty.”

    I think he is very lucky and dodged another bullet, but I also think the prosecution did itself a grave disservice by using the shotgun approach to the charges. I never thought the kidnapping and conspiracy charges held any water and they were just a distraction – worse still, they required testimony from the loopy, tainted Janet Arviso, which was disastrous.

    I have never had a personal stake in the verdict and I have no idea why anyone would think so.

  • nick

    maybe because of your recent outburst… Nobody has forgotten it you know…

  • http://www.yahoo.com Steve

    For all the MJ fans out there, remember that “not guilty” is different than innocent. I hardly think that another OJ verdict, proof to the world that our judicial system is biased towards the rich and famous, is something to celebrate.

  • Eric Olsen

    no one has to forget anything – I am still outraged that Jackson has been allowed by parents, society, law enforcement, etc., to behave as he has with boys over the last 20 years. That won’t change.

    I am sorry if anyone was led to reject my judgment based upon the ferocity of my “outburst”

  • nick

    OK OK I just thought I would remind you why some of us may think that “You had a personal stake in the verdict” because you just said yourself that you had “No idea why”.

  • nick

    “Not guilty” does not mean “Innocent” but it certainly does not mean “Guilty” either. Move on !

  • Eric Olsen

    what does “move on” mean?

  • nick

    Verb: move on
    Move forward, also in the metaphorical sense
    – advance, progress, pass on, march on, go on

  • Eric Olsen

    so no one should write anything about Michael Jackson anymore?

  • http://paperfrigate.blogspot.com DrPat

    There is JUDGEMENT (a trial verdict) and judgement (one’s personal conclusions in a matter). The JUDGEMENT is “Not Guilty.”

    The judgement, however, is that MJ needs to surround himself with broken, crazy and tainted people because others have long ago concluded that he is not someone to be connected with.

    And, Eric, “move on” usually means: I insist you substitute your judgement for the JUDGEMENT…

  • nick

    welllllll if you had something new to say why not, but apart from showing the very subtle line that exists between not guilty and innocent I have not learnt much from all the bitter people who live in their own fantasy world…

  • MCH

    Olsen,
    Your anti-Jackson diatribes, ad nauseum, reminds me of the movie “Groundhog Day.”

  • Eric Olsen

    whatever you say – read the dozens of stories I have written involving Jackson and I am guessing fewer than five could be called “diatribes.”

    And holy fucking shit! Are you — the ultimate one trick chicken hawk pony — really accusing ME of being repetitive? Astonishing irony there.

  • MichaelisGod

    I think the book should be BANNED and BOB JONES should be followed 24/7 by officials who will shoot the instant he utters anything at all that can be construed to be even remotely damaging or slandering to His Holines, our Lord and Saviour Michael Jackson.
    We live in a sick world where true purity and love and goodness cannot be understood. People will pay for condemning Our Lord. Michael Jackson is not the 2nd coming of the Christ…he IS the Christ and the world will bow before him or perish in Armageddon.
    BOB JONES and SNEDDON are clearly instruments of Satan.

  • http://toddyarling.com todd

    If MJ were not famous and well liked, no one would be defending someone who sleeps behind a locked door, which is behind a long corridor with sensors that give off warnings when anyone steps foot in the corridor, with little boys unrelated to him.

    Not to say I think he was guilty… I have no clue and it wasn’t my job to make that decision, as I was not a juror.

    I will say this tho… the Defense quite accurately pegged the mom as a scammer, but… what kind of person would let their child sleep with a grown man, other than a scammer or other type of distasteful person?

    No normal parent would allow that!

    Seems to me the defenses main tactic could have been used against them by the prosecution.

  • john

    hey it might be the truth but it might be false as well. The man has been fired and if he was any type of true human he would of been..I would of been out of there the firsdt time I saw something not after I had been fired after 30 something years of so called proof ohh common what type of human is he…..and yes I am a huge fan but if he did it he did it but it seems a little vingeful.!????

  • April

    Bottom line: Adult men should not be sleeping in the same bed with other peoples children. Also, adult men (or women) should not be giving alchohol to minors. Neverland is supposed to be about innocence. Michael Jackson is pushing line.

  • Bonebag

    Finally, somebody who had the courage to tell the truth! When LA and Babyface corroborated the story regarding Jermaine Jackson, When Halima decided that there needed to be space between Jermaine and his family, something in the milk ain’t clean!
    I am not blinded as most folks are!