Okay, I'm paraphrasing:
- The singer claimed his shoulder was dislocated and his wrists and back hurt during his arrest on 19 November 2003.
Santa Barbara Sheriff Jim Anderson said an inquiry by the California Attorney General and the Bureau of Investigation had found Mr Jackson was not injured.
....Mr Anderson said the official investigation had shown Mr Jackson was treated in a "in a professional manner".
"After interviewing 163 witnesses and expending an excess of 2,500 investigative hours, the California Bureau of Investigation determined that Mr Jackson was not injured at the hands of Santa Barbara Sheriffs Department personnel," he said.
Criminal charges
"The investigation also concluded there was no criminal conduct on the part of Sheriff's Department personnel during their contact with Mr Jackson."
The sheriff declined to say whether they would bring criminal charges against Mr Jackson for making the allegations.
The singer made the claims of mistreatment during a television interview on CBS in December.
He said: "They manhandled me very roughly, my shoulder is dislocated literally, it is hurting very badly." [BBC]
Article comments
1 - Dawn
And it certainly doesn't disprove my theory that he is a deformed and deranged douchebag either.
2 - Mac Diva
Since pain is subjective, there is no case here. It is not possible to prove Michael Jackson was not in pain. The allegations were likely made to create sympathy for Jackson. (I doubt the cops were foolish enough to rough up a celebrity, though they do that to regular people often.) People who support Jackson probably believe the allegations. Those who don't, probably don't.
3 - Eric Olsen
Good points, but specifically MJ stated that the treatment he received dislocated his shoulder, which was a factual lie.
4 - Sandra Smallson
Did they carry out any medical tests on MJ before the "investigative" dept came to the conclusion that it was all a lie?
Perhaps the man exaggerated the extent of his shoulder injury. Perhaps. However, I don't see how that makes him a PATHOLOGICAL liar..especially as you add "once again". I am at a loss. When is the other time that we the public, discovered that MJ is/was a pathological liar?
I hope you are not going to give an example of one of these child molestation cases because as you have rightly said being a "pathological" liar, which you are yet to explain as to how and when he became not just a liar but a pathological one, doesn't make him a child molester.
I haven't been following this matter because I have been otherwise engaged but I hear Mr Sneddon was on the stand recently and appeared a bit disorientated when being questioned as he seemed to have been caught in some palava. Can anyone enlighten me? I can't for the life of me find any info on the internet about this. I did hear it on the news though.
5 - Eric Olsen
Hi Sandra, I say pathological because he has repeatedly and very publicly - see last year's documentary - denied his innumerable plastic surgeries, his skin lightening and tried to pursuade himself and the world that his relationship with children is normal and healthy.
The BBC has an ongoing archive of Jackson trial stories, jsut follow the link above
6 - Sandra Smallson
Ah! I saw that as denial rather than any deliberate attempt at lying. Some might say there's no difference. I like to think there is just the slightest difference in being in denial and outright lying.
Thanks for the link. Will check it out. Oh, and hi Eric.
7 - Eric Olsen
that distinction is certainly possible, though to me part of "pathological lying" is self-deception
8 - Sandra Smallson
Eric:"....though to me part of "pathological lying" is self-deception"
Sandra: Then, I'm in trouble. Just call me, Sandra "pathological liar extraordinaire" Smallson:)
The world must be filled with pathological liars because 8 out of every 10 people I think, are in denial about one thing or the other.
9 - Eric Olsen
well, I agree that most people are self-deceptive to a certain extent, but theere are degrees, and on the self-deception scale most of us are mice and MJ is an elephant
10 - bhw
How can someone be "in denial" about undergoing so many plastic surgery procedures on his face that he is completely unrecognizable?
Eric is right: he's a lying sack of shit.
But he might not be a child molestor, although I wouldn't send my kids to his Neverland Ranch.
11 - JR
Yeah, I'd sooner send my kids to G. Gordon Liddy's mercenary training camp.
After which I might let them go to the Neverland Ranch.
12 - Sandra Smallson
Well, the poor sod is clearly in denial. He has convinced himself he has some skin disorder which results in him becoming a white man. He probably does have a skin disorder but I doubt that is the main reason he is now a white man. Plus, I think it's his nose he has had done. I am not sure much has been done to the face. He simply puts on make up like most rock stars do. It's the lightness of the skin and the make up, added to the severely tampered with nose that makes it look like plastic surgeons all over the land have had a go at that face.
Lying about how many nose jobs he has had is not really a big deal. People who have plastic surgery often lie about how much work they've had done or if they have had any done at all. It's only a big deal BECAUSE it's MJ lying about it.
13 - sarah
PEOPLE WHO THINK MICHEAL IS GUILITY PLEASE CAN U TYPE IN GOOGLE:
" lieing about michael jackson"
rip
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx :'( cant stop crying