I think that Blount telling to this fan (Sydney) that it wasn't Michael who was brought at the hospital can be a clue pointing to him being in the know. If Blount wasn't in on it and believed that it was a real emergency with Michael Jackson as the patient, then why would he lie to this fan by telling her that it wasn't him? I see no reason for a paramedic to do that, especially since all the media are reporting loud and clear that it's Michael Jackson. What's the point? Then Blount testifying in court that it was him and mentionning specifically that he recognized him. Sounds like it was done on purpose to create confusion and force people to question.<br /><br />Something that I don't understand is why the other paramedics have not testified. Is there an explanation for that? Coincidentally or not only the ones we suspect to be in the know testified.
In order for a hoax or ANY secret, guarded mission to be accomplished without fail is for AS FEW AS POSSIBLE to be in on it. Some people are going to be involved without even knowing it, but sworn to keep quiet and follow orders less they face consequences. Things that might appear out of the norm is a possibility, however, why is not revealed to them and they are mandated not to ask questions or discuss it. The superiors are the only ones with a need to know agenda. Their staff simply go in, do what is required of them, and get the heck out. No questions asked. That’s the only way something this sensitive will work. The ONLY way. Maybe that is why testimony went every which way but up. They repoted it as they saw it. Nothing added and nothing speculated on. Just what they were instructed to do and did and that was it. The only one who added something extra was Blount when he said that he saw Murray picking up 3 vials of lidocaine and putting them into his pocket. Perhaps that was his part to play, devil’s advocate. Flip the script.
Who said Blount lied to the fan? That could have easily been the truth and he instead, lied on the stand. For the many reasons 'hesouttamylife' stated, he could have been told to keep quiet because the court was afterall, apart of a sting operation! So even if he had doubts, there were many factors at play that would have prevented him from saying in court "the patient was not MJ!"; I assume all of these factors would also negate that "lie" from being illegal. <br /><br /> The whole court was based on the premise of Michael Jackson having been the victim who died on June 25; with not only the world believing he is dead, but the family and paramedics who all saw the victim *confirmed* the patient was indeed MJ. Remember, atleast two of the paramedics are in the know so they would have played a huge part in suggesting the victim was Michael. The power of suggestion is just that, powerful. So even if again, Blount didn't think the victim looked like MJ and he wasn't in on the hoax, he would have went along with the consensus anyway.<br /><br /> If he is in, that would only be 3 paramedics but still, one less is better.
<br />http://www.michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?f=145&t=18688&start=475#p325011<br /><br />Good eye! <!-- s --><!-- s --> <br /><br />[size=11pt]Although some have said that this thread is just going in circles, and nothing accomplished, yet there has been some definite progress. There have been strong arguments presented both for and against the corpse theory (with neither side fully convincing the other). But this can be a good thing; we will get a lot more information during the hearings, and some may find it easier to keep the faith with the corpse theory.<br /><br />On the other hand, I agree with bec and others, that the corpse theory is the least desirable—and would certainly be avoided if there was any other feasible way. Some are very strongly opposed to this idea, while others are not; and although the emotional argument holds a lot of weight on this forum (at least with some), it probably would not hold much if any weight in a court of law—which is the type of evidence we are looking for.<br /><br />And yes, I did say the fewer the better, not the fewest the best; nevertheless, for the sake of the challenge if nothing else, let’s examine this question from the fewest possible concept (and this is NOT the actual case, but for the purpose of making the point). <br /><br />What if MJ actually died morning of 6-25-09: how many would need to be “in on it”? NONE! Why? Because it would not be a hoax, and there would be no hoax for anyone to be “in on”. Then what if someone else actually died morning of 6-25-09, such as a hospice patient on life support: how many would need to be “in on it”? None, EXCEPT the following: those at the house who knew about the hospice patient there (could be none other than MJ and Murray), and one or at most a few involved in the autopsy.<br /><br />But in that case, wouldn’t people realize that it was not MJ? Scientific analysis (such as dental records) would only be done at the coroner; so this is why at least one there would need to be in. As far as visual recognition by others (paramedics, hospital staff, etc): this might not be as big of a problem as you would think. There are several things that would tend to distract people’s attention from the recognition factor: the power of suggestion (others saying that it is MJ), reports of baldness and wigs, and recent plastic surgery, and not very many recent pictures in the news, and the intensity of an emergency situation with a high profile VIP, and other distractions such as the fire alarm, etc (distractions created by the few who are in on it).<br /><br />We do know that This Scenario at least could have happened with the paramedics, since they reported not recognizing MJ. And if it could happen with the paramedics, then why not at the hospital also? In reality, we know that more are in on it than just Murray and the coroner; nevertheless, this should help to clarify which of the options would require the least number of people to be in on it. Any of the other options (MJ himself, an MJ living double, a dummy, or nothing) would require that ALL of the paramedics be in on it, as well as several at the hospital.<br /><br />So again, if anyone can debunk the corpse theory, please do. But not with emotional reactions please, only documented evidence.[/size] And there were a couple of good comments on the life support patient idea {http://www.michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?f=145&t=18688&start=175#p322797; http://www.michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?f=145&t=18688&start=375#p323766}.<br /><br />See also a similar but slightly different theory {http://www.michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?f=145&t=18688&start=375#p324064; http://www.michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?f=145&t=18688&start=400#p324431; http://www.michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?f=145&t=18688&start=550#p325518}.<br />
Just wondering...<br />Do you think the cabinet from the pictures match the cabinet from the video? Wouldn't that white border show up in the pictures?<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />
<br /><br />Good catch! I'm glad somebody noticed this--it is one of the "secrets" that I have been planning on pointing out, if nobody found it. But I'm always glad when someone else finds it first. There is one more thing about this that I will include later, if nobody else gets it first.<br /><br />
<br /><br /><br />TS, I was wondering what the other one more thing you were going to include. Did you write it to us already or someone else has found it or are you waiting for the ambulance research/discussion to end?
<br /><br />So far, I haven't seen anyone find the other thing on this. I'll give it a few more days for someone else to find it.
<br /><br /> Can you at least give us help in the right direction...it's hard to know what were looking for when we have nothing to go on. <!-- s:) -->:)<!-- s:) -->
<br /><br />Back on topic ...<br /><br />[size=14pt]I am now going to say that the staged photo was done in the same LAFD #71 ambulance--there were not two different ambulances. In fact, why would they need a different ambulance (rented or otherwise), if the FBI was working directly with LAFD station #71?[/size]<br /><br />The answer to the above pictures can be found in this video {http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A09tRR6ppKQ}.<br />
<br /><br />That's the key, isn't it?<br /><br />Answers everything. Why would they need a body [to fool medical staff @UCLA] if the FBI is working directly with MJ?
If the FBI was working directly with LAFD it doesn't mean ALL LAFD knows MJ faked his death.<br /><br />Anyway, thank you for posting those comments from TS. <br /><br />But for me TS sounds like supporting the corpse theory, and for you TS obviously sounds like supporting the nobody theory. <br /><br />TS insisted many times on the paramedics, asking us to figure out if ALL of them were in. Right from the beginning. I have this feeling that not ALL the paramedics are in, but that's just my feeling. I can't prove it though.<br />FBI working with LAFD could also mean FBI was able to provide a corpse (I think they have power and resources to do this) and only Senneff and Goodwin had to be in as they appear in the fake ambulance photo. The less in the know the better, even if FBI is involved. <br /><br />I also agree with those who say those who are not in the know are under the influence of the power of suggestion. But for an observing man the power of suggestion is not convincing enough though. Like you can tell me it's black when I see it with my own eyes it is white. There has to be confusion for the power of suggestion to work.
I've been away for the weekend and come back to find .......... nothing's changed!<br /><br />TS once warned that we can't solve problems in our theories by simply saying such and such must be 'in on it' (or words to that effect). I wonder if the FBI might comes under that category - a bit like the cavalry riding in and sorting everything out at a stroke! It may be too simple to say their involvement makes anything possible - on the other hand, that may be the simplicity that does indeed explain it all!<br /><br />Could the FBI have instructed paramedics, doctors, coroner (all the people we've suspected as in on it), to tell the stories we've heard under the guise of covering up how MJ really 'died', without them ever having to be told that MJ is alive? Could all these people be 'in on' something top secret, without knowing what exactly?
<br />Could the FBI have instructed paramedics, doctors, coroner (all the people we've suspected as in on it), to tell the stories we've heard under the guise of covering up how MJ really 'died', without them ever having to be told that MJ is alive? Could all these people be 'in on' something top secret, without knowing what exactly?<br />
<br /><br />But in this case and with no body they would figure it out it can be a hoax. FBI can't stop them from thinking for themselves.<br /><br />
^^ well Gina, WE figured out it's a hoax and no-one believes US!<br /><br />THEY presumably have far more information than us, and yes, would quite probably have worked it out, even if they hadn't actually been told - but they can't/won't say because of the handy FBI involvement!
Sorry, Gina I added a bit to my post while you were posting!<br /><br />Hmm - who's to say they actually saw ANYTHING happening? They could've just been told what to say they saw. Maybe?
Murray = FBI agent<br /><br />He is there, on hand to 'explain' as much as needs to be explained and give orders to those that need to know as June 25th unfolds???<br /><br />Has my weekend away revitalised my brain or made it total mush?!
No bec, no "key" there at all lol. All that shows is the paramedics in the staged ambulance photo had to be in on it. 2 paramedics.<br /><br /> Just because the F.B.I. is involved, doesn't mean having everyone "in on it" is safe. This is still a hoax at the end of the day, and it needs to be done with a theory that involves the LEAST amount of people. TS stated his frustration earlier in this thread by stating how everyones solution seems to be, "well they must be in on it". Thank you for posting those posts by TS though; because they do seem to indirectly point to one theory. A corpse. The 'nothing' theory was tossed out long ago.<br /><br /> You don't think TS asked everyone to find information on the longest lengths of time resuscitation efforts have been performed at UCLA, AFTER a person has flatlined, for no reason at all? Do you?<br /><br /> I think the old english proverb "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink" applies here...
@curls I do think that if anyone found out about the hoax after, the FBI involvement would keep them from "spilling the beans", but they didn't have to know anything beforehand.
<br /><br /> You don't think TS asked everyone to find information on the longest lengths of time resuscitation efforts have been performed at UCLA, AFTER a person has flatlined, for no reason at all? Do you?<br /><br />
<br /><br />Good point Suzy7.<br /><br />TS threw that question out to us and a few people picked up on it.....<br />
Body proponents make this 100% harder then it has to be. The only people that really have to be fooled are the media and the public. Period. Fantasize all you want about dead bodies, the ruse doesn't have to go that deep.<br /><br />People get all bent out of shape about fooling people that came into contact with the body on a speculative level. Alleged "people". None of them have ever come forward. They exist only in speculation and imagination. Whispers and insinuations. Assumptive persons that may OR MAY NOT EXIST.<br /><br />Suzy, maybe the horse doesn't drink because the bucket is fouled and the handler is too inattentive to notice.
<br /><br /> You don't think TS asked everyone to find information on the longest lengths of time resuscitation efforts have been performed at UCLA, AFTER a person has flatlined, for no reason at all? Do you?<br /><br />
<br /><br /><br />Good point Suzy7.<br /><br />TS threw that question out to us and a few people picked up on it.....<br /><br />
<br /><br />Yeah to go research and find out that those circumstances were under very controlled conditions with completely different circumstances then the "official story" of what happened to MJ on 6/25/09.
How is a person receiving resuscitation efforts for over 2 hours on the day of June 25, 2009, different from the other circumstances? All of the other situations sound much like the events that unfolded at UCLA on June 25, 2009.<br /><br /> The doctors and paramedics who testified about working on a body, don't exist? Hmmm...<br /><br /> No one is getting bent out of shape, but it seems you are for no reason at all. I'm not sure what part of TS' posts you interpret as 'nothing or MJ went to UCLA'. Again, you nor anyone else have provided evidence against the corpse theory.<br /><br /><br /> The person I referred to as "leading the horse to water", was TS. He did say "I would be handing much of it out on a silver platter", so why complicate things?<br />
The person I referred to as "leading the horse to water", was TS. He did say "I would be handing much of it out on a silver platter", so why complicate things?
<br />Yes, that would be 1 ambulance in real time, person on life support went to UCLA, only ambulance photo done another day, and a few good FBI agents helped with the operation because they've been carrying out a sting. They probably continued giving this then deceased patient resuscitation efforts long past normal times because they were told it was Michael Jackson. And MJ was flying.<br /><br />Gina<br /><br />
[size=9pt]I also agree with those who say those who are not in the know are under the influence of the power of suggestion. But for an observing man the power of suggestion is not convincing enough though. Like you can tell me it's black when I see it with my own eyes it is white. There has to be confusion for the power of suggestion to work.[/size]
<br />[size=9pt]Also if people are super busy working full time, family etc. They simply don’t have time to investigate more than just hear the main news stories. Even 10 years after 911, tons still believe the official story because they don’t look too deeply into things.[/size]<br /><br />[size=9pt]Curls[/size]<br />
[size=9pt]Could the FBI have instructed paramedics, doctors, coroner (all the people we've suspected as in on it), to tell the stories we've heard under the guise of covering up how MJ really 'died', without them ever having to be told that MJ is alive? Could all these people be 'in on' something top secret, without knowing what exactly?[/size]
<br />[size=9pt]I remember early on in 2009, I saw a re-inactment of MJ being murdered in the bed, by the same ones (CIA, etc. IDK) following the so-called pattern of other “take-outs” they had done, and the video mentioned a few names, possibly Tu-pac. But if these people are the creators of the elaborate hoax stories, why would they go so incredibly far. It would mean that TS works for them as a mis-information agent, and is evil. It’s a theory I thought way back, but just can’t see happening.[/size]
[size=9pt]Could the FBI have instructed paramedics, doctors, coroner (all the people we've suspected as in on it), to tell the stories we've heard under the guise of covering up how MJ really 'died', without them ever having to be told that MJ is alive? Could all these people be 'in on' something top secret, without knowing what exactly?[/size]
<br />[size=9pt]I remember early on in 2009, I saw a re-inactment of MJ being murdered in the bed, by the same ones (CIA, etc. IDK) following the so-called pattern of other “take-outs” they had done, and the video mentioned a few names, possibly Tu-pac. But if these people are the creators of the elaborate hoax stories, why would they go so incredibly far. It would mean that TS works for them as a mis-information agent, and is evil. It’s a theory I thought way back, but just can’t see happening.[/size]<br />
<br /><br />I think you misunderstood me, or I didn't explain very well - probably the latter! Reading it again my post sounds way out there - paramedics etc, in on covering up what they were led to believe was a successful murder with a plausible death scenario. Hmm, seems like just telling them about MJ's hoax would be simpler! Ignore me - I'll go back to my corner and just watch!
I am very confused.<br /><br />For how long are we going to "rehears" this investigation about what/who was in the ambulance?!<br />What are we missing?<br /><br />IMO all 5 paramedics saw the body. Also Faheen and Amir. And a few people at UCLA. I don't get it how they can all be in.
<br />The question of whether all, some, or none of the paramedics are in on the hoax, is a question that has not yet been answered with at least two strong points which nobody can debunk. Nevertheless, between the staged ambulance photo, and especially with the FBI involvement: nearly everyone is agreed that at least one or more of the paramedics are in on it. <br /><br />On the other hand, though, so far nobody has offered any strong support for ALL of the paramedics being in on it; and if any of them were not in on it, there would almost certainly need to be a real corpse. Please don’t dismiss this possibility too quickly; it would explain the warm room, the paramedics not recognizing MJ, he looked like a frail old man, etc—and it would also decrease the amount of people that would need to be in on it (both at the house, and at the hospital). If someone can bring at least two strong points against the corpse theory, and nobody can debunk either of the two: fine. And if not, then we need to be open to considering all possibilities—that is what good investigation is all about.<br />
<br /><br />IMO, the 'key' to figuring out who or what was in the ambulance greatly depends on whether or not ALL, none, or some of the paramedics were in on it. ANYTHING other than a real corpse would require that ALL the paramedics and ALL UCLA staff (that were in contact with the body) were 'in on it' (dummy, nothing, live MJ, living double). If it had been a 'real' emergency (and everything so far points to The Scenario being 'played out' as real as possible...i.e. as if it really was MJ 'dying' or already dead)....then there had to be more people involved at UCLA then just Cooper and Nguyen. The only way, IMO, to avoid having all these unnecessary people in on it would be to have a real body/corpse. Nguyen was supposedly called only AFTER resuscitation efforts had begun in the ER. So IF Cooper was the ONLY one at UCLA that was 'in on it'...and anything other than a real corpse was used...then that would mean that the 'body' was quickly ushered into a private room and the ONLY staff member present would've been Cooper. Not only is this highly unlikely (given the desire to keep it looking 'real')...but it would also raise ALOT of questions with all other staff that weren't in on it (i.e. they'd know that something was definitely 'up' because there's no way only ONE doctor would be working a 'body' in a real emergency). In ANY real emergency, a team of doctors, nurses, etc are present. It's difficult (for me anyway) to think that for the 2+ hours that this 'body' was being 'worked' at UCLA, that the ONLY staff members who saw the 'body' were Cooper and Nguyen. Sure, it's not impossible but IMO it's not plausible IF the goal was to keep it looking like a 'real' emergency.<br /><br />Back to the paramedics:<br /><br />TS:<br />
<br />A third strong point is the nothing theory would require ALL of the paramedics in on the hoax (which nobody has offered even ONE strong point, that I know of, much less two or three). And it would also require ALL of the UCLA staff who worked the situation, to be in on it. Again, why have so many in on it?<br />
<br /><br />Although TS was specifically talking about the 'nothing' theory...the same applies to ANY other theory other than a real corpse. Sure, they could ALL be 'in on it' but we still have yet to come up with any strong points that suggest they all were.<br /><br />I tend to think that Senneff was 'in on it'...but I'm not sure of the others. IMO, two strong points suggesting that Senneff could be 'in on it' are:<br /><br />1) he is the one who filled out the (incorrect) paramedic report (that just so happens to 'fit' Alvarez's story)<br />2) he is the one who went back into the house and back upstairs to the bedroom AFTER the 'body' was loaded into the ambulance (it just seems strange that, in a real emergency, a professionally trained paramedic would need to return to the 'scene' because he 'forgot' some supplies...in a 'real' emergency seconds matter)<br /><br />The problem I have with excluding the other paramedics as being 'in on it' is that none of them testified (other than Senneff and Blount)...so we don't have any 'evidence' to analyze coming directly from them. Blount is 'tricky' to figure out because (if we believe Sharon Sydney's story---which I would take with a gallon of salt considering she believes MJ was kidnapped and is being used as a 'music slave' :?), he didn't recognize the 'body' as being MJ. He then changed his 'story' on the witness stand to say he did recognize MJ right away. Not sure if we can logically deduce anything conclusively with that (i.e. there are several possibilities, including that Sydney's story is hogwash).<br /><br />The other things that trip me up with the other paramedics NOT being 'in on it' is that they supposedly sat there and waited while Senneff returned into the house. Would they not have found it odd and/or told him to leave the stuff behind cause they have to go? The other thing is the ambulance backing out at a snail's pace. In a real emergency, wouldn't this also be 'odd' behavior/actions of professionally trained EMT's? It could suggest that the driver was also 'in on it'...but wouldn't it raise questions with the paramedics that weren't 'in on it' (i.e. wouldn't they find the backing out slowly as 'odd' given it was supposedly a real emergency)?<br /><br />So...I'm still stuck on how many paramedics were actually 'in on it'. I tend to believe that the answer to that is NOT that they were ALL 'in on it'...nor that NONE were 'in on it'...it makes more sense (to me) that at least one, but possibly more, were in on it (with Senneff being the top contender of being 'in on it'). But either way, unless they were ALL in on it, then none of the other theories make sense (i.e. there would have to have been a real corpse). <br /><br />IF we can somehow conclude (with two or three strong points) that ALL the paramedics AND several UCLA staff (other than Cooper and Nguyen) were 'in on it', then any of the other theories are valid (i.e. dummy, nothing, live MJ, living double). The problem is that, to date, we have been unable to 'prove' this. That could mean that we're missing something OR that we just don't have/know all the 'pieces' yet (possibly intentionally) OR it could mean that there isn't two or three strong points because they weren't ALL 'in on it'.<br /><br />With L.O.V.E. always.<br /><br />
<br />Anyone who has been the person who arrive at the UCLA arrived dead, there is no IV of serum or medication<br /><br />
<br /><br />My question, why a person who is between life and death has no IV?, Or there was nothing in that stretcher or the person was dead arrive at the hospital<br />
Comments