<br /><br />Also I can't get my head around the scenario. So TS asked us, who went to UCLA, if anything. But regardless of who went, what went or if MJ went, you would still come up with the same thing...it is damn risky, the more I look at it, the more it looks really sloppy and not required and MJ is anything but sloppy.<br />
<br /><br /><br />Are we sure, that on 25 june 2009 went someone to UCLA? Are we sure that the picture with those people on UCLA are from 25 June 2009? I remember reading (dont know where) on exif that that picture was taken earlier.<br />Why there is nobody to tell us that he or she saw Michael at the hospital that day?<br /><br />According wikipedia Ed McMahon died on June 23, 2009, shortly after midnight at the Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center in Los Angeles, California. He was 86 years old. His nurse, Julie Koehne, RN, stated he went peacefully. No formal cause of death was given, but McMahon's publicist attributed his death to the many health problems he had suffered over his final months. McMahon had said that he still suffered from the injury to his neck in March 2007. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ed_McMahon#Death<br /><br />What if that picture we all saw was from june 23 not from june 25? <br /><br />Just my opinions...dont shoot me :icon_redface:
<br /><br />Also I can't get my head around the scenario. So TS asked us, who went to UCLA, if anything. But regardless of who went, what went or if MJ went, you would still come up with the same thing...it is damn risky, the more I look at it, the more it looks really sloppy and not required and MJ is anything but sloppy.<br />
<br /><br /><br />Are we sure, that on 25 june 2009 went someone to UCLA? Are we sure that the picture with those people on UCLA are from 25 June 2009? I remember reading (dont know where) on exif that that picture was taken earlier.<br />Why there is nobody to tell us that he or she saw Michael at the hospital that day?<br /><br />According wikipedia Ed McMahon died on June 23, 2009, shortly after midnight at the Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center in Los Angeles, California. He was 86 years old. His nurse, Julie Koehne, RN, stated he went peacefully. No formal cause of death was given, but McMahon's publicist attributed his death to the many health problems he had suffered over his final months. McMahon had said that he still suffered from the injury to his neck in March 2007. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ed_McMahon#Death<br /><br />What if that picture we all saw was from june 23 not from june 25? <br /><br />Just my opinions...dont shoot me :icon_redface:<br />
<br /><br />Do you remember the investigation threads that TS started? Well TS asked us to figure out what went to UCLA (a dead body, double, MJ or nothing) I'm pretty sure 'nothing' got debunked and 'MJ going to UCLA' was debunked. But on June 25th 2009 something DID go to UCLA, but the photo that was taken of MJ in the ambo wasn't taken on the fly (not all of it anyway), but some photo was staged before June 25th by the photog Ben (that day and the other da... guy). <br /><br />Do you mean the fans waiting outside UCLA? Well yes they were really there that day.<br /><br />Sorry what picture from June 23rd do you mean?
This is a picture taken by Ben Evensted on the 25th June 2009...from a different angle...It clearly shows "something" on the stretcher, and someone shirtless...So I beleive we concluded that "something was transported that day, with Paramedics from #71, and MJ's bodyguards...<br />
<br />This is a picture taken by Ben Evensted on the 25th June 2009...from a different angle...It clearly shows "something" on the stretcher, and someone shirtless...So I beleive we concluded that "something was transported that day, with Paramedics from #71, and MJ's bodyguards...<br /><br />
<br /><br />Someone who died, or someone who was alive and did not need any medication for what in the photo there is no IV<br /><br />
And another thing the June 25 had 2 helicopters in the UCLA, one to transport the body and another for filming the show for the media,..complicity of the UCLA.<br /><br />
@Flory, the two different days theory has been thoroughly debunked. There was an ambulance that went from Carrolwood to UCLA on 6/25/09, as reported and as witnessed. You can review that on this very thread, so please do if you have any doubts. That was Level 7a and we have moved on to 7B and c, respectively, who or what went to UCLA on 6/25/09, and is it a hoax court, sting court, or both?<br /><br />I mean it's been a long time but it's all on this thread right here so let's not muddy the waters too much.<br /><br />The only reason I can think of MJ having to go to UCLA is so they could court a large crowd of people. You couldn't fit a large crowd of people on the street in front of Carrolwood.<br /><br />BUT.<br /><br />A. They could have selected a hoax house which was in a location that could accommodate a large crowd of people.<br /><br />B. The 2 hours and 5 minutes that MJ was reportedly being worked on was the factor that allowed a large crowd of people to collect at the scene. As noted the 2:26pm calling of death was the least important number in the numerology so this wasn't really necessary, or at least the least necessary factor. So I am left thinking that the large crowd of people being drawn to a vigil was important. Perhaps just the media factor, a large crowd of people holding vigil for MJ outside the facility was important for the hoax story, the resurrection of MJ's image began right then. So how could we have a large crowd of people gather to hold vigil WITHOUT MJ going to UCLA?<br /><br />C. I'm led back to A. They could have selected a hoax house which could have accommodated a large crowd of people outside. However, Carrolwood is located kitty-corner from a house owned by Elvis. Carrolwood is surrounded by a solid exterior wall with a gated entrance. That can't be too unusual in LA., even though the location proxy to the Elvis house could be hard to come by. So was the location near the Elvis house so important that it necessitated the UCLA mess? With all the other hints, clues, and connections embedded within this hoax, it's difficult to believe a location near an Elvis house would be the link in the chain that required such an extreme risk as sending "MJ" to UCLA that day.<br /><br />D. Just occurred to me, MJ could have "died" at Staples Center during a rehearsal. Word could be "leaked" that MJ had a heart attack while rehearsing, paramedics could have attended, a large crowd could easily be accommodated outside, and after a time, the body could go directly to the corner's office (who is already, clearly, in on it).<br /><br />Seems to me that would work without the giant mess that would be/was UCLA involvement. Of course we would have missed out on the helicopter ride. I dunno, The Scenario is/was perfect drama for Live TV, so it is/was genius, but the UCLA factor is/was, no matter how you look at it, a GIANT risk, perhaps one not even crucial to the success of the project?<br /><br />It's tough to dance around without conceding that MJ must be dead based on TS's argument of risk avoidance.
My logic says to me that a “body” had to be taken from Carolwood to UCLA to distract attention of the goings on and clean up efforts, staging, etc. at the home long enough for loose ends to be tied together before attention was reverted back to the residence.
<br />My logic says to me that a “body” had to be taken from Carolwood to UCLA to distract attention of the goings on and clean up efforts, staging, etc. at the home long enough for loose ends to be tied together before attention was reverted back to the residence. <br />
<br /><br /><br /><br />The medical staff of the UCLA, the paramedics and bodyguards were creating a scene lure of his body being transferred to distract the media, that makes sense
The only reason I can think of MJ having to go to UCLA is so they could court a large crowd of people. You couldn't fit a large crowd of people on the street in front of Carrolwood.
<br />That’s why a parade—it accommodates larger amounts of people for a longer period of time. MJ’s hoax literally paraded along a considerable stretch for maximum complexity as well. Route –Staples, Carolwood (including Elvis’ former house), UCLA, coroner’s garage & office, Forest Lawn—City of Angels generally. As far as risk though, busy-ness and a flurry of events helps to cover/hide deliberate or accidental inconsistencies/hoax clues. That’s how magicians do their tricking. The biggest puzzle to me is who knew and who didn’t as it was happening. So TS-- "risk" shmisk. :icon_lol:<br />
Well for risk avoidance all that was done was that the masses were led to believe that MJ went to UCLA via what was reported by the absolute media frenzy (who must have been fed that information via "someone else"). <br /><br />It doesn't necessarily mean MJ was there....just the illusion he was there would have been enough to implement the scenes that day outside UCLA which were beamed all over the world.
<br />I had to go back and double check the wording of the verdict being read in the Conrad Murray trial for reference:<br /><br />Alleged victim: Michael Joseph Jackson<br /><br />Alleged date of June 25th 2009<br /><br />Just thinking out loud here.......if the Dr M trial/court was real and was being used for a sting operation then does the use of "alleged victim" and "alleged date" cover them? IDK......<br />
<br /><br />Good question. :icon_idea:<br /><br />Now you have something else to research ...<br /><br /> :icon_bounce:<br />
<br /><br />Bear with me but I'm going slightly off topic here. (Apologies my friends!)<br /><br />About the FBI...<br /><br />Maybe...the sting is against the FBI, or an internal sting - going on the assumption, for the purpose of this post, that there IS a sting.<br /><br /><br /><br />Remember this video? MJ was HEAVILY scrutinized by the FBI for years, quite intrusively. It started with death threats against MJ then continued with the molestation allegations. Brian Oxman claims it was he who requested the files on MJ be released (back in Aug '09) and the 333 pages were released on 12/22/09 (intended for 12/21). He says he knew, as an attorney, that the FBI were significantly involved in Michael's life. <br /><br />One of the FBI's top priorities is public corruption in government agencies so I imagine theoretically that this could include the FBI themselves. The X Files is a perfect example of corruption within the upper echelons of the organization. If TPTB wanted to nail MJ to the cross with the allegations, they could muscle their way in via the FBI in an effort to intimidate Michael and make his life hell. However, in the process, they found no evidence against Michael. Did they stop keeping an eye on MJ? Probably not. Is it possible that during this, some honest agents saw what was really happening and teamed up with Michael for his hoax and a sting against their own agency? Ya it's possible.<br /><br />The FBI numerology (333, 12/21) therefore could've been a wink from MJ's team OR it could've been from the "other" side letting Michael know they were onto him.<br /><br />Once again sorry for off-topic'ing here. I just had these thoughts come to me about an hour ago and wanted to put them out there, right or wrong.
<br />Well for risk avoidance all that was done was that the masses were led to believe that MJ went to UCLA via what was reported by the absolute media frenzy (who must have been fed that information via "someone else"). <br /><br />It doesn't necessarily mean MJ was there....just the illusion he was there would have been enough to implement the scenes that day outside UCLA which were beamed all over the world.<br />
<br /><br />Good point.<br /><br /><br />To attain the highest media attention as possible on a public place like the UCLA. If the UCLA, helicopter, ambulance, paramedics a.o. were not be a part on this hoax it would have been less sensational, dramatic and complicated. The more a detailed, well thought out and complex scenario, the more credible and convincing the hoax, which I think is risk avoidance too. <br /><br /><br />@TS, thank you for the leads, much appreciated I allegedly failed to find the words "alleged murderer" and/or "alleged victim" in a verdict during a trial movie, so it is possible that MJ's alleged movie about this hoax might be the first movie EVER who uses these words during a verdict, which makes it phenomenal :icon_e_wink:.
Regarding the "Body" going to UCLA...<br /><br />what testimonies were useful in the trial? was any of the testimonies from those in UCLA helpful towards to clues? I haven't watched all testimonies as yet
Last night I was watching the Jodie Foster movie "Contact" and in it was mentioned something called "Occam's razor" which is a principle stating that among competing hypotheses, the one that makes the fewest assumptions should be selected. The razor states that one should proceed to simpler theories until simplicity can be traded for greater explanatory power: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor<br /><br />Anyway thinking about this principle - the hoax and how it was pulled off immediately sprung into my mind. It reminded me of what TS talked about at the very beginning of this Level:<br /><br />
At this point, I’m going to give you a couple of real good pointers, which should help you as we go through this final level. Start with the fewest people possible in on it, which would actually be zero and no hoax (MJ really died); and then work backwards from that point—changing nothing from the no hoax scenario, except what is NEEDED to be changed in order to accomplish the hoax. I already gave you an example with the ambulance: if MJ really died, then the ambulance came to Carolwood and went to UCLA on June 25, 2009. Don’t change that for the hoax, unless there is a need for it to happen on a different day. And use this same principle, in putting all the pieces together.
<br />Last night I was watching the Jodie Foster movie "Contact" and in it was mentioned something called "Occam's razor" which is a principle stating that among competing hypotheses, the one that makes the fewest assumptions should be selected. The razor states that one should proceed to simpler theories until simplicity can be traded for greater explanatory power: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor<br /><br />Anyway thinking about this principle - the hoax and how it was pulled off immediately sprung into my mind. It reminded me of what TS talked about at the very beginning of this Level:<br /><br />
At this point, I’m going to give you a couple of real good pointers, which should help you as we go through this final level. Start with the fewest people possible in on it, which would actually be zero and no hoax (MJ really died); and then work backwards from that point—changing nothing from the no hoax scenario, except what is NEEDED to be changed in order to accomplish the hoax. I already gave you an example with the ambulance: if MJ really died, then the ambulance came to Carolwood and went to UCLA on June 25, 2009. Don’t change that for the hoax, unless there is a need for it to happen on a different day. And use this same principle, in putting all the pieces together.
<br />
<br /><br />This does make me wonder which June 25 scenario makes the fewest assumptions. Pretty much all of them require the same key people to be in on it.
Actually, the fewest assumptions principle could eliminate MJ leaving on a jet plane because that theory would be adding an airport and its officials - in addition to a hospital.
The June 25 if they had 2 helicopters at UCLA but none fly in Carolwood, all the attention was in the hospital and none in the house.<br />Anyone know if that day had any ban on flights over the area where is the house.?
<br />Actually, the fewest assumptions principle could eliminate MJ leaving on a jet plane because that theory would be adding an airport and its officials - in addition to a hospital.<br />
<br />If we follow that Occam's razor principle then yes it does......in fact following that principle then the simplest explanation is that MJ is dead...... :errrr:<br /><br />I think I'll forget I read about that principle and carry on as usual :icon_e_biggrin:
<br />Actually, the fewest assumptions principle could eliminate MJ leaving on a jet plane because that theory would be adding an airport and its officials - in addition to a hospital.<br />
<br />If we follow that Occam's razor principle then yes it does......in fact following that principle then the simplest explanation is that MJ is dead...... :errrr:<br /><br />I think I'll forget I read about that principle and carry on as usual :icon_e_biggrin:<br />
<br /><br />See but that's not at all the simplest explanation which is why we are all here. That explanation forces you to believe all these inconsistencies and discrepancies are just how things are in real life and all the numbers are just coincidences and MJ's entire family are callous and completely uncaring AND sociopathic enough to perpetuate a false hoax for years... including his 15 year old daughter. So really, that explanation asks us to make quite a few assumptions to arrive at it.<br /><br />I agree completely with Andrea. Sending MJ off to the airport as "risk avoidance" necessitates an entire second location and entire second set of people to either fool or let in on things. If it's so risky to send MJ to the hospital when everyone in the world KNOWS he's there anyway, then how is it comparably safe to send him to an airport to get on a plane outa dodge when he's supposed to be dead at UCLA?<br /><br />One could argue, well MJ escaped the night before, no one was looking for him at the time nor was anyone even probably thinking about MJ. True, however, this is the most famous man in the world. If you see MJ, it isn't something you're likely to forget, no matter how you feel about him, and you ESPECIALLY don't forget it when 24hrs later he's suddenly dead, with his body being flown around on live TV and the internet crashes. You remember and you go, wait, I saw him at LAX last night... wtf??<br /><br />So then you have the same series of problems. How did they get MJ into and out of LAX with no one being the wiser? <br /><br />You use a disguise. Someone else on the stretcher, and all eyes are there. No one is looking at anyone or anything else. He could be his own bodyguard or paramedic, the stretcher draws everyone's attention. MJ could have walked into UCLA in disguise easily, and could have walked right out as well.<br /><br />Surely MJ didn't just figure out how to disguise himself so effectively right before LKL?<br /><br />Ps. <br />
on 1351212884:
<br />Regarding the "Body" going to UCLA...<br /><br />what testimonies were useful in the trial? was any of the testimonies from those in UCLA helpful towards to clues? I haven't watched all testimonies as yet<br />
<br /><br />Please review the thread from page 1, it will answer all your questions. We can't slow down for those who are new, but thankfully you can catch up by reading from the beginning.
Yes @bec - what you covered in your above post was running through my mind and hence that is why I said I was disregarding that principle in relation to the hoax....
<br />Regarding the "Body" going to UCLA...<br /><br />what testimonies were useful in the trial? was any of the testimonies from those in UCLA helpful towards to clues? I haven't watched all testimonies as yet<br />
<br /><br />Please review the thread from page 1, it will answer all your questions. We can't slow down for those who are new, but thankfully you can catch up by reading from the beginning.<br />
<br /><br />it was a rhetorical question more so that actual questions. <br />I don't buy into the UCLA trip was merely to gain a larger crowd, it seems rather thin layered and superficial. The testimonies that happened in the trial of conrad murray would not have existed which would have made it less complicated, less timely and the Dr Murray Character looses some depth on top of that the strange times of the surveilance camera's at the hospital also doesn't exist... less holes in the whole hoax for people to pick out.. How much of the trial was about Doctor Murray, Paramedics and the people from the hospital? and again that's a rhetorical question. <br /><br />
Andrea, thanks for posting the FBI stated reasons for their involvement in MJ’s case.<br />In the new ‘Elvis is Alive’ CD rap song, Elvis sings that he was a Federal agent, so maybe he did have a hand in MJ’s case and hoax, who knows. <br />And unfortunately, there is the dreadful possibility that the incredible numerology and whole entire hoax is not from MJ at all, but from TPTB, Sony, Branca, big companies like Coke, media and all (including FBI), that they have paid off the entire family or threatened them, and MJ is dead. And TS is on payroll as well. The hoax within the hoax in a bad way. But I reject this notion. :errrr: :icon_mrgreen:<br /><br />Leilani81<br />
Regarding the "Body" going to UCLA...<br /><br />what testimonies were useful in the trial? was any of the testimonies from those in UCLA helpful towards to clues? I haven't watched all testimonies as yet
B. Defendant’s Misrepresentations to and Concealment from UCLA Doctors.<br />1. Defendant’s false statements to Dr. Cooper.<br />14. On June 25, 2009, at 13:15 hours or 1:15 p.m., the paramedics brought Michael Jackson into<br />the UCLA emergency room. Defendant Murray was present, and in his presence Michael Jackson was <br />identified to UCLA personnel under the false name Soule Shaun.
<br />What also comes to my mind is Kathy Hilton. She tells Pierce Morgan that she went to UCLA that day, that Latoya and Randy let her in the room where MJ supposedly was, and she said he was dead. However this is where it gets bizarre. At 2:20 she rubbed his head, feet and whispered funny things in his ear. :affraid: So was this a dead hospice patient or MJ in bed pretending to be dead? :icon_lol:<br /><br /><br /><br />I agree that this working back from MJ is dead scenario, and including only the fewest people needed for a hoax, is really simplest if MJ is there in disguise, with everyone's focus on the stretcher.
I'm sure TS didn't ask about that movie for nothing....there must be something very interesting about it and it's very frustrating that I can't find or guess what movie is that.<br /><br /> :icon_e_sad:<br /><br />There were some movies relevant for this hoax, starting with The court of Last resort, then Gilda and The Illusionist and V for Vendetta and 2012. TS can't you please narrow the research area and give us some hints?<br />
<br />Actually, the fewest assumptions principle could eliminate MJ leaving on a jet plane because that theory would be adding an airport and its officials - in addition to a hospital.<br />
<br /><br /><br />perhaps at some point ( i am guessing long ago ) he found a way to come and go as he pleased unnoticed and without all the hoopla. <br /><br />we saw murray running round all over with just one person . come to think of it why did he need that person anyway? body guard ? why was that dude the one who was forking over the money for the balloon that was bought for the kid that one time? personal assistant? and where and when did this person become involved? just wondering.
Comments