you know i am looking at this letter and it is saying that this kid will have to sign a confidentiality agreement when they turn twenty one. how does someone foretell that this kid is going to be willing to sign this when they come of age? isn't that kind of off :icon_e_confused:
I suggest you guys get your heads out of the garbage and refresh your memories by reading the court transcripts - Souza, where are they hiding these days? They used to be an easy to find sticky or blog or something ... now I can't find them to post a much needed link right here, right now.<br /><br />The only merit in the past few posts and links in this thread is as a reminder of just how far the conspiracy, manipulation, lies and evil surrounding the Jacksons spreads.<br /><br />EDIT: Found them, and much more than just court transcripts, under 'MJDHI Blog', scroll down to 2010, 'V for Vendetta - V for Vengeance' (Sorry Souza, they weren't hidden at all, I just hadn't scrolled down far enough!) http://www.michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/forum/index.php/page,mjdhi_blog_index.html<br /><br />Seriously, if you're having doubts about MJ's innocence, spend some time reading that, instead of listening to 'MJFacts'.
Curls, I'm not listening to 'MJfacts', I'm trying to find out if the letter Suspicious posted, is genuine. If so, then it isn't so strange that I'm adding up these things. We are investigators, right?
<br />In short, it's conceivable that Gordon was in the know and feeding information to La Toya. <br />
<br /><br />Hi Starchild,<br /><br />But 'in the know' about what then? Knew Michael's advisers/powerfull men about these checks, gave this information to Jack Gordon who then told it to La Toya, who then told the rest of the world about it? That doesn't change the fact that these checks seems certainly to exist, because La Toya knew about the name on the check, which appeared in the letter of Suspicious, with the exact amount as well.
if the statement here is an actual artifact of this whole saga then if it implies sexual misconduct doesn't it also imply that it was not suddenly realized by the "victim" all these years later? if this kid also gave testimony in 2005 , as an adult then that is perjury right? hummm then you must ask where they protecting mike or their own parents ? "if" latoya is to be believed :suspect: what does it say about dear sweet kate :icon_rolleyes: and her relationship with her son? <br /><br />@curls we have been diggin in the garbage throughout this whole thing. perhaps the reality of all this is buried in there somewhere and we are going to have to get a little dirty to figure it out. as for michael's innocence my concern is just how innocent is/was he and is that at the bottom of this messy pit what really was exploited along with his gifts. <br /><br />sadly though even if we figure it all out how are we ever going to really know if we have or not. :screaming-7365:<br /><br />
<br />In short, it's conceivable that Gordon was in the know and feeding information to La Toya. <br />
<br /><br />Hi Starchild,<br /><br />But 'in the know' about what then? Knew Michael's advisers/powerfull men about these checks, gave this information to Jack Gordon who then told it to La Toya, who then told the rest of the world about it? <br />
<br /><br />That’s what I glean from reading La Toya’s words in Starting Over.<br /><br /><br />
on 1402145865:
<br />That doesn't change the fact that these checks seems certainly to exist, because La Toya knew about the name on the check, which appeared in the letter of Suspicious, with the exact amount as well.
<br /><br />I have no idea where La Toya would have obtained her information if she didn’t receive it from Jack Gordon, particularly given her limited contact with others (including her mother) while she was entangled with Jack Gordon. <br /><br /><br />I do agree with you that it would be nice to know the actual origins of the letter, and it would be nice to have a better context of the twitter discussion in which the letter appeared.<br /><br />Do, I’m all out of ideas and speculations on this topic. :smiley-vault-misc-150:
<br /><br />I have no idea where La Toya would have obtained her information if she didn’t receive it from Jack Gordon, particularly given her limited contact with others (including her mother) while she was entangled with Jack Gordon. <br /><br />I do agree with you that it would be nice to know the actual origins of the letter, and it would be nice to have a better context of the twitter discussion in which the letter appeared.<br /><br />Do, I’m all out of ideas and speculations on this topic.[/color][/font] :smiley-vault-misc-150:<br />
<br /><br />Hi Starchild,<br /><br />La Toya, by her own saying, obtained this information from her mother. I know it seems hard to grasp, because it would put everything we wanted to believe about this family, in a different light. Many people don't want to see any wrongdoing in Katherine. But yelling at your husband: stop it, you're gonna kill him, you're gonna kill him (Michael's words) and then allow many times after that more abuse of your children, does say something. According to La Toya she called Michael 'a damn faggot' when she went to show the checks to La Toya.<br /><br />You're right, it's important to know if this letter exists and the context of the twitter discussion.
Do, I did take a look at those 'desiree' links you posted for me. Took just a couple of minutes to see she was using MJFacts as one of her 'sources'. That told me all I needed to know really, as I've seen that site before. A hater who lies and twists facts to 'prove' his own agenda. Couple more minutes to find the original tweet (and I don't even use Twitter!) Job done!<br /><br />Don't you find it odd that random internet bloggers can come up with the dirt, when all the decades of official investigations into MJ never came up with anything on him ... and I'm damn sure they wanted to.
<br />Don't you find it odd that random internet bloggers can come up with the dirt, when all the decades of official investigations into MJ never came up with anything on him ... and I'm damn sure they wanted to.<br />
<br /><br />Curls, that's absolutely true, I didn't look at it that way. I guess it's difficult for me to stick to an opinion (I tend to look at every angle and then I cannot decide what to believe. It's a real shortcoming, I know).<br />Anyway, thank you for answering me and keeping me on track, and for your patience!
<br />this mjfacts person does seem to have an awful lot of argument and not a lot of facts, but where did they get this letter?<br />
<br /><br />to quote this as--ole , he gives you the answer if you read further down the link.....<br />someone asked where he got this from and he replied<br />"i made it up to show Curt how easy it is to fake documents after he posted a supposed emancipation letter related to Jordan C."<br /><br />This piece of crap doesn't deserve the time given him here in this thread.
I cannot believe what I'm seeing. How can you entertain the idea that Michael was guilty? That man has nothing but a heart of gold. I've spent most of my life defending him to people and I will continue to do so. I never thought that I would need to defend him here. :over-react-smiley:
Michael writing checks or giving gifts, especially during the 80's and 90's when he was at his most successful, doesn't mean anything. He's a very generous person, and was known for giving expensive gifts to people he cared about on a whim. So it's not inconceivable that, when finding out one of his young friend's father works a rather low-paying job, that he would want to assist them. That's just the type of person he was.<br /><br />If you don't understand why he would do this simply out of the kindness of his heart, than you don't know Michael.<br /><br />I'm not sure how to properly embed youtube videos, so here's a link to Chris Tucker giving a little taste of Michael's generous heart (and being wicked funny doing so)
<br />This piece of crap doesn't deserve the time given him here in this thread.<br />
<br /><br />Yes RK, and I'm sorry for posting the link to his Twitter, but I thought people ought to see it before they got swept along any further.<br />
<br /><br />aww take it easy on yourself curls i am the one who brought it here. :icon_neutral: but the conversation has been interesting. seems like perhaps we learned from discussing latoya's input into the mess as a whole that some people will do unthinkable things under the right set of circumstances. trouble is how do we ever really know which people and under what circumstances. :judge-smiley:
<br />This piece of crap doesn't deserve the time given him here in this thread.<br />
<br /><br />Yes RK, and I'm sorry for posting the link to his Twitter, but I thought people ought to see it before they got swept along any further.<br />
<br /><br />aww take it easy on yourself curls i am the one who brought it here. :icon_neutral: but the conversation has been interesting. seems like perhaps we learned from discussing latoya's input into the mess as a whole that some people will do unthinkable things under the right set of circumstances. trouble is how do we ever really know which people and under what circumstances. :judge-smiley:<br />
<br />I cannot believe what I'm seeing. How can you entertain the idea that Michael was guilty? [size=12pt]That man has nothing but a heart of gold. I've spent most of my life defending him to people and I will continue to do so.[/size] I never thought that I would need to defend him here. :over-react-smiley:<br />
<br /><br />Agree. I have always and will always believe that Michael is an innocent man.
True Thriller, it wasn't my intention to blame Michael and I also said in one of my previous posts that I will never judge him. I know he has a great heart but I also believe he went through great sadness in his life. I just try to figure out, out of the tons of information that is out there, what has happened in his life. I also do believe he was under control a major part of his life.<br /><br />That's why I wanted to see the whole letter that was posted by Suspicious. Curls provided the whole twitter convo, so that was even better. Now I know that the letter was forged. What I do find a bit disappointing is that from the links I posted, only the source 'MJfacts' was enough to influence this whole discussion and made people prance right away. It's not my mission to blame Michael of anything, hell no, but I give all information a fair chance.<br /><br />One of the subjects in the links that I posted was a radio interview with Tom Mesereau from January 2014 (just an example) in which he said that the insurance company did NOT pay in 1993, while we (at least I was) were convinced that Mike's insurance company wanted him to settle in 1993 and that they paid the millions to the Chandlers. Does that mean Michael is guilty? No ofcourse not, but it just means that some information we believed was true, may not be true after all. You can only form an opinion of you read everything and not stop when you see a source that might be trashy. <br />
<br />True Thriller, it wasn't my intention to blame Michael and I also said in one of my previous posts that I will never judge him. I know he has a great heart but I also believe he went through great sadness in his life. I just try to figure out, out of the tons of information that is out there, what has happened in his life. I also do believe he was under control a major part of his life.<br /><br />That's why I wanted to see the whole letter that was posted by Suspicious. Curls provided the whole twitter convo, so that was even better. Now I know that the letter was forged. What I do find a bit disappointing is that from the links I posted, only the source 'MJfacts' was enough to influence this whole discussion and made people prance right away. It's not my mission to blame Michael of anything, hell no, but I give all information a fair chance.<br /><br />One of the subjects in the links that I posted was a radio interview with Tom Mesereau from January 2014 (just an example) in which he said that the insurance company did NOT pay in 1993, while we (at least I was) were convinced that Mike's insurance company wanted him to settle in 1993 and that they paid the millions to the Chandlers. Does that mean Michael is guilty? No ofcourse not, but it just means that some information we believed was true, may not be true after all. You can only form an opinion of you read everything and not stop when you see a source that might be trashy.<br />
<br /><br />it is always interesting to listen to tom . he is pretty skillful in the way he makes sure he is accurate when correcting misconceptions without reveal more than what he needs to.
Comments