First Prev
of 28
Next Last

Since: Jun 13

Wilson, NC

#681 Apr 13, 2014
No I doubt she's that smart to spread it lol behind closed doors, Katherine knew what Michael was doing was wrong but of course, she didn't wanna destroy the goose that laid the golden age even though technically she played a part in it.

“Evolution is fab!”

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#682 Apr 14, 2014
Len is Disgusted wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you think Katherine may have spread the hoax, herself? Even if she didn't, she seized upon it and spoke in public, about it. She knows very well Jordan isn't allowed to publicly say a word about the matter, or the estate's legal team would jump all over him.
I do remember seeing a very short video clip where Jermaine (greasy face) Jackson gave an interview to a journalist about a day or two after Pedo Pan had croaked it, where he claimed that Jordan had telephoned him and confess that the allegations were a lie. I wonder if it was Katherine, who told told him to say that or whether he alone had concocted that pathetic claim. Either way, I don't recall him ever making that claim again, which is odd.

Since: Jun 13

Wilson, NC

#683 Apr 14, 2014
^ Yeah it was after the hoax became public. Jermaine has lied a lot of times so I doubt anyone believed it. You take whatever Jermaine says with a grain of salt.

“at yet more f'loonspin”

Since: Aug 11

I live far away from f'loons

#684 Apr 14, 2014
Butterballs wrote:
<quoted text>
I do remember seeing a very short video clip where Jermaine (greasy face) Jackson gave an interview to a journalist about a day or two after Pedo Pan had croaked it, where he claimed that Jordan had telephoned him and confess that the allegations were a lie. I wonder if it was Katherine, who told told him to say that or whether he alone had concocted that pathetic claim. Either way, I don't recall him ever making that claim again, which is odd.
Perhaps Jordan's attorney contacted him.
Trolls are sadists

Hellerup, Denmark

#685 Jun 24, 2014
Butterballs wrote:
<quoted text>
Bill Dworin, the highly respected child molestation expert also confirmed that Jordy's description was 100% spot on.
He said ..... "He (Jordy Chandler) described Jackson genitalia, it was unique because of the discolouration. And then we obtained a search warrant to photograph Jackson to cooperate, what the child had said. When photographing Jackson's genitalia, it did cooperate. In other words, the boy saw Jackson naked. Does that mean Jackson molested the child? No, but it adds to the credibility of the child".
One would have thought Wacko Jacko would have raised some objections about any inaccuracies in the statement if it hadn't been true.
Why, it would have given him an opportunity to try to sue Bill Dworin for slander or libel and get hiimself a nice financial settlement of his very own.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =panosN01HrkXX
OK, I was wrong, Jordan's description was 100% accurate.
Ghughes

Palmdale, CA

#686 Jul 1, 2014
persephone wrote:
Yes, you heard it here first, folks. A very young teenage boy named Jordan Chandler, who was well below the age of consent could give law enforcement officers a detailed roadmap of Michael Jackson's genitals. He was able to tell them exactly where to find a horrible dark-colored mole, which was located on Michael Jackson's penis. Photos were later taken of Michael Jackson's penis, which confirmed that Jordan's description was 100% accurate.
http://www.sbscpublicaccess.org/docs/ctdocs/0...
And as for the child haters who keep using the weak excuse that it was only according to Thomas Sneddon that they matched. I have news for you!!!! Two grand juries also viewed Jordan's description and the photographs of Michael Jackson's penis and agreed that they were a perfect match. So stick that in your pipe and smoke it.
If the description was accurate, and if the two grand juries agreed they would have handed down an indictment. That's was the proceeding was all about, to find corroborating evidence (not just hearsay). The FACT that there was no indictment, proves that they did NOT have the conclusive evidence to indict Michael Jackson. Please put this in your pipe....

“at yet more f'loonspin”

Since: Aug 11

I live far away from f'loons

#687 Jul 2, 2014
Ghughes wrote:
<quoted text>
If the description was accurate, and if the two grand juries agreed they would have handed down an indictment. That's was the proceeding was all about, to find corroborating evidence (not just hearsay). The FACT that there was no indictment, proves that they did NOT have the conclusive evidence to indict Michael Jackson. Please put this in your pipe....
What two grand juries? The only judge I know who looked at the material was Judge Melville, and he knew they matched; it was not hearsay. Want me to give you links, to the legal documents and court transcripts? I love being given an opportunity to do that.
Choober

United States

#688 Jul 14, 2014
MJ Child molester yes or no?
Most definitely yes.
Only a guilty man pays off his accusers.
A 50 year old man Who builds a funfair to groom boys is certainly not innocent, it's like some man offering to show kids his puppies.
FOREVER MICHAEL

London, UK

#689 Jul 14, 2014
I Love Michael Jackson.and no he did not do anything to anybody.I am not
Going to feed your lies you are so wrong
Nothing matched.Michael was Innocent
The only person I will listen to is Michael
I believe every word he said. The allegations are nothing but lies and trash.through the lies Michael was the
Truth! Michael was the most beautiful
Angel. I will always be there for him
No mattet what. Have you not heard
Lies for cash.parents make children lie
They'll do anything for money.
You wish

Avon, CT

#693 Jul 14, 2014
persephone wrote:
<quoted text>
Sneddon did not go to the trouble of arranging the nude photography session for no reason. It was done specifically to seek a criminal indictment. It requires a grand jury to hand down a criminal indictment.
Of course I know you'll continue to be in severe denial about anything and everything that weakens your argument.
Then why did mj attorney's fight and win to keep the photographs and description out of court ?
Smh
Juggs Judy

AOL

#696 Jul 14, 2014
Ghughes wrote:
<quoted text>
If the description was accurate, and if the two grand juries agreed they would have handed down an indictment. That's was the proceeding was all about, to find corroborating evidence (not just hearsay). The FACT that there was no indictment, proves that they did NOT have the conclusive evidence to indict Michael Jackson. Please put this in your pipe....
Do you think that Jackson was infallible? Do you perhaps view him as a godlike being who could do no wrong, and was incapable of falsely denying a series of appalling crimes?

You can put as much spin as you like on Jordan's description, the fact remains that Jackson himself never denied that it was a correct match and $22,000,000 settlement arrived just weeks after his genitalia was photographed. Geez, what a surprise.
Octopus

Albany, NY

#698 Jul 14, 2014
persephone wrote:
<quoted text> It seems more likely that if he were truly guilty he would have quickly agreed to Evan Chandler's requests and avoided the whole mess altogether.
There is no evidence that Evan Chandler requested money. He simply found out that Wacko molested his kid. He actually went to the police and Jordan drew a diagram of the clown's spotted dong. Wacko paid because he was stripped searched nude and dehumanized by the honorable, Thomas Sneddon.

“at yet more f'loonspin”

Since: Aug 11

I live far away from f'loons

#702 Jul 14, 2014
persephone wrote:
<quoted text> Do you not understand Melville's statement that it was 'irrelevant to the case at hand' and that he didn't want it to turn into a 'case within a case' scenario?
Amazing how haters refuse to acknowledge valid points even when a judge makes them.
Gawd, you're either stubborn, or you conveniently forget information you don't like. I posted an entire thread, about what really happened during that courtroom conversation, and none of it supports what you state. If I have to, I'll post a link to it. But for now, read what happened. It's from the transcripts, dated 5th of May, 2005.

http://www.mjfacts.info/transcripts/Court_Tra...

“Evolution is fab!”

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#703 Jul 15, 2014
Octopus wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no evidence that Evan Chandler requested money. He simply found out that Wacko molested his kid. He actually went to the police and Jordan drew a diagram of the clown's spotted dong. Wacko paid because he was stripped searched nude and dehumanized by the honorable, Thomas Sneddon.
Len has posted a legal document several times clearly showing that Wacko was the one who insisted Evan and Jordan's mother receive a substantial sum of money in return for complete silence. It's also funny that floons label Evan as an extortionist, yet he had no problem sending his son to be thoroughly interviewed by police officers and one of the world's leading child molestation experts. Oh, and then there's the accurate drawing Jordy made of Michael Jackson's genitalia. I just can't imagine that any con artist would allow their child to make a description of a man's penis or be interviewed by the police if the whole thing was a lie. Evan and Jordy were very cooperative and open with the police, while the monster that was Wacko Jacko wasn't.

“Evolution is fab!”

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#704 Jul 15, 2014
Len is Disgusted wrote:
<quoted text>
Gawd, you're either stubborn, or you conveniently forget information you don't like. I posted an entire thread, about what really happened during that courtroom conversation, and none of it supports what you state. If I have to, I'll post a link to it. But for now, read what happened. It's from the transcripts, dated 5th of May, 2005.
http://www.mjfacts.info/transcripts/Court_Tra...
Not stubbornness, Len, just an extreme case of celebrity worship syndrome. Or maybe creep-o-phone uses that line on his or hers neighbours when questions are asked about the gawky teenager in the bathroom problem he or she had.

“at yet more f'loonspin”

Since: Aug 11

I live far away from f'loons

#708 Jul 15, 2014
Butterballs wrote:
<quoted text>
Not stubbornness, Len, just an extreme case of celebrity worship syndrome. Or maybe creep-o-phone uses that line on his or hers neighbours when questions are asked about the gawky teenager in the bathroom problem he or she had.
Good point. He/she never has admitted why a gawky teenager would be in the bedroom, with a naked man who has an erection.
Kid Gruesome

Dublin, Ireland

#710 Oct 8, 2014
Does anybody know if Jordie's description will be available to Wade's and Jimmy's case?

“at yet more f'loonspin”

Since: Aug 11

I live far away from f'loons

#711 Oct 9, 2014
Kid Gruesome wrote:
Does anybody know if Jordie's description will be available to Wade's and Jimmy's case?
I hope so. Perhaps it's part of the evidence the Estate is trying to keep out of the hands of Wade's legal team.

“Agent Provocateur”

Since: May 14

Location hidden

#712 Oct 9, 2014
Len is Disgusted wrote:
<quoted text>
I hope so. Perhaps it's part of the evidence the Estate is trying to keep out of the hands of Wade's legal team.
This has got me thinking. The fact the estate is trying to keep evidence from Wade's legal team is telling, it means they have many things to hide. Which is not surprising. I wonder if they will use the photos and the description as evidence? And possibly release them to the public so we can finally prove that they matched. It would certainly be interesting.

I hope the photos/description get released one day, the debate on whether they matched or not (and they obviously did) is more than annoying.
Bella

Switzerland

#714 Monday Nov 24
persephone wrote:
Yes, you heard it here first, folks. A very young teenage boy named Jordan Chandler, who was well below the age of consent could give law enforcement officers a detailed roadmap of Michael Jackson's genitals. He was able to tell them exactly where to find a horrible dark-colored mole, which was located on Michael Jackson's penis. Photos were later taken of Michael Jackson's penis, which confirmed that Jordan's description was 100% accurate.
http://www.sbscpublicaccess.org/docs/ctdocs/0...
And as for the child haters who keep using the weak excuse that it was only according to Thomas Sneddon that they matched. I have news for you!!!! Two grand juries also viewed Jordan's description and the photographs of Michael Jackson's penis and agreed that they were a perfect match. So stick that in your pipe and smoke it.
These twisted idiots who defend MJ need to answer one thing. If as they say Jordan's description was a mismatch, then how come MJ never sued anybody who said otherwise? You have numerous people, including police detectives, saying it was a perfect match, yet Jackson didn't dispute their claims, nor did he ever take legal action. Was he an idiot? I don't think so. He sued ex-employees of Neverland and was certainly no stranger to legal action. Clearly the fact that MJ didn't sue anybody is overwhelming proof that Jordan told the truth about the molestation and the blotch on his penis.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 28
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Michael Jackson Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Boy in beobsession, drug blackouts, His underwe... 4 min goodvibrations 4
La toya lived with wacko, saw wacko's huge amou... 11 min goodvibrations 2
Michael Jackson Is One Reason J.K. Rowling Left... 59 min goodvibrations 1
If Michael Jackson was standing in front of you... 4 hr Len is Disgusted 332
Are MJ Fans Worried? 4 hr Len is Disgusted 168
Young Man Believes Music Can Heal The World 4 hr Pop Tart- 142
Conrad Murray and girlfriend Nicole Alvarez enj... 4 hr goodvibrations 29
Wacko photoshoot, circa 1993 7 hr Jermaine 7 93
More from around the web