MEDIA OVERKILL

Or How To Make a Star And Then Kill It

 

As a teenager in the early 90's, I wasn't very much into Michael Jackson. As a matter of fact, I wasn't anything into Michael Jackson. I was into Heavy Metal and post Thrash Metal.

I was the kid who would listen to Pantera's "Cowboys From Hell" and bang my head while listening to the latest Ozzy Osbourne's CD.

I was also a HUGE Black Sabbath's fan and I would listen to it every day. So Michael Jackson was too “light” and “cute” for my headbanger's taste.

But the news about an alleged molestation case concerning MJ struck me hard anyway. I had grown up with him. "Thriller" had been one of the first albums I had ever heard and I would play while listening to Bad when I was 12.

I would talk about it to my friends in school. “No, I don't think that guy would do it.” “No, I don't think that guy would hurt a fly.” I honestly believed the guy was innocent.

Most kids near me would agree with me. We were also way too worried about going or not going to college to spend much time reading about MJ and the kid who had accused him. We simply didn't have enough time to read all the news, so we would get only the information we were fed with by watching the news on TV.

Television, some of you might remember it, was the ultimate source of information in the universe back in the 80's and the 90's.

Internet didn't even exist back then. I had only seen something similar to it on The Terminator movie.

On the other hand, the Media seemed too interested to show only one side of the story, no matter whether this specific side was reliable or not. For instance, they never broadcasted the news of how the father of the kid who accused Michael Jackson had obtained the first “statement” from his son.

They have never even informed that the father was a screenwriter either. He was also a dentist, so he knew how to use certain drugs. He was called Evan Chandler. His son's name was Jordan. For those who don't know, Evan had given his son sodium amytal, a controversial drug commonly known as an alleged “truth serum”. The information about such drug can be found on the following site:

http://yourtotalhealth.ivillage.com/sodium-amytal-interview.html

 

Some of the information contained on this site is transcribed bellow:

“People contemplating the use of either sodium amytal or hypnosis to "uncover" memories should be aware that neither amytal nor hypnosis constitute a "truth serum." Both procedures alter the patient's consciousness and "may yield symptoms that mimic dissociative pathology in patients who do not have DID," the ISSD notes. While sodium amytal and hypnosis do not necessarily increase the accuracy of memory, they CAN increase the patient's CONFIDENCE in his or her memory -- even when the memory may be false or distorted.


Both sodium amytal interviews and hypnosis should be used by trained practitioners who avoid leading and suggestive questions. Patients and practitioners may also want to videotape any such interviews to have a permanent record of the process that will allow them to address any later concerns about leading questions or memory contamination. Keep in mind that memories or experiences processed under the influence of sodium amytal or hypnosis may not be admissible court testimony in some states. “

 

The news agencies have never informed us that the father of the kid was somehow a failed screenwriter and that he paid only $500 dollars a month of child support to his son.(source:wikipedia)

No, they never broadcasted this information. So what did they broadcast? They only broadcasted that Jackson had signed up a settlement with the kid's parents in order to avoid prosecution.

Everyone, including me, thought Jackson was guilty because of it. “If he paid off the kid, then he's hiding something.”

The news never informed us that it was a civil settlement, not one involving criminal charges. They have never informed us that the kid had been called in to testify and had refused to do it.

Allow me to transcribe the following parts of the above-mentioned settlement:

“This confidential settlement shall not be construed an admission by Jackson that he has acted wrongfully with respect to the Minor, Evan Chandler or June Chandler, or any other person or at all, or that the Minor, Evan Chandler or June Chandler have any rights whatsoever against Jackson. Jackson specifically disclaims any liability to, and denies any wrongful acts against, the Minor, Evan Chandler or June Chandler or any other persons. The Parties acknowledge that Jackson is a public figure and are an important element of his earning capacity. The Parties acknowledge that Jackson claims that he elected to settle the claims in the Action in view of the impact the Action has had an could have in the future on his earnings and potential income.”

Further in the same document, the parties involved estate this:

“The Parties recognize that the Settlement Payment set forth in this paragraph 3 are in settlement of claims by Jordan Chandler, Evan Chandler and June Chandler for alleged compensatory damages for alleged personal injuries arising out of claims of negligence and not for claims of intentional or wrongful acts of sexual molestation.”

So, it was not a settlement for “sex molestation”, but for negligence.

The settlement can be found here:

>>settlement<<

 

How did I get this?

 

Here are the sites where I got it:

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/

http://images.google.com.br/imgres?imgurl=http://www.thesmokinggun.com/graphics/art3/0616041jacko5.gif&imgrefurl=http://floacist.wordpress.com/2007/08/30/the-1993-settlement-myths/&usg=__2aFNsWzxSrGgl1kIT9Bm0gKtQ98=&h=900&w=700&sz=41&hl=pt-BR&start=2&sig2=V833snhYTQC7cDRyy5Fw9w&um=1&tbnid=DxE6PpwLcbnZnM:&tbnh=146&tbnw=114&prev=/images%3Fq%3Djordan%2Bchandler%26hl%3Dpt-BR%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dcom.google:pt-BR:official%26sa%3DX%26um%3D1&ei=LcVSSs3GI43DtwfmoIzkCQ

 

Why haven't they told us anything regarding that?

 

Remember, we were in the pre-internet days then: there was no Google or Yahoo. News came in slower, cable was an illusion for most the world and newspapers were still the best way to be informed.

If I were a reporter, I would get down deep to get to the information, present both sides of the story and let the reader or news watcher get to his/her own conclusions. I would inform, and never manipulate the audience into thinking a way that better suited my editor or me.

But the side I'm presenting now has never been shown us. Why? Did they want to make money out of selling magazines and newspapers selling us a lie, because it seemed more sensational? I guess it was.

Years passed and the Internet was created. At the touch of a button we were miles away. Information started to flow more easily and the recording companies were going crazy in the new millennium with the downloading phenomena. And a new accusation against Michael Jackson was filed.

This time, I was already an attorney with Internet access and knew some things about the somehow strange psyche of the human being.

I had been working as a lawyer for four years and was way more interested in getting all the information I could get than I had been all those years before. Michael Jackson's old music had become interesting for me again, but I still like Pantera way more than Jackson's music, and his new material didn't appeal to me. I had become a hard working lawyer with a different perception of the human being and the world. I had become suspicious. I was not the same naïve girl who only thought about the next Chemistry test. I was an adult then and I knew how to think.

I had watched Bashir's “Living With Michael Jackson” on TV and had been shocked.

The above-mentioned documentary had showed Michael Jackson's strange behavior, his need to play like a child and his absurd spending of money. It also showed that some of his friends were kids. It even showed a kid called Gavin Arvizo who seemed to rely a lot on Jackson.

Then, as and adult, I thought, “Which kind of mother allows her child to sleep over at a grown man's home? Especially a man who has been subject of as many speculations as Michael Jackson?”

I was already 28 years old and had worked in courtrooms. I had lost a job, gotten another, been broken hearted, and had learnt one of the most important things in my life: every story has two sides.

Sometime after the documentary was broadcasted, Gavin Arvizo's mother, all of a sudden, accused Michael Jackson of molesting his child.

Allow me to remind you that the accusation involved the word “molestation”, not rape.

The media made a circus out of the whole thing. The most shocking thing for people is that Michael Jackson thought it was normal to sleep with a child.

Allow me to remind you, again, that he said “sleeping” with a child was normal. As a lawyer, I have learnt to pay a great deal of attention to detail, and it has proven useful to me in Court more than a few times.

I have come around some people who were molested as children in my line of work. I have heard the most horrible stories and have met at least one pedophile. I have volunteered working at helping victims of pedophiles and have become friends with an Assistant District Attorney (Promotora de Justiça in my country) who has worked dealing with this kind of situation. Therefore, by the time of Michael Jackson's second accusation and trial, I was already an experienced person.

He was acquitted, after the hearing of about 200 witnesses.

The media, in this case, was a bit more accurate (just a bit), they informed that Gavin Arvizo's mother had a history of con artistry.

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_v._Jackson )

But the shadow of the Jordan Chandler's case still lurked around. All right, Michael Jackson had been proven innocent in the Arvizo case, but had he been really innocent in the Chandler's case?

Most people thought that he wasn't. Michael Jackson became a subject of jokes anywhere. Comedy sketches were written insinuating that Michael Jackson was a pedophile.

But the shadow of the Jordan Chandler's case still lurked around. All right, Michael Jackson had been proven innocent in the Arvizo case, but had he been really innocent in the Chandler's case?

But the shadow of the Jordan Chandler's case still lurked around. All right, Michael Jackson had been proven innocent in the Arvizo case, but had he been really innocent in the Chandler's case?

His behavior, which had always seem strange, with constant plastic surgery and even the lightening of his skin color, became ever stranger. He became more reclusive and moved with his children do Bahrain.

Michael Jackson spent a couple of years in Bahrain while the character he had built around himself, and which had been turned into a monster by the Press, became even a greater subject of jokes. Even South Park present an episode in which a “Mister Jefferson” liked to sleep with kids.

Sometime ago, in 2009, Michael Jackson returned to the United States and rented a mansion in Los Angeles. He had scheduled 50 gigs in the O2 Arena in London. All the shows had been sold out. Rehearsals had been good and word was that he was preparing a huge come back. Versions and remixes of his songs from younger artists had been around from sometime and had peaked the curiosity of younger fans about his work.

Then the unthinkable happened: Michael Jackson had a heart attack and died. He was only 50 years old.

Not old, you may think, but word is that he had been taking prescribed medication in excess for sometime. News are still not clear about the circumstances around his death. Maybe they will manage to be clear and accurate about something soon. Who knows?

I was shocked when I heard about it. I wasn't a fan, just a music lover and, as such, I felt his death.

Now, with worldwide access within my grasp, I started searching the web about the first accusation against Michael. The documents I found, all pretty accurate, have been presented before in this same article.

I have noticed a rumor on the web about a Jordan Chandler's recent allegation about Michael Jackson's innocence. Many of us have read about it.

No matter whether it was really Jordan Chandler who made such a statement or not, it is unlikely that he will ever show up stating anything. He would risk facing a lawsuit if he ever showed up saying anything.

All we can say about him and his Dad is that Jordan Chandler and Evan Chandler have proven not to be very reliable for two reasons:

•  Jordan Chandler has never testified before a courtroom. When he gave his statement to a Police Officer and to a Psychiatrist, we see that he describes acts of “touching”, “masturbating”, and of “oral sex”, whereas he had told his father, at first, during the sodium amytal influence, that Michael Jackson had touched his penis. He didn't say masturbating or practicing oral sex. “All actions would be wrong, but no matter how wrong they all seemed to be, they all differed a lot from each other

•  Jordan Chandler has prosecuted his father for almost killing him. The document of the case of him against his Dad is shown in the following link:

http://lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/decisions/appellate/a0422-05.opn.html

 

Or here:

>>click here<<

 

It seems pretty suspicious that such a worried and responsible father, who seemed so conscious of his son's rights, actually performed the acts described bellow:

“The judge found that plaintiff had proved that he and his father, the defendant, were members of the same household when defendant struck him on the head from behind with a twelve and one-half pound weight and then sprayed his eyes with mace or pepper spray and tried to choke him. The judge also found that the weight could cause serious bodily injury or death. Thus, the judge was satisfied that plaintiff had provided evidence, which if believed, would support a finding of aggravated assault. "

The Press has never broadcast such news, either. The reason why the Press has never done it remains a mystery to me.

Another thing that has never been mentioned is that the settlement I presented before was made by t he insurance carrier, who negotiated and paid the settlement, over the protests of Jackson and his personal legal counsel

Source of this information:

http://floacist.wordpress.com/2007/08/09/jordan-chandler/

 

and here:

http://lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/decisions/appellate/a0422-05.opn.html

 

It seems to me that Michael Jackson was killed by the media circus created around his persona. It stressed him in such a way that it gave him a heart attack.

A friend of mine recently said to me “2 alleged cases of pedophilia in 20 years with all those children going there... Had it all been true, there would have been hundreds of cases.”

I have to admit I agree with him. I firmly believe Michael Jackson received ill treatment by the Press. They condemned him without judgment, violating “Due Process of Law”, ignoring his right to defend himself and mocking him.

The media killed him in life, condemning one who once had been one of the most gifted artists of all time to oblivion and mockery.

As a Heavy Metal fan, which I still am, I must quote the German Band Scorpions on this:

“They're watching me

They're watching you

Taking all the world under control

They make you laugh

They make you blue

In the end they try to eat your soul

Satellites transmit the latest media thrill

We can't escape the media overkill”

The irresponsible journalists lead us into thinking the way they wanted. They must sell the news, no matter who they hurt.

It seems to me Michael Jackson suffered a lot with the “Media Overkill”. He was exposed, decomposed and destroyed. The Press killed him by inches every day, distorting all the truth regarding him and not giving all the information we deserved.

I'm not a journalist, I'm a Lawyer and a musician. I haven't been a real Michael Jackson's fan for over a decade. Therefore, I cannot be said to be a “close minded fan”. Because of it, I can view reality the way it is. I have seen that the essence of the facts has never been truly presented to us.

Now it's up to us, people, to decide. Let's think and not accept what we are told. This man was a media martyr. They destroyed him. They pronounced him guilty in a trial in which they were the judge, the jury and the executioner. We were just the mass, manipulated into thinking the way they wanted.

Now it's up to the reader to decide: what do you think?

I have come across child porn fans. People who like to see websites with child pornography and do nasty things, even to their pets. Would you really think that a pedophile would expose himself the way Michael Jackson did on Bashir's documentary? You already know my answer. Now it's time for you to think for yourself.

Other interesting links:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1196633/How-Jacksons-surgery-desperate-bid-look-like-father-hated.html

In the above-mentioned link, Michael Jackson's biographer tells that Jordan Chandler claimed Jackson was circumcised , he wasn't.

Here is an interesting blog, in Portuguese:

http://www.reidopop.com/mjbeats/showthread.php?t=5625

 

>>HOME<<