Skip to content

HIStory vs EVANstory: The 1993 allegations Part 1

April 20, 2011

Who lured who?

In May 1992, Michael Jackson was driving in Wilshire Boulevard in Beverly Hills, when his jeep broke down. He was spotted by Mel Green’s wife – Green was an employer at Rent-A-Wreck. She called her husband, who rushed to the scene in order to meet the world’s most famous celebrity and bring him to his employer’s shop. When Mel Green verified that it was really Michael Jackson, he called David Schwartz, the owner of Rent-A-Wreck, who immediately called his wife June Chandler (she never took Schwartz’s last name, she was always June Chandler) and told her to bring her son Jordan Chandler because he had a big surprise for him. Jordan was a big MJ fan who used to dress like him, a very common behavior for young (and in many occasions older) die hard fans of Jackson (and other popular artists for that matter). His mother verified that, in her April 11, 2005 trial testimony (direct by Sneddon):

18 Q. Now, let me go back in time. Before this

19 meeting that you had at your husband’s place of

20 business in 1992, had Jordan ever expressed, to your

 21 knowledge, some admiration for Mr. Jackson?

 22 A. Oh, very much so, yes.

23 Q. How did he display that admiration?

24 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; hearsay.

25 MR. SNEDDON: I didn’t ask for a statement,

26 Your Honor. I asked for a display.

27 THE COURT: All right.

28 He’s not asking for anything that was said. 5603

1 Do you understand the question?

2 THE WITNESS: Would you repeat the question,

3 please?

4 Q. BY MR. SNEDDON: Yes.

5 How did your son Jordan, prior to this

 6 meeting that occurred at David Schwartz’s place of

 7 business, express — display his admiration for Mr.

 8 Jackson?

9 A. He had a little sparkly jacket that he would

 10 wear to parties. He would have a glove like Michael

 11 Jackson, and dance around like Michael Jackson.

 12 Q. And this was all before he met Mr. Jackson?

 13A. Before he met Michael Jackson, yes.

June and Jordie arrived at the shop to meet Michael. June, who was a former model, was described by everyone that knew her as a very attractive Eurasian woman, and her marriage with her 70 year old husband was not going well at the time (they eventually divorced) and Mr. Schwartz had already moved out. According to the people who were present at the scene, Jackson was quickly taken by her as she introduced herself to him.

Wade Robson’s mother testified at the 2005 trial that June was after Michael. She said “My impression of her is she was a gold-digger“. She also stated she felt June Chandler tried to use Michael and that she would order the staff around like she owned it. Even Evan Chandler had noticed that, as it is revealed from his taped conversation with Jordan’s stepfather, David Schwartz. This conversation is listed in the full transcript that is included as exhibit no 10 in the case no SC 031 774 (Schwartz vs. Chandler-David Schwartz sued Evan Chandler because in late 1993 during a meeting in Larry Feldman’s office David yelled at Evan Chandler that “this is all about extortion”, and Evan lost it and hit David). Also it is revealed from June’s testimony that she had a conversation with Michael about trust issues, telling him that men in her life had let her down and she had a hard time trusting someone. That’s not exactly a friendly conversation.

June introduced Jordan to Michael and she informed him that they had seen him before, while eating at an L.A. restaurant but they didn’t approach him. She also informed him that when he was hospitalized for his Pepsi burn accident in 1984, Jordan, who was 4 at the time, sent a letter and a picture of himself to the Brotman Memorial Hospital. The letter included their telephone number. In reality, it was June who wrote the letter and gave it to MJ’s bodyguards in the hospital including the picture and her telephone number. She was trying to meet Michael for a long time before May 1992. Thousands of fans all over the world had bombarded the hospital with letters and phone calls and extra staff was hired from the hospital to handle the fans’ reaction. Former US president Ronald Reagan was among the people who sent MJ a letter to wish him well. The Pepsi commercial accident made big headlines worldwide in newspapers, magazines, shows and TV news at the time. Michael Jackson called the Chandlers back to thank Jordan for his letter, as he used to do throughout his life on numerous occasions, given the well- known and amazing attachment he always had with his fans. He also suggested that Jordan should participate in an audition for one of his commercials at the time. Jordan did participate but he wasn’t selected and he didn’t meet Jackson. In 1989, Frank Dileo contacted June to offer her tickets for the BAD concert in Los Angeles. MJ has offered tickets to his fans of all ages, races, social status and sex, hundreds of times in his career, a fact well documented over the years going back to his Jackson 5 days. June and Jordan attended the concert and tried to meet MJ backstage, but with no success.

After June explained to MJ how huge a fan Jordan was, she wrote down her telephone number and handed it to him, suggesting that he should call Jordan sometime. David Schwartz seconded that, adding that Jordan was his biggest fan. That was the second time June was offering Jackson her phone number. June verified the Rent-A-Wreck incident in her 2005 trial testimony. From her direct examination by Sneddon:

“5 Q. And do you recall how long you were with Mr.

6 Jackson and Jordan that day?

7 A. Briefly. Five minutes. Ten minutes.

8 Q. And did — was there any information

9 exchanged between you and Mr. Jackson that day?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. And what was that?

12 A. I said, “If you would like to see Jordie or

 13 if he could call you or if you’d like to speak to

 14 him, here is our number, and you can give him a

 15 call.”

16Q. And you gave that to Mr. Jackson?

 17A. Yes, I did.

 

Jordan described the pressure on Jackson to take the phone number and call him in his interview with Dr. Gardner on October 6, 1993:

-My stepfather took him [Michael] outside to choose a car for him to use. And I guess when my stepfather was outside he said, ‘You don’t have to pay for the car if you just take Jordie’s number and give him a call’.
– Why would your stepfather say that?
– Because my stepfather knows I was interested in Michael Jackson and his music.
– And this was in your presence?
– No. I was told this by my stepfather.

Mel Green, who was also present, had the following to say in his interview with Mary Fischer for her 1994 GQ article on the case: It was almost like she (June) was forcing [the boy] on him,”  “I think Michael thought he owed the boy something, and that’s when it all started.”

According to every available given fact coming from the parties involved, including the Chandlers themselves, it is unquestionable that they  forced themselves on Michael Jackson, not vice versa, as the media still likes to falsely present it. They offered their phone number twice without Jackson asking for it, they pressured him to call because Jordan was his biggest fan, David called June to bring Jordan, they brought him to David’s shop, and they tried to meet him before May 1992.

MJ-Chandlers friendship

Jackson befriended the Chandlers-like he did with many other families that approached him over the years- inviting June, Jordan and Lily to Neverland in February 1993. June invited him many times to her house as well.  During the same period of time, MJ had a friendly relationship with others including the Culkins, Cascios, Robsons and Barnes.  June lived with her son Jordie, her daughter Lily, and a live-in housekeeper. Mr. Schwartz had already moved out by then. Sometimes they were joined by Evan Chandler when Michael was there.  In her trial testimony, June said that MJ never stayed there 30 days in a row after the trip to Monaco, as the media falsely reported. June testified that could be a week or two only. From her testimony:

Q. After you got back from Monaco, did Michael Jackson spend nights at your home?

A. Yes.

Q. Were the 30 nights you’ve described after you got back from Monaco?

A. No.

Q. How many nights after you got back from Monaco do you think Michael Jackson stayed at your home?

A. Oh, perhaps a week or two.

Q. And this was a point where you were getting upset that your son wanted to spend all of his time with Michael Jackson, right?

A. Yes.”

Given the timeline we know from the Chandlers, and the business schedule of MJ, those 30 days are somebody’s fabrication. June’s 2005 trial testimony and MJ’s overloaded schedule refute it even for the period prior to Monaco. It couldn’t have been in Mr. Chandler’s house either because June Chandler said Michael stayed at Evan’s on one or two occasions for 4-7 days. Jordan Chandler gave an even more confusing and contradictory timeline to Dr. Gardner. It seems that no one was able to keep his story straight. Jordan’s confused memory was also noted in the DCFS report.

She also said that it was her son and not Jackson who requested her permission to sleep in MJ’s bedroom during their 3d visit at Neverland.

Evan Chandler felt uncomfortable about the fact that Michael Jackson had begun to take his place in Jordan’s life. He discussed it with June and David. Michael Freeman, June Chandler’s lawyer, said that Mr. Chandler felt that he was left out. David Schwartz also felt that he had lost his wife because of MJ (although there were marital problems before that) and he didn’t like the fact that Michael was buying presents for June. In fact Michael Jackson had a very old habit of buying jewellery for women he liked, dating back to his elementary school years, when he used to steal his mother’s jewellery to give them to teachers he liked. He talks about it in his autobiography, and so does his mother in her book. He kept that habit throughout his life, which is a very well-known fact about him. Evan reportedly didn’t have much of a great relationship with Jordan, as he was $68,804 behind in child support.

The National Enquirer tabloid wrote an article after Michael’s trip to Monaco under the title “Michael’s new adopted family” and everybody was wondering who that beautiful woman was next to Michael. The media played constantly the footage of Michael, June, Lily, and Jordan and presented it as if Michael and June were having an affair. Evan Chandler and David Schwartz were not amused and they discussed this issue.

Evan finally met Michael and according to his side of the story he had already been suspicious about Michael and Jordie’s relationship, although he never provided any explanation for this. When the allegations were made public, J. Randy Taraborelli said that Jackson’s staff were investigating Evan Chandler since May 1993, and they refused to give in to Chandler’s request because the allegations were false. The interesting thing here is that May 1993 is the time where Michael Jackson was seen in public with the Chandlers and the media picked it up.

Having said that, one can only wonder why Evan invited Michael to stay in his house (he had expressed his suspicions before the invitation by asking his patient Carrie Fischer, who knew Dr. Arnold Klein, for information on MJ. Dr. Klein answered that Michael was a nice guy acting like a big child, and that he was perfectly straight), why he asked him to build them a new wing so he can spend more time there, and if MJ could possibly buy them a bigger house.

How did Mr. Chandler come up with thatsuspicion in the first place?June Chandler never suspected Michael of anything and she was very clear about it both in 1993 and 2005. Jordan Chandler never said anything like that to his father at the time and he even denied the allegations when he was questioned in July 1993. David Schwartz didn’t agree with Evan either and even accused him of extortion. So where did that accusation come from? For the record, at no time did Evan Chandler ever claim to have witnessed any sexual misconduct on Jackson’s part. Did someone approach, manipulate and use Mr. Chandler by planting the seeds of molestation in Mr. Chandler’s head, after seeing the family in the news in May 1993? Was someone around Evan Chandler before he even had any thoughts and ideas of misconduct?


The Plan

On July 7, 1993, Evan Chandler filed papers for modification of the custody agreement. For everything that was about to follow, Mr. Chandler first needed to have the custody of Jordan. During a July 8, 1993 taped conversation with David Schwartz, Evan said that he was angry because MJ stopped telephoning him and he stopped being his friend. He also said that he recently informed Michael about what he wanted from their relationship. When referring to the same event, Michael Jackson said that Chandler asked him to fund movie projects for 20 million dollars making him a partner to his Sony deal. This is corroborated by painter David Nordahl in his interview with Deborah L. Kunesh (2010):

“I was working on sketches for his film production company, called “Lost Boys Productions”….Sony had given him (Michael) $40 million to start this production company and that little boy’s dad (Evan Chandler), who considered himself to be show business material, because he had written part of a script….after that he considered himself a Hollywood screenwriter, and being friends with Michael and his son being friends with Michael, this guy had assumed that Michael was going to make him a partner in this film production company and that’s where the $20 million figure came from. He wanted ½ of that Sony money. It was proven. It was an extortion. Michael listened to his business advisors and they all told him to keep his mouth shut and to go on to Korea, go on with your tour, you’re in the middle of a tour. We’ll take care of it….”

http://www.reflectionsonthedance.com/interviewwithdavidnordahl.html

It was also mentioned in Los Angeles Times dated August 28, 1993:

“Film industry sources have said that the boy’s father sought a $20-million movie production and financing deal with Jackson. Although the boy’s father has not commented publicly about that charge or any other aspect of the case, he has told friends that the extortion allegation is untrue.”

Evan’s request for partnership in movies was not a secret in film industry circles. According to his brother, Ray Chandler, he discussed it with his wife Natalie. In this conversation Evan Chandler says that Jordan asked for Michael to give him a job in his movie productions. Chandler had faced serious professional problems, and there was a period where his license was suspended. He had also been sued by one of his clients. He wanted to become a movie writer and quit his job, and in 1992 he co-wrote the script for Mel Brook’s Robin Hood: Men in Tights. From Los Angeles Times article dated June 13, 1993:

You’ve all heard of script doctors. Well, here’s a new one: script dentists.

 Beverly Hills dentist Dr. Evan Chandler–the man who’s entrusted to care for Sherry Lansing’s, Christian Slater’s and Valerie Golino’s teeth, among others–found a new patient in his chair one morning interested in listening to a couple of his movie ideas. The patient was screenwriter J. David Shapiro; the idea actually came from Chandler’s then 11-year-old son, Jordie. The conversation took place post-“Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves” and resulted in a writing partnership that has become “Robin Hood: Men in Tights.”

“Evan Chandler’s son turned to his father and said, ‘You know, Dad, you know what would be a great thing, a spoof of Robin Hood,‘ ” recalls the King of Parodies, Mel Brooks, who liked the duo’s screenplay send-up of the 1991 hit that starred Costner as the chivalric arrow-slinging hero who stole from the rich to give to the poor and decided to make it his next movie. “It didn’t hurt that the man’s in a lot of show-biz mouths,” he said, acknowledging his connection to Shapiro through a mutual friend who works for Brooksfilm.

Brooks also gives a nod to the kid despite the fact he’s in a Writers Guild arbitration with his father and Shapiro over who should get what screenplay credit. Brooks says they should get story credit and he and Shapiro screenplay credit. Chandler would not comment for this story. (Consideration is being made whether to give Jordi some recognition in the end crawl credits.)

“Even though the kid was 12 or 14 years late, it was still a good idea,” said thespoof-meister of such genre lampoons as “Blazing Saddles” and “YoungFrankenstein.”

Evan and Jordan Chandler were capable of writing a Hollywood script. That is a fictional story, which could become a movie. The idea was Jordan’s, and he participated in the writing of the script. Anyone who has seen “Robin Hood: Men in Tights” knows that it is filled with sexual jokes and innuendoes. June Chandler had an argument with Evan Chandler because he didn’t give his son part of the money for the script. She said he owed him $ 5,000 dollars.

At the time, June, David and Michael were a team against Evan Chandler. June and David tried to warn Michael about Evan but unfortunately he didn’t take them seriously, saying that these kind of things happen to him all the time, and people were always trying to get money out of him, which is a very common problem for celebrities.

Evan Chandler also said the following on the tape (excerpts from the transcripts dated early July 1993):

20 MR. CHANDLER: Let me put it to you

21 this way: I have a set routine of words that I’m

22 going to go in there that have been rehearsed and

23 I’m going to say.

24 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

25 MR. CHANDLER: Okay? Because I don’t

9

1 want to say anything that could be used against me.

2 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

3 MR. CHANDLER: So I know exactly what I

4 can say. That’s why I’m bringing the tape

5 recorder.

6 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

7 MR. CHANDLER: I have some things on

8 paper to show a few people

9 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

10 MR. CHANDLER: — and that’s it. My

11 whole part is going to take two or three minutes,

12 and I’m going to turn around [tape irregularity],

13 and that’s it. There’s not going to be anything

14 said, other than what I’ve been told to say

15 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

16 MR. CHANDLER: — and I’m going to turn

17 around and leave, and they’re going to have a

18 decision to make.

19 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

20 MR. CHANDLER: And based on that

21 decision, I’ll decide whether or not we’re going to

22 talk again or whether it’s going to go further.

23 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

24 MR. CHANDLER: I have to make a phone

25 call. As soon as I leave the house, I get on the

10

1 telephone.

2 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

3 MR. CHANDLER: I make a phone call.

4 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

5 MR. CHANDLER: Say “Go” or I say,

6 “Don’t go yet,” and that’s –

7 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

8 MR. CHANDLER: — the way it’s gonna to

9 be.

10 I’ve been told what to do, and I have

11 to do it.

12 I’m not — I happen to know what’s

13 going to be going on, see? They don’t have to say

14 anything to me. [Tape irregularity] “you have

15 refused to listen to me. Now you’re going to have

16 to listen to me. This is my position. Give it a

17 thought.”

18 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

19 MR. CHANDLER: “Think it over.”

20 I’m not saying anything bad about

21 anybody, okay? I’ve got it all on paper.

22 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

23 MR. CHANDLER: I’m going to hand out

24 the paper so that I don’t inadvertently [tape

25 irregularity], handing out the paper, “Michael,

11

1 here’s your paper. June, here’s your paper.”

2 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

3 MR. CHANDLER: “Compare papers. Read

4 this whole thing. This is my feelings about it.

5 Do you want to talk further? We’ll talk again.”

6 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

7 MR. CHANDLER: “If you don’t” [tape

8 irregularity] — but, see, all I’m trying to do

9 now, they have forced me to go [tape irregularity]

10 on paper and give it to them to read –

11 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

12 MR. CHANDLER: — because [tape

13 irregularity]. I mean, isn’t that pitiful?

14 Now, why would they want to cut me out,

15 to go this far, spend this much money, spend so

16 much time in my life crying, being away from my

17 practice, not paying [tape irregularity] everybody

18 else? Why would they want to put me through that?

*******************************************

13 MR. CHANDLER: Well, I have to count

14 the days because I can’t let it go on forever.

15 By the way, they’re going on tour on

16 August 15th. They’re going to be gone. They’re

17 going to be out of the country

18 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

19 MR. CHANDLER: — for four months.

20 MR. SCHWARTZ: Is that bad?

21 MR. CHANDLER: Well, I’m not going to

22 be able to communicate with them about this when

23 they’re gone, am I?

24 MR. SCHWARTZ: I mean, but you think

25 that –

18

1 MR. CHANDLER: By the way, they’re not

2 going.

3 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

4 MR. CHANDLER: They don’t know that

5 yet, but they are not going.

17 MR. CHANDLER: — to give it one more

18 try, and that’s the only reason, because this

19 attorney I found — I mean, I interviewed several,

20 and I picked the nastiest son of a bitch –

21 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

22 MR. CHANDLER: — I could find, and all

23 he wants to do is get this out in the public as

24 fast as he can, as big as he can –

25 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

25

1 MR. CHANDLER: — and humiliate as many

2 people as he can, and he’s got a bad [tape

3 irregularity] –

4 MR. SCHWARTZ: Do you think that’s

5 good?

6 MR. CHANDLER: — (simultaneous,

7 inaudible) he’s costing me a lot of money.

8 MR. SCHWARTZ: Do you think that’s

9 good?

10 MR. CHANDLER: I think that’s great. I

11 think it’s terrific. The best. Because when

12 somebody — when somebody tells you that they don’t

13 want to talk to you –

14 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

9 MR. CHANDLER: It’s true. I mean, it

10 could be a massacre if I don’t get what I want.

11 But I do believe this person will get what he

12 wants.

13 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

14 MR. CHANDLER: So he would just really

15 love [tape irregularity] nothing better than to

16 have this go forward. He is nasty, he is mean

17 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

18 MR. CHANDLER: — he is very smart

19 [tape irregularity], and he’s hungry for the

20 publicity [tape irregularity] better for him.

21 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

22 MR. CHANDLER: And that’s where it’ll

23 go –

24 MR. SCHWARTZ: You don’t think everyone

25 loses?

27

1 MR. CHANDLER: (Simultaneous,

2 inaudible) totally humiliate him in every way –

3 MR. SCHWARTZ: That — everyone doesn’t

4 lose in that?

5 MR. CHANDLER: That’s not the issue.

6 See, the issue is that if I have to go that far –

7 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

8 MR. CHANDLER: — I can’t stop and

9 think “Who wins and who loses?”

10 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

11 MR. CHANDLER: All I can think about is

12 I only have one goal, and the goal is to get their

13 attention –

14 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

15 MR. CHANDLER: — so that [tape

16 irregularity] concerns are, and as long as they

17 don’t want to talk to me, I can’t tell them what my

18 concerns are, so I have to go step by step, each

19 time escalating the attention-getting mechanism,

20 and that’s all I regard him as, as an

21 attention-getting mechanism.

22 Unfortunately, after that, it’s totally

23 out of [tape irregularity]. It’ll take on so much

24 momentum of its own that it’s going to be out of

25 all our control. It’s going to be monumentally

28

1 huge, and I’m not going to have any way to stop it.

2 No one else is either at that point. I mean, once

3 I make that phone call, this guy’s just going to

4 destroy everybody in site in any devious, nasty,

5 cruel way that he can do it. And I’ve given him

6 full authority to do that.

7 To go beyond tomorrow, that would mean

8 I have done every possible thing in my individual

9 power to tell them to sit down and talk to me; and

10 if they still [tape irregularity], I got to

11 escalate the attention-getting mechanism. He’s the

12 next one. I can’t go to somebody nice [tape

13 irregularity]. It doesn’t work with them. I

14 already found that out. Get some niceness and just

15 go fuck yourself.

16 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

17 MR. CHANDLER: Basically, what they

18 have to know, ultimately, is that their lives are

19 over, if they don’t sit down. One way or the

20 other, it’ll either go to the next step or the

21 [tape irregularity]. I’m not stopping until I get

22 their attention.

24 MR. CHANDLER: The other times I tried

25 to tell them that I needed to talk to them, all I

131

1 got was, “Go fuck yourself. We’re not talking to

2 you.”

3 So now I had to let them know and make

4 sure that they know they’d [tape irregularity]

5 they’re gonna get hurt by it, so (inaudible) — I

6 had to make [tape irregularity] if they don’t sit

7 down and talk to me they’re gonna get hurt. They

8 can’t keep telling me to go fuck myself anymore.

9 They have to talk. I want to talk to them. I

10 don’t want to hurt anybody. They’re forcing me to

11 do it. They’re forcing me to do it by refusing to

12 sit down and talk to me. That’s all I ask for.

13 “You sit down and you talk to me [tape

14 irregularity] side of the story, I’ll listen to

15 yours, we all sit down and see how it could be

16 resolved.”

17 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah. So that’s

18 there –

19 MR. CHANDLER: That’s all I ask for.

21 MR. SCHWARTZ: But when you say

22 “winning,” what are you talking about, “winning”?

23 MR. CHANDLER: I will get everything I

24 want, and they will be totally — they will be

25 destroyed forever. They will be destroyed. June

133

1 is gonna lose Jordy. She will have no right to

2 ever see him again.

3 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

6 MR. SCHWARTZ: Does that help –

7 MR. CHANDLER: — Michael the career

8 will be over.

9 MR. SCHWARTZ: Does that help Jordy?

10 MR. CHANDLER: Michael’s career will be

11 over.

12 MR. SCHWARTZ: And does that help

13 Jordy?

14 MR. CHANDLER: It’s irrelevant to me.

5 MR. CHANDLER: That’s silly. No.

6 Michael has to be there. Michael has to be there.

7 He’s the main one. He’s the one I want.

25 MR. CHANDLER: Let me put it to you

128

1 this way, Dave. Nobody in this world was allowed

2 to come between this family of June, me and Jordy.

18  If

19 I go through with this, I win big time. There’s no

20 way that I lose. I’ve checked that out inside out.

21 MR. SCHWARTZ: But when you say

22 “winning,” what are you talking about, “winning”?

23 MR. CHANDLER: I will get everything I

24 want

*****************************

1 MR. CHANDLER: You know, you gotta

2 forgive me for one thing, but I have been told by

3 my lawyer that if I say one thing to anybody –

4 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah. Okay.

5 MR. CHANDLER: — don’t bother calling

6 him again. He said this case is so open [tape

7 irregularity] “You open your mouth and you blow

8 it,” he said, “just don’t come back to me.”

9 MR. SCHWARTZ: Okay. I respect that.

10 Okay.

11 MR. CHANDLER: Not that I don’t trust

12 you or anything –

*************************************

24 MR. SCHWARTZ: But why not? Why

25 couldn’t we go talk it over –

197

1 MR. CHANDLER: Because the thing’s

2 already — the thing has already been set in

3 motion.

4 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

5 MR. CHANDLER: It’s happening at 8:30.

6 8:36 tomorrow –

7 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

8 MR. CHANDLER: — it’s out of my hands.

9 I do nothing else again –

10 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

11 MR. CHANDLER: — after 8:36 tomorrow.

12 It’s all been automatically set in

13 motion.

14 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

15 MR. CHANDLER: I’m not even in contact

16 anymore –

17 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

18 MR. CHANDLER: — with this person.

19 This thing is –

20 MR. SCHWARTZ: Let me ask you this,

21 then.

22 MR. CHANDLER: (Simultaneous,

23 inaudible) 8:36, unless I call in –

24 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

25 MR. CHANDLER: — and tell him not to

198

1 do it.

2 MR. SCHWARTZ: So why don’t you call

3 and say not to do it?

4 MR. CHANDLER: Because I’m not going

5 to.

6 MR. SCHWARTZ: Why? Why wouldn’t you

7 go with me? I mean, we trust each other. We

8 respect each other. Why couldn’t you go with me

9 and we’d decide together?

10 MR. CHANDLER: Because I don’t want to

11 talk to you about it.

12 MR. SCHWARTZ: Why?

13 MR. CHANDLER: I want to talk to June

14 and Jordy and Michael –

14 MR. CHANDLER: (Simultaneous,

15 inaudible) Michael Jackson — Michael Jackson’s

16 career, Dave. This man is gonna be humiliated

17 beyond belief. You’ll not believe it. He will not

18 believe what’s going to happen to him.

19 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

20 MR. CHANDLER: Beyond his worst

21 nightmares. [tape irregularity] not sell one more

22 record.

23 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

24 MR. CHANDLER: That’s for sure. And I

25 mean I’m [tape irregularity] it just has to happen

201

1 in order to get — to keep [tape irregularity] and

2 it doesn’t have to happen if they show up tomorrow.

3 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

4 MR. CHANDLER: But if they don’t show

5 up — and I’ve made it very clear — I’ve tried to

6 make it really clear on that answering machine,

7 “This is the last chance to talk. If you talk, we

8 have a chance. If we don’t talk, it’s all over.”

9 It’s out of my hands. I mean, what

10 else can I do?

 20 MR. CHANDLER: Then why don’t you just

21 back me up right now and let’s get rid of Michael

22 Jackson.

 5 MR. CHANDLER: There are other people

6 involved that are waiting for my phone call that

7 are intentionally going to be in certain

8 positions –

9 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.

10 MR. CHANDLER: — [tape irregularity].

11 I paid them to do it. They’re doing their job. I

12 gotta just go ahead and follow through on the time

13 zone.

14 MR. SCHWARTZ: Um-hmm.

15 MR. CHANDLER: I mean the time set out.

16 Everything is going according to a certain plan

17 that isn’t just mine. There’s other people

18 involved –

A small part of the taped conversation between Evan Chandler and David Schwartz was played by Pellicano in a news conference, after the allegations were made public on August 30 and September 1, 1993.

If Evan Chandler indeed suspected that something wrong was happening, then why didn’t he go to the police? Why did he try hard to make them listen to him and give him the attention he needed? Why did he say that the issue could be resolved? Resolved in what way? And what was the issue, since June and Jordan discredited him at that point? Why did he hire a lawyer that could get what he wanted, and why was Evan rehearsed on what to say so not to say anything that could be used against him? What did he want? And why was he afraid that this could be used against him? What was the plan he was talking about that wasn’t just his?

Mr. Chandler sued June Chandler and David Schwartz for invasion of privacy, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and conspiracy because they taped him and released the audio. The mother said that they were being sued by Evan Chandler to avoid payment of child support and they filed a cross-complaint against Evan Chandler. In that cross-complaint David Schwartz stated that he did not think Michael Jackson had molested his stepson. The stepfather also sued Evan Chandler for brain damage, two counts of assault, and two counts for battery.

The paper Mr. Chandler refers to in the taped conversation as evidence, is the letter that Dr. Mathis Abrams, a psychiatrist, sent to Barry Rothman (the nasty lawyer Evan picked up). Barry Rothman was an entertainment lawyer of questionable character that had been accused for fraud, had a temper, owed people money, and had filed for bankruptcy in November 1992. He was also the lawyer of a client who accused her ex – husband for molesting their child while Mr. Rothman worked at the father’s company at the same time. As a result of his work on this case, he had some experience regarding child abuse accusations. It should be noted that Rothman, with respect to this case, was accused of conflict of interest.

Rothman called Dr. Abrams and presented him with a hypothetical incident. The psychiatrist didn’t meet with anyone at the time. Based on this hypothetical scenario by Barry Rothman, he sent back a letter stating ”reasonable suspicion exists that sexual abuse may have occurred”.  This was the letter Evan Chandler used as a bargaining tool for the $20 million dollar demand in his meeting Michael Jackson on August 4, 1993, and he is referring to it in the conversation as “evidence”.

Mr. Chandler also repeats many times how crucial it is for him to be listened to and not ignored, otherwise he will go crazy. He also said that he cried hysterically over the phone to June because he was losing but she didn’t care about his feelings. He is complaining that Michael Jackson, who has money and power, impressed his family and now is a role model for Jordan, replacing him. He also concluded that if it weren’t for MJ, June and Jordan would still be in his life. In the phone calls he appears to be clearly jealous of the superstar. The transcript is full of grandiose statements and threatening behavior. Through the years it became known that he was bipolar, receiving medical treatment for the serious mental disorder, and that he wasn’t always very compliant with his medical treatment. He also had a well known temper, and violent behavior, which is one of the reasons June divorced him. He tried to kill his son Jordan in August 2005, he hit David Schwartz, he spoke about violent behavior in the transcripts, and here is what Jackson’s biographer J. Randy Taraborelli had to say about him after he committed suicide in November 2009:

I met him several times in the 1990s. I had lots of secret meetings with Evan Chandler, trying to get to the bottom of what was going on. I was pretty young, sort of green and wish I had my present level of expertise to be able to have applied back then. I have stories about that guy that I have never even published. He was about as inconsistent as they come. He was so determined to get me on his side, I thought he was just a tad scary. If you read my book you sort of get how I felt — feel — about him. When it came out, he called me screaming at me for not just buying his story 100%.

He actually threatened me, and I thought… okay, pal, now I know who you really are. I wish it had all been handed differently. To be honest, I wish MJ had never settled, and I told Michael that several times. But… he felt he had to save his life, and I understood that, too. He really was in bad shape. However, I wish it had gone to trial so we could have had real evidence presented in a court of law – like the Arvizo nonsense — and then really been able to sort through it and come to some real decisions. It all seems so useless now, though, doesn’t it? And such a shame.”

Taraborelli, in his 2010 edition of Michael’s unauthorized biography, also writes that Evan Chandler called him after his 2003 edition was published and said “You owe me. If I ever see you again, it’s not going to go well for you. You’d better hide because I am coming for you”.

According to the court documents filed in 2006 (in which Jordan Chandler sued his father and he obtained a permanent restraining order against him), Evan Chandler hit his son from behind with a 12.5 pound weight, which means there was no self-defense involved. Then he maced him in his eyes and tried to choke him. The date of the incident is more than interesting. August 2005; Michael Jackson was acquitted on all counts on June 13, 2005. But the media, who have been negatively criticized for their unethical, unprofessional, and biased tabloid coverage, continued to lie about the singer. Did Jordan decide to speak up for Jackson and did Evan Chandler lose it again? Had Jordan defended MJ, Evan could have faced charges. Jackson’s 2005 lead defense attorney, Tom Mesereau, repeatedly said in public that he had witnesses to testify that Jordan had admitted the 1993 case was his father’s set up plan against Jackson and he was innocent of the allegations. These witnesses were Jordan’s friends. In fact, Jordan Chandler has been very talkative about it during his period in college, but the media didn’t find it convenient for their agenda to report it.

MESEREAU: Now the one you’re talking about never showed up. He’s the one who got the settlement in the early 90s. And my understanding is prosecutors tried to get him to show up and he wouldn’t. If he had, I had witnesses who were going to come in and say he told them it never happened. And that he would never talk to his parents again for what they made him say. And it turned out he had gone into court and gotten legal emancipation from his parents. His mother testified that she hadn’t talked to him in 11 years. So, you know, there was a problem there as well.
(Harvard U
niversity , November, 29 2005)

 Josephine Zohny was one of the potential witnesses for the defense in the 2005 trial, and her name can be found in the witness list. What she had to say was this: during a conversation regarding Michael Jackson’s allegations, Jordan Chandler expressed the belief that the singer was innocent, and when he referred to his father, he said that he had a poor relationship with him, and he made him do things he didn’t want to do.

The prosecution in the 2005 trial never opened the door for the defense to bring witnesses regarding the 1993 allegations. The defense’s role is to rebut the prosecution; they are not the ones who introduce subjects or witnesses to the trial. Jordan Chandler never came to testify against Jackson and his mother, who testified, did not accuse the singer of anything.

June, Michael and Jordan never showed up in that July meeting Evan was desperately asking for.

Geraldine Hughes was Barry Rothman’s legal secretary that witnessed the plot for extortion that took place in Rothman’s office. She was there when Evan Chandler had meetings with Rothman way before any allegations were made and she met Jordan as well in that very office. She described Jordan as being cool, while Evan was stressed, and Jordan was trying to calm him down. Hughes describes the plot/plan in detail in her book Redemption, in which she kept a calendar with a chronological order of the events. In the book she states that her calendar can stand the scrutiny of a forensic ink dating test. When her book was released neither Rothman nor Evan sued or challenged her. She offered her testimony to the defense during the 1993 investigation, but no trial ever took place. Among numerous things she offers in the book are overheard statements that she wrote down such as:

It’s my ass that’s on the line and in danger of going to prisonChandler yelling at Rothman after the allegations had made it to the public.  He said that on August 24 1993 and it was the day Pellicano publicly mentioned the extortion.

Chandler to Rothman  “I almost had a twenty million dollar deal”.

Rothman to Chandler telling him over the phone that they had “to meet over the weekend” before speaking to the investigator “to make sure our stories are the same”.

Rothman to Chandlerwe just have to stick to the plan, we cannot deviate from the plan”.

Pellicano to Rothman before the allegations “No way-that’s extortion”.

On July 9, 1993 June and David met with MJ’s private investigator Anthony Pellicano and played him the tape that David had made of his conversations with Evan Chandler. Michael’s lawyer Bert Fields was also present in that meeting and he represented June as well, according to her testimony. (For the record, Evan sued David for recording him and David said he did it because Evan has been violent and threatened him, and he needed evidence for his lawsuit against him). Bert Fields later said he was very concerned after hearing the tape because it sounded like extortion. The singer had already heard the tapes and he was very angry. Among other things, he said “Tell Evan that Michael Jackson said he can go to hell”.

Anthony Pellicano arranged a meeting to talk to Jordan Chandler the next day. June Chandler confirmed the meetings with Pellicano in her 2005 testimony, acknowledging the fact that Pellicano was representing her too at the time, along with Bert Fields. She was on Michael Jackson’s side against her former husband. Pellicano questioned Jordan for over an hour, asking him directly if anything inappropriate ever happened. Jordan Chandler’s answer to all of these questions was NO. Pellicano in his various media appearances at the time, talked about that day.Paul Baressi handed to Aphrodite Jones portion of the transcripts from the Jim Mitteager tapes, which were well known to the media. Mitteager was a reporter for The Globe tabloid, and he recorded his meetings with the parties involved in the 1993 case while interviewing them. Many famous journalists have listened to these tapes, and when he died his widow gave them to Baressi. Parts of these transcripts were handed over to FBI for the case against Pellicano (in 2006 he was arrested on illegal wiretapping, among other charges). Here is an excerpt handed to Jones that can be found in her official site:

TRANSCRIPT

September 1994

PELLICANO:  You have to understand something. I have nine kids.  Michael [Jackson] plays with my baby.  They crawl all over him.  They pull his hair.  They pull his nose.  Sometimes he wears a bandage across his face.  If I let my own kids (unintelligible) do you think there’s a chance?

MITTEAGER:  Well, all things being equal, I would say, no.

PELLICANO:  Not only that.  If you sat this kid [Jordie Chandler] down like I did, as a matter of fact, he couldn’t wait to get up and go play video games.  I said, “you don’t understand how serious this is.  Your dad [Evan Chandler] is going to accuse Michael of sexual molestation.  He going to say all kinds of stuff.”  He [Jordie] says, “Yeah, my dad’s trying to get money.”  As a matter of fact, I (unintelligible) for 45 minutes.  Then I tried tricking him.  I mean, I want you to know, I’m a vegetarian.  I picked this kid with a fine tooth comb.  So we’re there (unintelligible) with this kid… and If you sat down and talked to this kid, there wouldn’t be any doubt in your mind either.  And I said Michael is all upset.  We went over and over.  I tried to get him to sit down and he wants to play video games while I’m sitting there.  I’m sitting there with the kid’s mother [June Chandler] and David Swartrz walks in and (unintelligible) what’s this all about? And [Barry] Rothman(unintelligible)asking questions. There is no question that Rothman (unintelligible) what this is all about.”

http://www.aphroditejones.com/Michael_Jackson_Trial/Michael_Jackson_Trial.htm

This would not be the only time Jordan Chandler would confirm the extortion. Jordan mentioned the extortion in the Child Services report on August 17, 1993. Excerpt from the report:” Minor stated he and his father met with Michael Jackson and attorneys for father and Mr. Jackson and confronted him with allegations in an effort to make a settlement and avoid a court hearing”. Almost everyone in the media had illegally obtained this report but they chose not to mention this part with the exception of a few (non-tabloid of course) newspapers like The Times and USA Today. And there is another mention of the extortion from Ray Chandler, Evan Chandler’s brother, in his book.

Had Michael paid the twenty million dollars demanded of him in August, rather than the following January, he might have spent the next ten years as the world’s most famous entertainer, instead of the world’s most infamous child molester.”

Evan Chandler also admitted the extortion in his diary in his own words and it was read in public in May 1994. They all refer to the August 1993 meeting where the extortion took place. Their references are consistent with what Michael Jackson was telling all along, including the exact amount of money. The Chandlers self-admitted the extortion with Jordan doing it twice, even admitting that he was aware of his father’s plan. David Schwartz also referred to the extortion in a late 1993 meeting in Larry Feldman’s office.

June agreed to let her ex-husband have custody of Jordan for one week beginning July 12, 1993, as Evan Chandler requested. After this, he demanded that June sign a stipulation were he asked her not to move Jordan outside L.A., not to let him meet Michael Jackson, allowed her 2 days of visitation per week, that all child support obligations from Evan be paid in full, and that no further child support would be paid as long as he maintained Jordan’s custody. June Chandler signed it because as she said, Evan threatened not to return Jordan as it was agreed on June 18, 1993, unless she signed the stipulation.  Why did Evan need to take such extreme measures for Jordan not to meet Michael? If Jordan was molested he would avoid Jackson himself. Instead he was more than happy to visit Michael, and he was missing the scheduled visits with his father. All the people (parents and children) that saw Jordan at Neverland said to police that he looked cool, he didn’t avoid the singer, and he wasn’t afraid of him at all.

And there is also the Monaco trip in May 1993. Supposedly the alleged molestation occurred there as well. Fortunately, the World Music Awards were televised on May 12, 1993. During the whole event coverage the camera zoomed numerous times at the star of the night, Michael Jackson. We could see Lily seating on his lap, Jordan and Lily pushing each other to sit with Michael throughout the night, Lily at some point was sitting in Linda Evans’ lap, June was seating in the row behind them, and Jordan at some point is sitting in Michael’s chair, but not on his lap (Michael is moving and dancing to the song, but Jordan is still. That means he was on the seat). Jordan is comfortable with MJ, he was in a great mood and he was singing and smiling throughout the whole event. This is a weird behavior for an alleged molestation victim. In almost all video footage and photos from that trip Michael is holding Lily in his arms. Also Michael Jackson’s longtime friend and music producer Teddy Riley had this to say about meeting Jordan Chandler at Neverland:

I can only say for myself that it’s not true (the allegations) because I have met this little boy and he’s been with Michael along with my daughter, and I’ve never seen anything occur, such as something stupid like that. I think it’s a money thing. I’ve been a friend of his for over ten years and I’ve never never witnessed… I mean he’s been with my daughter, my daughter was three years old, and we stayed with him and had so much fun. He’s just a fun guy”.

Evan Chandler didn’t return his son to his mother even after she signed the stipulation. Rothman and Chandler were notified that an Ex Parte hearing would be held on August 17, 1993, for the immediate return of Jordan Chandler to his mother’s custody. Between July 12 and August 17, Evan had plenty of time to deal with his plan. Actually he had been negotiating with Michael Jackson’s camp since August 4, 1993. If MJ had given in to the extortion, Evan Chandler would have never accused him of child molestation. The whole ordeal would have been avoided. Instead MJ was armed with lawyers and investigators and didn’t pay Chandler, though he could have stopped everything right then and there. Ray Chandler confirmed the extortion by saying that if MJ had paid Evan the money he asked, he wouldn’t have accused him, and Evan Chandler said in the tape that if MJ showed up at the meeting and talked to him, nothing would happen. Evan Chandler also confirmed it in his diary.

Evan Chandler had another chance to report to the judge his suspicion of child abuse in the Ex Parte hearing. June would lose custody and Jordan would be safe. Of course Evan Chandler again didn’t report anything and the Court ordered that he should immediately return his son to his mother and that the stipulation would be overturned. It was clear that Evan Chandler was holding off reporting the allegations as part of his plan.

On August 17, 1993, instead of obeying the court’s order, Evan Chandler took his son to see the psychiatrist Dr. Abrams (who wrote his letter based on Evan’s hypothetical) who was obligated by law to report the allegations to the authorities. Ms. Hughes was the one that typed the letter for Barry Rothman to Evan Chandler advising him how to report child abuse through a third party without liability to the parent. The informative letter was sent to Evan Chandler on July 27, 1993. He had been very open about his plan that wasn’t just his as early as July 8, 1993, on the taped conversation.

“There is no way I can lose. I’ve checked that inside out”

Pay close attention to the dates. Evan has been referring to his plan as early as July 8, 1993 (that we know of). Rothman sent him the letter about Third Party Disclosure on July 27, 1993. Jordan Chandler hadn’t accused Michael Jackson of anything at that time. He was even questioned on July 10, 1993, where not only did he deny everything, but he confirmed that he was aware of his father’s plan. Up to that point Evan never contacted the police, but he was desperate to carry out his plan, make his negotiations, and force people to listen to him. The only person accusing Michael Jackson of molestation was Evan Chandler.

On August 2, 1993, during the week that Evan had temporary custody of Jordan, he extracted his son’s tooth using the questionable drug sodium Amytal. This is a psychiatric drug that is used to amnesia adult patients, and it certainly has nothing to do with the extraction of a child’s tooth. Prior to the 1993 case there was another case involving accusations under the influence of that drug (The Gary Ramona case). The defendant was acquitted, and various medical experts testified that the plaintiff’s accusations must be viewed as unreliable because of the drug. Courts, based on scientific research by medical experts and previous cases, have ruled that information obtained from narcoanalysis is inadmissible.

Mark Torbiner, a dental anesthesiologist, was present at this procedure (he was the one that introduced Evan Chandler to Barry Rothman). According toEvan Chandler himself, (in a phone interview that was aired on TV after Harvey Levin reported the story of the drug use on May 3, 1994 for KCBS-TV), when Jordan woke up under the influence of that drug, only then did he come up with allegations against Michael Jackson. That story was repeated again by Jordan for psychiatrist Dr. Richard Gardner on October 6, 1993. The transcript of that interview was made public and the full tooth story is mentioned:

“My father had to pull my tooth out one time, like, while I was there. And I don’t like pain, so I said could you put me to sleep? And he said sure. So his friend put me to sleep; he’s an anaesthesiologist. And um, when I woke up my tooth was out, and I was alright – a little out of it but conscious. And my Dad said – and his friend was gone, it was just him and me – and my dad said, ‘I just want you to let me know, did anything happen between you and Michael?’ And I said ‘Yes,’ and he gave me a big hug and that was it.”

The California Court of Appeal on August 17, 1997 for the Ramona case: “sodium amytal is, in some aspects, even more problematic than hypnosis in its effects of producing false memories and confabulations. If the patient is concerned about sexual matters, he or she will tend to recall sexual experiences. This is likely to forever distort the memory of the subject.”

But there is one thing missing from Jordan’s interview with Dr. Gardner, and that is Dr. Gardner’s report. Not only was it never mentioned, but we know from Dr. Katz’s (the psychologist who interviewed the Arvizos) testimony in 2005 that he entered the 1993 case when Larry Feldman asked him to review the tapes of that interview and give him his feedback. From the 2005 transcripts, Dr. Katz’s testimony:

13 My work was to review the videotapes that

14 were made between the victim –

15 Q. No, I’m — go ahead.

16A. — and Dr. Richard Gardner.

17 Q. Okay.

18 A. And to review those tapes, those videotapes,

19 and to view them and analyze them to give my

20 feedback to Mr. Feldman.

Larry Feldman sent Jordan to Gardner, and he was the civil attorney for Evan Chandler in his lawsuit against Jackson. Why would Mr. Feldman need another report for that interview? Why didn’t he like Dr. Gardner’s report on Jordan Chandler and his story? Why was there no mention of Dr. Gardner’s outcome? Dr. Gardener was an expert in false child abuse allegations.

We now know from Feldman and Katz that they knew each other because Feldman’s wife is a psychologist and she knew him from the McMartin case. Dr. Katz was the one that assessed 400 children and determined that 369 of them have been sexually molested. The story turned out to be completely false and the children were highly coerced and manipulated in the interviews. From the 2005 trial transcripts Dr. Katz cross examination:

3 Q. Were you involved in that case in any

4 professional way?

5 A. Yes, I was.

6 Q. How were you involved?

7A. I was the director of training and

8 professional education at the Children’s Institute

9 International, and that’s the agency that initially

10 interviewed all the McMartin children.

11 Q. And were you involved in that case for a

12 number of years?

13 A. Well, my involvement was that I was director

14 of the program. And Kee McFarland, who was the

15 woman who interviewed the children, actually worked

16 under me. But I was not — I did not directly

17 interview the children’s parents.

18 I did interview — my involvement with the

19 McMartin case was, I did do assessments. I was

20 asked by the Department of Children & Family

21 Services to assess the children of the alleged

22 perpetrators to see if they had been molested.

23 Other than that, I had very little involvement

24 directly with the case.

25 Q. Is it your understanding that that was

26 perhaps the longest and largest criminal case in the

27 history of Los Angeles County?

28 A. I think it was.

So Larry Feldman knew how easily Dr. Katz diagnosed sexual molestation. No wonder why he chose him when Dr. Gardner’s report didn’t serve Mr. Chandler’s plan. Yet it was the same Dr. Katz who, in a taped conversation dated June 2003 with sheriff’s investigator Paul Zelis of Santa Barbara Police Department, said the following about Michael Jackson:

“And, you know, he doesn’t even really qualify as a paedophile. He’s really just this regressed 10-year-old.”

“Yeah, yeah, I agree,” replied Zelis.”

The expert who sees sexual abuse everywhere around him said that and Zelis agreed.

August 2, 1993 was the first time Evan Chandler allegedly heard his son saying he was molested by the singer. So what was the story with Evan accusing MJ prior to that? And why didn’t Evan report the abuse? Why didn’t he mention it on August 17, 1993 at the Ex Parte hearing for custody? Apparently, it was not part of the plan. The allegations begun to form only after Jordan was removed from his mother and was isolated under his father’s control. Up to this point, the only person accusing Jackson of molestation was Evan Chandler and nobody else.

On August 4, 1993, there was a meeting which is described by Pellicano in his interview to Mary Fischer. The same was repeated for Randy Taraborelli who had interviewed everyone involved in the case. From the 1994 GQ article:

Chandler and his son met with Jackson and Pellicano in a suite at the Westwood Marquis Hotel. On seeing Jackson, says Pellicano, Chandler gave the singer an affectionate hug (a gesture, some say, that would seem to belie the dentist’s suspicions that Jackson had molested his son), then reached into his pocket, pulled out Abrams’s letter and began reading passages from it. When Chandler got to the parts about child molestation, the boy, says Pellicano, put his head down and then looked up at Jackson with a surprised expression, as if to say “I didn’t say that.” As the meeting broke up, Chandler pointed his finger at Jackson, says Pellicano, and warned “I’m going to ruin you.”

Anthony Pellicano also said about that meeting where both Evan and Jordan Chandler hugged Michael Jackson: “If I believed that somebody had molested my kid and I got that close to him, I’d be in the death row right now”.

That same night Rothman made the $20 million dollar demand to Pellicano.

On August 9, 1993, Rothman met with Pellicano, who, according to Geraldine Hughes, yelled at Rothman “no way, that’s extortion!”. Pellicano later sent a fax to Rothman stating that Michael Jackson didn’t do anything wrong and he will not pay the money requested. They met again on August 13. The recorded conversation with Barry Rothman was all about money, and molestation was not mentioned. Mr. Rothman was very careful in the conversation, as Pellicano was very famous for taping people. When Pellicano brought up the $20 million demand made by Rothman ($5million each for 4 movie deals), the lawyer answered “we’re past that point”. Barry Rothman certainly did not sound like he was hearing the extortion issue for the first time.

Did Jordan participate in the plan to please his father during the bitter custody battle? Did Evan really give the drug to Jordan? Torbiner, who was supposedly present and administered the drug, was reluctant to speak about that day, saying only the confusing “If I used it, it was for dental purposes”. But the medical experts and the drug’s instructions refuted Torbiner, because it can’t be used for dental purposes and it can’t be used on minors. We know that Jordan was aware of his father’s plan in July 10, 1993, and he denied any allegation against Jackson. The choice of Jordan’s words when he was approached in 2005 to testify in the trial is more than interesting. He told the FBI that he wasn’t interested in testifying against Jackson, and threatened to take legal action if Sneddon tried to subpoena him, and he said “I have done my part”.

What was his part? Did he participate in his father’s plan instead of being manipulated during anaesthesia?  Why is Torbiner silent? According to Jordan Chandler, Torbiner (who has a proven questionable professional past  because he illegally drugged people) was not present in the scene between Jordan and his farther, a very convenient move because there was no witness. And just why did the anaesthesiologist leave before the patient’s full recovery, especially after having given him a dangerous drug for which there are no legal doses for someone of Jordan’s age? Evan Chandler even tried to frame Jackson in his home in May 1993 where he invited him despite his suspicions, brought Torbiner to drug him when he complained about a headache, and put him to sleep in Jordan’s bedroom. Evan Chandler did have controlling behaviour, he was violent, he was mentally ill, he was jealous of Michael Jackson, he wanted to become a screenwriter and quit his job as a dentist, he was hungry for money and he did have a plan. And Torbiner’s role is very mysterious. The timeline, the contradictions and the events surrounding the case always spoke loud enough for themselves.

Evan Chandler covered everything the best possible way. He was never going to be accused of perjury because it was Dr. Abrams who reported the allegations, not him. And it was not his fault that Jordan came up with allegations under the drug’s influence. Jordan had already changed his story, which makes him an incredible witness, plus he changed it under the drug’s influence, so legally he couldn’t be blamed, or be believed. Evan made sure that his son could not be a credible witness and he could never be competent to stand trial. Not one of the Chandlers was going to be accused of perjury. Yes, it was indeed a good plan. Remember Evan’s words:

“There is no way I can lose. I’ve checked that inside out”

Advertisements
153 Comments leave one →
  1. June 3, 2016 10:17 pm

    Evan Chandler also admitted the extortion in his diary in his own words and it was read in public in May 1994. They all refer to the August 1993 meeting where the extortion took place. Their references are consistent with what Michael Jackson was telling all along, including the exact amount of money. The Chandlers self-admitted the extortion with Jordan doing it twice, even admitting that he was aware of his father’s plan. David Schwartz also referred to the extortion in a late 1993 meeting in Larry Feldman’s office.
    Could you give me a LINK to this please. If Evan Chandler admitted to extortion in his diary, then that would almost definitely prove that MJ was extorted.

  2. September 30, 2012 4:54 am

    David that’s great news!

  3. sanemjfan permalink
    September 29, 2012 12:34 pm

    Good news! Mary Fischer will be publishing her 1994 GQ article “Was Michael Jackson Framed?” as a paperback and and Kindle eBook on October 4th, and it will include a brand new foreword from her! http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=Mary+Fischer+Was+Michael+Jackson+Framed

    Here’s the link to download the free Kindle app for PC, which will allow readers to buy and read the Kindle eBook without actually owing a Kindle eReader: http://www.amazon.com/gp/feature.html/ref=kcp_pc_mkt_lnd?docId=1000426311

    Here’s the Kindle app for Mac:http://www.amazon.com/gp/feature.html?ie=UTF8&docId=1000464931

  4. stacy permalink
    August 22, 2012 8:58 pm

    @nannorris

    It doesn’t matter who was on the jury because the verdict still would have been the same based on the evidence.

    • nannorris permalink
      August 23, 2012 9:03 am

      Zonen likes to give the excuse that the jury could not understand the evidence , due to their age.., which we all know is ridiculous…The evidence completely exonerated MJ which is why , imo, Zonen got so personal about MJ spending habits , his music etc in his closing arguments, just to try and turn anyone on the jury against him

  5. lynande51 permalink*
    August 20, 2012 4:37 pm

    Here is a link to Santa Barbara County Court information on Judge Thomas Adams.
    http://www.sbcourts.org/general_info/judicial_officers/adams.htm

  6. lynande51 permalink*
    August 19, 2012 7:57 am

    Yes but he would only be giving him use immunity if there was something he would be charged with other than contempt. So can we assume from that information that Miko was familiar with the 1993 case to the point the the prosecutor thought he could charge him with something and what was the something they thought they could charge him with. It would have had to be against him that there were charges threatened otherwise he could not have taken the fifth because it is used to protect against self incrimination, that is all.
    This is also good news when one of the stories that haters use is actually that Miko said he would never let his kids go to Neverland or be around Michael. That was another lie that was perpetuated in the court papers because Miko was not married and did not have kids until after 1995 so that would have been premature of him to make a statement like that. Then it would appear that Miko made no statements at all to that Grand Jury so that is just another lie that they used based on the words of none other than Victor Gutierrez go figure.I can’t believe that the whole case was based on the thoughts of that man with the help of the greedy Evan Chandler.
    Here is what a lot of people overlook when they refer to the Chandler case. Evan was researching this long before he had custody of Jordan. He was asking Carrie Fisher about Michael back in April. He has MJ at his house one weekend in May when he gives him somethingand then asks him a bunch of questions. He met him a grand total of once before he started demanding money and meetings. One time, long enough to find out about Michael’s money and then he made the phone call to Dave Schwartz 9 days before Jordan’s so called discloser. Then him and his lawyer start negotiating a “deal” with MJ but never told him what it was about until August 4th. Someone tell me that was not a set up.

    • nannorris permalink
      August 20, 2012 5:25 am

      Evan had said he was happy that MJ was in the picture because Jordan would be set for life.He immediately thought he won the lottery..It is so disheartening how all this was reported in the media.
      AS for Miko , he is the first witness called and he was in there for 4 hours , I think it said-on the video..
      S perhaps he was testifying but not telling them what they wanted to hear, as in MJ is guilty of something..
      so this was a round peg Sneddon was trying to but in a square hole from the get go…
      What a sick man..
      I think it is pretty interesting that this was going on in Santa Barbara and that Sneddon could just get a judge to come in and try and convince Miko to talk..Sneddons body language is so aggressive when he is with the judge .
      I notice that Sneddon doesnt allow the judge through the doors first, Sneddon goes first…he doesnt seem to have any kind of respect or deference to the judge ..That is because he thinks he runs the town imo.
      Wonder if he usually pushed Melville around too..
      I just cant think what the judge would have been called in for other then to threaten Miko personally in some way , maybe saying he could be charged with some crime after the fact or something..
      Frankly I think they should have charged Ralph Chacon with something if they believed his story because supposedly he just stood there and watched a crime against a child..I would have thought that would have made him a party to the crime in some way

      • lynande51 permalink*
        August 20, 2012 11:41 am

        In the 2005 case the first judge that it went to was Judge Adams. He was the one that they went to for the affidavit for all of the search warrants. He is the one that I think was in Sneddon’s corner about the case because he was the one that signed the body search warrant as well if I am not mistaken. When it came to trying the case I think the reason that Melville got it was because of the venue and to be perfectly honest I think that Sneddon and crew thought the defense was going to ask for a change of venue and hoped it would end up in Santa Barbara. When the defense didn’t it kind of threw their whole case off and that is when you find them lying to the court in court papers and going to the Grand Jury instead of a prelimiary hearing to get what they want.
        Chacon’s story was that he originally saw Brett. IF you read through his testimony and the one motion of the prosecutions you can see what the problem was. First he said it was Brett and that is what inspired not only Sneddon but 3 others to fly to Australia and confront the Barnes’ with his statement of what he says he saw. Where his whole story gets messed up is in his testimony because he remembers the story he told them back then and was trying to work that into his testimony in 2005.He had to because Tom Messereau would have had that original statement to ask him about like he did with all the others to point out the contradictions. He said that it happened when the weather was nice, like late spring, early summer. Michael met Jordan May of 1992 and he did not have in person contact with him until February of 1993, late February.Then Michael was in rehearsals for at least 6 weeks prior to his first leg of the Dangerous tour which started in July of 1992.As for charging him for perjury that would have been up to the prosecution to do that so we know why that never happened.They helped him with his story so they could hardly have done that to him. Also charging him with something in 1993 that could only have happened if what he said back then was proven true like “I saw him with Brett” and then Brett would have had to cooraborate the story. He never has and he never will because it never happened.
        To understand Sneddon I think you have to look first at his overzealous desire to prosecute MJ in 1993 to see what the 2005 case was about. He was/is a man used to getting his way in Santa Barbara no matter what the cost. Just look at his history to know what he was about.He wanted MJ in court and he decided he was guilty based on a very shaky story at best. What would have to be inside someone to want to do that? Prejudice that’s what.

    • nannorris permalink
      August 20, 2012 10:34 pm

      I used to think it was the celebrity factor and his wealth that made the prosecutors crazy , but I really am thinking now the fact he was a black guy so rich and so loved all over the world really made them want to take him down….It would have to be race that would make them so insanely illogical..
      I know Mesereau speaks about how they tried to get the term” govt prosecutors” to be not allowed by the defense because the north section of santa barbara was more libertarian, I have heard Zonen say there were things he would change and I think that is one of them , but I hear him make excuses about the age of the jurors too.,Sour grapes..this is the 2 hour version of the Harvard seminar where Mesereau mentions about how The North actually tried to secede from the southern part of the county and how he thought that would work in their favor..

  7. lynande51 permalink*
    August 17, 2012 4:26 pm

    David, the tired old excuse about it being an investigative only Grand Jury comes from the prosecutions pleading about the settlement agreement. In there is where the author of the rebuttal to the Motion by the defense to not allow any reference to the amount of the settlements by the prosecution in their opening statements or in questioning.That is where these people get some of their ideas from and now we see that was a lie.It sure is a lucky thing for Sneddon that no one had this footage back in 2004/2005 when they stated that in their court papers.But that is not the most disturbing part.The most disturbing part is bringing a judge into a Grand Jury to “convince” Miko to testify against Michael.What was he using for intimidation? Were they threatening him with some kind of trumped up charge in the mess like they did with Frank in 2005? That would be my guess because a judge is not in charge of a Grand Jury the people are in charge of a Grand Jury.I just have to shake my head at the lengths to which Sneddon was willing to go or better yet where he thought he could go. That was outrageous malicious prosecution even in 1993 and it just went from bad to worse in this case. He should have to answer in some way to the people of Santa Barbara County, the people of the State of California and the people of the United States starting first with Michael Jackson, his children, his family and his friends and fans.
    To anyone out there that reads this blog that may be thinking of becoming a lawyer I have some advice.This is not who you should fashion yourself after. If you want to fashion yourself after a prosecutor fashion yourself after David Walgren and Debra Brazil. They are the ones that acted in exactly the way a prosecutor should act.

    • nannorris permalink
      August 18, 2012 2:26 pm

      http://www.indybay.org/uploads/2008/10/03/grandjuries-infosheet.pdf
      I was reading in this article that a lot of times people are recommended to take the fifth..I would think maybe that was what Miko was doing because any tidbit he might say could be twisted against mj / or himself for that matter…
      I wonder if the judge was brought in to tell him what could happen to him if he was granted immunity and still refused to testify, although, never heard of a judge trying to make a witness testify but i have heard of prosecutors doing it like this situation below
      ——————-

      If you take the Fifth, you won’t have to say so more
      than a few times. Once you’ve exercised your right to
      remain silent in response to several questions, and it’s
      clear that you’re not going to give any further answers,
      you’ll be excused. However, there’s a hitch. Sometimes,
      the prosecutor grants immunity to a witness who’s
      exercising her right to remain silent, to try to force her to
      testify. It doesn’t matter whether or not you’ve requested
      immunity. The prosecutor or judge can just impose
      immunity on you—and then you’re no longer entitled to
      the protection of the Fifth Amendment (because if you’re
      immune, what you say can’t be used against you).
      However, there are two kinds of immunity. The good
      kind is called “transactional immunity” and it means that
      you can’t be prosecuted for the incident(s) you testify
      about. The bad kind is “use immunity” and it means that
      the prosecutor can’t use your own testimony against you—
      but he can use other people’s testimony and evidence
      against you. So if the prosecutor makes a bunch of people
      testify, they’ll likely end up providing enough evidence to
      convict each other, like a circular firing squad. Naturally,
      grand jury witnesses are almost always given use
      immunity, not transactional immunity.
      If you refuse to testify after being granted immunity,
      you’ll normally be held in contempt and locked up. Some
      people who’ve chosen not to comply have had to stay in
      custody until all the grand jury proceedings were ended

      or
      the case was over. This can take months or even years.

  8. lynande51 permalink*
    August 16, 2012 8:35 pm

    So according to the news report this Grand Jury was going to be asked to hand down an indictiment. So much for an investigative only Grand Jury.
    How about Sneddon bringing a judge into the Grand jury room to “convince” Miko to testify. That man would stop at nothing I tell you.

    • sanemjfan permalink
      August 16, 2012 9:40 pm

      @Lynette
      That’s a great observation! I’ll be sure to include this video in my rebuttal to the MJ hater’s website where they stated that it was an “investigation only” grand jury!

      By the way, everyone be sure to look through all of the videos in mjjlmfp’s playlist because there are lots of rare news reports about MJ from the 1990’s.

    • nannorris permalink
      August 16, 2012 10:30 pm

      I noticed that too about the judge being brought in…I have never heard of that before , Another intimidation tactic above and beyond the grand jury and notice how it wasnt questioned by the media..

  9. sanemjfan permalink
    August 16, 2012 12:32 am

    Here’s some media coverage of Miko Brando’s testimony during the 1994 grand jury proceedings: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iuhH1aWfDE&feature=BFa&list=UUhKEnXuy_9rtWJzZdRRnlxA

  10. August 6, 2012 7:39 am

    @differentkindofree I am gkad to hear that. Thank you for sharing it:)

  11. August 6, 2012 1:38 am

    I just saw someone on a forum saying that they now doubt MJ was a pedophile because of some of the info on this page. Great job, guys!

  12. shelly permalink
    September 27, 2011 4:51 am

    I found interesting that except for Michael no Hayvenhurst five were called to testify against MJ.

  13. shelly permalink
    September 27, 2011 4:12 am

    Michael Jackson’s millions lure cons of all stripes.

    By ABIOLA SINCLAIR

    Media Editor

    Shaking off the PBS “Front Line” criticism like a dog shakes off fleas, “Hard Copy,” in one of its “exclusives,” this time backed up as sworn testimony, maintains they “have the smoking gun.”

    This time it’s Jackson’s former female bodyguard, Charlie Michaels, a blond no-nonsense-looking White woman who swears that she saw Michael in an inappropriate situation with a young boy.

    She maintained she worked for him for three years, guarding his person and protecting the ranch. She said Michael had a boy in his dance studio teaching him to dance and showing him how he does it. She said Michael then “draped himself over the boy after going through some steps and touched his (the boy’s) crotch…Michael then said ‘wheeee’ the way he does (when he grabs his own crotch).”

    According to Michaels, she gave her statement to the Los Angeles D.A.’s office as part of their criminal investigation. She is also part of the latest civil suit case with four other former bodyguards who maintain they were fired because they “knew too much” about Jackson’s personal business, which included, they say, child molestation and pedophilia.

    The “Front Line” look at tabloid journalism reported that the bodyguards, at least two of then, received six-figure payments for appearing on the TV tabloids saying what they saw.

    “Hard Copy” seems determined to bring Jackson down. Michaels Jackson was not going to sing. NBC advertised that Jackson would appear and would perform. As for Jackson, he looked good. Performing at the special were Dionne Warwick, Gladys Knight, Smokey Robinson, Louis Gossett, comedian Paul Rodriguez and others.

    Despite the case being dropped against Michael Jackson due to an out-of-court settlement, there is grand jury testimony going on in Santa Barbara, spurred on by the district attorney’s office. Several people connected with the Jackson case have been subpoenaed to testify under oath as to what they know or knew about Jackson’s personal affairs. The Santa Barbara office is hoping to get lucky with some testimony that could be grounds for an indictment against Jackson.

    Scheduled to testify is a mother of a young boy that Jackson’s bodyguards claim was molested by Jackson. The mother has already stated that she has no complaint against Jackson, but the DAs office is purshing the issue because bodyguards to Jackson claim Jackson paid her off.

    Also set to testify are Jackson’s chauffeur Gary Hearns; bodyguard Lee Tucker, who is part of the suit against Jackson, and the big fish, Norma Stacous, the head of Jackson’s M.J.J. Productions, who was named by several informants, but who was conveniently out of the country for most of the scandal but who was conveniently but has since returned.

    She supposedly assumed the coast was clear because of the out-of-court settlement, but the Santa Barbara DA’s office is trying to make a name for itself.

    Ethnic NewsWatch SoftLine Information, Inc., Stamford, CT

  14. September 27, 2011 1:32 am

    This is incredible! I already knew of most of this, but hearing it in much more detail is fantastic!! I actually had no idea that the reason Chandler chose Sneddon was that he was publicity hungry, mean, and (don’t we all know it) the nastiest SOB out there. Thank you for this amazing article! I’m bookmarking it and will possibly use it in the future to back some of my arguments.

  15. August 5, 2011 12:08 am

    Excellent Olga.

  16. June 16, 2011 7:14 am

    Michael Jackson HATERS should read this so that they get educated and stop being so ignorant and stop being so naive into getting manipulated by the media!

  17. TatumMarie permalink
    May 28, 2011 4:15 am

    I ‘ve had similar experience with the sodium amytal- when DD wrote that their wasnt any proof that it was used. That turned out to be true too- but she always elaborates and twist the information.

  18. lynande51 permalink*
    May 28, 2011 3:34 am

    @Tatum, I know when you first read any of the books all you feel is anger. There are little bits of information that are in them mostly the chronologies. In DD’s book there is one portion about the Neverland Five and their lawsuit. I don’t know if you remember but they were also suing several of Michael’s employee’s for among the charges sexual harrassment. One of the Personal security guards that was named in that suit was Jerome Johnson. Well he “got religion” and decided to “tell the truth”. However on his first day of testimony a letter was found at the defense table and they asked for an In Camera hearing with the judge. The letter stated:
    ” In the best interest of all concerned in regard to case number SM 89344 we ask that seven million( $7,000,000.00) be wired to the following no later than Wednesday, January 24,1996: Great Western Bank,401 California Street. San Francisco California 94104. Account Number 062-808-364. After verification of receipt, outstanding items will be completed and forwarded to to the appropriate parties and full cooperation will be extended.’
    According to her book Judge Zel Canter was so angry about it he had a DNA analysis done of the saliva on the envelope. He ordered swabs taken from all the participants and it turned out to be a match to Jerome Johnsons wife. When he was finally called to the stand he took the fifth. So there was no help for the Neverland Five.
    I thought that was just her being dramatic but it turned out to be true except of course the truth was 3 million not seven. I think Diane Dimond needs a remedial math course the way numbers just continue to grow around her. It comes out in the testimony of the Neverland Five. I guess one way to win a case of extortion is to continue to extort the money right?

  19. TatumMarie permalink
    May 28, 2011 2:02 am

    @Truth Prevail
    THANK YOU:)

  20. lynande51 permalink*
    May 28, 2011 12:30 am

    Helena I intend to post excerpts of it with the piece I am writing on the Neverland Five. I am looking for the Spanish version of the book because there are additional pages of it. YOu are right the fantasy is unbelievable and very laughable. I will emai lyou to let you know about the Spanish version.

  21. Truth Prevail permalink
    May 27, 2011 10:37 pm

    no1 here should be taking vg word as gospel like you guys said hes a proven lier prob gets paid to come up with the nastiest BS he can think of so you guys shouldnt take his word for it that he was on mj in the 80’s hes a horrible man!

Trackbacks

  1. Fact Checking Michael Jackson’s Christian Faith, Part 6 of 7: Christians Who Have DEFENDED Michael! « Vindicating Michael
  2. Fact Checking Michael Jackson’s Christian Faith, Part 2 of 5: Michael Did NOT “Channel” Demon Spirits to Help Him Write Songs! « Vindicating Michael
  3. Joe Jackson And Abuse | rhythm of the tide
  4. Transcript of Matt Drudge’s vehement defense of Michael Jackson in 2005, part 2 of 3 « Vindicating Michael
  5. Debunking the Demonic Deception…Michael Jackson and the Truth: Part 2 « Reflections on the Dance
  6. When It Comes To Michael Jackson, Andrew Breitbart and Matt Drudge are Poles Apart! « Vindicating Michael
  7. HIStory vs EVANstory: The 1993 allegations Part 1 (via Vindicating Michael) « Alondra Jimenez's (ilovemjforever's) Blog
  8. Trasncript Analysis- Chandler’s Behaviors and Words- Part 2 | mjjjusticeproject
  9. Joe Jackson’s Abuse On His Children « Et Tu, Brutus?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: