Jackson Trial: Mothers, Why?

[blog critics]

Written by Eric Olsen
Published April 12, 2005

Apart from Michael Jackson’s guilt or innocence, the enormous question hanging over the trial proceedings like a poisonous cloud is why on earth did parents — and in particular, mothers — essentially turn their young boys over to the care of the grown man who expressed intense, and in retrospect, alarming interest in their sons?

The obvious but incomplete answer is that while Jackson “groomed” the boys (again, putting aside his guilt or innocence of the charges at hand), he also groomed their mothers with expensive gifts and accomodations, and at least in the case of June Chandler, the mother of the boy who received the $20+ million settlement in 1994, effectively used emotional blackmail to elicit her complicity in the “relationship.”

Yesterday Chandler testified that her son was already a fan of Jackson when they met by chance at her ex-husband’s car rental office in Los Angeles in mid-1992. The two established a fast telephone friendship, which led to invitations for the family to come to Jackson’s Neverland Valley Ranch for weekends.

Chandler said she, her son and daughter intially stayed in a guest cottage, but on their third visit, her son asked her if he could sleep in Jackson’s room. She said no.

Then Jackson took the three of them on a trip to Las Vegas for a weekend. On the second night she gave Jackson permission to take her son to see a show, after which the grown man and the 12 year-old boy appeared at her Mirage hotel door. The boy was quiet. Jackson was “sobbing, shaking, trembling,” according to Chandler’s testimony.

Jackson wailed, “Why don’t you trust me? Why won’t you let him sleep in my bed? We are a family! Why won’t you trust me?” She testified she told Jackson she didn’t think it was right. Jackson begged, “There is nothing going on, why don’t you trust me?”

She finally gave in after about 30 minutes. Jackson bought her a Cartier gold bracelet the next day, and over the next several months gave her more jewelry, a $7,000 gift certificate to the Fred Segal boutique, and the use of his credit card for a shopping spree. The “King of Pop” traveled to the family’s Santa Monica home and slept in the boy’s room — which had only one bed — about 30 times between April and June of ‘03, sometimes for “a week or two” at a time. Jackson would leave when the boy went to school and return after school, she said.

Chandler also said she let her son sleep with Jackson during unaccompanied visits to Neverland and on “family” trips to Monaco (where the “boys” recuperated from the flu in bed together), Disney World twice, and New York.

Once she made the decision to trust, she apparently had a very hard time admitting to herself that the decision was wrong, that she was complicit in whatever was going on. And the presents were nice too.

But over time the boy changed. She told the jury, “It started to get weird. He started dressing like Michael, he started acting withdrawn, sort of smart-alecky — not as sweet as he was.”

In August 1993 the family told police they suspected Jackson had molested the boy. The boy received a multi-million dollar settlement from Jackson, who admitted no guilt, in ‘94.

Chandler has not talked to her son, who is now 25, in over 11 years. Santa Barbara County Dist. Atty. Tom Sneddon asked whether she regretted the decision to let her son start sleeping with Jackson. She choked back tears. “Very much so.”

C O M M E N T A R Y

One need not argue extensively on a matter that is already being addressed in court. To be honest, some of the people posting on this site surprise me. There is literally nothing new being brought forth in this case – no incriminating evidence whatsoever — just one sided accounts of people who have been well briefed by the prosecution and have some material interest in the outcomes of this case. Justice calls for us to look at the facts and act logically. How can you base your link on one witnesses testimony? Don’t you see that as bias in its own right?

DRS

Eric: “I specifically said this is apart from whether or not Jackson is innocent or guilty of the specific charges against him, there is no dispute at all that he spent a huge amount of time and attention and money on these boys and their families.”

1) NOT on boys, on CHILDREN. Jackson carried on his arms little sister of 1993 accuser throughout the world, she sat on his laps in front of hundreds million audience of World Music Awards in 1993, not only Jordan. The same with Arvizos, sister of current accuser was there at Neverland and traveled to Miami with her friend on jet, and she was always there at Neverland. Sister of Macaulay Culkin was there always, no more rare than other brothers of the family. Jackson had about 25-30 nephews and **nieces** cousins, etc. hanging at Neverland. Jackson also spends time with his daughter, Paris, for 7 years already.

3) By the way, Ryan White’s mother, among other, seen 1993 accuser at the time his estranged mother claimes he become “distant” and “changed”. Guess what? Those claims are false, as well as about Gavin’s rude depression. And that is why June Changler never took her family out of Jackson, and that is why she always denied molestation until 1994, when boys father threatened to her to sue and that jury will find her responsible for “molestation”, until she got her solely own $1.5 million as part of settlement with her son.

5) How nice that all the mothers in this case were ready to prostitute their children, but never call to police. June lied when she said she reported molestation to police on August 7, 1993. Molestation was “discovered” in June 1993, and for nearly two months there was blackmailing on part of his father, Evan Chandler, through lawyers, to get multi million financing of his Hollywood projects. When Jackson refused, psychiatrist Dr. Kats reported to police, not June Chandler. The mother and step-father of Jordan never believed in molestation until 1994.

6) Michael Jackson also “groomed” Liza Minelli, Elizabeth Taylor, Ryan White mother, Marlon Brando, Diana Ross, Sophia Loren, Quincy Jones, Chris Tucker, Brett Bratner, Madonna, Tatum O’Neal, Lisa Marie Presley and tens of other people famous and not. That is because Jackson is quoted to be one of the most generous people ever one could meet. He gives away gifts and money to the left, to the right all the time.

7) Eric, the questions you rised in your commentary have sense only if suppose that mothers’ testimony was not biased, and truthful. Prosecution specifically limited time and area of asking question so defense could not cross-examine them in more details. Even so, mothers said enough to impeach themselves, when defense will present their case, will call its witnesses that will show that their “worries” never existed, and their families were happy, laughing and playing all around. Also, June Chandler dared to deny she was telling to Jackson her family was in $5 million debt, and defense in going to show she was.

My biggest problem with every witness the prosecution has called is that ALL of them seem to be tainted by money in some way — it’s hard, VERY HARD, for me to believe this didn’t come out sooner if it were true. One man even said he saw Michael put his mouth on a little boy’s penis! I absolutely do not believe it: if it were true he’d have told the police in 1990 when it happened. I have never believed these kinds of stories about Michael (regardless of whether or not I’m a fan of his music), because it has ALWAYS been about the bottom dollar.

And, to your knowledge, those two settlements did not ever include points that accusers would be prohibited to testify in criminal court. Also, what you call “all” is:

1) Drugged “memories” of 1993 accuser, arranged by his father who owed $68 000 aliments and was never interested in his son until he befriended with Michael Jackson.

2) Son of the maid, who gave every kind of nonsense and contradicting statements about why he did not tell anyone about “tickling” in 1987, 1988 and 1990, and discovered this only in 1993, after his mother sold his photos and molestation stories she admitted later be false to tabloids, and after police raped his memory.

A) For your information, real victims of genitalia touching and tickling molestation always tell about their reaction on this as wanting to pee. Nothing similar to this Jason described.

3) Jason said he was small and did not pay attention to tickling. That is very uncredible, if something indeed happen, children of age 7-10 years are perfectly understand where their balls are and that other people should not go with their hands there to tickle them. So if this happened — the more so numerously, Jason undestood that it was wrong. Why he did not tell to his mother, other servants, guards and/or authorities? For $100? Ridiculous.

Jason said he repressed his memory about those incidents. This directly contradicts his earlier explanation that he was just very little and did not understand what was going actually on. Later Jason said he firstly confessed to “God” that those ticklings were actually molestation. When this happened, he did not say. Either way, he lived for 3 years after last alleged molestation tickling, with no sign of distress or any complaints, or any therapy needed.

In 1993, when Jordan Chandler scandal broke, Jason’s mother drawed him into molestation, selling stories and even his photo with her and Jackson to tabloids. She lated admitted that she never saw anything about her son. Jason said that she never witnessed any thing and he never talked to her about it. In the first multi hour interview to police, Jason did not tell any thing, and wanted to hit policemen for pushing him in inventing lies. One of the first things that stood out was covered by the Associated Press in an article dated today (April 5 2005) titled “Jackson witness pleads poor memory”. From the court transcript:

Q. Do you remember stating in that interview, “They made me come out with a lot more stuff I didn’t want to say. They kept pushing. I wanted to get up and hit them in the head”? Do you remember that?

A. No.

Q. Would it refresh your recollection if I show you the transcript of that?

A. Probably not. But you can show it to me anyway.

MR. MESEREAU: May I approach, Your Honor?

THE COURT: Yes.

MR. ZONEN: What page, Counsel?

MR. MESEREAU: 30.

THE WITNESS: Okay.

Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Have you had a chance to look at that page of the transcript?

A. I have.

Q. Does it refresh your recollection about what you’ve said?

A. No, it does not.

Q. Do you remember anything you said in that interview at the moment?

A. Not really.
(4908-4909 (20-15))

They “made him come out with a lot more stuff” that he didn’t want to say? Huh? They “kept pushing” him so much that he wanted to “hit them in the head”?? These are not the words of someone simply trying to hide a molestation. This appears to be a flat-out admission. Many observers who chimed in were completely stunned that this witness would make a statement like that. This also fits with the defense’s theory that these adults were leaning heavily on this kid back in 1993 to make an allegation against Jackson.

***Another*** bright example of Jason’s credibility:

Mesereau:

Q. In your second interview in 1994, you were asked, “Did you ever have any discussion with Michael Jackson about whether you should tell anybody about the things you described?” Remember that?

A. (Shakes head from side to side.)

Q. You don’t? Okay.

A. No, I don’t.

Q. Okay. Do you remember telling the interviewers, when you were asked do you remember anything that he said, you said, “No, I’m working on that”?

A. No.
…

Q. In the second interview — let me rephrase the question. I’ll withdraw it. In the second interview in 1994 – okay? –

A. Okay.

Q. — that was recorded – all right? – when asked if Mr. Jackson said anything to you about whether you should discuss what happened, do you remember telling the interviewers, “No, but I’m working on that”?

A. I do not remember that.

Q. Would it refresh your recollection if I show you the transcript?

A. No. But — you could bring it over.

Q. Well, I can’t unless you’re willing to see if it refreshes your recollection.

A. Okay. Bring it over. I’ll give it a shot. I’ll read it just to see if it refreshes my memory.
(4941 (11-23|28), 4942 (1-16))

He’s “working on that”? Working on what?? Getting his story straight? Or coming up with a story that police wanted to hear? This is not a standard response to the question he was asked by police in 1994. Someone asks a supposed “victim” if he was ever told not to tell anyone about abuse, the last response would be “No, I’m working on that.” Apparently, the sheriffs also complained that Jackson has a lot of money and called him a molester in front of J. Francia in 1993. And still, Francia said Jackson never touched him in his genital area.

DRS, comment 21 is fantastic. It is a proper response to the likes of Eric. Eric, I have stated in another post that I find the similarities in the 93 case and Arvizo case orchestrated by the Prosecution. What are the similarities anyway? Buying gifts? He does that to any and everyone. Let’s remember that the 93 case only has the prosecution’s view on show. As it never came to trial, the defense do not have their view on show. This is why I find this effort to mesh both cases together like we are fixing a puzzle totally ridiculous. If Jordy can do us all a favor and show up to be cross examined, it would help us all out. I can not understand why Sneddon won’t subpoena him.As for the 11 years silence, it could easily be that Jordy has realized that his parents used him to get money from MJ who had become his good friend and he has now lost a friend by the greed of his parents. He can’t say anything now because MJ would be entitled to restitution, so he has disappeared completely, refusing to speak to his parents and wants nothing to do with it. DID THAT THOUGHT CROSS ANY OF YOUR MINDS? Or is it always, MJ is guilty that runs rampant in your heads?!

The mother has not been punished for 11 years. She knows exactly why her son wants nothing to do with her. I’m afraid that the idea that he refuses to speak to her for ELEVEN years because he feels she did not protect him does not hold water. After all, he got his money which is what he is living on now. Why isn’t he talking to mommy, daddy, step daddy, uncle that wrote a book, etc? Ms. Chandler knows why and only Jordy can tell us because his lying, thieving mother will not. Then again, the apple does not fall too far from the tree so maybe Jordy is just angry that he did not get a large enough sum from mama and uncle and step dad and daddy and whoever else shared the bonanza.

Read June’s testimony here.