TO Victor G: Whose Diary was that again?



  by lynande51 on vindicatemj.wordpress.com



September 04, 2010


To Victor Gutierrez I just have one question: Whose Diary was it again? I don’t need to make any comments in this article it speaks for itself.

TV show continues to prick Michael Jackson’s credibility Article from:New York Amsterdam News Article date: May 21, 1994 Author: Abiola Sinclair

Abiola Sinclair
New York Amsterdam News
05-21-1994
TV show continues to prick Michael Jackson’s credibility.

Tabloid TV show “Hard Copy” continues its leading role in the persecution of Michael Jackson with a so-called diary written by the father of the 14-year-old boy who was allegedly sexually abused by Jackson.

The diary, which was admittedly procured by “Hard Copy,” was read on the air Monday and Tuesday May 9 and 10, in typical “Hard Copy” fashion.

The diary tells the father’s version of the events surrounding the abuse case, but despite “Hard Copy’s” attempt to put its own suspicious spin on the information, it also reveals the father’s greed and manipulation of the situation for his own benefit.

The father, according to the diary, asked his son had Michael ever “touched him.” The boy hesitated and told his father he did not want to hurt Michael and asked his father to promise not to tell anyone. The father agreed. The boy then said that yes, Michael had touched him. With this information he approached Jackson via Anthony Pellicano, Jackson’s then security chief and, according to the father, a deal was suggested that would “help his son.” He told his own lawyer that the deal, which involved $20 million, should be negotiated but, if it fell through, to begin legal proceedings. The deal, according to the diary, involved a film script “for me and my son.”

It appears the whole affair was engineered by the father to get vast sums of money out of Jackson for what was likely a minor indiscretion on the part of Jackson.

Jackson was willing to pay but wanted the money put in trust for the boy. Also, Jackson was unwilling to go as high as $20 million. The incident, such as it was, did not warrant that. There was no force, no nudity, no attempt at penetration. The boy said Michael touched him on the outside of his pants, later that changed to the inside, which was seen as having more effect, as noted by PBS’s “Front Line” in a February 15 special on the scandal.

The second motive of the father was to take custody of the boy away from his wife, who had divorced him and was living with another man — a wealthy man.

The diary confirms the contention by the Jackson camp that the crux of the matter was the $20 million the father wanted for the script deal. When Jackson refused, he sent the boy, according to the diary, to the doctor knowing if the boy said anything about abuse to the doctor he would be obliged by law to tell the police. The question is, Did the father tell the boy what to say in the doctor’s office?

“Hard Copy” never brought out the manipulations of the father and presented the entire matter from the father’s perspective. They did this with all of the people they had on their show, including Quindoy, the valet, Blanca Francia, the maid, as well as others.

Their lack of fairness and objectivity in this matter is unprecedented and warrants attention and counterbalance in the Black press. The father is more dangerous to the boy than Michael Jackson ever was.

The case was settled out of court, but Jackson got even with the father by tying up the money in trust for the boy until he reaches legal age, with a court appointed financial overseer. The father, who claims he can no longer work as a dentist and really wants a career as a screenwriter is now violating the legal agreement for his own motives, no doubt hoping to get a movie deal, book deal and whatever else he can get via shows like “Hard Copy.” He may be angling for a movie-of-the-week deal, but he is also dragging his son back into the limelight, after the case has been settled. Why?

Ethnic NewsWatch SoftLine Information, Inc., Stamford, CT

Provided by ProQuest LLC. For permission to reuse this article, contact Copyright Clearance Center.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HighBeam™ Research, a part of The Gale Group, Inc. © Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. www.HighBeam


* * * * * *

UPDATE from vindicatemj 4.09.10

Lynette, thank you for this find – the article is SENSATIONAL.


It is also great because it is the first-hand information about those events as it is dated May 21, 1994. This places the article in the period when the settlement had already been made but the criminal investigation was still in full swing.

The article needs to be thought over really carefully, but let me share with you some of my immediate veiws on this piece (and I am not using the comments section as I need to post some pictures here):

1. Up till now we’ve been told (by Victor Gutierrez) that his book of slanders was based on Jordan’s diary. However from this article we are learning that it was Jordan’s father who allegedly wrote it. I say ‘allegedly’ because with those liars and all this pathological lying you never know… But if Evan Chandler never remonstrated against those Hard Copy shows it means that he admitted his authorship? Did he ever dispute it, I wonder?

QUOTE: “Tabloid TV show “Hard Copy” continues its leading role in the persecution of Michael Jackson with a so-called diary written by the father of the 14-year-old boy who was allegedly sexually abused by Jackson. The diary tells the father’s version of the events surrounding the abuse case…”

2. So if Evan Chandler is the author it means he started writing the ‘diary’ before, after or during the settlement with Michael – thus breaking the confidentiality of the agreement. Knowing what a coward Evan Chandler was it seems to me unlikely that Evan would speak of his authorship so openly – which does not rule out the possibility of him being its author though.

3. This makes me think that most probably the copy of the ‘diary’ was obtained from Victor Gutierrez who worked as a stable source of information for the Hard Copy and Diane Dimond and who was evidently working in close cooperation with Evan Chandler. He could be a co-author of the diary too.

4. Recalling that Victor Gutierrez had been after Michael even before the allegations started and prior to the Chandlers meeting Michael – remember the article about VG ‘interviewing boys’ well before the Chandler allegations – it seems that Gutierrez comes first in the succession of these events and Evan comes only second. The initiative could have been on the Gutierrez’s side.

5. Therefore it would be interesting to see all the connections of this mysterious Victor Gutierrez – people he associates with, media channels he uses, who supports him…

6. The point in the article which David didn’t like also attracted my attention, though for a different reason:

QUOTE: “It appears the whole affair was engineered by the father to get vast sums of money out of Jackson for what was likely a minor indiscretion on the part of Jackson…. The incident, such as it was, did not warrant that. There was no force, no nudity, no attempt at penetration. The boy said Michael touched him on the outside of his pants, later that changed to the inside, which was seen as having more effect, as noted by PBS’s “Front Line” in a February 15 special on the scandal.”

So initially there was no nudity? Which means that all those horror stories about them ‘taking a bath together’ and ‘seeing each other naked for the first time in Monaco’ are nothing else but simple science fiction?

And initially it was just “touching him on the outside of his pants”? Where did we last hear this scenario? Wasn’t it Macauley Culkin who couldn’t believe his ears when Philip Lemarque said that MJ’s hand was first on the outside and then reached into the inside of his pants when the price of his ‘revelation’ rose to $500.000? Not to mention the fact that Michael never touched him at all as Macauley repeatedly said?

So all this 1993 absurdity started with Jordan thinking that Michael had touched him on the outside of his pants ONLY? Or was it some tickling as was Jason Francia’s case?

And that is all there is to it? And this is probably why it took him a whole hour for Jordan to answer whether Michael did or did not touch him funnily when his father was interrogating him after that dental procedure?

7. Another quote of this article is also disclosing some of the Chandlers’ most cherished secrets to us:

QUOTE: “The second motive of the father was to take custody of the boy away from his wife, who had divorced him and was living with another man — a wealthy man”.


David Schwartz at 70

Yes, in contrast to Evan Chandler David Schwartz was a millionaire. As far as I know his business was worth some $40 mln or so. But have you ever seen him? Look at the picture of this vigorous but nevertheless 70-year old man and you will realize that June Chandler married him not out of love, but out of love for a different substance – MONEY.

Evan Chandler was an embittered and hurt former husband, abandoned and revengeful. Seeing June being that much success – going from a simple millionaire to the most desired and richest celebrity of the world was probably really too much for his wounded pride. Revenge was on his mind. Killing two birds with one stone. Getting rid of all of them with one blow. Showing them all…

8. Yes, he wanted a new career, publicity for himself, lucrative and successful shows, EvanStory songs or whatever – it was SUCCESS he was seeking:


Evan Chandler before surgery

QUOTE: “The father, who claims he can no longer work as a dentist and really wants a career as a screenwriter is now violating the legal agreement for his own motives, no doubt hoping to get a movie deal, book deal and whatever else he can get via shows like “Hard Copy.” He may be angling for a movie-of-the-week deal..”

9. And the only person who is really taking care of Jordan’s interests in this horrible saga of money and success pursuit was Michael Jackson who took pains to give money not to Evan Chandler directly but to the boy – thus thinking of his future:

QUOTE: “The case was settled out of court, but Jackson got even with the father by tying up the money in trust for the boy until he reaches legal age, with a court appointed financial overseer.”

10. Money was also the reason for further division between Evan Chandler and his son – see another article, horribly slanderous about Michael but enlightening as to the relations between the Chandlers:

“Jordan bought an apartment in Manhattan, in a building with a rooftop swimming pool and running track, and a beachfront mansion in The Hamptons, the summer retreat for millionaire New Yorkers.

With his $20 million pay-off fast mushrooming, thanks to some lucrative investments – he bought shares in Mobil, Chevron and Texaco – life ought to have been sweet for a young bachelor with film-star looks.

Yet he was constantly on the alert for some revenge-seeking Jackson fanatic and lived the life of a recluse.

His demons returned four years ago, when Jackson finally faced trial, accused of having sex with another young boy, cancer victim Gavin Arvizo.


Weeping mother

Appearing chastened, Jordan’s weeping (!) mother gave evidence for the prosecution, and he was expected to do the same. He never took the stand, however, and attempted to evade the spotlight by staying in a Nevada ski chalet, accompanied by a group of friends, including singer Sonnet Simmons (a Greek-American he had met at school).

Tracked down there, he was photographed on the slopes, wearing an apparently carefree smile and chic designer skiwear, and cruelly branded a coward in some quarters for refusing to testify.

In later years, though, it was Jordan’s increasingly turbulent relationship with his father that troubled him most.

According to Diane Dimond, author of Be Careful Who You Love, an acclaimed book about the Jackson child abuse saga, the relationship was dogged by rows over money.

Despite his million-dollar settlement from Jackson, Mr Chandler was not in his son’s financial league, and for several years Jordan subsidised his father with a generous allowance, Dimond says.

Mr Chandler was forced to go cap in hand for more handouts, and for a proud man, this was unedifying.

He would fly into uncontrollable tempers, blaming his son for all the trauma that had befallen the family, and the burden of his painful genetic illness only made him more irascible.

Their final row occurred in the summer of 2005, when Jordan and he were sharing the apartment where Mr Chandler shot himself.

Filing for a court restraining order against his father, on the grounds of ‘domestic abuse’, Jordan claimed he had been battered over the head with a 12lb dumb-bell and sprayed with mace.

In his testimony, he also accused his father of trying to choke him.

The frenzied attack took place just two months after Jackson had been acquitted of assaulting Gavin Arvizo.

Father and son never settled their differences.

Jordan moved to a new apartment, across the Hudson River in Manhattan, but now spends much of his time back in California, where, to some acclaim, Sonnet has just released the love song they penned together.

Until the events of recent days, Jordan had every reason to feel his life was at last heading in the right direction.

But his father spiralled into a mental and physical decline. Still deceptively youthful-looking by dint of his many facelifts, he was in constant agony from his genetic illness and barely able to walk in his final days.

He also seems to have been friendless, and so totally estranged from his family that, when I spoke to Raymond Chandler on Wednesday, he was waiting to hear about the funeral arrangements – unaware that his brother had already been cremated.

‘Actually, there was no one there,’ said a member of staff at the Jersey City funeral home which organised the service.

‘We were instructed that no one would want to go. It was very sad. They still haven’t decided what to do with the ashes.’

Precisely why Jordan and the rest of the family did not pay their last respects will doubtless be the subject of more speculation in the internet chat-rooms.

Whatever the reason for their absence, the crematorium was a hauntingly empty place when the curse of Michael Jackson claimed its latest victim.

Read the rest of the filth (if you want to) here: What drove the father of Jordy Chandler to put a gun to his head?

You will find photos of various pages of this book out on the internet. They will include a description of how Brett was not circumcised and how he had to masturbate differently. If this book were truly Jordan’s diary it an admission that he was aware of the difference between an intact and circumcised male therfore getting that part of the description wrong could only mean that he had never seen Michael Jackson naked or masturbating. The reason for this is that when an intact male masturbates the foreskin moves back and forth over the glans penis. I can’t pu it any more simply than that. If Jordan had seen it he would have known it.






Thank you Helena for your generosity sharing your investigation!









TOP