August 17, 2010
In our search for the truth about Michael Jackson, how do we
find it if the MAIN media spokes person, the self proclaimed
Michael Jackson expert, Diane Dimond doesnt give us all
the information? How are we or were we expected to make a reasonable
fact based decision if she withheld pertinent information?
Although it cannot be proven that the deceit was hers and hers
alone, she was still guilty by omission
of not providing us with all of the information that was needed
to make a true determination of how Michael Jackson settled
the 1993 sexual abuse civil case by not making available the
entire settlement document. Though we cannot prove that her
intent was malicious (and I would bet it was, but that is
my opinion) it does bear questioning her tactics and her
motive in the timely (for the prosecution) leaking of
this document to the Court TV website.
Thats right, we are missing, and we always were, and always
will be, and with it, it created what I have dubbed The
case of the missing Paragraph 3. There are many unanswered
questions that are more than likely answered in paragraph 3.
One would be the myth of the totality of the settlement amount.
An educated guess (I have been sued so I have one of these
I can use as a reference) leads me to believe that it would
include the name of the Insurance carrier, and the terms of
the settlement or why they were agreeing to settle on claims
of negligence. It would have definitely spelled out exactly
who got how much there would be no more guessing or adding on
to have it total up to $30,$40,million dollars and I have even
seen an estimate as reckless as $80 million dollars. But Diane
knows, oh yes Diane knows,
what is in paragraph 3, otherwise it
would have been there.
Diane would like us to believe that Michaels lawyers;
Johnny Cochran and Howard Weitzman and Jordan Chandlers
lawyer Larry Feldman and Evan Chandlers criminal defense
lawyer Richard Hirsch (yes remember
that pesky little extortion charge that was filed)
did not have everything spelled out exactly or in other words
they had not done their jobs to the best of their ability when
she leaves a large part of this document out of the public domain.
Without Paragraph 3 we have a venue to open public and media
speculation on the settlement terms. Without paragraph 3 she
could spin Michael Jackson in whatever direction she wanted
to take him. For Diane that was down, down, down to that burning
ring of fire. Yes she was largely instrumental in putting Michael
Jackson through hell on earth. She may not have overtly lied
but she only gave us part of the truth and then continued to
add her editorial to what she believed the document meant.
What we are allowed to see is that Michael and the Chandlers
agreed not to make movies or write books and it covers almost
any other medium out there in the world in reference to the
agreement in the leaked redacted version of the Settlement Agreement.
It would probably help us to understand the term of negligence
and what charges were dropped from the original lawsuit if only
we had the now and forever missing paragraph 3 available for
us to read but I think Diane doesnt want us to see it.
We do know for sure that it was CONFIDENTIAL
and that is about all.
Diane does however want her friends and fellow journalists to
follow in her suit and generously shares her version of the
Settlement Agreement minus paragraph 3. They go over and over
this Settlement and probably add money to the amount (this is
evident in the many reports of multiple amounts) and the oh
so erroneous speculation that Jordan Chandler was paid off.
What is the matter with me, these poor, and poor, misunderstood
journalists! After all what was I expecting they didnt
have paragraph 3 either did they only Diane had paragraph 3?
Here is one of many examples:
Jacko Paid $23M To End Molest Suit
Court TV: 1994 Settlement Included $15M Trust Fund For Alleged
By Bootie Cosgrove-Mather
Like this Story? Share it:
CBS Video- Jackos $23M Settlement
Documents acquired by Celebrity Justices Harvey Levin
show that Michael Jackson paid an accuser millions to settle
molestation allegations 10 years ago. Levin gave The Early
Show the details.
Michael Jackson (AP) (Any photo of Michael is a good photo)
CBS/AP) Court TV is putting a dollar figure on the settlement
Michael Jackson gave to his first accuser.
Court TVs Diane Dimond says shes acquired
a copy of the final settlement Jackson made to the boy who accused
him of molestation in 1993. The document, dated January 1994,
says Jackson set up a trust fund worth more than $15 million.
(Fact: $15,331,250.00 yes it was slightly
more than $15 million)
Court TV quotes unnamed sources (Uncle
Ray? Evan Chandler? ) as saying the boy got a
seven-figure payment up front. It says each of his parents got
$1.5 million, and the familys lawyer was given $5 million
expenses. (Are they sure this is
addition and not division? Can I see paragraph 3 please?)
The settlement has Jacksons signature on it but it does
not mean Jackson admitted guilt. Dimond quotes the document
as reading, This agreement shall not be construed as an
admission by Jackson that he has acted wrongfully with respect
to the minor.(Wait until you see what she says in some
of the other articles!)
CBS News Legal Analyst Andrew Cohen notes the legal language
is standard for any settlement agreement.
Jacksons lawyers never would have allowed him to
pay all that money without language that says its not
an admission of any wrongdoing. But that admission isnt
objective proof that nothing happened; in fact, prosecutors
likely will argue that the settlement is financial proof that
something did, says Cohen. (Well!
I sure hope the prosecutors get the whole thing! I mean what
kind of evidence is this without paragraph 3? Watch out Michael
here we go! Down, Down, Down to that burning ring of fire.)
This is a devastating leak for Jackson because its
likely that those in his jury pool will hear about this reported
settlement long before they know that they may be called to
duty in his case, Cohen says. And that knowledge
clearly will have a negative impact on Jacksons image
with those potential jurors. (They
could only hope! Down! Down! Down! to that
Jackson is currently facing unrelated criminal charges that
he sexually molested another young boy. (Then
why are we even talking about this if we are talking about an
On Monday, a judge refused to lower Jacksons $3 million
bail, saying the singers wealth justified setting his
bail at an amount higher than normal.
Santa Barbara County Judge Rodney S. Melville said that although
Jacksons bail was more than the normal amount for defendants
facing similar charges, it should remain high to ensure that
Jackson appears at future court dates.
While there has to date been no significant issue with
regard to the defendants appearance at scheduled court
events, it continues to appear to the court that a cognizable
financial incentive to do so should be in place, Melville
Jacksons bail was set when he was arrested in November,
but his attorneys did not fight the amount.
Jacksons new attorney, Thomas Mesereau Jr., requested
that Jacksons bail be reduced to no more than $435,000
after he took over the case in April.
Mesereau said at a May 28 hearing that the judge should lower
Jacksons bail because of his charitable contributions,
lack of criminal record, and ties to Santa Barbara County, where
the case was filed. He said there were no legal grounds for
setting Jacksons bail above the normal amount just because
of the singers wealth.
But prosecutors said Jackson was likely to flee the country
if his bail was reduced.
Deputy District Attorney Ron Zonen said $3 million was roughly
comparable to what he (Jackson) would spend in a weekend in
Las Vegas, and noted that the pop star is a self-declared
That is just one example. I will give you more, but you get
the idea. Now lets examine the Court TV version of the
1994 Confidential Settlement Agreement entered into by Michael
Jackson and the Chandlers. This is 22 pages and I will not be
opening the file but will add it for you to open. This is exactly
how it appeared on the Court TV website on 6/14/2004.
You will notice on the bottom of page 4 of the Confidential
Settlement is the number 3. Followed by an Editors note
that reads: [Editors note: The terms of the settlement
payment was (were?) not disclosed. Please note this section
and the next eight redacted pages pertaining to the Settlement
payment were subsequently omitted for the readers convenience.]
You will also find it impossible to find that pesky old paragraph
3 when it is referenced throughout the rest of the document.
It sure does make it hard to read so I am not sure that was
done for my convenience. Lets read another article about
the leaked settlement document, after all, by now the only thing
that is confidential about it is paragraph 3.
Lets see what Diane Dimond can make of it in a chat shall
we? I should also tell you that I have added a commentary which
is in Red font. I will admit too that at times it is snide and
sarcastic but then I have never said I wasnt.
Court TVs Diane Dimond discusses Michael Jacksons
1993 settlement of child molestation accusations
June 16, 2004
Court TV Host: Michael
Jackson agreed to pay more than $20 million in 1993 to settle
his first molestation suit, according to documents
uncovered by Court TV. See
Diane Diamonds exclusive report from Tuesdays
Crier Live, watch her second in a series of three special
reports on todays program, 5pm ET/PT, and chat live with
Diane Dimond about Michael
Jackson live online. Court TV Host: Thank you Diane,
for being our guest today. Diane Dimond: You bet! Court
TV Host: Anything youd like to say before we begin?
Diane Dimond: Right off the top let me say that if youve
been following my reports, sources tell me that Michael Jackson
agreed to pay at least $25 million, not just the $20 million
our website says. It had to be more than that too, because Im
not including what Jackson had to pay his defense team.( Yes
it grows from minute to minute when Diane does the math)
Question from chromophil: Where does the info come from
that Larry Feldman got $5 million and the parents each $1.5
million in 1994? This is NOT in the redacted copy of the settlement
agreement. Diane Dimond: Thats correct. That information
comes from confidential sources of mine, and, coincidentally,
has been confirmed by confidential sources of Maureen Orths
of Vanity Fair magazine. You can see her explain it tonight
on Catherine Crier Live at 5pm ET/PT. ( And
we all know what paragons of truth yours and Maureen Orths
sources are, what are you guys related to the Chandlers
or something or did you cut some kind of deal with them. If
I use my bank role at Hard Copy I will be able to buy more victims
for you. One smart person asks one smart question)
Question from jenni: Diane, do you know if the insurance
paid the whole amount of the settlement?
Diane Dimond: No, theres no way to tell. But Im
told that maybe more than one insurance company was involved.(
Well Diane why dont you read
paragraph 3 again to see if you missed something or better yet
read it aloud to the rest of the class)
Question from kali: Dont you agree that the 20
million dollar settlement makes Michael Jackson look very guilty?
How do you think this will affect his case?
Diane Dimond: Well, I must say I never heard of anyone
else paying out $25 million on just an ALLEGATION of negligence.
I dont know that it will affect the current criminal case,
because for 10 years weve heard about this settlement.
So, I was just able to tell you the exact amount, but I dont
think it will change any jurors minds. ( Well
we can only hope I am tainting the jury pool.NO one else had
you on the case Diane how would you know if it had never been
Question from pearl: Diane, were you surprised what constituted
negligence in that settlement document?
Diane Dimond: In that settlement, there was no definition
of negligence, [(Diane crosses her
fingers) That could not possibly be true all legal documents
define everything. It is just in paragraph 3 and I dont
want anyone to know what was in that one] just that
Jackson agreed to the allegation of negligence from the civil
suit. If youll look at the civil suit posted on our website,
and that is case # SC026226, and look at page 15, paragraphs
44-45, thats the allegation Michael Jackson agreed to
pay for. As you can see, it mentions that Jackson negligently
had offensive contacts with plaintiff which were both explicitly
sexual and otherwise. My reaction to this is: I cant
figure out how someone can be negligently explicitly sexual
with a child and still deny sexual molestation occurred.(
She references the original suit shall we see if she is right?)
(Yes. this lawsuit does say that. However
the definition of negligence in the Confidential Settlement
is most likely in paragraph 3 and she will not show it to us.
One might ask her why? Does it have some information in it that
may implicate that there was no contact because the only evidence
is Jordans version of the story without supporting evidence
like a matching description?)
Question from psychocat: Wow, thanks for being here,
Diane! How long did it take you to get the document on Jackson?
Diane Dimond: 11 years. (That
would appear to some as stalking, it would depend on the individuals
definition of stalking maybe. Either that or she has the whole
Journalist thing going so she can stalk someone and the California
Shield Law protects her.)
Court TV Host: Does publication of this document now
affect any terms of the settlement?
Diane Dimond: Its my understanding that all of
the money that was going to change hands has changed hands.
Its also my understanding that all the parties are still
bound by the confidentiality agreement. It doesnt matter
that Ive made this public now. They still are not supposed
to talk about it. However, keep in mind that a subpoena to testify
in a criminal case trumps a confidential civil settlement. If
hes subpoenaed, the boy, now a young man, will have to
testify. (Did they do this to force
Jordan to testify? What date did the FBI and Ron Zonen meet
with him in New York?)
(Oh yes it was September 28th 2004 at a hotel in New York and
to my surprise they sent both Ron Zonen and Gordon Auchincloss
to New York more taxpayers money spent. HMMMMMMMMMM.)
Question from pearl: Diane, what surprised you the most
in that settlement document?
Diane Dimond: I guess the fact that the family agreed
to drop six of their seven complaints. They agreed to drop sexual
battery, batter, seduction, willful misconduct, intentional
infliction of emotional distress
and they allowed Jackson
only to pay only on the negligence
Also, I was staggered
by the amount of money involved. To actually see it on the paper
was stunning. Remember, the $15 million trust fund is an annuity,
and sources tell me it is all tax-free money the boy will get
for the rest of his life. He takes money from the interest earned,
but the principal keeps growing and growing, so he stands to
earn millions of dollars more. (It
would seem that to Diane it was the gift that kept on giving.
I think she may be confused on that what is the actual earning
potential of that annuity? We need a tax attorney but then there
was the provision in the Confidential Settlement that allowed
them to show it to the necessary tax people, why would they
add that if it was not taxable? Lets ask H&R Block.)
Question from Angel: Did the insurance company do an
investigation of their own before they agreed to pay?
Diane Dimond: I have no way of knowing that, and I dont
know which insurance company was involved. I wish I did. (Read
paragraph 3 Diane.)
Question from jenni: Diane, how damaging to Michael Jackson
do you think this being revealed is?
Diane Dimond: Ive been surprised at the response
to this, because again, everyone has heard for ten years about
this settlement. Im not sure that this will change anybodys
mind. (It was more that she ever could
have hoped for wasnt it Diane.)
Question from donna: Do you think the minor from the
93 case will be called to testify?
Diane Dimond: Thats the $64,000 question. If he
does take the stand, this new document could be used to both
strengthen his case and to weaken it. The state could say, look
at how much money Michael Jackson paid him.( And
what could the defense say look all these years later
these other kids are still denying it and the photos were never
a match no evidence of sexual molestation to anyone. But
wait didnt Uncle Ray tell you that when he gave you this?)
Question from JpDuke: Diane, was anything done that was
illegal in getting this info?
Diane Dimond: The answer is absolutely not. And I understand
the Jackson camp is now alleging that I paid big bucks
for this document. Nothing could be further from the truth.
(It is not illegal to purchase a legal
document from a member of the family is it? Uncle Ray had to
get the money to publish his book somewhere didnt he?)
Question from jackiefly: If the now-adult accuser is
subpoenaed in the current case, can he be questioned about the
confidential settlement in addition to his interaction with
Diane Dimond: Its my understanding he can. Again,
a subpoena in a CRIMINAL case overrides any other type of agreement
anyone might have made. (Evan, Jordan,
Ray are you listening?)
Question from Incognito: Did you say that an insurance
company paid the money? What kind of insurance would that be?
Diane Dimond: Note that Jackson agreed to pay on the
allegation of negligence. Check out your homeowners policy.
If you negligently leave out a banana peel that someone trips
and falls over, your insurance company will pay out for your
negligence. They will not, however, pay out if you committed
a crime. Thats probably why he agreed only to the negligence
claim. So his insurance company would have to kick in.( Yes,
they settled on the claim of negligence because that is what
insurance companies do. As for them doing their own investigation
I would imagine they relied more on Michaels photos and
the tapes by Anthony Pellicano. I have always maintained and
always will that this man had more than he showed us.)
Question from ty: Are you biased towards M.J because of
your own personal experience?
Diane Dimond: A lot of people ask me that question. No.
Ive never been molested. (No
my bias and my eagerness to lead the public on a wild goose
chase is based on greed and maintaining my status as a Michael
Jackson expert. If I dont make him look guilty who is
because there isnt really any evidence. Now, stop asking
these silly questions I dont want you to know the answers
Court TV Host: Any closing thoughts?
Diane Dimond: I have to go get ready to do the Catherine
Crier show. I hope youll all watch tonight and tomorrow
for the end of my three part series
Im on in twenty
minutes! (How exciting! Im sooooooo
And I will add the icing to the cake. This is the article from
The Smoking Gun website regarding the Leaked Document. I may
add more of my snide and sarcastic remarks that do have a tendency
to appear as though I am attacking Diane Dimond who is a respected
journalist as we all know.
Michael Jacksons $15 Million Payoff
Agreed to pay $15 million to settle boys 1993 sex
JUNE 16Michael Jackson agreed to pay $15.3 million to
settle child molestation charges leveled against him in 1993
by a California boy, according to a confidential legal agreement.
A heavily redacted version of the 31-page document, a copy of
which youll find below, was obtained by Court TVs
Diane Dimond.( See She is the one that
did this they admit it.)
The January 1994 agreement contains a one-line reference to
Jackson delivering confessions of judgment totaling
$15,331,250 to the boys attorneys. However, since the
entire eight-page section of the agreement titled Settlement
Payment is not included in the document, it is unclear
how the eight-figure payout was distributed to the boy or what
his parents were paid. However, a reference to the establishment
of a qualified funding asset would indicate that
an annuity (likely tax free) was a central part of the settlement.(
Well at least this person isnt
adding $ 10 million to it like she did.)
As with most confidential deals, Jackson admitted no wrongdoing,
noting that the cash was to settle claims for damages
for alleged personal injuries arising out of claims of negligence
and not for claims of intentional or wrongful acts of
sexual molestation. The agreement also states that Jackson
elected to settle in view of the impact the action has
had and could have in the future on his earnings and potential
income. (This is actually an
important note here. It basically says that they had cost him
enough already and he was through with them. I Could not agree
with him more.)
The settlement was signed four months after the boy and his
parents filed a civil suit
against the King of Pop and just weeks after the teenager signed
a sworn declaration luridly detailing Jacksons
The unredacted portions of the agreement do not address payment
of the accusers legal fees, though a September
1993 retainer agreement between the family and attorney
Larry Feldman called for the family to pay their counsels
fee. According to the retainer, Feldman stood to earn $3 million
on a $15 million settlement. Any recovery above that figure
earned Feldmans firm an additional ten percent. (
I have tried many, many times to open the link to that retainer
document but it says time after time that I am not authorized.
What is a retainer. This is where Evan promised to pay Larry
Feldman no matter what the outcome was of the lawsuit. Since
Evan probably didnt have $3 million the only way Larry
was going to get paid was to settle this case or win it in court.
I will add more to this following this article.)
A redacted version of the settlement agreement was prepared
in connection with a May 1996 lawsuit brought against Jackson
by the childs father, who claimed that the singer breached
terms of the 1994 legal agreement during a June 1995 interview
on ABCs Primetime Live. During that chat with
Diane Sawyer, Jackson and then-wife Lisa Marie Presley accused
the boy of fabricating his tales of sexual abuse. Those televised
statements, the father argued, violated a provision of the 1994
agreement guaranteeing that Jackson would not publicly accuse
the boy or his parents of any wrongful conduct whatsoever.
As part of the 1996 lawsuit, a California judge ordered that
counsel for Presleywho married Jackson in May 1994 and
divorced him in January 1996be provided with the heavily
redacted version of the 31-page settlement document. (Why
would he, Lisa Maries Lawyer, only get this heavily Redacted
version wasnt he defending his client on the basis of
the entire document? It doesnt make sense to me. It also
is against the law for her attorney to leak this document and
he would risk losing his license to practice as he is an officer
of the court)
That one wasnt as bad as I thought to comment on. Now
about the retainer, a retainer is a document where the attorney
agrees to take the case for a specified fee. It is common practice
in a civil suit to sign one at the time someone hires an attorney.
It is usually understood that it will be paid when in full when
the lawsuit is resolved. That said it would mean that Evan and/or
June would probably pay him out of their share of the lawsuit
which equaled $3million dollars. When you know this it would
have been in Evan, June and Jordans best interest to settle
this case once they knew that the evidence they had lead the
public to believe was so damning, the description, was not a
match. However that information is in Paragraph 3 and Diane
wont let us have it.
I should tell you the documents that I refer to are in the Adobe
links. I published them to my account with Adobe and they can
be acessed when you click on them to reveal the original documents.I
am also working on adding many of the articles I use for reference
to Adobe so I preserve them for us as references when we need
them.I do not use less than 2 source articles and I do not use
tabloid articles for my research. Once upon a time Court TV
was a reputable source before the likes of Diane Dimond and
her crew got involved, then they caused an avalanch of ignorance
with spin on every topic.
I havent decided yet who my next article will be on I
think it will probably be Larry Feldman and then Tom Sneddon
so watch out you two. I can build quite a story out of newspaper
articles just like Uncle Ray can.
Thank you Helena for your generosity
sharing your investigation!