All you wanted to know ABOUT IT but were afraid to ask. Part 2. Jordan´s drawing

  by Helena on

To finish off the circumcision subject I will ask you point-blank: Is your sexual partner circumcised or not? Who says she doesn´t know? NONE??? Well, now that you´ve admitted that it is IMPOSSIBLE NOT TO KNOW let´s move on…

How could Jordan Chandler learn of any splotches on Michael´s body?

Easily. On February 10, 1993 Michael Jackson spoke to Oprah Winfrey and disclosed to 100 mln. people watching the show that he had an extensive case of vitiligo which had started about the Thriller time. After such a revelation it was no problem to assume that Michael had blotches all over his body including genitalia. When Anthony Pellicano later asked Jordan direct questions about how much he had seen of Michael´s body the boy said that Michael had once lifted his shirt to show his vitiligo.

What description did Jordan Chandler make of Michael´s genitalia? Did he draw a picture of them? The Smoking Gun haters give the following answer: “With Los Angeles Police Department detectives weighing his claims, Chandler gave them a roadmap to Jackson´s below-the-waist geography, which, he said, includes distinctive ´splotches´ on his buttocks and one on his penis, “which is a light color similar to the color of his face”. The boy´s information was so precise, he even pinpointed where the splotch fell while Jackson´s penis was erect and the length of the performer´s public hair”.

The same thing is repeated by Yan Halperin in his book “The Unmasked” where he adds: “Jordan even drew a picture of Jackson´s genital area. Beside it he wrote: “Michael is circumcised. He has short pubic hair. His testicles are marked with pink and brown marks. He has brown patches on his ass, on his left gut”.

Then Halperin explains how the boy could see the splotches on the singer´s buttocks and why the police needed something more substantial than that: “There was a swimming pool at Neverland where Jordan often swam. It was quite possible that the boy had seen Jackson undress when he was changing into his trunks. So the prosecutors were searching for details that the boy couldn´t have simply spotted during these routine periods of nudity.” As Jordan described where “the splotch lay on the singer´s penis when he was erect” a humiliating strip search of Michael´s genitalia was made during which Michael was asked to raise his penis”.

“By then a number of tabloids reported that the exam confirmed Jordan´s description. Diane Dimond even disclosed that ´sources´ told her the dark patch on Jackson´s genitals “was found exactly where young Jordan Chandler said they could find such a mark”.

Let me remind you that in January 1994, USA Today and Reuters cited law enforcement sources confirming that “photos of Michael Jackson´s genitalia do not match description given by the boy who accused the singer of sexual misconduct”. However the news was reported the NEXT day after the financial settlement with the Chandlers had been announced, so no one really paid attention…

Up till now the haters fuss about a picture allegedly drawn by Jordan for his father Evan on October 23, 1993 as a piece of damning evidence against Michael (source: A sketch of Michael Jackson´s penis, based on the description of an earlier accuser.

Let´s have a look at it.

Well, the scraps of the text you can read there are more or less repeating Jordan´s words. However the handwriting looks to me more typical of an adult than of a child. On the other hand the drawing is so bad that it was apparently meant to create the impression it was drawn by a 13-year old. And the small spot shown in the picture is something which can be easily found on the skin of any vitiligo patient …

Can the picture be true? Judging by the “College humor” name of the website one would expect it to be just a bad joke. However an attentive Michael´s fan remembered seeing this drawing in a book written by Victor Gutierrez who claimed his dirty story was based on Jordan´s diary (which incidentally, Jordan never kept).

Michael Jackson sued this author for slander in 1998 and won the case on April 9, 1998. The book was not allowed for sale in the USA and its author fled to Chili not to pay Michael 2mln. in damages. This man´s hatred towards Michael is so overwhelming that he recently bragged on Chilean TV that he is relieved that Michael is dead as he doesn´t have to pay the money he owes him….

The guy who recognized the drawing (Oldschoolfan) says about it:“ That picture is from a book called ´Michael Jackson Was My Lover´ which was written by an ´investigative reporter´. How do I know all this? Because I had that book, that´s why. The biggest load of bullshit I´ve read in my life.

If this book had so much information about everything, right down to conversations, and every detail of the sex they apparently had, why didn´t they make a case of it? If there is THAT much evidence that someone could make a book like that then surely he would have been locked up years ago.

As soon as I saw that picture I recognized it straight away. When you read something like that at first it can be greatly convincing, but once you start to analyze it you can see the whole thing just makes Michael look even MORE innocent”.

So the source of information is not credible at all — however this is the only picture which is attributed to the 1993 case and is circulating in the internet as the evidence over which Michael Jackson was persecuted for so long by the police.

Whether it is a fake or not, it actually doesn´t matter. If the drawing is fake, now you know the true worth of the book the drawing comes from. If the drawing is genuine, now you know over which scrap of paper Michael Jackson was humiliated beyond belief, his life ruined and turned into a complete massacre…

Now let´s see what Dr. Richard Strick has to say on the subject. Who is Dr. Strick? There were only two doctors during Michael´s strip search in Neverland — Dr. David Forecast representing Michael and Dr. Strick who was there to make a determination on behalf of the sheriff´s office. In October 2009 he was interviewed by Geraldo Rivera and said: “The genitalia were very oddly colored with dark skin and light skin and I was told later that the deposition and the photos that were taken absolutely matched what the child had described”.

Wait a minute — he was supposed to make a determination, and the media reported he did, however now he says he was TOLD that the description and photos matched? So it wasn´t HIM who made the determination?

WHO made it then?

Thank you Helena for your generosity sharing your investigation!