How Much Is A Human Life Worth? Two Years!

One Of My Favorite Photos Of Michael
One Of My Favorite Photos Of Michael

Two years. That is the message sent loud and clear by Conrad Murray’s release.

You can kill a person and, with a little good behavior and the luck of jail overcrowding on your side, walk scot free to enjoy your mistresses and you fine wining and dining.

You can kill the world’s most beloved entertainer, and continue to torture his kids with your delusions.

Two years later, and Conrad Murray has yet to offer one shred of remorse or to take one iota of responsibility for what he did. That still blows my mind.

Let’s revisit that historic day of Murray’s sentencing. Judge Pastor passed down the harshest sentence allowed within the law, and stated emphatically that if he could impose an even stiffer punishment, he would do it gladly.


Today, Murray walks. Coming on the heels of AEG’s “victory” it seems even more of a bitter pill to swallow.

I often go back to a favorite argument that is often made by many, but bears repeating. Whatever choices Michael made; whatever mistakes he made, he paid the ultimate price.

There are still, in my estimation, far too many who owe a debt that has not yet been paid at all.

Conrad Murray hasn’t even paid a percentage of what he owes.

As for the photo I chose of Michael to accompany this article, call it pathos if you will. But there is a reason why this is one of my favorite photos. Could anything else possibly capture the essence of his innocent sweetness more?

I look at this and think on that word “Homicide.” I look on this and think: Two years is not enough. It is not nearly enough.

I look at this and feel the twinge of helplessness, and then an immense wave of apathy at the hopelessness of it all.

Too many tonight are walking, breathing, eating, drinking, laughing, making love.

Michael is inside a cold crypt in Forest Lawn. His daughter’s life is a mess.

And millions of us feel the eternal cold emptiness of a world without him.

Are we to believe two years is sufficient to pay that debt?

The law says yes. The heart says no. Never.


95 thoughts on “How Much Is A Human Life Worth? Two Years!”

  1. Oh Raven, so well said, but we, Michael’s loving fans are not helpless or hopeless. Helena on Vindicating Michael has put links to TeamMichaelJackson’s site for a petition and 2 letters to Hawaii and Nevada State Medical Boards which we can all take part in, and I have just done that, even from here in South Africa, and emailed the petition link to my other MJ friends who are fans.

    We cannot change the fact that Murray is out in a ridiculous amount of time served, (and to be honest I am not sure that I would have been much happier if he had served the full 4 years, as that wasn’t nearly enough either), but we can help revocation of his medical licenses so that he never practices again, and boycott any and all media who pay Murray for his story!!!!! what a disgrace to even think that we have to do such a thing, but we can do it – we MUST do it.

    Michael asked “Will you be there?” – well yes, we all are here for him in all his trials and tribulations etc., for as long as it takes. As long as I have breath in my body Michael will “Never be alone” nor his family either.

  2. I do wish that Michaels’s family had allowed David Waldgren to proceed with the claim for compensation against Murray after the trial ( If I remember a date had been set). OK he was penniless at that point, but I can see this man becoming very wealthy on the back of his crime. I’m sure he won’t care if he makes a fool of himself in any interviews as long as he gets a big fat paycheck for doing so , knowing that (other than his creditors)he will be able to live a comfortable life at Michael’s expense.

    (I realise there may have been some legal reason why this was dropped, but the reason given at the time was simply that he would never have been able to pay.)

    Caro.. I will sign the petition and letters.. thanks for bringing this to our attention.

    Michael said ” My fans are activists. They will fight you to defend me”

  3. He shouldn’t be allowed to profit from his crime in any shape, form, or fashion. It makes me sick to think of him writing books, granting interviews, etc. The man is a convicted felon (and one who has not even served his time, at that).

    1. Hi Raven,

      Of course I 100% agree that the idea that he could and will (God help us!) profit from his crime is sickening beyond comprehension!! I truly don’t understand why legal action wasn’t pursued to prevent this?? And the idea that he was released without having to serve his full term, as short as that would have been anyway, is laughable. To that point my understanding is that in California in order to ease the prison overcrowding issue, via re-alignment, non-violent criminals would have their terms shortened…although I don’t know how criminal intent plays into this. Anyway, the shortened term is certainly a concept that boggles the mind in this particular case! At the end of the day is killing a person slowly over 6 weeks any less violent than wacking someone over the head with a crowbar or shooting them with a gun? I guess many would say yes but in many ways the slow death over time can be even more sinister and evil ESPECIALLY at the hands of a so-called doctor with access to tools more subtle than crowbars and guns. For me what Murray did is still a violent act. In light of that we can experience some small satisfaction that Judge Pastor strongly stated that the sentence was not long enough. Pastor’s comments at the end of that trial were truly excellent and satisfying and I pray those comments haunt Murray’s nightmares for the rest of his pathetic life.

  4. What seems worse than the pitiful sentence he served is his continued lack of remorse, and refusal to take full responsibility for what he did. It’s as though he feels it was Michael’s fault for expecting him to use Propofol. He is NOT a responsible, caring physician. If he had really cared about Michael, he would have refused to use such treatment and insisted that Michael seek the intervention of true professionals in the area of sleep deprivation. Clearly, money overrode his hippocratic oath. He was so unprepared, so cavalier, so preoccupied with his carnal desires. I honestly wonder how Michael could have held him in such high regard considering his wreck of a private life. He was a male whore. Maybe Michael didn’t know and maybe he felt that his private life was just that, even if he didn’t agree with his behavior. It’s very painful to face the fact that he may get a sweet book deal and people may actually buy the book in droves. I hope not. God! I hope not! What I’d like to see happen to him is that his reputation becomes such a liability that he is forced to leave the US and goes back to Jamaica or some other island. I will sign whatever petitions are created that prevent him from living a life that he’s not worthy to be living. He is a persona non grata.

    1. His complete lack of remorse is what continues to get my goat as well. I am not saying I would feel pity for him if he said “Yes, I admit I was wrong” or said “I’m sorry” but, for sure, it would at least help. I’ve heard his tapes where he breaks down crying; I’ve listened to his tales of woe about how poor he grew up and all he had to overcome. And yes, there have been times when I’ve felt, maybe this man really was just a victim of circumstances. But then I go back to his sociopathic attitude, his complete lack of remorse, and that crazy documentary he made-which I think went far in revealing his true colors-and…well, I can’t. I just can’t.

      Conrad Murray is a piece of work. There is something very, very off kilter about that man.

      1. Raven said, “There is something very, very off kilter about that man.” So VERY, VERY true!!!

        One of the MANY, MANY off kilter issues that stays with me is when Kenny Ortega testified during the Murray trial as to how Murray told him to basically keep out of MJ’s medical issues in a very abrupt manner. We know that KO had expressed very legitimate concerns as to his observations of MJ’s condition not long before MJ’s death. And it didn’t appear, from what had been testified to, that KO had any other conflicts with Murray…correct me if I’m wrong. Of course Murray would not be obliged to reveal MJ’s medical issues to KO but the idea that Murray would not even repectfully make note of any issues that anyone expressed about MJ’s health is extremely unprofessional for a so-called “health care professional.” Of course this was just one of so many red flags that have since been revealed to the public during 2 trials.

        Off Kilter? YES!

        Although I like Anderson Cooper, several months ago I made the mistake of watching his show when he conducted a remote prison interview with Murray at which time Murray proceeded to sing to Cooper. Needless to say AC along with the rest of his audience were dumbfounded by such a creepy performance!!! On top of the fact that he was still very much clueless as to the level of his responsibility in MJ’s death.

        Off Kilter? ABSOLUTELY!

        Should I mention the shameful attempts to communicate with members of the Jackson family such as Katherine and Paris since he ended MJ’s life? He bizarrely tries to offer comfort with no admission of responsibility of any kind. He acts as if he is a bystander and victim somehow removed from the tragedy and not a critical component of it. Truly he shouldn’t be allowed to communicate or come within 100 yards of Michael’s mother or his children…especially not Paris.

        Off Kilter? SHAMEFULLY!

        I won’t go on.

  5. I really don’t worry that much about a Conrad Murray media blitz. He’s a convicted felon, a very unlikable personality, and deadly dull on top of it. There will be no Murray reality shows, and if he manages to write a book, I don’t think it will sell. What is there left to say – that he got away with murder? At this point, Murray’s best move is to slink away. There are still plenty of unanswered questions about the circumstances of MJ’s death. If Murray runs off at the mouth, he could find himself back in court. Because of the prohibition against double jeopardy, he can’t be tried again for involuntary manslaughter. But if he discloses previously unknown information, he could still be charged with murder.

    1. He’s not very likeable, for sure. We have only to look at the national mood against him at the height of the trial to see what a fool he made of himself time and time again. The public is gullible sometimes, yes. But not totally stupid. I think people can see right through Murray, and recognize him for what he is.

      I’m not as much worried about his reception by the public, but it does sicken me to think he will even have the opportunity for these things-and most likely, being what he is, will take full advantage.

      Hopefully the reaction to him will be lukewarm enough to discourage him from that path. He really just needs to do as Jordan Chandler and just slink away to a life of anonymity. It would be the best for all parties concerned.

  6. Personally I don´t think the interest of the media on Murray will last long, in a month he will be almost forgotten (hopefully !) Media is a quick business nowadays ! Look what happened to WR, he is barely in the media anymore !

  7. I’ve been thinking about saying this, and more specifically how to say it, for several days. But here it is: for once I agree with Conrad Murray when he said “Michael would be appalled at the way people are disparaging me.”

    The Michael who inspired millions of people to “make the world a better place” both during his life and after his death had no truck with hatred and revenge. The last thing we heard him say, in the film This Is It, was “We have an important message to give. Okay? It’s important. We need to give love back into the world. We’re putting love back into the world to remind the world that love is important. Love is important. To love each other. We’re all one. That’s the message.”

    By disparaging Conrad Murray and clamoring for his demise, by wanting him hunted, humiliated and hounded for the rest of his life, we are putting hate into the world.

    In a moving essay on Michael’s impact on the world, and his impact on her specifically, Linda Higgins, Director of Community Development for Michael Jackson and pilot of the Michael Jackson Tribute Portrait, had this to say regarding her hating of Michael’s enemies: “I was putting hate into the world. One negative story comes along and I become angry at the world. He had to deal with this for much of his life and yet his love for humanity never waned. How did he do it?”

    Michael’s way to grace was to turn the other cheek. This is the man who refused to disparage even those who did him the most heinous (unjust) harm, as in Gavin Arvizo. What did he say about Gavin Arvizo after Gavin’s ridiculous allegations irrevocably broke his fragile heart? “This is a sweet child.”

    And now Michael’s “Soldiers of Love” who claim to the world that they have been inspired by him to become better, more loving persons, are going into attack mode, crying for “an eye for an eye.” Hating Conrad Murray. Attacking him relentlessly. And publicly. Circulating petitions whose aim is to destroy his life.

    “Let’s ruin his life for killing Michael. Only then will justice be done.”

    I’m appalled by this reaction. I am embarrassed to be associated, by proximity, with this segment of the Michael Jackson community. And though I know that there are still many who act with forgiveness and love in Michael’s name, I despair that they are vocal minority. What the public sees via CNN, ABCNews etc., are angry, vindictive fans circulating petitions calling for the crucifixion of morally vacant and best-forgotten man.

    I have to go to obscure sites like MajorLovePrayer to find people who pray for the forgiving kindness I believe Michael would have wanted us to show toward Conrad Murray.

    What would Michael do? That’s a question that, since his death, I have taken to heart. It has inspired me to try to be more forbearing, to be more kind and understanding to every person I daily interact with.

    “In a world filled with anger, we must still dare to comfort,” Michael Jackson said. “It all begins with forgiveness, because to heal the world we must first heal ourselves. My mission is healing–pure and simple.”

    And above all, “It’s all for love.”

    What Michael’s life is worth is not connected with Conrad Murray. What Michael’s life is worth depends on whether (or not) his mission to “make the world a better place” inspires us all to do the same.

    1. Do whatever you please, but I don’t claim to be anybody’s “soldier of love”. I am not a member of the “Michael Jackson Community”. I haven’t signed any petition and don’t plan to. But come on, Murray has not expressed one bit of remorse for killing Michael Jackson. To this day he persists in blaming Michael for his own death. His deliberate cruelty to Michael’s children is revolting. I think he’s earned the criticism that come’s his way.

      If you think this disgusting jerkwad should be forgiven, you go right ahead. But I can do without the sanctimonious sermonette aimed at those who disagree.

    2. I personally think this is all a little unwarranted if it is being addressed at my post. I have never at any time advocated that Murray be hunted down, or harrassed, etc. There are certainly many, many people who did dirty turns to Michael who are living relatively safe lives and aren’t being hounded by angry, vindictive fans, despite what the media claims. If fans vent about these people on the internet, that is their choice.

      Having strong feelings against the relatively short sentence that Murray has served isn’t being vindictive. It’s how I feel, and excuse me for having strong feelings against a man who killed someone I care about. I don’t think anyone here is after Murray’s hide. But should he be allowed to practice medicine again? I think most reasonable people would say no. Should he have served more time? Yes. Does he deserve to be able to have a media blitz, or to line his pockets, at Michael’s expense? No. He does not.

      I do have some level of compassion for Murray as a fellow human being. But that is where it begins and ends. If we use the excuse that Michael set an example that he was all about love and not about vindictiveness (which is true) we also have to remember, however, that anything he said in that regard was BEFORE his life was robbed from him at only 50, and before he was forever separated physically from his children, all with the undeniable aid of this very man.

      If it had been my own family member killed at Murray’s hands, believe me, feeling compassion for this man would be something for which I would really have to dig to the deepest recesses of my beliefs in Christian principles, and that is where I currently stand as far as the man is concerned. I can forgive to a point; it doesn’t mean I forget. Michael wasn’t family, but he also wasn’t just some anonymous person we knew nothing about. He was loved by many, and taken from us in the name of greed and avarice.

      I am certainly not advocating an eye for an eye. But if I have very strong feelings against Murray’s early release, it is within my rights to express them. What are we supposed to do, as people who cared about Michael? Are we supposed to take Murray’s hand, shower him with love, and sing Kum-ba-ya? I don’t think so. And personally, I don’t think that’s how Michael would feel about it, either, if he had known what Murray was up to that morning when he was supposed to have been monitoring him.

      There is a vast difference between having strong opinions against their early release, and crying for someone’s scalp. Murray serving four years is still a travesty of justice in my opinion, but at least if he had served his four years, I would then say, well, he has paid his debt.

      Not that any of it, when all is said and done, is going to bring Michael back.

      On a somewhat related note, I have always, for example, been a strong opponent of the death penalty. But I have often asked myself how I might feel if it were someone i loved who had been killed by a Death Row inmate. It is easy to feel compassion for strangers. But when that person has killed your mother, or father, or sibling or spouse, I am sure it must feel very different. And in all honesty, I know in that situation, my principles would be really put to a hard test.

      Conrad Murray has shown time and again that he feels absolutely NO REMORSE for his part in Michael’s death. If he had ever just said, “I’m sorry; I screwed up” would it mitigate my feelings somewhat? I can’t say for sure, but I think so. Unless Murray was, in fact, just some fall guy-or someone else slipped into that room while he was chatting away with his mistresses-then, yes, it is absolutely his fault and he needs to own up to that, and accept his responsibility for it.

      We do not owe Conrad Murray our compassion, or our forgiveness. The BEST Murray should expect from those who cared about Michael Jackson-and that is a global family in the millions-is that he is left alone. But the pay-off for that should be that he agrees to leave Michael’s name alone; that he stays out of the media, and that he endangers no more lives by practicing medicine again ever.

      It will, ultimately, be up to God-not us-to judge Conrad Murray.

      But I still say, the price of taking a life has been far, far too small for him.

      1. Although I sympathize with what Ara is expressing I do agree with you, Raven, on what your blog is about. Yes, Ara, Michael was about bringing peace and love. It was rare for him to speak in a hostile way about someone publically but he did do it on occassion. In fact, he had some very hostile things to say about attorney Gloria Alred publically and lets not forget the very public battle he had with Tommy Mottola (Sony).

        As for Murray we all know that it was proven in a court of law that he was found criminally responsible for MJ’s death and certainly to question his sentencing or to question the idea that he will at sometime try to profit off his crime are legitimate issues of justice that should be called into question. Can Murray be forgiven for his crime? Yes, we are called to do so but that is up to each individual. However, forgiving someone does not absolve that person of their responsibilities. In this case, Murray has not acknowledge the fact of his own responsibility in the death of another human being and the idea that he should just simply resume his life as if nothing happened is unacceptable. At the end of the day, God, not any of us, will have the final say as to Murray’s punishment in the context of eternity.

        Michael Jackson wanted to bring peace but he was also an activist. As an activist he did vigorously campaign to bring about political/social change through his music and occassionally through public speaking events with individuals such as Rev. A. Sharpton. A person of very stong opinions that Michael did respect and aligned himself with.

  8. I don’t believe that Michael’s “way to grace was to turn the other cheek.” Or that he “had no truck with hatred and revenge.” To see him mad as hell check out “They Don’t Care About Us”–esp. the prison version, check out “Scream,” check out “Money,” check out his fury in “Earth Song” and in the coda to “Black or White”–Michael was NOT all about hearts and flowers. Check out him talking about Motola as a ‘devilish’ in his speech about the exploitation of black artists, telling people to burn tabloids (‘It’s garbage’), and “Stop Filthy Press.” Please, MJ was a highly complex person and artist, let’s not reduce this complexity.

    Having said this, I share Ara’s opinion that calling for Murray’s head on a stake is not a good plan in terms of bloodthirstyness, but I fail to see where that is happening here or on the sites I visit, but if people really want to see him DEAD, I agree they go too far. However, he should have been in jail for much longer for sure, and in a real prison. I saw a recent documentary where people who had blown up a lumber mill, a slaughter house, and a couple of similar sites, all of which was arson/property destruction and no one was injured or killed b/c the arson was done at night and the group made sure no one was in the bldgs. One of the guys involved got 7 years in a special prison designed for terrorists. These were people who were part of Earth Liberation Front in Oregon in the late 90’s. The one guy who was the focus of the documentary and who got the 7 years refused to agree to a plea bargain that involved ratting on the others. In this specially built facility for terrorists, he can have one 15 minute visit a week, and one visitor a month through a glass partition. That’s it. Now in comparison, CM was able to give interviews to CNN, etc., make phone calls, have visitors, etc, etc, and was in a county jail–and he killed MJ. So where is the justice? There isn’t any, except for the fact that he was found guilty. So not only did he get a comfortable and lenient sentence for his gross negligence that resulted in the killing someone, he now wants to practice medicine and will no doubt publish a book, etc on his victim. And no, I am not ok with this and I am not going to send him love–no.

  9. Whoops, correction: the guy in the special prison for terrorists gets one 15 minute phone call (not visit) a week, and one visit a month.

  10. While I agree with Ara in principle, I know that Michael was a human being and according to those who knew him well, he expressed anger when he was truly frustrated and he didn’t just swear and fume! He really let go. But, again, this should not be about Michaael expressing God-given emotions, it’s about our justice system which does, on occasion, fail. This is a clear example of failure, as was the verdict in the AEG trial. But for one vaguely and poorly worded question, a billion dollar exploitating machine walks away with nary a bruise. Not every one may be aware, but Michael sought counseling after the ’05 trial and he was quoted as saying “he hated Gavin Arvizo.” Who wouldn’t? That little monster ruined Michael’s life. So he was still a juvenile. He KNEW right from wrong and he knew what he was doing was clearly wrong. I don’t hold that against Michael Jackson. How would any of you feel after you reached out in love and kindnes and gave freely of your finances to help the boy heal from cancer and he turned around and agreed to a plan to ruin your life–for more M O N E Y? I think we’d all struggle constantly with the demon of hatred and retribution. We are, afterall, human. We’re not God. And hell, even Jesus blew his cork with the money-changers in the temple. Yes! Jesus expressed anger. Because some fans in the MJ fan community are calling for a lynch mob, it doesn’t mean we all are. No matter what area of life, you have people who are “reactionaries”. Who allow their emotions to dictate their actions. It’s wrong. It’s dangerous and as we see almost on a weekly basis here in the United States, it becomes deadly when that “reactionary” has a high-powered rifle or other gun in his hand. Living in California, I knew the day Murray was sentenced to his pitiful four-year term that he would only serve, at the most, two years of it because of a very serious prison overcrowding situation. Only the most violent and danerous criminals serve their full sentences. Murray wasn’t violent, but he is dangerous. If he could be so cavalier and inattentive to his most important patient in his lifetime, what’s to say that he will now take his responsibilities more seriously and never again put a patient at risk? He doesn’t deserve to practice medicine again, at least not in this country. He could go abroad and be a medical doctor there but he violated his hippocratic oath to the point where a patient didn’t just suffer from his malpractice, he DIED! While I could not hope to know how MIchael would feel about all of this, I do know that he has no chance of picking up and starting again. He’s gone. His three beloved children are essentially orphans and they must live many, many years wtithout the love of their father. A love that made all the difference in the world to them.

  11. I read someone’s view recently that I concur with, that justice will be served with Conrad Murray’s punishment having to constantly be watching in fear over his shoulder, feeling the anger of millions of Michael Jackson fans; now that will be a life sentence in his imagination. I have emailed Nevada, Texas, California and Hawaii’s Medical Boards requesting them to revoke Murray’s medical licence and/or certificates. Hawaii replied to say that his licence already expired in 2010.

  12. @Ara
    What Murray (and AEG!) did to Michael is so bizar and unprecedented, I think that Michael would have reacted in the most human way, because he is. We can only guess but we got an idea, straight from the horse’s mouth when he told Gloria Allred to go to hell when she had the nerve to touch on his children.
    No one in his right mind condones hatecampaigns. But compassion is the last thing Murray deserves for his wrongdoing,his unwillingness to take responsibility and his own lack of compassion to seek attention in the tabloids from a child who because of his acts is fighting for her life.
    I am personally more appalled by that and by the ongoing hate campaign against Michaels family and mother by people who by way of “defending’ Michael miss no opportunity to call her greedy, leeching, a limping bitch, bluntly wish her death or in a more subtle way in defense of AEG suggested that any damages paid should be according to life expectation, not of the deceased, but of the plaintiff.
    Some selected intimi of Michaels are subject to the same hate campaign and have whole forums dedicated to hating them, ‘fans’ bidding against each other and applauding at who is most ’eloquent’ in their hateful rethoric.
    Are you appalled by that too or is a convicted felon more deserving of your compassion than people, even children, who on a daily basis are bashed, bullied, ridiculed and spit at just for being Michaels family, with all the good and bad that goes with being family, being family of Michael Jackson and being human. Like Michael was.
    Why so many different standards if it is really about justice.

    1. Do I think Conrad Murray “deserves” forgiveness? No. He’s done nothing to “deserve” forgiveness. In Buddhism forgiveness is seen as a practice to prevent harmful thoughts from poisoning one’s own mental well-being. It can be granted without any expectation of restorative justice and in the absence of any remorse from the offender. As I said in my post, Conrad Murray is a morally vacant and best-forgotten man.

      The justice/punishment he deserves is that he become completely irrelevant.

      He’s become irrelevant as a doctor by the suspension of his medical licenses. God forbid he be successful at restoring even one of those. But here’s the thing: he’s already considered to be a martyr by many Michael Jackson haters. The more venom spewed at him the more of a martyr he becomes to them. The more calls for his head the more attention he attracts. The more of a spotlight he attracts, the more poisonous he becomes to the world.

      God forbid he get a soapbox. God forbid he get a book deal. God forbid he takes up any more of anyone’s time.

      Conrad Murray, in my opinion, doesn’t deserve one iota more of the world’s attention.

      Michael, at least in my mind, does.

      1. Ara said, “Conrad Murray is a morally vacant and best-forgotten man.
        The justice/punishment he deserves is that he become completely irrelevant.”

        Well said, Ara, I couldn’t agree more!! Although I had reservations concerning your earlier comment, your more recent comment is spot on with one modification. You said, “He’s become irrelevant as a doctor by the suspension of his medical licenses.” True, but the only way that can have any measure of permanence is persistence by the public in preventing him from getting any sort of license to practice medicine anywhere in the U.S. if such a thing should ever be possible. Of course that would require a certain amount of respectful and urgent attention to be directed at those with the authority to grant those licenses. Outside of that I agree he should be forgotten.

        I also agree with your observation of forgiveness but with a question. If I’m interpreting correctly forgiveness is something that benefits the forgiver more than the forgiven by freeing the forgiver from the emotional burden of potentially poisonous thoughts…as you mention. However, are forgiveness and vigilance compatible concepts in your view? Can a person forgive and still be involved in campaigns to prevent medical licenses from being granted?

        1. To clarify, my question regarding forgiveness is just that…a question. At this stage for me forgiveness is very far from my mind when it comes to this convicted felon even though my faith calls me to do so. In fact, I give Murray very little thought other than occassional comments made here. I would certainly like to think that despite my lack of forgiveness I’m not burdened with “poisonous thoughts” on this issue in that I’m not after his head and although I would promote campaigns to prevent him from practicing medicine I would never promote aggressive behaviour toward him or anyone else.

      2. IMO, Murray should be prevented from monetizing himself through Michael’s death. To hopefully assist in ensuring this does not occur, I see no harm (and perhaps benefit) in expressing oneself via email and ltrs, to the various medical boards on the issue of restoration of Murray’s licenses. To my knowledge, the only state which has “revoked” his license is Texas, as opposed to “suspension” (California and Nevada), which is why Murray is suing Texas, claiming it was revoked prematurely in light of his pending appeal. He filed the lawsuit 3 days before his release from jail! The law is all three states provides for revocation, not suspension, of medical licenses “upon conviction for a felony”. Revocation did not occur in all states.

        And I believe supporters should expend whatever efforts each deems appropriate to see Murray doesn’t profit from book sales, interviews, etc., although at present only the usual tabloids are speculating this is a possibility.

        I certainly don’t advocate violence or hatred of Conrad Murray. He is irrelevant and should just melt away; problem is he doesn’t see it that way and still, to this day, accepts no responsibility for his unconscionable acts.

        1. Agreed. Although my comments have focused on the need to be vigilant in regard to preventing Murray from regaining any kind of medical license (scary thought!) I would also include any potential for profiting off of Michael’s death via books, interviews, etc.

          It is very confusing that his license wasn’t immediately revoked in all 3 states upon his felony conviction?? Is it known why??

      3. I appreciate that Ravens blog is as versatile on the topics as Michael was , whether he chose them or they happened to him. I also appreciate that we are not told to shut up because certain topics feel inconvenient to some or that we have to go along with the opinion of the blog owner and commenters, or else be called hater or something like that. There are times when I don’t want to hear all the negative stuff, then I choose to stay away from it all. There are as many blogs as there are topics on MJ, so we can choose depending on our interest.
        Also what about just sit and listen to his music, watch his home movies or shows or read his books; Michaels legacy is not what is said and commented on blogs and forums, but what he left us in music, quotes, books, recorded performances, or our memories of him, available at any time.
        But when it comes to the darker topics, Id much rather have MJ supporters do their own research and write about them, then rely on journalists or reporters who will adjust their story to their convenience. How many of us did not spend a lot of money on Aphrodite Jones book when it was in high demand and not available, to now hear her contradict her own words and her innuendo about Michaels sexuality based on her feelings. So please keep writing about these subjects because there will always be attempts to rewrite history . Michael is not dead 5 years and some facts of his life are already completely disregarded , twisted and turned upside down(lied about)despite recorded evidence of what really happened.

  13. Ara, I basically agree with your post (and I thank you for posting it), with some slight caveats.

    Personally, I don’t care about Conrad Murray one way or the other or about what happens to him. There are so MANY such injustices in the world, after all: people committing crimes and getting off scot free, people wrongly imprisoned (or incarcerated for too long), and even people being killed for crimes they didn’t commit.

    It’s no mystery why the call for Murray’s head (or the outraged feelings regarding his early release) comes from a very heated and emotionally intense place where a lot of fans are concerned. To many, he is a family member.

    My interest in Michael Jackson’s overall legacy is somewhat more detached: I want more people to write thoughtfully about his music, his art, his cultural impact; and I would like more fan venues to cease and desist from clinging so tenaciously on the themes of his enemies, his suffering, his disparagement by the media and the general public, etc.

    Michael is increasingly lauded in the press, in the two Cirque shows in Las Vegas, and even by the Ohio State U. marching band. We are dealing with a new reality now. Why, only yesterday, “Healthy Living” magazine’s executive editor, Aida Poulsen, published a very “positive” cover story about him:

    I see no purpose in maintaining this stance of (seemingly) permanent anger and grievance about all those who did Michael Jackson wrong (and there are many). My best guess is that this fan tendency is not a *reasoned* stance that has to do with Michael’s overall reputation over the long haul: rather, it’s an emotional response to a sore spot that has grown increasingly inflamed and sensitized because of the years of wear and tear.

    For that reason, I can’t particularly judge it, but instead reflect upon another theme that was dear to Michael: that of “healing the world” in more global ways. I believe he would like us to direct our attention to ameliorating a great many social injustices that persist in the world (especially when it comes to the welfare of children), not devote so much energy and effort toward HIS particular wrongs. Michael is no longer with us, after all.

    In my view, we need to look at the larger cultural phenomenon in connection with the wrong that was done to Michael: why celebrities are hounded by the media, seemingly at the behest of a public that voraciously consumes any and all news, however aspersive. Otherwise, we risk having the same thing happen to the next enormously gifted and generous star that comes along.

  14. Raven says,
    “We do not owe Conrad Murray our compassion, or our forgiveness. The BEST Murray should expect from those who cared about Michael Jackson-and that is a global family in the millions-is that he is left alone.”

    I agree, Raven: we don’t owe Murray any of these things, and I’m not suggesting we shower him with love or sing Kumbaya. He doesn’t warrant any of that.

    But in my view, neither does he warrant ANOTHER SECOND of our time or attention, even for the purpose of disparaging him, engaging in letter-writing campaigns, etc. etc.

    It’s the system that’s broken, in my view. We need to understand a lot of things that go on behind the scenes in the entertainment industry in order to better understand the corruption (and kindness) of those who operate on all levels within it. I agree that Michael was an activist, and he would like us to devote our attention to things we CAN effectively do something about; not things we can’t.

    Moreover, I believe Michael would want us to devote our attention to HIM—*not* (heaven help us) Conrad Murray, and *not* Wade Robson, and *not* Gloria Allred and all the rest of them. These hatreds are not the way to secure his legacy. These people will pass out of the public consciousness very soon (and have already been justly forgotten by all but the most “devoted” fans).

    Michael, on the other hand—his achievements, his energies, the art and work he left behind—will be with us for a long, long time to come.

  15. What I am posting here is an impassioned plea by Vindicating Michael, which I agree with wholeheartedly. It speaks for itself. I hope it is acceptable for this particular blog, and it is current and up-to-date.

    ‘And what about opening the transcript of AEG court proceedings on September 9, 2013, reading
    Ms. Chang: … there’s two different conflicting pictures of how Michael Jackson was treated by defendants shortly before he died. The defendants have all stated on this day of love, affection, total support, no pressure inflicted on Michael Jackson whatsoever. Plaintiffs, however, know that there’s an entirely different scenario. And we state, based on the case law, that in search for the truth in the case, the jury’s entitled to hear evidence from both sides.
    Sad as it is but AEG people are everywhere you look and they work real hard – much harder than Michael Jackson’s supporters do, who seem to be still waiting for the manna from heaven to fall upon their heads.
    Or do they wait for the time when AEG lies fully overwhelm the public? But if it is hard to fight their lies now, how much harder will be when these lies take root and leave much bigger debris to sort out?
    Don’t wait. Go and fight for each grain of truth NOW and simply do the most of what you can.
    Point 1
    All you need to do to spread the truth about the real way Michael Jackson was treated by AEG is quote Ortega’s words to Karen Faye about AEG bullying Michael, and tell everyone that they threatened to make Michael lose his kids in case he didn’t attend their rehearsals which he was not even supposed to attend:
    Karen Faye’s iphone messages say: ‘Kenny told me “He and Randy Phillips and the doctor held a sort of intervention. MJ didn’t show till 9:30 p.m. AEG, (Randy Phillips) is funding his entire life right now. His house, food, kids, school, everything. AEG threatened Michael that unless he ”attended every rehearsal”) they would ‘PULL THE PLUG IF HE DOESN’T GET HIS SHIT TOGETHER. IF HE DOESN’T DO THIS, HE LOSES EVERYTHING HE HAD’ (yes, the catalog too) PROBABLY EVEN HIS KIDS.
    So what is important now is to lose no time and tell the truth to everyone on this planet that AEG threatened Michael with a risk of losing his kids if he didn’t attend those damned rehearsals! Need I tell you that threatening Michael with these words was the worst thing they could ever say to him? The kids were the most precious things Michael had, the reason for his whole existence and a threat like that was the most devastating and deadly blow he could ever receive.
    As a side note let me say that Michael wasn’t even obligated by his contract to attend the rehearsals and it was only AEG’s opinion that he should.
    It was much worse than a “freak” email, a slap and all the rest of the bullying and harassment they subjected him to during the several months of their wonderful collaboration. It was a lethal blow which surely sent Michael into a couple of sleepless and tormenting nights all of which led to the disastrous June 19th rehearsal which was a clear signal of the future catastrophe.
    Up till now all information about one more meeting prior to June 20th was suppressed and this is why Ortega’s message to Randy Phillips sent at 2 am in the morning after the June 19th rehearsal was somewhat of a mystery to us. It mentioned details which up till now have never been mentioned anywhere at all and it is only now that its every little detail is fitting into the general picture:
    That day his body temperature was ice-cold to the touch, he was rambling and obsessing and saying that God was talking to him, he begged Ortega as a “lost boy” not to leave him and produced the overall impression of a man who needed a psychiatrist or at least urgent medical help.
    Not only couldn’t he get on the stage but he could barely function as a human being that night, and this is when Kenny Ortega got really frightened for what they had done to him several days earlier.
    Also doesn’t all of it make it clear why Michael Jackson hired a lawyer on June 18th which must have taken place almost immediately after that intervention meeting? The immediate reason for it must have been shielding himself from the danger of everything being taken away from him – his kids, his catalog and his dreams.

    So all those impeaching AEG CEOs of different ranks with their never-ending “I don’t remember a thing” looked more trustworthy to juror #27 and his supporters than Karen Faye’s messages found on her old iphone, readily offered for forensic analysis and confirmed by Alif Sankey’s declaration at that?
    Doesn’t it tell you more than you ever wanted to know about this mysterious juror #27 and those who are embracing him with their open arms?

    Point 2.

    The MJ “contract” with AEG said that the tour was to start on JULY 26 ONLY. So when AEG set the first concert on July 8, they shortened the period of rehearsals THEMSELVES by two and a half weeks earlier than the date stated in the contract. The almost three weeks they added to the actual shows at the expense of rehearsal time were exactly the three weeks they were short of in June 2009.
    Also they forget to tell you that their own contract with Michael initially said that the shows were to begin only on July 26.
    And all this was due to their unlimited greed and desire to grab more money in March 2009 when they expanded 10 shows into 30 and then to 50 – the period provided for by the contract did not allow to fit that much and the date of starting the tour had to be moved to an earlier date.
    The two and a half months for producing a show of this scale was too little time for it, so the problem of a mad race with rehearsals they created for the whole company was the problem of AEG’s own doing, incorrect timing and poor production skills.
    They wanted to correct their mistakes at the expense of the artist, namely Michael Jackson,
    Point 3
    The “freak” email was sent on January 28 which was the only time when Shawn Trell was in Michael’s house. How could he attend the signing of the contract on January 26 then?
    Shawn Trell also blatantly lied when he made two mutually exclusive statements as to when Michael Jackson signed his contract – on January 26 when Tohme/AEG and MJ/AEG agreements were allegedly signed, and when Trell was in Michael’s home just once, on January 28 as their email about meeting with the “freak” actually said.

  16. Sory, but the idea that AEG could somehow take away MJ’s kids seems too far-fetched to me. which is what is being asserted (“‘PULL THE PLUG IF HE DOESN’T GET HIS SHIT TOGETHER. IF HE DOESN’T DO THIS, HE LOSES EVERYTHING HE HAD’ (yes, the catalog too) PROBABLY EVEN HIS KIDS.” How were they going to do this when even the likes of Gloria Allred getting Child Protection involved back in 2003 could not do that?? I just don’t buy that AEG had any interest in taking away MJ’s kids, or that MJ feared they would.

    1. Of course AEG had no interest in taking away Michael’s kids. They had an interest in making him believe that if he lost his assets, he might put his life with his children in jeopardy. Remember when MJ first died, there were many voices raised that suggested MJ’s children should be removed from the custody of the Jacksons and placed with white families. Seems outlandish and ludicrous now, but the idea had currency back then.

      If AEG could convince the public that they had to “pull the plug” on This Is It because of MJ’s mental instability, or his failure to “face his fears”, a move to take his children would have followed. It was an intimidation tactic, pure and simple. While it seems far-fetched, it’s no more far-fetched than AEG continuing to deal with Tohme long after MJ fired him, or color-coding a performance calendar so it would look like MJ wasn’t being worked to death, or requiring him to sit in rehearsals in a freezing cold stadium, when they had no authority to require him to attend at all. We’re talking about thugs here. There’s no telling what they might have said or done.

      1. Sorry but I don’t see that color-coding a calendar is the same as taking someone’s kids away. Surely MJ knew full well that no one had the right to take his kids away–so how would any threat to take his kids away from him work in that case??

        1. MJ knew no such thing. MJ’s home was invaded by 70 troopers. He had gone through a five month trial because of Sneddon’s baseless vendetta. This was a man stripped naked and groped and probed as he stood on a box in a room full of leering, laughing cops. Why wouldn’t he be fearful? All the laws of privacy and procedure did not protect him in the past.

          1. Very true indeed. Not to mention other abusive tactics that were used on MJ prior to the ’05 trial such as allegedly being locked in a filthy bathroom while police stood outside and mocked him and the bruising on MJ’s arms as a result of rough treatment by the police while he was handcuffed.

            AEG would not have directly been able to take his kids away but the bullying tactic of threatening his assets, in other words, threatening Michael’s ability to financially support his own kids under his own roof and the very real possibility of the emotional break down he may experience as a human being following such an event could lead to such a seperation. A devastating thought indeed!

          2. During the strip-search MJ was never touched, let alone groped, etc. He was photographed and videotaped but he was not touched. he had lawyers present in the room. No one touched him. Having 70 detectives search the premises did not result in having his children taken away, so why bring it up? If his children were not taken away when he was accused of child sex abuse, why would they be taken away when he was not accused of anything??

          3. iutd, forgive me for pursueing this but the ’93 strip search was an intensly and devastatingly humiliating event even if he wasn’t groped or proded physically. And the episode with the 70 troopers ransacking his home was just as humiliating even though he wasn’t on the premises at the time. Emotionally the effect would be very similar in that his privacy had been violated in a very personal way. Both events were examples of someone, Sneddon in this case, using intimidation tactics to wrongly harrass and impose their will on Jackson. As for AEG, the overbearing contract and intimidating tactics used on him then must have felt similar, in terms of a sense of powerlessness on MJ’s part, even though reasons for the bullying were different. Why does any of this matter? As I tried to explain before, AEG couldn’t take MJ’s kids away directly and I’m sure he knew that, however, if they “pulled the plug” on the shows, as was the implied threat, that could mean finacial ruin and a subsequent emotional breakdown for Michael. Such ruin could very well lead to him being seperated from his children due the very real possiblity that if such a thing happened he wouldn’t be able to financially or emotionally support them properly. In short AEG couldn’t take his kids away directly but their was an indirect threat. With all due respect, surely you can see that, right?

  17. Yes Nina(H) I read that too. That site is excellent at ferreting out anomalies (whatever the particular “Michael” subject). I visit various blog sites and occasionally leave a comment . It is always interesting to read another’s point of view/ perspective, and I find that generally speaking I will agree with most posts and comments in part , even if not completely . And to me that is the important function of blog sites. Information and, if we feel like it, discussion. It’s not likely that we can influence outcomes, but we can re-examine our own attitudes, and I find that can be a great comfort ( if needed). I realise that sometimes I forget all the positive stuff that is going on with Michael (which far outweighs the negative), and that sometimes I just need to apply common sense. which can get lost because of the intensity of my feelings.

    As Nina YF has said :

    Moreover, I believe Michael would want us to devote our attention to HIM—*not* (heaven help us) Conrad Murray, and *not* Wade Robson, and *not* Gloria Allred and all the rest of them. These hatreds are not the way to secure his legacy. These people will pass out of the public consciousness very soon (and have already been justly forgotten by all but the most “devoted” fans).

    Michael, on the other hand—his achievements, his energies, the art and work he left behind—will be with us for a long, long time to come.

    Once again Raven, thank you for allowing us “free rein” to express our thoughts

  18. iutd says, “If his children were not taken away when he was accused of child sex abuse, why would they be taken away when he was not accused of anything??”

    I’ll try again. The Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution was written to protect citizens from “unreasonable search and seizure”, of their “persons” or physical body, as well as their property. By no stretch of the imagination was the raid on Neverland, the seizure of MJ’s personal property, and the strip search of his body reasonable. It doesn’t matter how many lawyers were in the room. But they did it, because they wanted to humiliate Michael Jackson.

    Removing children from the custody of a parent deemed “unstable” is not unusual. Certainly if the authorities eagerly disregarded his fundamental Constitutional rights, MJ had every reason to believe that powerful Phillip Anschutz could cause him to have to fight for his children. Before the AEG trial began, Brian Panish had the court stipulate that there would be no discussion of the children’s paternity. He didn’t pick that out of the blue. He knew that AEG was carrying on psychological warfare against the children, especially Paris, by trying to suggest that MJ wasn’t their father. Remember it was the children suing AEG. AEG was not above using any method, fair or foul, to win the suit. I reiterate – these are thugs we’re talking about.

    I’m curious – do you just not believe that such a threat was uttered? If that is so, you must think that Karen Faye made it up. Or is there another theory?

    1. I definitely agree that AEG’s representatives did behave as thugs and were waging “psychological warfare against the children.” Such behavior has been thorougly and utterly unconscionable!!

    2. “During the strip-search MJ was never touched, let alone groped, etc. He was photographed and videotaped but he was not touched. “
      I am speechless at the suggestion that unless you are groped or touched,to be strip searched, stand in the middle of a room butt naked, have ones penis examined, measured, videotaped and photographed in front of complete strangers not knowing what they will do with the images. is not that bad. It sounds horrible to even talk about it, let alone be the subject of it.

      Did they do that to REAL molesters like the priests who molested kids institutionally, Corey Feldmans abusers , Gary Glitter, Roman Polanski or to a serial molester like Sandusky ? NO they didnt.
      Michael had every reason to be scared of threats to take his children away. They did during the 2005 trial and Gloria Allred was not just anyone. Remember,in the 2 years prior to the AEG contract he had been living like an outcast, travelling from place to place, staying with random people. After chasing Michael for years AEG had made a study of this man and exactly knew his vulnerabilities.
      From Tohme they must havelearned that Michaels biggest wish was not going on stage again, but to have a home for his children. If AEG was funding his life as they said and providing for a roof over his head , they basically had control over him. They had no qualms to fool him with a contract, call him a freak , scary and lazy ,were encouraged by their bosses to talk fluff to fool him, all on record, threatened Murray as Prince testified, together with the authentic text messages on KFs phone its not rocket science that they are very capable of making these threats to pressure him. I keep saying if half of what happened to Michael would have happened to other artists, there would be very serious repercussions. With Michael? not so.

      1. “I am speechless at the suggestion that unless you are groped or touched,to be strip searched, stand in the middle of a room butt naked, have ones penis examined, measured, videotaped and photographed in front of complete strangers not knowing what they will do with the images. is not that bad. ”

        And I am speechless that you think I said that.

        1. @ IUTD
          Not only do I think you said it, I quoted you saying it.
          And reading Junes ^^^ respons to exactly the same phrases you used,I am nôt the only one who understood it that way.
          “iutd, forgive me for pursueing this but the ’93 strip search was an intensly and devastatingly humiliating event even if he wasn’t groped or proded physically ”
          They are your words, whether said intentionally or as a slip.

          1. I never said or implied that the strip search was a good thing or what you claim I said: that being photographed as opposed to groped, probed “is not that bad.” I merely corrected an assertion that he was groped and probed by saying that he was not. I never concluded that either way–groped or not–was a good thing. I simply said he was not touched and now you accuse me of saying, actually saying, that IT WAS NOT THAT BAD. Hello? I NEVER SAID THAT.

          2. For the record, I need to make it clear–b/c incredibly some people seem to think I am in favor of MJ being strip searched–NO I AM NOT. It was horrible and a complete violation. I merely said he was not touched, and for that I am accused of thinking it was no big deal to have his privates photographed, which I never said. Please do not accuse people of things they did not say. Would you rather I let the notion he WAS groped, probed stand and not set the record straight? Isn’t accuracy important? Why is being factual suddenly cause for accusations that I support the strip search. This is so crazy, words fail me.

  19. Just not buying this at all, Simba. Your arguments have not convinced me that AEG wanted or were trying or threatening to take MJ’s kids away. I really don’t care to continue this as I think you have given this your best shot and I still find it totally unreasonable. But please, by all means, continue to believe it of you think it’s credible. I do not.

      1. Karen Faye is currently accepting questions on twitter through an intermediary, whose email address can abe seen on KF’s twit timeline. Anyone supposedly can email any question although there is no guarantee of that she will answer all questions. She seems open to most literate intelligent inquiries.

        While Michael could have perceived the bullying techniques as attempts to do him in and take his kids away, even if he had faced financial disaster as a result of the pulled plug, imo he wouldn’t have lost custody of his kids. I realize his perception would have increased his anxiety levels on this issue; however, a certain degree of embellishment was exhibited in supposed sworn trial testimony. Doesn’t anyone believe if financial armaggeddon hit, his family would finally step in to assist him? Based on my research of the J family, I don’t give them credit for much but I do believe that under the worst dire financial circumstances they would have stepped up.

        1. June said, “I don’t give them credit for much but I do believe that under the worst dire financial circumstances they would have stepped up.”

          Yes, I agree that if a financial catastrophy were to happen the family would step up. I can only imagine how devestating that would be to Michael if such a thing had happened. Here’s a man who had always been the provider for so many in his family, not just his own children. Of course, one can only speculate on what such an arrangement would look like and the emotional impact it would have had on everyone involved, especially Michael and his children. Cetainly the current reality has been far more devastating emotionally.

          As for Karen Faye’s twitter I’ve just noticed the Q&A she’s is allowing for outside the context of twitter through an associate of hers, Steph Martin. In fact Steph is strongly encouraging this info be passed on. This is the blog post for the Q&A for those interested. Hopefully it’s alright to post it here:

        2. June, Karen Faye’s iphone message to her BF re ‘he will lose everything probably even his kids,’ supposedly said by Ortega to her, was found after Karen Faye had given her testimony and there was an effort to have it introduced into evidence but in the end it did not become part of the record. It was discussed in a sidebar without the jury present.

          1. Thanks. I knew it was several layers of hearsay and not said directly to Michael. I don’t think I initially raised it here but it’s made for some interesting comments!

  20. Hang on a minute.. whilst I totally support debate and discussion , and all points are valid in the above comments, ( so not intending to upset anyone here)could we please take a step back for a minute or two. I think Michael would be absolutely mortified at the argument going on here, and the way it is being conducted.It was for him, as he has said the most humiliating experience.
    If newcomers visit this site, especially if they are the sitting on the fence type of visitor, I don’t think they would be impressed by the way this particular discussion is being played out.( Just my opinion)

    Oh and by the way.. Michael did end up losing everything.. including his beloved children.

    1. I have been a bit out of pocket here this week, mostly just having enough time to check in and make sure no comments are being held. I had planned to catch up on reading the conversations this weekend. But I have seen the comments going back and forth on this issue.

      Iutd is right in one regard. There is no record that states Michael was probed or groped during that examination. At the very least, no indication that it was carried out in any way that was above and beyond what is routinely allowed by law during such strip searches. He was, after all, under suspect for sexual child abuse. So was the examination carried out in a lawful way, given the circumstances? Probably yes. At the very least, we have nothing on record, either from Michael himself or the authorities in question, that anything of the kind occurred. On the other hand, that isn’t to say it didn’t (only that we’ll probably never know). For sure, the DA would never own up to it if anything of the kind occurred. And in all likelihood, even Michael himself would have been too mortified to ever admit such a thing to all the world. The experience itself was too humiliating for him. It took a lot of guts for him to even talk about it on national TV. This is a very sensitive thing for any man. Even if it would have elicited public sympathy for him, there is something about the sheer degradation and complete violation of being “probed” that cowers even the strongest man into complete and utter silence on the matter. I think for a man, it is probably the most shameful and embarrassing thing he can ever own up to, even if it was not his fault and there was no way he could control what happened. For sure, this would not have been how Michael wanted the public to think of him when they saw him or heard his name. He wanted people to think of magic when they heard his name, of singing and dancing and bringing joy. Not, “Oh, there’s the guy that was strip searched and probed.”

      This also reminds me of the controversy over the LAPD treatment of him when he was arrested in 2003. Michael showed the world his bruises, claimed to have a dislocated shoulder, and said he was locked in a feces smeared bathroom for over 45 minutes. The video footage released by the LAPD in response to those claims (which may or may not have told the whole story) show the officers, in fact, turning on the car air conditioning for him when he requested it. So it came down to his word against theirs (and I say this because I agree with the family that the LAPD was very selective in what they chose to release). I am not sure what I make of the story about the bruises and the dislocated shoulder, but I do believe him when he said he was locked in that bathroom for 45 minutes. He may have embellished some things, but I believe overall, his story had merit. LaToya once mentioned having a friend who worked for the LAPD who quoted some of his fellow officers as saying that they hoped one day they would get a chance to stop Michael Jackson on the highway. When asked why, the response was, “So I can beat the s&^% out of him.” Whether joking or not, that was a horrid thing to say and bespeaks volumes about the attitudes of many LAPD when it came to him-and this was BEFORE any accusations had ever been made against him. So you can imagine the bit of “high fiving” that might have been going on at the chance to finally have Michael Jackson at their mercy. I am not saying this applies to the entire force. I am sure it is/was just a few nasty individuals. But what if Michael had the misfortune to have some of those very individuals in charge of him that day?

      To be fair, I don’t think that Iutd is saying the strip search was a good thing, or that it wasn’t a horrific thing that happened to him. At least, I did not get that impression. It is more of a quibble with the terms of “probed” and “groped” and what they imply. And I think that really comes down to a matter of definition.

      Michael may or may not have been physically manhandled by those conducting the examination. We simply don’t know. But there can be more than one way to define these terms-not just in the physical sense, but in the sheer emotional humiliation of what happened to him. A person is never more vulnerable than when they are naked. Now imagine having to stand buck naked in front of a roomful of gawking strangers-especially if you are as shy as Michael was-while your privates and buttocks are photographed and examined from every angle. Imagine you are that person, standing there naked and being gawked at, while you are asked to “lift” your penis so they can examine the underside of it. Even if they didn’t personally do the groping or probing themselves, I don’t think that would have made much difference for Michael, because he certainly must have FELT like someone who was being groped and probed. In other words, however you define it and however you slice it, the end result for him was the same.

      So in this sense, I can somewhat see both sides that are being argued here. But even if the examination was carried out to the utmost letter of the law (and we have no way to know that for sure) it was still a violation, and one no less psychologically damaging than a rape. All we have to do is look at that statement he released in Dec of ’93 where he described the examination to see the pain, indignity, and humiliation that was still so fresh in his mind when he spoke of these matters. As my sister once said, it took balls for him to go on national TV and talk of this. Just to say as much as he did took a lot of courage. Even IF there was more to tell, I doubt he ever would have. But what he did say was plenty, and it was enough to let us know that the way he saw it, he was violated and as good as raped. But he also stressed that if this is what it took to prove his innocence, then so be it.

      1. So well stated, Raven, in summing up the prior comments. Every time the subject of the stripsearch is raised I wonder to high heaven how it ever came about. Has there been another major or even minor celeb in our lifetime subjected to such invasion? Michael, in his televised statement, said refusal to submit to it would have been perceived as(I believe these were the words) “evidence of my guilt”. Comparing his anatomy to the supposed victim’s drawing? Were Sneddon and his cohorts the source of Michael’s knowledge of what would happen to him had he not acceeded to the SS demand? I know a warrant was issued permitting the SS; was it legally challenged, and if not, why not? I know I will be shaking my head in disbelief for the very foreseeable future that this miscarriage of “justice” and abominable invasion of Michael’s privacy was ever permitted to happen.

        1. Yes, I am sure had he refused to cooperate with the strip search, that would have been used against him. He was really in a no-win situation at that point. Had he refused to cooperate, or challenged the legality of the warrant (and I’m not sure if that would have been an option for him, at least not without doing more research) I am sure we would be hearing to this day from the hater faction of how Michael refused to be searched because he obviously “had something to hide.” At least, by submitting to the search, he forever robbed them of that bit of satisfaction.

      2. As it was my use of “groped” and “probed” that has caused some consternation, I would like to explain why I used the terms. I will try to find where I read it, but purportedly one of the aims of the strip search was to determine if MJ had been involved in homosexual activity, even though this had nothing to do with confirming JC’s description. I don’t want to be indelicate, but MJ’s anus was inspected, and the conclusion was there were no signs of penetration. There is no way this could be done without physical manipulation.

        This strip search did not follow any established legal protocol. MJ’s lawyers should have been sued for malpractice for not protesting the manner in which this was carried out. Although there was no justification for it, quick cursory exam by a physician, with no photographs, would have been sufficient. In essence, the LAPD required MJ to establish his innocence, a blatant disregard of his Constitutional rights.

        1. What in the world??? How is a strip search going to “prove” that someone has been involved in “homosexual activity”?

          How would inspection of someone’s anus, after the fact, “prove” that someone had been penetrated? Moreover: is penetration assumed (by the authorities, OR by anyone here) to be the *only* form of homosexual activity that can take place?

          Besides: Is a woman not capable of “penetrating” a man, perhaps using some device?

          I mean, wouldn’t the police department already be apprised of these realities? And then, shouldn’t the fans be just as wary of jumping to conclusions?

          A whole lot of assumptions are being made in this very discussion, bogus assumptions that don’t hold up even under the lightest scrutiny, and this leads me to feel—to my great surprise—even LESS inclined to put any stock in fan opinion than I am the word of the police, or other authorities!

          1. @NinaYF, Without going into more detail on this issue, the reason given for obtaining the warrant for the stripsearch was to determine if Jordan Chandler’s drawings of Michael’s private parts matched up with the real thing. Jordan claimed Michael had splotches on his private parts (due to vitiligo). Per Sneddon, only way to verify yes or no was to view and photograph. There was no match.

        2. If you can find that source, please post it here or send it to me in email if you would like.

          I agree with Nina, though. I fail to see how on earth they would think an anal probe would “prove” anything as far as Jordan’s allegations? The only thing such an examination could possibly accomplish would be to cast a cloud of circumstantial doubt, but as Nina said, even if such an examination would have yielded what they were looking for, there would have been too many variables to say with any certainty that it implied guilt

          1. It’s naive to believe that the LAPD had pure investigative motives when conducting the strip search. Factions in the LAPD hated Michael Jackson, and if they could have gotten away with beating him to a pulp, for “resisting arrest” perhaps, they would have done it. Checking him for evidence of anal sex was an intimidation tactic. If they had found any, it certainly would have been leaked to the public. If the only purpose of the strip search was to ascertain if JC’s supposed description matched MJ’s appearance, it would not have taken twenty-five minutes.

            Sorry that that some here find the idea upsetting or not credible, but this kind of check is pro forma for incoming inmates. Some cops go crazy over searches – two men in New Mexico who were pulled over for minor traffic infractions are suing because police officers subjected them to multiple anal probes, x rays, enemas, and even a colonoscopy, because they ‘suspected’ they were hiding drugs. (I suspect they were just getting off on their power over a citizen.)


            It would be pleasant to only discuss MJ in the context of love and peace and positive subjects, but that was not his life experience. There were many things he went through that most of us find hard to believe. It doesn’t mean they didn’t happen.

          2. Well, as you know, I have great respect for Helena’s research so I will be sure to read it. I try to keep up with most of the posts there, but occasionally some slip past me, and this may have been one of those.

      3. Yes, well said, Raven.

        I did want to comment on this when you said, “To be fair, I don’t think that Iutd is saying the strip search was a good thing, or that it wasn’t a horrific thing that happened to him. At least, I did not get that impression. It is more of a quibble with the terms of “probed” and “groped” and what they imply. And I think that really comes down to a matter of definition.”

        I wanted to clarify that I agree that I don’t feel Iutd ever suggested the SS was not a bad thing as was clarified in a later comment by Iutd. My apologies if I implied anything different. And to my understanding MJ hadn’t been physically touched, whether it be “groped” or “probed,” so I agree with Iutd there. Although he may very well have been man-handled in order to begin the SS but not the SS itself. No proof just my opinion. That said the entire experience would still have an emotional impact similar to a rape as Raven has pointed out. Devastating indeed! And very gutsy of him to speak of the SS as he did publically as others here have noted. My dispute was with how these events might affect MJ’s overall perception (total speculation I know) of how such events could affect the custody of his children.

        The reason why I feel this has any validity is the history of various issues Michael had concerns over. We know that over the years Michael had concerns regarding his personal safety and these legitimate concerns became more intense in later years. I’m sure we’re all familiar with FBI report that spoke of a man being sent to prison for two years for threatening to kill Michael and the President many years ago and certainly Michael had received death threats as a result of the false accusations against him in ’93 and then again in ’03. Certainly young Prince testified that his father said to him more than once in regard to AEG, “They are going to kill me!” Although it’s not entirely clear whether Michael meant this literally or figuratively.

        All of us are also aware that Michael had serious concerns that there were those trying to relieve him of the Sony/ATV catalog by various means whether by financial ruin, perpetuating lies, false imprisonment, total emotional collapse, etc. We know that while he was alive he didn’t lose the catalog.

        And let’s not forget Ms. Gloria Allred and her never ending crusade in pursuit of Michael regarding her misguided views which, if she had succeeded, could have caused Michael to lose his kids. Of course, while he was alive he never lost custody of his kids.

        O.K., what does any of this have to do with AEG and Michael’s children? It seems to me that a lot of the things that Michael had real concerns about over the years; personal safety, the catalog, finances, his children; could potentially come true to varying degrees as a result of his relationship with AEG and their implied threat of pulling the plug on the shows. He could lose everything!

        Alternatively, the success of the shows would have caused Michael to regain his place in the entertainment industry by reminding people of why we know the name Michael Jackson in the first place. It could put him in the position of calling his own shots again as opposed to a corporation such as AEG or even Sony. He could potentially be in a better position to pursue projects with other celebrities and businesses such as building a children’s hospital and of course he’d be in a better position to start tackling his very real debt. Even more important is that he wanted his children to be proud of their father. Not for just what he did in the past but for what he was doing in the present. Clearly the potential reward was worth the potential risks that I’m sure he was well aware of and would do anything to avoid – hence using drastic measures to deal with a very real sleeping disorder. A disorder that was the one thing in 2009 that was standing between him and a better future for he and his children. Devastatingly, as we all are painfully aware the true outcome was the very worst that could be imagined.

        1. I agree. I think he was willing to work with AEG, despite a lot of misgivings and (as we know from the trial) a lot of humiliating treatment because he was looking ahead to the bigger picture.

          It seems very sad that when we look back over the history of Michael’s last decade, what we see are a series of planned “comebacks” and huge plans of getting back in the saddle, so to speak, which in every case were thwarted by forces he had no control over. We see this in 2003, when the raid on Neverland happens just as he is in Las Vegas shooting what would have been a new video. We see it in 2006/2007, when he is recording tracks for a new album and doing the Ebony and Vogue photo shoots. We saw it in 2009, with what would have been the This Is It shows.

          While I always quibble somewhat with the word “comeback” because Michael was always working and never went away, if we use “comeback” in the sense of him once again being in a position of power and complete control-as well as on top of the charts-then I suppose it is a word that has merit. Michael, I firmly believe, was driven by a desire to show the world who he was one more time. Perhaps one of the greatest tragedies of his life is that he never got that chance. It is true, as some say, that perhaps by dying he achieved his greatest “comeback.” But it would have been wonderful if he could have accomplished this while he was here to enjoy it-and to reap the benefits of it.

          Also we have to ask, what would be sweeter? Going out on a high triumphant note, or only on the possibility of what might have been? We will always, forever, be teased by that question, for which there will never be an answer.

    2. I am not playing semantics. I never accused anyone of saying that ss was a good thing or that anyone was in favor of it. I dont know or care if the ss was lawfully executed or if he was groped or not. What I object to is downplaying what happened, because of selectiveness of who or what is deemed credible. There is nothing to embellish about a stripsearch. There is also nothing to embellish about being threatened to lose everything , probably even ones children. There was nothing embellished about what we heard the AEG people say ON RECORD, so why would Karen Fayes text message about the threats written while it was happening be embelished?
      Was Prince making it up when he said that his father would cry after talks with AEG people? Was that hearsay too?

      1. I’d also like to remind everyone to the lengths AEG went to inorder to bully their way out of the trial many months ago by suggesting they were going to reveal something shocking related to the parentage of Michael’s children. I believe the suggestion of such a thing was reported by Alan Duke. Still looking for the video to post.

  21. @MagsUK….”Oh and by the way.. Michael did end up losing everything.. including his beloved children.”
    You shook me to my core, Mags.

    Time to end the arguments about what Michael endured. He’d be aghast that his fans would be wrangling over the disgusting details of that strip search. We don’t have to do this. It’s over. We all know it should NEVER have happened and is a dark time in human history. He rose above it. He triumphed. He rose above everything those jealous, devious human beings did or tried to do to him. Why? Because his heart was filled with love and love will not be conquered or denied. It haunts me more, knowing what I know now, that those who COULD have intevened, DIDN’T! Debbie Rowe said it perfectly…”they were selfish.”

    Let’s all agree to move away from arguing. It’s not about who’s opinion is correct. Deep down we all hold the same frustrations, anguish and regrets. I love AllforLove blog. I love your posts, Raven. You are a thoughtful, wonderful writer and skilled at research and bringing us the facts. Instead of debating what we really can’t be completely certain of, how about we just acknowledge that there is probably some truth in all of it? There are so many incredibly wonderful humanitarian efforts going on right now in Michael’s name, brought about by the kindest, most giving people I’ve come across. Though I’ve not met any of them, personally, what they are doing in Michael’s name makes me so happy that I’m frequently in tears, I realize that we all have our own personal beliefs about God, Allah, Spirit, or whatever you may envision the Creator to be. In my mind, I do believe that God makes it possible for Michael to see and appreciate all the good, all the love. Let’s all join in and continue to pull that curtain back, tear away the ugly remnants of an ignorant and shallow public media, so the WHOLE WORLD can see his true legacy….LOVE!

    I love all of you because you love Michael. It just makes me sad to see such heated discussions on a public forum.

    Blessings to you all and love forever and always for ((((((Michael))))) 🙂

    1. Ladypurr, I appreciate your beautiful post and I agree with the sentiments you express. I try to maintain a balance here between those positive things that celebrate Michael’s legacy, as well as those darker and more troubling subjects that, while unpleasant, need to be addressed in order to provide better or clearer understanding of what happened. For example, the allegations that Wade Robson has made has led me on a renewed crusade to let readers know the root causes of those allegations. While many of you who comment here regularly are devoted fans who have researched these things as thoroughly as I have (and some of you even more!) there are nevertheless many casual visitors and lurkers who arrive here out of curiosity; who are in the process of learning these things for the first time, and I feel it is an important part of what I do to give them accurate information on these topics to balance all of the sheer junk they are going to encounter elsewhere. I don’t necessarily enjoy the dark topics, but I won’t shy away from them, either. And, of course, these topics will always generate their fair share of heated debates and controversy. That just goes with the territory.

      As to what those readers may think when they see heated debates like this, in all honesty, they are probably just apt to think, wow, this is a blog that has life! And this is a subject that readers are very passionate about. I don’t think we should have any reason to fear being passionate about such a complex subject as Michael Jackson and the life he lived. The fact that so many are still interested-and care enough to debate these topics so fiercely-speaks volumes.

      However, I, too, have been feeling the heavy weight lately of just getting too mired down in depressing topics. I have about 2-3 more posts I want to do of the Wade Robson series because there are some critical issues I still need to address, but after that, I will probably give it a rest until his hearing comes up in June.

      Over the next few months, I’m going to be doing a lot more field work and investigative reporting. For example, I’m planning a road trip this spring to try to track down the story of Michael’s racial beating in Alabama (I live in Alabama, but where the incident was said to have occurred is still a good 4-5 hour drive) and to try to talk to some of those witnesses. The venture may or may not produce any results (but as they say, you never know until you try). I think this trip will also give me an opportunity to connect more with Michael’s early roots, because I’ll be visiting Katherine’s home town where she spent her first four years (and where many of her relatives still live) as well.

      As always, I will keep trying to bring readers the best of what we love about Michael, as well as those topics that need to be addressed in order to provide better understanding.

      1. Hi Raven;

        May I just say that I appreciate all the topics you cover regarding Michael.

        I think we can all agree that Michael’s talent and all his god given gifts were a blessing that millions appreciate. I love all the positive articles on Michael. But also, we have to acknowledge that like it or not, those hateful allegations will also colour others’ perceptions of him. The fact that you always cover the negative stories attached to his name in such an intelligent and dignified manner is needed. As you probably know, Aphrodite Jones has let it be known that she has a “question” now about the ’93 allegations – a total turnaround from what she had published in her book. She discussed it on the King Jordan show on November 5th. So although the positive about Michael should always be front and centre, I also believe we have to let the truth about his innocence also be discussed – no matter how unpleasant that may be due to the treachery that was done to him. As you say, Raven, you get a lot of new fans who likely don’t know the torture Michael went through and your site is one the best places to do this.

        1. I didn’t get to listen to that King Jordan radio show interview with Jones when it aired. I had planned to listen to it today. She said that? I am wondering if this came about in light of the Wade Robson allegations. A lot of people were curious as to why she had remained silent when he came forward. I figured that she would be asked about it on this show, which was one reason I was wanting especially to listen to it today.

          If so, that is a very flimsy reason to change her position if you ask me. Unless she has actual, new evidence that has given her reason to see the case in a new light, basing such a comment off of Wade Robson’s allegations makes no sense, as he has yet to offer one shred of proof other than his word-which is good for absolutely nothing. I am very disappointed in her if that is the case. However, I probably need to listen to the interview to get the full context of what was said before I comment any further.

          1. Hi Raven;

            Sorry for being vague on Jones’ statments regarding ’93.

            In fact, she does NOT believe Robson. She is questioning the’93 allegations only. She has not changed her position on the Arvizos or Francia and thinks Robson is after $$$$$. She is basing it on June Chandler’s testimony (if you can believe that). She says she sat just feet from her during the trial and felt “unnerved” by her testimony, which completely contradicts what she wrote about. She is also of the opionion that Michael was “in love” with J Chandler. Why she is saying this now is completely baffling.

          2. I remember asking Aphrodite Jones in 2010 about her thoughts on June Chandler. I wanted her insight on the rumors of this alleged affair between Michael and June. Her response to that idea was pretty quick and to the point-and very dismissive. She made it clear that she believed June wanted an affair with Michael, but that he was not reciprocal to her. However, she never implied (then) any belief that Michael was in love with Jordan. But in light of what she’s saying now, I’m inclined to think she must have been believing this even then.

            It sounds like, after having gone to the far left in her very public defense of Michael-and having maintained that position for many years- she is taking a few steps back towards the middle. But I still wonder why, when neither her book Conspiracy, nor her numerous interviews since then, have given any indication of this position up until now. After all, she is a journalist and no one would think it odd if she publicly maintained doubts about the ’93 case, even while defending him against the Arvizo case. Yet she has never made any such statements until now. I find that very odd.

          3. Wow! Such a revelation from a staunch supporter is very odd indeed and very un-nerving. Those factions that have aggressively asserted Michael’s guilt will surely use Ms. Jones recent comments as potentially new ammunition against Michael. Of course such individuals will also use this as a way of dismissing Jones book with even more vigor. That siad, I have to admit that I also have not heard the interview so my comment here is based on what I’ve read here only.

      2. Raven said, “As to what those readers may think when they see heated debates like this, in all honesty, they are probably just apt to think, wow, this is a blog that has life! And this is a subject that readers are very passionate about. I don’t think we should have any reason to fear being passionate about such a complex subject as Michael Jackson and the life he lived. The fact that so many are still interested-and care enough to debate these topics so fiercely-speaks volumes.”

        Well said and so true. Raven, as other have said, you have done an excellent job of keeping this blog balanced. Sometimes we do get mired in the darker sides of the story but it always comes back around to the positives of Michael’s story. That’s why we are here in the first place. Ladypurr’s comment from November 8, 2013 at 8:52 pm, is a perfect example of that…:-)

      3. “Over the next few months, I’m going to be doing a lot more field work and investigative reporting. For example, I’m planning a road trip this spring to try to track down the story of Michael’s racial beating in Alabama (I live in Alabama, but where the incident was said to have occurred is still a good 4-5 hour drive) and to try to talk to some of those witnesses. The venture may or may not produce any results (but as they say, you never know until you try). I think this trip will also give me an opportunity to connect more with Michael’s early roots, because I’ll be visiting Katherine’s home town where she spent her first four years (and where many of her relatives still live) as well”.

        That will be an interesting perspective ,to learn more about Michaels family background and his own experiences. Except from a little part in the homevideo where they visit Alabama and interviews with Ms Jackson, I have not read much about it. Looking forward to your report.

  22. Ravens post is titled: How much is a humans life worth.
    That is a subject that will generate discussion and disagreement.
    If the subject was about his charities or music that is what we would be discussing. One does not exclude the other.
    We can choose what we engage in and avoid the subjects we are uncomfortable with.

  23. Why did Michael agree to doing that televised statement from Neverland, where he described the strip search, anyway? If it was so horrifying for him to even speak of the matter (and who would blame him if it was?), then why didn’t he decline to do it?

    1. I think the answer to that question is easy. He was angry, and he WANTED people to know what had happened. He was hoping the forces would rally around him, and to some extent that did happen. Polls taken in the immediate aftermath of that televised statement showed a dramatic increase in support for him. Just as my sister had commented, that statement gave the impression of someone being very brave enough to speak out against a horrible injustice that had been done to him. Michael was also smart enough to know that providing those details of the strip search would simultaneously accomplish two goals-proving his innocence (by letting the public know just how thoroughly the search was carried out), and rallying support for a fellow human being who had been subjected to such a horrific ordeal.

  24. I feel some here are so caught up in who knows the most, that “heated debate ” is a euphemism , and seem to assume that any one else who doesn’t like the idea of hanging Michael out to dry and dissecting every little detail ,whilst trying to score points off each other, is perhaps in some fantasy state of denial. Not true. Of course we need to face up to those dreadful things that happened to him. Of course some will want to to debate.. Of course that will sometimes cause disagreements (but hopefully not anger towards each other.. which I have sensed here). To me , this is the best blog around. As has been repeated so often .. Raven’s research and presentation is always fantastic. and I for one am grateful for all she does and can’t wait to read her posts , because they are so factual and level-headed. I have learned so much from this site because she allows us to share our differing points of view and knowledge without censor . It has caused me to investigate further the things I was unaware of. It has re-enforced my own belief in Michael Jackson, and that is simply he was a decent human being who was treated very shabbily.. so yes those of us who feel that it is of benefit (to him) can debate the “dark side” of his life.. but I do wonder sometimes if he was standing looking over our shoulders he might say ” Hey.. this me you’re talking about !!).

    1. “…but I do wonder sometimes if he was standing looking over our shoulders he might say ” Hey.. this me you’re talking about !!)”

      I actually have that feeling quite a bit with everything I write here, lol. It is also why I can’t help but be amused whenever someone is referred to as a “Michael Jackson expert,” as they do sometimes on those talk shows when they are interviewing someone about him, usually someone who has written a book, or sometimes even myself or fellow bloggers. I always have to laugh because, you know, when we get right down to it, there was only one person who could have ever possibly been an “expert” on Michael Jackson, and that is Michael Jackson. We can write, speculate, theorize, debate, etc till the cows come home, but the one who knew the whole truth-and the only one who will ever know the whole truth-isn’t here. And even when he was here, he still preferred to keep us guessing most of the time.

      Sometimes writing about Michael feels almost like a kind of dance with his spirit. I don’t mean that in a “crazy” sense, as if I really think I’m communicating with him. But sometimes I do feel like I’m channeling him, if that makes sense. There have been times when I have awakened at 3am with this burning, pressing urgency to write something here. I know that is the spirit or essence of him, urging me on because it’s something urgent I feel he wants to be shared ( have had this feeling many times). Other times, it is like pulling teeth and I know those times may be when we are wrestling over certain things. Sometimes I just have to trust my heart and instinct. If it is saying “don’t go there” then I don’t. Just as I would have respected his privacy and confidence in life. I know it is hard to explain without sounding crazy. But my feelings when writing about Michael-and choosing WHAT to write-has never been a case of “oh well, anything goes just because he was a public figure.” Some DO take that approach (obviously, many journalists) but I often think that’s just an excuse to salve a guilty conscience, when in truth, they know they have crossed a boundary that should never have been crossed.

  25. Raven, there’s no need for explanation. We don’t think you’re crazy and frankly, I believe that Michael DOES communicate with those who possess open minds and hearts, willing to be still and listen to him. Makes me chuckle when you say, “There have been times when I have awakened at 3am with this burning, pressing urgency to write something here. I know that is the spirit or essence of him, urging me on because it’s something urgent I feel he wants to be shared ( have had this feeling many times).” You, and others who feel that “urgent” need, are given a rare glimpse into what it was like for him to be constantly “receiving”, feeling, and driven to create and inform. No wonder sleep was such a rare thing for him. He had no time clock and for those who are especially gifted and so evolved consciously, time really has little importance in the greater scheme of life. In wanting to know more about Michael, you have been a source of incredible knowledge. I welcome ALL topics (but naughtily admit that I’m missing your Michael–Fom Head to Toe series 😉 ). He was wonderfully human and innocent. Anyone with a spark of interest in who he was is going to be delighted to read what you share–and I mean that sincerely! Debate is as necessary to freedom as breathing. But we must all realize at some point that our egos may be interfering with rational discourse. What he endured during that strip search was beyond anything that could come close to necessary (and HUMANE!) But to argue about things we really aren’t certain of makes little sense now. I’m more concerned about those within the assembly of the TII tragedy (yes! it was!) and those nagging questions, Who? What? Where? When? and Why? STILL hold so far too many undisclosed facts. I say this because I’m haunted as to why Michael chose (or did he?) to engage in another concert tour when he was 50, didn’t really want to tour, and his heart and mind were elsewhere, focused on film production and his own acting. I see these popular artists recognizing that a resident show in Vegas is more lucrative and less stressful than taking your show on the road. Celine Dion has a fabulous vegas show. Michael spoke with her at length before the TII concert idea to explore the possibility. Mark Wishna, a powerful Vegas figure, tried to get him to agree to such a venture. Now Brittany Spears has her own show! I go over this in my mind and it kills me. If only the details could have been worked out. All of us, ALL of us might have had the rarest opportunity of our lifetimes to see Michael perform in Vegas. It would have been my dream come true. It would have allowed him to “connect” on a new and special way with his audience, his legion of fans all over the world. He would have made millions, erased his debt, been able to spend time with his children and STILL pursued his lifelong dream of being an actor and producer of unforgettable films. What power did some very dark individuals wield over him? What forces were at work to quietly and cleverly dismantle the most powerful, influential, and beloved human being on the planet?

    That’s what I want to know because when THAT truth comes out, the missing pieces to this ugly puzzle will then fall into place. It won’t bring him back but dammit, we’ll know the truth. The AEG discovery pulled back the curtain on the beautiful, vulnerable human side of Michael. But it failed to give us the truth and it failed to hold those who are really accountable and to blame for his senseless death.

    Thanks, Raven!

    Don’t stop!
    (Susan T)

  26. My sentiments exactly Susan – couldn’t have said it better myself. I don’t comment so often because often the discussion gets beyond me, and to be honest i don’t want to argue. However, I really appreciate this blog Raven, so please keep up the good work. I would also love the Michael Head to Toe segment to come up again soon – I just loved it.

    I also believe that Michael’s ‘spirit’ is very much in the world, and that he does know what is going on, and is able to communicate with open minds. I have had several dreams about him since his death, and not being a fan until 10 months after he died I find this incredible, and wonderful I must say. These dreams are very vivid – i can still remember them – and when i analyse them, i can see just how important and relevant they are to my life.

    It is blogs like this one and Dancing With the Elephant and Vindicating Michael that help to keep his spirit alive in the world amongst his fans, so please keep up the good work, because I feel the nay-sayers will not win in the end. It is our love for Michael that will overcome in the end, we just need to “be faithful ……..and fight til the end”.

  27. Can someone enlighten me why it is wrong to discuss a stripsearch that did happen to Michael , in the context of the article ‘how much is a human life worth’, But it is OK to dissect Michaels anatomy and put it under a microscope for sheer entertainment, fun, pleasure …….you name it. I have my opinion about it but should I tell the host or the visitors like myself what they are allowed to talk about and what not ?
    No, I just stay away from the subject.
    But I find the multiple standards and the liberty people allow themself to tell others what to do or not on someone elses property, interesting indeed.

  28. Michael Jackson is leading the pack in Vanity Fair’s open to all voting contest for “best cover” in it’s 100 year history. Artistically it’s easy to see why. Even if you’re not a fan, his cover is clearly superior to any of the others in its history. Wouldn’t it be ironic if he won–with that magazine’s history of viciously slandering him?

    Please go on line and vote. His cover rightly deserves to win. I’d love to see Vanity Fair eat crow on this–and then go eff itself.

    1. Haha

      Yes! Vanity Fair indeed! Poetic justice! What could be better than to celebrate the 100th anniversary of Vanity Fair with a Michael Jackson cover.

      But have you noticed? They’ve extended the voting deadline. Because Michael is in the lead, I presume. It’s not Florida and its not a ballot recount, so why extend? It’s just a stupid magazine poll…

      They thought they had finished him off long ago and now it seems they’ve got a problem. Bwahahahaaa

      vote people vote!

  29. I’m completely reconciled to the idea that Murray will go out and do interviews and books and attempt to profit.

    I say, bring it on. Nothing could be better, at this point, that for that fool to go blathering his idiocy in prime time. He is not credible and the media will turn on him. They will destroy him eventually and the general public will get a clue too.

    It’s a contrarian stance I take, I know, but at this point.there HAS TO BE a huge heaping helping of karma awaiting. The tide always turns. Its just a matter of time.

    Truth runs marathons!!!

Leave a Reply