Did Evan Chandler Coach Jordan Chandler? A Closer Look at the 1993 Allegations
▲ 22 r/DeconstructingMJ+1 crossposts

Did Evan Chandler Coach Jordan Chandler? A Closer Look at the 1993 Allegations

What happened?

On July 16th 1993, Evan sedated his son Jordan with a drug to pull out his baby tooth. During this procedure, he blackmailed and repeatedly pressured the boy into admitting Jackson molested him.

https://preview.redd.it/vvs804kkegah1.png?width=720&format=png&auto=webp&s=41a648023f2f70f9617c3142b6b265aa48427050

​According to their book All That Glitters, Evan repeatedly questioned Jordan, but after the allegations broke, the boy told child psychiatrist Dr Richard Gardner in an interview in October of 1993 that he was asked by Evan only once, leaving out the part where his father badgered him and threatened to destroy Jackson unless he got the desired response.

https://preview.redd.it/9trodwqlegah1.png?width=720&format=png&auto=webp&s=6ededdd4fd1234a929a32babbb7a090066ed5c38

Evan imagined the same sex acts Jordan later would accuse Michael of kissing and masturbation after lying about bugging Jordan’s bedroom.

https://preview.redd.it/rq0nd7hnegah1.png?width=640&format=png&auto=webp&s=74dd3e3af7da80a99adb35dc47783d9696d84cf3

We either believe this is a remarkable coincidence or accept that Evan coached the boy to falsely accuse Jackson of committing those acts later on.

In a taped conversation between Evan Chandler and his ex-wife’s husband, Dave Schwartz, Evan accuses Jackson of using power and fame to seduce his son Jordan and ex-wife, June, and blaming them for breaking up the family.

https://preview.redd.it/fb3jf8zoegah1.png?width=720&format=png&auto=webp&s=b162cc6b219e1c983c0ed2bee061f042154879c3

​In the interview with Dr Gardner, Jordan told the doctor that after revealing to his father the alleged abuse, they never spoke about it afterwards.

Evan also claimed the same thing.

https://preview.redd.it/me4e12fqegah1.png?width=720&format=png&auto=webp&s=adc096cf5286abf6bf3ced293cfbb53bbdde65ee

​However, in the meeting with Dr Gardner, Jordan’s statements almost verbatim reflect his father’s views.

https://preview.redd.it/8g48abiregah1.png?width=640&format=png&auto=webp&s=92007295783bf6d8cbdb9088e7906225a8cc358b

Experts on deception and coaching have noted that this behaviour is common in cases of false allegations. When coached to make accusations, the programmed individual often repeats specific phrases or ideas their coach has implanted. This can signify that the allegations are not based on the individual’s experiences or memories but rather on instructions.

Ironically, this snippet comes from a book by Dr. Gardner, a man the Chandlers acknowledged as the foremost expert on false CSA allegations.

https://preview.redd.it/8fbwuuotegah1.png?width=720&format=png&auto=webp&s=23f0db5ad258b5a0c37767f0136c41e7be9427e3

https://preview.redd.it/57x1wfgvegah1.png?width=720&format=png&auto=webp&s=4d3bfa4c14212e43bbecc163217c13ed0c4dba13

So how would this parroting of his father have occurred if Jordan and Evan had never discussed anything after the reveal?

During Jackson’s trial in 2005, the media leaked many specifics of the Chandler case to the public, including the settlement.

However, the leaks only revealed the interview between Jordan and Dr Gardner; the doctor’s interview with Evan and conclusions about whether he detected signs of coaching and false allegations remain out of the public’s reach to this day. How convenient for the Chandlers and the media, who all financially benefited from perpetuating the mysteries surrounding this case.

A coached child wasn’t just a one-off event in Jackson’s life.

In 1995, a Canadian boy accused Jackson of molestation. His allegations were so detailed, as was his knowledge of Jackson’s homes and employees.

https://preview.redd.it/y6dyez2yegah1.png?width=480&format=png&auto=webp&s=a2fbee39fb4bc9060055ab475ff0d6bb4eaabb07

The police found him believable. But it was a scam. The boy never even met Jackson. Convicted child molester Rodney Allen was the mastermind behind the plot [who knew Victor Guiterrez and said he was a pedophile too]

https://preview.redd.it/w3ljdgmzegah1.png?width=720&format=png&auto=webp&s=683d46848c7da33fb73e2b385d3727e8c85a6d92

Police also charged the boy with a public mischief offence.

Nobody accused Jordan of making up the allegations on his own, but the case in Canada demonstrates that someone can coach a boy his age to lie about molestation convincingly.

Did Evan Chandler Have Evidence of Michael Jackson’s Guilt?

In the recording between Chandler and Schwartz, Evan claimed to possess evidence of Jackson’s guilt locked up in a safe and intended to release it if Jackson didn’t attend the meeting.

https://preview.redd.it/dnepihk6fgah1.png?width=720&format=png&auto=webp&s=a7ac2d905a75d02e11cfe14563ccd1782b8b52ae

What was this evidence? In a nutshell: Despite Evan bragging to Dave that he would show the evidence on a screen in court, it was nothing damning overall.

Evan handed the “evidence” over to his brother. Court reviews discovered it comprised newspaper and magazine clippings, deposition transcripts, court pleadings, and roughly six to eight hours of tape recordings.

https://preview.redd.it/ep7baab9fgah1.png?width=720&format=png&auto=webp&s=3ef847a7c9318661b39fe6c91cd4862b5d2a45a4

Again, nothing damning towards Jackson.

Also worth pointing out is despite sounding so sure and having this “evidence”, Evan still admitted he had no idea what was happening between Jackson and his son.

https://preview.redd.it/7z5k9njbfgah1.png?width=720&format=png&auto=webp&s=1c93b7d6e012137ca2bdc6d7d4187f72d405d9e1

During the conversation, Evan flipped back and forth between two stances. On the one hand, he confidently asserted that he possessed evidence of Jackson causing harm to Jordan and threatened to expose this evidence. And on the other hand, Evan attempted to downplay the situation. He suggested that he wanted to have a discussion to determine if his suspicions were incorrect and if a resolution with Jackson could be reached.

https://preview.redd.it/2woue2edfgah1.png?width=720&format=png&auto=webp&s=1f55473f3416597d07791fe548cc758fca819be3

​Versus

https://preview.redd.it/yl12vc4hfgah1.png?width=720&format=png&auto=webp&s=e1aa25b795cf18109c6024019279eeed80f09997

If you knew someone was harming your child, what kind of solution would you want to make with the abuser?

Also, would you hug your child’s alleged abuser as Evan Chandler did?

https://preview.redd.it/2l1u2njlfgah1.png?width=720&format=png&auto=webp&s=440aabacfdae3e9006f07bd03a7b00f04d7d513f

Honourable mention, straight from Ray Chandlers book. Reminder that Evan Chandler first approached MJ prior to going public with the allegations with a 20 million dollar film production deal, and that MJ had multiple opportunities to pay out Evan and silence the family with a NDA and instead chose to fight the case.

“Had Michael paid the twenty million dollars demanded of him in August, rather than the following January, he might have spent the next ten years as the world’s most famous entertainer, instead of the world’s most infamous child molester"

https://medium.com/@Smitherhands/did-this-man-coach-michael-jacksons-1993-accuser-78bb49a18304

reddit.com
u/sardi8 — 5 days ago

how to deal with traction alopecia as a hijabi with 4c hair

I’ve been using minoxidil and i can’t tell if its working. The problem is regardless of if it works or not, I’m still going to have to be pulling back my hair to fit it under hijab. I have thick type 4 hair and I’ve been trying to leave my hair as is underneath the hijab and just in a loose bun but it genuinely looks crazy😭😭

The bump doesn’t go down unless i pull and tug to fit it into a tight bun or braid it back which only makes traction alopecia worse. Plus even when i do get over how insane it looks and just slap on the hijab it’s still causing friction and causing tension at the edges of my hair so the minoxidil just feels redundant. helpp. Is there some undercap or something that solves the issue. Taking it off isn’t currently a option for me

reddit.com
u/sardi8 — 6 days ago

mj watching janet arvizo get arrested after his trial

sneddon, the fbi + the lapd investigating my goat for 10 yrs, carrying out multiple property raids n putting him thru a 4 month trial to find a whole lot of absolute nothing but Janet Silly goose Arvizo talking for 5 minutes on the stand n accidentally admitting to criminal activity will never fail to make me laugh😭😭how was the 2005 trial real

u/sardi8 — 7 days ago

E-Reader with no page turning lag?

I like to read my books on my laptop as a pdf, but lately i’ve been looking into E-readers. I tried out my sister old kindle and I couldn’t bear the lag between each page, or how slow it was if i tried to go back or how the e-ink wasn’t really clear. I even tried to contact amazon about it but it was out of the warranty period.

Anyone have any recommendations for a e-reader with a smooth interface with no lag, delay, issues with e-ink or slowness please? I don’t have a particular budget in mind either i’m prepared to make a investment

reddit.com
u/sardi8 — 7 days ago

Vincent Amen exposed on his own website: Frank Cascio denies that the magazines belonged to MJ

Nah this is crazy😭

Vincent Amen's own website has the correspondence with the NE that Frank denied that the CD catalog belonged to MJs and that Frank actually bought it for his own use ("Doesn't matter as far as we are concerned..." )

I cannot believe they put that in the documentary with no sources and people are just eating it up. We're meant to believe that despite the fact that MJ had extensive raids conducted across multiple properties and there being no "CP dvd magazine orders" ever being found in his possession and despite the fact that Sneddon offered Vincent immunity to reveal what he had about the allegations and he never mentioned anything about these magazines that these items are now somehow MJs bc Vinnie says so?? Netflix is a joke

https://preview.redd.it/9saxqzit5e5h1.png?width=314&format=png&auto=webp&s=d795ac04747788de7be8c19501bb3f88892ff48f

reddit.com
u/sardi8 — 1 month ago

Neverland Raid (1993 & 2003): What Was Found in the Books Seized at Neverland

In 1993, law enforcement raided Neverland and associated properties, seizing computers, videotapes, and personal documents, and found no child pornography, no illegal material, and nothing sufficient to support criminal charges. A decade later, the 2003 raid was larger still, as 70 investigators executed the warrant, seizing more than 80 video recordings and 16 hard drives across Jackson’s properties, all examined by the FBI’s Computer Analysis Response Team, which found no incriminating material and no search history for illegal content on any of them. Two separate grand juries found insufficient evidence to indict, and in 2005 a criminal jury acquitted Jackson on all fourteen counts. The only items the prosecution could produce across both raids were two legal art photography books [which are currently available in the Library of Congress], seized in 1993 and held in prosecution custody for twelve years before being submitted as evidence in the 2005 trial. The context of MJ’s ownership of the books is explained directly below, and an analysis of what the books contained and media framing of them is explained further down. Sources are linked at the end.

Firstly, before we get into an analysis of the books' material and the biased media framing in regards to it, it is important to note that the books' NAMBLA association was not known when it was first published and became commercially available. Indeed, the books received widespread commendation and were made available to universities and could be purchased at book fairs [cited further down].

In addition, The Boy: A Photographic Essay was fan-sent, and the second book, with MJ's inscription on the cover, Boys Will Be Boys,was written by the same author. These books could be purchased together and were also stored together, and it is therefore likely that both books were sent by the same fan.

MJ's inscription is something frequently mentioned by his detractors, and inscribed on the cover of Boys Will Be Boys reads: "Look at the true spirit of happiness and joy in these boys' faces. This is the spirit of boyhood, a life I never had and will always dream of. This is the life I want for my children."

However, rather than the sexual lusting of a pedophile, the inscription documents grief about a stolen childhood and a desire to do better for his own children, which is consistent with everything publicly documented about MJ's abusive upbringing. This reading is not a defence invented after the fact; it is the natural response the book itself was designed to provoke. Reviewers at the time wrote about Boys Will Be Boys that "This book reminds me of my youth growing up in the south and the pleasures of being free. Nostalgic and innocent. Those were the days. They don't exist anymore. How sad." Mainstream newspaper reviewer Elizabeth A. McSherry, writing at the time of publication for The Boy: A Photographic Essay, which had similar photos, described it in almost identical terms: "It catches the joy and innocence of boyhood... if the adult would like to steal away from the world and its distractions... I would suggest that he sit down with this wonderful book and dream quietly away the remnant of a troubled life." [screenshots cited further below]. MJ's inscription and McSherry's review, as well as many other acclaimed reviewers, have the same emotional tones of nostalgia and longing for the fleeting nature of childhood, and rather than being pedophilic, all his inscription shows is a man responding to a book exactly the way its contemporary reviewers said any adult reader would.

We also know he can't have accessed the books since 1991 because when police raided Neverland with 70 investigators and searched and found the keys to his other locked belongings, they could not find the key to the locked cabinet containing the books. In fact, not a single employee at Neverland had the key in the first place, and current staff had to direct them to former employee Blanca Francia [who, by her own testimony, had not worked there in over two years] to open the locked filing cabinet the books were in amongst other hoarded fan gifts. As we know, MJ rarely stayed at Neverland for too long, as he was always touring, travelling, or away on business, so all his belongings and fan gifts were always sent back to Neverland. A second key would have therefore have either been on his person and found in the sudden strip search he was subjected to, or been found amongst his belongings at Neverland. No cabinet key was found on his person, none was found among his belongings despite 70 officers spending enough time to go through a 10,000 book collection, and not one current employee knew where a key was or could be-the only person who had this key was Blanca Francia, who, again, had not worked at Neverland for 2 years.

So if the contents were something he was actively using, or if he actually cared for those books, he would have kept the key himself or retrieved it off her when she left. But MJ clearly did not care enough about the cabinet or its contents to even remember who had the key. The fact he neither retained the key himself or ensured that access remained with his current employees proves he never cared about the cabinet or its contents, which appear to have been stored away alongside countless other forgotten possessions and fan gifts.

MJ was also not found with any art books of this nature again. Indeed, in the 10 years between the first raid, where the prosecution seized and confiscated the books, and the second raid [the second raid of which he had not anticipated and, according to La Toya's book, thrashed his hotel room when he found out], there wasn't a single bit of material found that was similar or alike, which is extremely at odds with the progressive and compulsive nature of pedophilic behaviour.

Forensic psychiatry and clinical literature on pedophilia consistently document two things: escalation and accumulation. Pedophilic disorder is compulsive by nature. Offenders do not plateau; they acquire more material over time, seek out new victims, and leave increasingly extensive evidence trails. The American Psychiatric Association's DSM-5 characterises it as a persistent pattern, rather than an isolated phase. A decade between two raids of the same property is an enormous window, and the 2003 raid found nothing of this nature. No escalation, no new material, no expanded collection, nothing consistent with a progressive disorder that had allegedly been active since at least 1993. If MJ was a functioning pedophile across that entire decade, the 2003 raid should have produced more, not less. It produced nothing. No physical CP and no internet searches for CP that would show him giving into what would be his escalating urges.

Lastly, his fingerprints were either not found in the contents of the books or weren't tested for, which is strange given the prosecution's intent to prove he'd used nudity as grooming material.

2 raids later and 16 hard drives searched, those 2 art books out of the 10,000 books MJ owned were all the prosecution had to even slightly substantiate the outlandish claim that MJ was a serial child molester. So why did they not test their apparent smoking gun for fingerprints or for the fingerprints of his accusers despite testing his adult heterosexual pornographic material?

The prosecution was trying to claim that MJ was using certain types of material (anything that had nudity [legal adult material included] or anything that could be taken as or misconstrued as “sexual”) as a “grooming method.” If the prosecution was concerned about MJ using material in this realm to “groom” young children, then surely they would want to check the books to see if there were fingerprints belonging to any minors, right?

If they didn't submit results of fingerprint testing as evidence, then either:

a) They tested it and didn't find the fingerprints, or

b) They didn't think art books seized in 1993 and confiscated for 12 years would be important enough in the trial.

So thus far, what the prosecution had as their smoking gun were two fan-sent legal art photo books available in the Library of Congress, locked in a cabinet of fan gifts he hadn't accessed in years because a former employee had the only key, inscribed with language indistinguishable from mainstream critical reviews of the same book, with no fingerprints of MJ or any minor recovered, and found among 10,000 books and an extensive heterosexual pornography collection his fingerprints actually were on. Two raids, 16 hard drives, 70 officers, and $2 million spent on a investigation later, this is the physical evidence the prosecution had to prove he was a serial child rapist.

Now we will look into the obsessive media framing of these books and the information ommited and lied about by the media

A week before jury selection, Dimond "through a source or two" learned that "The Boy: A Photographic Essay" was seized in 1993.

She ran headline w/ video proclaiming it to be "child erotica" according to "connoisseurs on the Internet"A claim that was never made in open court.

https://preview.redd.it/xt0bwf63235h1.png?width=509&format=png&auto=webp&s=587c2e5abb3fc5a0971bbb57d017f5eaa3ec9b68

In the story, Dimond uses an interview w/ retired NYPD investigator to bolster the claim that this mass-published, commercially sold book was somehow "child erotica."

But the involved law enforcement investigators never classified it as such beyond TV publicity & pretrial spin.

There are state & federal cases dating back to the 80s where "child erotica" was distinguished from CP & used as a contributing component in a suspect's investigation. The erotica was distinctively noted during search warrants & seizure summaries.

It never happened in MJ's case.

https://preview.redd.it/nkz1tdv5235h1.png?width=450&format=png&auto=webp&s=c521304f5ec898abfd3a1e3aaa22f46154f30c82

Another famous face in the skewed perception comes from Bill Dworin (a guilter fav including his baseless Chandler claims).

Dworin appeared in another TV hit piece during jury selection and said the book would "become child erotica" IF a person had sexual interest in kids.

https://preview.redd.it/3s8jsjz7235h1.png?width=900&format=png&auto=webp&s=c78cdb6768e776c3bdda6e42f1bb7412000bafda

When Sneddon submitted these books to court in 2005, he omitted a 3rd photo book from the same search w/ boys AND girls playing.

By way of omission (including every other innocuous picture and book at NL) Sneddon tried arguing that the two books demonstrated MJ was boy-obsessed.

https://preview.redd.it/qvkuw33a235h1.png?width=680&format=png&auto=webp&s=738b6a482f80cfdfee177947dd0fd6af2b663723

In TS' motion for books he cites Memro (95) where non-sexual pics "in context of possession" inferred sexual attraction to boys.

But in Memro's case, Menro CONFESSED to wanting to have sex w/ boy(s), disrobe them & other evidence.

MJ's case had nothing beyond two retail books.

https://preview.redd.it/yp13jfob235h1.png?width=1306&format=png&auto=webp&s=d741f884cf2f28e7d7ae0e01f108c6c696a2f15a

In 2005, Dimond purchased copies online. She referred to them regularly & loaned to Nancy Grace for her shows.

On CourtTV, Grace went as far as to refer to the book as "child porn" while holding it to the camera & on HLN said she feared she'd be arrested, while doing it again

https://preview.redd.it/jf9tuhhd235h1.png?width=1592&format=png&auto=webp&s=6908b36fdae883b485f5410e4648c943f82e3002

In 2016 (fake "police files" by RO) headlines egregiously claimed the books were CP found at NL. Any CP would've been an immediate arrest by FBI & new charges filed.

In the purest insane example of media stupidity, here is a headline claiming the book was CP, and also on Amazon.

https://preview.redd.it/jgoc5v5f235h1.png?width=680&format=png&auto=webp&s=ccc2ae52651e4549286d426dcec948d761e2ffc5

The book reignited in 2019 amidst LN, notably from Jacobshagen in a series of impossible tabloid stories. He suddenly claimed MJ gave him an scandalously inscribed copy (years after it was seized from NL).

Like Nancy Grace, he suggested it was CP—while showing it to the cameras.

Dimond was on the same special as Jacobshagen, but instead of rebutting what she knows was a forged book by Jacobshagen she joined in to flaunt her own copies of these books.

A commonality is how guilters seem to gravitate to the same pages.

Dimond has giant bookmarks to flip right to the most "controversial" pages for showing.

Jacobshagen flips to similar pages & on camera "discovers" circles drawn around boys' backsides for added grossness factor

https://preview.redd.it/id363x3h235h1.png?width=680&format=png&auto=webp&s=fe55798280e1865848c30a422e34503d751d5c53

Guilters spam the same images & excerpts endlessly while claiming there are "hundreds of naked & suggestive photos."

A Photographic Essay is 232 pages & over 400 photos.
Boys Will Be Boys is 258 pages & 360 photos.

Both feature dozens of photographers; "slice of life" photos.

https://preview.redd.it/jppazqpj235h1.png?width=1280&format=png&auto=webp&s=6172cfc324f1e986510b055d88b59fadf90f1f7a

https://preview.redd.it/y8l311ok235h1.png?width=360&format=png&auto=webp&s=6074f59e95a250aef8b72781bcdce19b172c7a9e

https://preview.redd.it/arz38fhl235h1.png?width=710&format=png&auto=webp&s=2daf59f06d607be3ef06561eacd98e46d32c4693

So while Sneddon, Dimond, Gace, Jacobshagen and the collective guilter society hand-select very particular photos to imply illicit purposes, healthy humans instead gravitate toward the majority of mid-century photos that candidly capture universal kids studying, playing, working.

https://preview.redd.it/vf8hjzip235h1.png?width=1280&format=png&auto=webp&s=75d127b0878d5551388c709b8ebf2ba02b01e7c6

"The Boy: A Photographic Essay" was sold globally in magazines and newspapers from 1964 through the mid-1970s and was reprinted 4-6 times.

It featured photos from many countries including in promotion of sportswear and companies like Donmoor-Isaacson (American knit shirts).

https://preview.redd.it/5st65i8s235h1.png?width=1280&format=png&auto=webp&s=b4f6b6b5bccdf86766f7d3376676d53e3c0c2c76

Many film memorabilia collectors will also recognize the book for its large series of photographs taken during the filming of the original, extremely popular Lord of the Flies film from 1963.

https://preview.redd.it/adzgl5fu235h1.png?width=1280&format=png&auto=webp&s=929adfb5d16dc6394f80ab4c6744315c36c06d90

The book was well-reviewed by respected editors and clubs, who applauded the variety.

McSherry: "It catches the joy & innocence of boyhood...all over the world. If the adult would like to 'steal away from the world and it's distractions' sit down with this wonderful book..."

https://preview.redd.it/usdeuwrw235h1.png?width=521&format=png&auto=webp&s=1f56e37bbbb9af420d0727611e115f3e643ef6cc

https://preview.redd.it/ut8umclx235h1.png?width=710&format=png&auto=webp&s=be71b3545b8c32259f73328e87161022f13f2b43

This book appeared in university libraries and was also sold at book fairs. It was available in a variety of traditional brick-and-mortar shops including chain stores like Brentanos' and Doubledays'.

It was as commonplace in the 1960s-1970s as any specialized photo essay book.

https://preview.redd.it/xpokh18z235h1.png?width=1280&format=png&auto=webp&s=f00b10d335c52756dde7745552b9d9d90d674fd3

While guilters say these books are "common among pedos" they neglect to mention that troves of actual criminal materials are found alongside them whenever such books are found in pedo raids.

In MJ's case every raid from 1993-2004 and the FBI scrub of hard drives yielded nothing.

https://preview.redd.it/d3f4dmw1335h1.png?width=390&format=png&auto=webp&s=2db4d00050291fa1ae4f68302259b619d239b03b

While Bill Dworin insinuates the books may be deemed "child erotica" depending on owner, in MJ's case everything found was exculpatory.

In '95 Dworin posed as a pedo to catch one; that raid found 36 CP & 45 child erotica pics.

In MJ's case, 0 found despite massive raid efforts.

https://preview.redd.it/brcbttm3335h1.png?width=680&format=png&auto=webp&s=144a2e1841e2755efff4c6a1faa572f68d31eee7

Guilters say MJ kept these books for sexual reasons & had them locked away for secrecy.

In fact the books were unmoved for years, stored w/ other items in a cabinet that he freely gave staff access to. He never moved them or changed the locks even two years after Blanca left.

To underscore a guilter's mindset:

In 05 Dimond read the book's sleeve: "innocence & joy..carefree abandon..the flower of youth."

Her "CSA Dr." pandering to her, interpreted this as "speaking to [people] who want to to deflower these boys."

MJ wasn't the problem, they are.

https://preview.redd.it/19u5y3d5335h1.png?width=680&format=png&auto=webp&s=7e657b3f407c5d8e834c662339d4cf657c392640

Sources

reddit.com
u/sardi8 — 1 month ago

Why MJ settled explained

Key myths debunked [sources are all linked below]

MJ was obsessed with Jordan from the moment he met them and called Jordan 24/7 : It was actually David Schwartz who'd told him you can have the car rental for free [after his car broke down] if you take Jordies number and give him calls here and there since Jordan was a big fan of MJs. MJ already frequently kept in touch with fans from all over the world via phone call so he took the offer and called Jordan once a month across 8 months.

MJ lived with the Chandlers as part of his sinister grooming process: It was June who'd invited him over to their home as a place to recover in April following his scalp surgery a month prior. Their sleeping arrangement-where he slept in the same room as Jordan and his step brother-was greenlit and provided for by June herself. While it isn't clear whether or not they slept in the same bed whilst he was at June's house, it can be assumed that given his well documented habit of loving sleeping on the floor [slept on the floor in his own room at Hayvenhurst, slept in a on the floor cot whilst Corey Feldman was around him and was known to have slept in sleeping bags during these slumber parties] that he didn't sleep in Jordan's bed as June would've mentioned that telling detail in her testimony. Regardless she had access to the room throughout and it was never thought of as predatory grooming but a open, family-inclusive dynamic where she could walk in and out

MJ settled because he was guilty: To summarise what's explained later in this post, MJ and his lawyers tried multiple times to have the criminal case heard before the civil case so why would a guilty man risk a criminal case where he could be arrested and sent to prison if he knew he was guilty? In addition, if he just wanted to "pay off" his accusers and be done with it, why not pay the initial 20 million amount Evan had demanded before he ever took the allegations to court all together?

Ray Chandler, writing in his own brother's defence, admitted on page 128 of All That Glitters: "Had Michael paid the twenty million dollars demanded of him in August, rather than the following January, he might have spent the next ten years as the world's most famous entertainer, instead of the world's most infamous child molester."

His own brother here is admitting that the case was never about seeking justice but about securing film deal and that MJ could've avoided the media circus and copy-cat allegations for years to come by paying the 20 million initially. It was his insistence that they fight it in court that led to him being forced into a civil settlement and that ultimately in the lasting misconception that his settlement is a admission of guilt when the clause he signed explicitly stated that he was not liable of anything, did not admit wrong doing and did not prevent a criminal trial. MJ wanted a criminal trial.

MJ filed a suit against Evan Chandler for extortion and lost: Not true, he filed extortion charges in August 1993, but the DA declined to prosecute them citing Jackson's own team's delay in reporting while simultaneously negotiating. Then on January 24 [before the settlement was even signed] MJs lawyers withdrew the extortion claim as part of the mutual settlement negotiations, where both sides cleared all outstanding claims simultaneously.

Keep in mind after MJs lawyers first filed for extortion, Evans lawyer Rothman withdrew from representing the Chandlers and both he and Chandler hired high profile criminal defence lawyers.

The settlement and the lead up to it explained:

Evan Chandlers relationship with Jackson began as a financial opportunity

Evan Chandler had been largely absent from Jordan's life since divorcing June when the boy was around five years old. He only re-entered the picture when he found out his son had befriended one of the most famous and wealthy people on the planet. Almost immediately, Evan proposed that MJ finance a new wing on his house framing it as a way to let Jackson visit more then floated a 50/50 film production deal [his real passion was screenwriting]. Jackson declined both. Actress Carrie Fisher, who was his dental patient at the time, wrote in her 2011 memoir Shockaholic that Evan would "go on and on" about his son's friendship with MJ and made the disturbing remark: "You know, my son is very good looking" with what she described as a suggestive raise of the eyebrows. She wrote that he was "letting me know that he had this valuable thing that Michael Jackson wanted, and it happened to be his son." Fisher added she never believed MJ was capable of the abuse he was accused of.

Evan was angry MJ wasn't returning his calls or showed interest in his business ideas

On a secretly recorded phone call on July 8, 1993, before any formal allegation existed Jordan's stepfather David Schwartz recorded Evan laying out exactly what he intended to do and why he intended to do it. He told Schwartz that MJ stopped returning his calls- " I respected him and everything else for what he is, you know. There was no reason why he had to stop calling me. He could have called me". He admits in that same call that he is not sure of his suspicions about MJ – he goes on to speak of his ‘imagination that kills’ and that he ‘was led’ to believe certain things about MJ but he truly “had no idea what was going on” . He goes on to call MJ "evil" not so much because of his suspicions of molestation but because he thinks MJ is breaking up a family and it sounds alot like his ire towards MJ stems from realising MJ did not want to do screenplay business with him despite being generous to his ex-wife June. In any case, he goes on to tell Schwartz he had hired "the nastiest son of a bitch I could find" as his lawyer. He says: "If I go through with this, I win big time. There's no way I lose. I've checked that out inside out", that the family would "be destroyed forever" and "Michael's career will be over." When Schwartz directly asked whether he thought MJ had actually done something to Jordan, Evan replied: "I don't know. I have no idea." And when Schwartz asked whether any of this would help Jordan, Evan said: "It's irrelevant to me." [Schwartz-Chandler tape transcript, July 8, 1993]

Jordan himself had denied anything happened repeatedly to his father

Throughout this period, Jordan consistently defended MJ. According to Ray Chandler's own account in All That Glitters (2004) Jordan refused to corroborate his father's suspicions when Evan confronted him directly. For eg "Hey, are you and Michael doin' it?" Jordie reacts with disgust -*"That's disgusting! I'm not into that. Jordans alleged conversation with Pellicano after as well reiterates this same sentiment that MJ had in no way, shape or form been inappropriate with him. Evan then sedated Jordan on July 16, 1993 under the guise of pulling a baby tooth, and after Jordan came around, attempted to extract a confession through what Ray Chandler describes as threats and coercion, lying to Jordan about having bugged his bedroom [to which Jordan was said in the book to have stared at him blanky], that he was going to "destroy Michael," and that it would be "all your fault." Jordan eventually gave what Ray describes as an "almost inaudible yes" and then, critically, Evan claims they "never talked about it again" and that he asked no further questions. He had, in his own brother's words, heard "all he needed to hear." [All That Glitters, pp. 90–92]

What makes this even more telling is that Evan had already obtained a letter from psychiatrist Dr. Mathis Abrams on July 15 [the day before the sedation] stating that "reasonable suspicion would exist that sexual abuse may have occurred." Dr. Abrams had never met Jordan or MJ. The letter was based entirely on a hypothetical scenario Evan and his lawyer presented to him whilst Jordan was still denying MJ acted inappropriately. Evan later used this letter as a "negotiating tool."

The demands made by Chandler

On August 4, 1993, Evan and Jordan met Michael Jackson and his PI Anthony Pellicano at the Westwood Marquis Hotel. Evan greeted Jackson [the man he had been telling Schwartz he was going to destroy] with a hug, patting him on the back "like an old friend." [All That Glitters, p. 102]. Pellicano later remarked '"If I believed somebody molested my kid and I got that close to him, I'd be on death row right now."

After reading the Abrams letter aloud, the meeting broke up and Evan and his lawyer invited Pellicano to Rothman's office, where they demanded $20 million, structured as four screenplays at $5 million each.

MJ refused. Pellicano countered with $1 million for three screenplays- deliberately structured, Pellicano later confirmed, to create a paper trail of the Chandlers negotiating for money, i.e., to document extortion. [Mary A. Fischer, "Was Michael Jackson Framed?" GQ, October 1994] Evan rejected it expecting more. MJ then lowered the offer to $350,000. Evan's lawyer tried to reinstate the $1 million offer; Jackson refused again. He had multiple opportunities to pay and prevent this from going public. He chose not to each time.

Then on August 17 on the very day a court order required Evan to return Jordan to his mother June, who had sole legal custody, and on the same day that Evans lawyer had rejected the 350k offer, Evan took Jordan to Dr. Abrams instead. The mandatory reporting laws did the rest: Abrams notified authorities, the criminal investigation began, and Evan retained control of his son.

Ray Chandler, writing in his own brother's defence, admitted on page 128 of All That Glitters: "Had Michael paid the twenty million dollars demanded of him in August, rather than the following January, he might have spent the next ten years as the world's most famous entertainer, instead of the world's most infamous child molester."

Read that sentence carefully. The accuser's own uncle is confirming that the outcome, the investigation, the allegations becoming public, and everything was contingent on whether MJ had paid the 20m Evan initially demanded. His own brother is inadvertently admitting this was a extortion attempt and not a father trying to seek justice for his son.

The searches found nothing.

Police raided Neverland and multiple other properties. An LAPD source told the Los Angeles Times on August 27, 1993: "the search warrant didn't result in anything that would support a criminal filing." Dozens of children who had spent time with Jackson were interviewed [including many who were subjected to aggressive and misleading questioning] and they all insisted that MJ never acted inappropriately. A December 20, 1993 strip search photographed Jackson's body for comparison with Jordan's description; early Reuters and USA Today reports cited law enforcement sources saying the photos did not match, and Jackson's 2009 autopsy confirmed he was not circumcised which directly contradicting Jordan's reported description of him as circumcised.

The legal loophole MJ and his lawyers tried to fight

In California at the time, both a civil and criminal proceeding could run simultaneously, and the Chandlers, having chosen civil attorney Larry Feldman specifically because they wanted "a quick, quiet and highly profitable settlement" [All That Glitters, p. 167] rather than a criminal trial, filed a $30 million civil suit in September 1993. Feldman won a Motion for Trial Preference, invoking a California rule giving priority to cases involving children under 14 (Jordan turned 14 in January 1994). Civil trial was set for March 21, 1994.

MJs legal team vehmently fought this. They filed motions arguing the civil trial should wait until after the criminal matter was resolved and cited Pacers, Inc. v. Superior Court, which held that a defendant is entitled to a stay in civil proceedings when both arise from the same conduct. They lost. Per Geraldine Hughes who was legal secretary to Barry Rothman, Evan's original attorney, and who documented what she witnessed - that Jackson "lost all four motions." Hughes wrote: "The District Attorney's office was operating, with the blessings of the Court, in violation of Michael Jackson's constitutional rights, and the Court was weighing heavily in favour of the 13-year-old boy." [Geraldine Hughes, Redemption, 2004]

The reason this mattered so much: in a civil trial, MJ would have been compelled to give a full deposition, something he could not refuse without consequence, unlike in criminal proceedings where the Fifth Amendment protects him from self-incrimination. Everything he said in that deposition would have been available to prosecutors building a criminal case. The civil burden of proof is also only "preponderance of the evidence" (greater than 50% likelihood), far lower than the criminal "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard. A civil loss could then prejudice any criminal jury. And the rules of evidence in civil proceedings are far more relaxed, making it riskier for any defendant regardless of innocence.

MJs business advisors [keeping in mind that MJ was generating hundreds of million dollars a year] recommended settlement to protect both their criminal defence and MJs career. Tom Mesereau, who was not Jackson's 1993 lawyer but defended him at the 2005 criminal trial and knows the case better than almost anyone, has said on the record that MJ told him settling was "the biggest mistake he ever made" and that he should have fought it in the civil anyway, even if it meant their entire defence would've been exposed to the criminal lawyers. Mesereau has also said the decision came from people who "intended to earn millions of dollars from his record and music promotions and did not want negative publicity from these lawsuits interfering with their profits." [Tom Mesereau, public statement, 2004]

The settlement was not an admission of guilt and did not stop the criminal case.

The January 25, 1994 settlement contained an explicit no-admission-of-guilt clause. LA DA Gil Garcetti stated publicly: "The criminal investigation of singer Michael Jackson is ongoing and will not be affected by the announcement of the civil case settlement." Feldman said: "Nobody's bought anybody's silence." The document itself preserved Jordan's right to testify in any criminal proceeding. [AP/Deseret News, January 1994]

Two separate grand juries [ one in Santa Barbara County and one in Los Angeles County] then heard the prosecutions evidence. Neither indicted Jackson. Keep in mind that the Chandler's were still cooperating with the criminal case at this point and had provided information and were willing to testify across a 5 month window, from January to July 1994. The criminal case formally closed on September 22, 1994, after Jordan informed investigators in July that he would not testify. Garcetti confirmed: "We have a very important witness who has told us, 'I am sorry, I do not want to and will not testify.'" [New York Times, September 22, 1994]

The Chandlers had the money and they were now done.

Ironically this prompted California changed to close the legal loophole that allowed the Chandlers to profit first.

Sneddon later confirmed on the record that California introduced new legislation as a direct result of this case, specifically to close the loophole that had allowed a civil payout to precede and effectively neutralise criminal cooperation. [AP/Linda Deutsch, November 20, 2003] The law made it possible for prosecutors to intervene in civil proceedings and removed the financial incentive that had allowed the Chandlers to take the money and walk away from a criminal trial.

So if MJ was guilty:

Why did two separate grand juries [whilst the Chandlers were still cooperating] find insufficient evidence to indict him on anything?

Why did Evan Chandler say his son's welfare was "irrelevant to me" on tape, before a single allegation was formally made?

What kind of father responds to believing his child has been sexually abused by demanding $20 million structured as a film deal which-curiously- was the exact same business arrangement Jackson had already refused him?

Why did Jackson refuse to pay in August 1993 when he had EVERY opportunity to make this disappear quietly and only settled five months later after losing the legal battle to have the criminal trial heard first?

And if the Chandlers wanted justice, why did they stop cooperating with the criminal investigation the moment the money cleared which left Sneddon without a witness after five months of finding nothing to charge independently?

Sources:

u/sardi8 — 1 month ago

netflix doc drops in 2 days n im genuinely worried

As a renewed fan of MJ since the biopic i’ve been doing a lot of research into his life and subsequently the allegations and most of the search results that turn up in regards to anything MJ related are from #that subreddit. Like dozens of answers n posts related to anything about the accusations, about his relationships with kids to his own kids to fans to his relationship with his blackness and there is ZERO pushback.

I tried to correct someone there who was saying he bleached his skin to be white by saying he had vitiligo (something that is validated in his autopsy report?) n got banned 💀It’s so frustrating seeing the blatant hypocrisy there too, for eg anyone in support of MJ is not credible n money motivated but anyone against him is obviously meant to be 100% believed ; not believing Latoyas statements in support of MJ post recantation but the Cascios and Wade Robsons completely changed accounts are taken as gospel

Regardless,following the release of the biopic their visitor numbers multiplied exponentially n it’s bc of their approach of spamming posts about MJs life so when ppl research they inevitably stumble across their page n read their debunked claims with nothing to challenge it since they ban n delete anything that questions their narrative.

Given the release of the netflix documentary soon, the exact same will happen but amplified-people will try to do their own research, will be bombared with the biased, debunked search results from their subreddit n come to believe it.

I think we need an FAQ series- thorough, cited posts targeting the stuff people are actually Googling right now. Why he settled, what his relationships with children actually looked like, the credibility and financial issues with his accusers, what these sleepovers consisted of, what the Neverland raids actually uncovered, his relationships with women and just overall how the pattern of allegations always coincided with financial disputes. The information to counter it all does exist and is sitting in the wiki but people have to stumble across a post from here during their research first.

Anyways im still deep in the rabbit hole myself so ill post stuff as i find it but if anyone has solid info on these FAQs pls post so we can at least create a balanced narrative on this platformm

reddit.com
u/sardi8 — 1 month ago
▲ 19 r/unimelb

anyone have any idea how long scheduled maintenance usually takes?

it says its off for maintenance till 7am but its past that now n when u press on the lms link the "down for maintenance" page pops up. I havent finished going through the revision material i do not want to sit this mst today

u/sardi8 — 2 months ago