Posted by Accusing Familys Motives Questioned MJEOL Bullet #128 NY Daily News has recently reported that, unlike the media spin given previously, Jacksons accuser is not a sickly cancer patient on deaths door. This is nothing we didnt already know, but some of the general media are now picking up on these facts because of the Daily News article. Apparently the family engaged in the attempt to broker a $15,000 deal to tell their story to the media as far back as Feb 2003. If youll remember, comedy club owner Jamie Masada was very instrumental in pushing the sickly cancer patient story onto the public. Masada who has been described as the man who introduced the accuser to Jackson, has previously been outed by Geraldo Rivera (see Audio). In fact, Masada admitted to never even having met Jackson. The accuser is described as a robust teenager able to withstand the rigors of military camp and scale 8 foot walls. Again, nothing that hasnt already been reported. However, as recently as this month, some commentators and guests on various shows were still speculating about the case if this accuser should diethe sickly patient that was supposedly gravely illbefore a possible trial. Apparently those panelists didnt get the memo and the Daily News report may cause them to stop using the gravely ill cancer patient moniker as a way to spin their words. The accuser is in a boot-camp-style youth group called the Sea Cadet Corps and has been seen in photos appearing to be the picture of health. The Daily News also reveals some starling details in their 2 part report about this family. Reportedly, the accuser and his brother were allowed to go shopping with Fox 11-KTTV reporter Barbara Schroeder in Jan 31 2004. No, thats not a typo. The report continues with information about how the reporter and the children had lunch, went shopping, and spent time at a video arcade. The accuser and brother were described as cheerful:
On Jan. 21, the family’s former attorney William Dickererman told The Associated Press the family was “in hiding” from the media, adding, “They’re very private people.” However, 10 days later, the accuser’s mother allowed the boy and his 13-year-old brother to go on an unsupervised dining and shopping spree with a local TV reporter. Photos show Fox 11-KTTV’s reporter Barbara Schroeder and the boys cheerfully chatting on the Jan. 31 excursion. They lunched at a café, shopped at an electronic games store, where the accuser emerged with a bag of goodies, and spent 40 minutes at a video arcade. When Schroeder brought the kids back 21/2 hours later, the mom came outside to chat. (see The secret life of [Jackson’s] accuser)
These are the same kids now claiming to have been abused or witnessed abuse by Jackson, but said nothing at the time. The same kids who claimed to have been held hostage by Jacksons employees, but said nothing to anyone at the time; even going so far as to have a sit-down conversation with CBSs Ed Bradley in which they defended Jackson and wanted to go on TV to do so (see Article). These are the same kids who were reportedly being harassed and were in hiding, but apparently felt comfortable enough to go on a shopping spree with a TV reporter. Why in the world would you let your allegedly abused child go on an unsupervised trip with a reporter, if we are to believe the Daily News report? How many concerned parents allow their allegedly molested children to do go traipsing around town with a tv reporter? Why were the children described as being cheerful; so cheerful that they were up for a shopping spree and visit to an arcade? This is a far cry from the way media pundits have attempted to paint the family. There were reports of death threats, that theyre in hiding, and that they stay away from the media reports. Well if the Daily News is correct, those are certainly lies put out in the media either to draw the publics sympathy or to help take the heat off the way in which this case is being prosecuted. The Daily News also reports that not only is the accusers mothers new boyfriend a major player in the family, but also that he sought a $15,000 deal for the family to tell their story to the media after the Bashir documentary aired last year. Major Jay Jackson, the boyfriend and army reservist with an LA-based Army unit, reportedly negotiated the deal:
But in Feb 2003months before the boy first revealed sexual abuse allegations to a therapistthe take-charge Maj. Jackson negotiated a $15,000 deal to sell the familys story to a journalist. (see Article)
The report goes on further to state:
“The major demanded $15,000 for the family to tell their story of life with Michael Jackson at Neverland. The major was clearly calling the shots. The mother deferred to him,” said a source familiar with the deal.
Apparently, Maj. Jackson has been involved with the family for a while because the report says the deal didnt happen. The family, who allegedly were on good terms with Jackson at that time, was flown to Miami where they stayed with actor-comedian Chris Tucker. The questions remain: Why in the world was he negotiating a $15,000 deal for the family to sell their story? Does the fact that he apparently didnt get the money contribute in any way to the family, then, trying to get more money out of Jackson? When they didnt get any money out of Jackson, did that spark the family going to money lawyer Larry Feldman? This appears to be hard evidence that the family has been after money at least since the Bashir documentary aired. This also opens the door to a number of other questions yet to be answered about the motives of these people. There were reports from the accusers fathers attorney saying that sources have told him the mother may have either sold or arranged for pictures of the accuser to be taken for a London tabloid for $200,000. This certainly would explain how the family is now living in a two bedroom condo near the posh Brentwood neighborhood and why the mother was seen riding around in a new $21,000 Volkswagon Jetta recently. Jacksons co-lead attorney, Mark Geragos, said in Dec 2003 that this case was an intersection between prosecutors with an axe to grind and money-hungry people. But for months, the public has been told that the family didnt want money; they only wanted justice, according to news reports. This argument was toppled when the Santa Barbara News Press revealed that the current district attorney, Tom Sneddon, secretly struck a deal with the attorney representing the family in which they promised not to file a civil suit against Jackson until the criminal portion of the case was over:
As he launched his investigation against Michael Jackson, District Attorney Tom Sneddon reportedly sought assurance that the family of the boy accusing the entertainer of child molestation would not make a multimillion-dollar deal like another young accuser’s family did a decade ago. A source close to the boy’s family in the current case told the News-Press on Wednesday that Mr. Sneddon asked the attorney representing the family to “solemnly swear” not to file a lawsuit against Mr. Jackson during the criminal investigation and prosecution of the singer. (see Sneddon Begged Family not to File Civil Suit ).
So who is footing the bill for the condo and the new car? Some reports say the attorney who instigated these molestation charges is responsible for paying the bills. Other reports insinuate that the family is getting money from leaking/selling information to various media outlets. And with the new report that the family through Maj. Jay Jacksonmay have possibly tried to negotiate a $15,000 deal, the latter may be closer to the truth than we realize. It is astonishing, however, that more people havent picked up on this information and reported it with the same fervor with which they reported the nonsense that turns out to be false. You will more than likely read Fox Newss Roger Friedman complaining about the Daily News getting some of this information from his precious column. However, I have yet to see Friedman appear on various shows–like At Large w/ Geraldo Rivera, Dayside, or Crier Live–to discuss this information in the same way he appeared to whine about Jacksons finances and charity involvement. Finally having to relent that Jackson wasnt going broke or selling the Beatles catalog, he had to claim that Jackson had some financial Messiah come in and save him. Great way to save face, Rog. But I digress. Getting back to the accusing family, theres no doubt the media was sitting on this information for a number of months before it quietly made its way to the very few outlets which reported about it months ago. Theres always wall to wall coverage of defamatory information about Jackson in neon signs so bright that you cant help but to notice. Think about the coverage the defamatory Vanity Fair article by Maureen Orth got. Now, compare that to the measly coverage the Daily News article has gotten so far and youll see what I mean. Ive yet to see the same amount of coverage given to the Daily News article (see article) or the Reuters report about Carole Lieberman and Gloria Allred teaming up to bring about another false allegation against Jackson (see article1 // article2). Rather than do Jackson any favors by reporting it, some media purposely sat on this information. This story may continue to get the minimum amount of coverage until it becomes painfully obvious that this was a scam from day one ..or until it becomes more profitable to report the truth, whichever comes first. -MJEOL