Accuser’s Family Spoke to Media When Allegedly ‘Kidnapped’ & After – MJEOL Bullet #159 It has come to MJEOL’s attention that the current accusing family was speaking to the media during the time when they were allegedly being kidnapped and conspired against to keep quiet by Jackson’s employees, according to prosecutors.The Sunday Herald, in a report dated in Feb 2003, reported the family as saying some very flattering things about Jackson at a time when they were supposed to be abducted and being conspired against for their silence.Those things include the accuser calling Jackson “daddy” and plans to “travel the world with him.” Will the accusation now change, again, to include an allegation of the family being forced to give supportive interviews on Jackson’s behalf? If so, could the interviewers be called to testify by prosecutors? Or could they instead be called by the defense to testify that the family talked to them on their own volition during a time when they were allegedly being conspired against? The accuser’s mother, Janet Arvizo—now Janet Jackson after marrying Maj. Jay Jackson in Las Vegas in May of this year—was reported as saying at the time:

All of my kids have stayed over with Michael. I am comfortable with that. They are happy with him and are hoping to travel the world with him. He is their angel. (see article)

The report goes on to state some information given to the media by Jamie Masada, the family friend who claimed to have introduced the accuser to Jackson:

“They were living in a stable with the hay and the horses for a long time,”Masada said.

We now know that Masada has never even met Jackson. As a matter of fact, Masada was outed live on the air by Fox News’s Geraldo Rivera during one of his many sympathy-gathering interviews (hear audio). But what’s more interesting about that comment is that we now know the family sued JCPenney and received a settlement for $137,500 in Nov 2001. What happened to that money and when/why were they living in a stable as Masada claimed? Masada also is quoted as saying something very interesting about the street-wise accuser:

Masada said: “No matter what people may say about Michael Jackson, he came in and has helped this boy survive…G—- said they had fun and played games. G—- is not a naïve kid. He would have said if something bad had happened.”

Not a naïve kid? Would have said something if abuse was happening? Interesting. But I digress. The Sunday Herald report continues by saying the current accuser referred to Jackson as his “father” and told his mother “I am living for my daddy, Michael.” I guess he’s now living for his daddy, Jay. In a CNN article also dated in Feb 2003, the Arvizo’s are reported as using the British tabloids to air their differences. The mother was quoted as saying:

Michael has pet names for all of my children, and G—- even calls him Daddy,” said mom Janet Arvizo, 34, who was once so poor that she temporarily lived in a horse stable with her children. “He is the father they never had.” She said G—- and siblings S—, 11, and D——,16, “are hoping to spend a lot more time with him in the future.” (see article)

Without getting into a breakdown of the changing timeline, it is incredulous that the family was allowed to speak freely to the media whenever they wanted, AND be held hostage and conspired against to keep quiet at the same time. But it doesn’t end there. In other bizarre behavior from the family, the New York Daily News reported in April 2004 that the accuser and his brother was allowed to talk to and go shopping with a Fox 11-KTTV reporter in Jan 2004. No, that’s not a typo. According to the Daily News, this was after their former attorney, Bill Dickerman (the one before Larry Feldman), claimed they were “very private people”:

Photos show Fox 11-KTTV reporter…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 [the reporter] brought the kids back 2 ½ hours later, the mom came outside to chat. (see article)

Allowing your children to talk, unsupervised, with a reporter is suspicious enough. But, according the Daily News, this is an allegedly abused child by Jan 31, who apparently wasn’t so distraught and traumatized that he couldn’t go on a shopping trip with a reporter. What will the excuse be to cover up this little excursion? Will that reporter now be accused of child abduction by the family as a way to explain-away those actions? No wonder Sneddon appeared bothered and peevish during Friday’s June 25 2004 hearing, according to a number of observers in the courtroom. Who knows what else this family did between Feb 2003 and today. Articles dated in late Feb 2003 also have the family talking up Jackson and his help provided to the accuser. And these are only the reports and interviews we know about! Stay tuned. -MJEOL

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *