Part 3: Ray Chandler Provides More Lies to Dateline – MB#192-C

Part 3: Ray Chandler Provides More Lies to Dateline, Other Outlets – MB#192-C
Another Dateline ‘Special’ that turned out not to be so special

Another Dateline “special” aired last night, September 12 2004, with the interview of Raymond Chandler (Charmatz); chock full of distortions, inaccuracies, one-sided conversations and allegations of Jackson being the “devil”. No, I’m not kidding.

Knowing that Jackson cannot respond to the old allegation, Ray Chandler is scheduled to be on numerous programs defaming Jackson and trying to turn himself into a saint by attempting to convince parents not let their children around Michael Jackson.

We won’t rehash all of the tired, sorry story from Chandler as you’ll be hearing from the opportunist enough this week; right ahead of the current accuser’s mother set to testify in court on September 17 2004.

Ray Chandler leaks documents that he only could have gotten from the accuser’s father or other people subject to the confidentiality agreement, and claims that these documents prove molestation. The “documents” are simply the unchallenged, un-crossed-examined, unfounded allegations initially made by the accuser. Nothing more; and certainly nothing proving guilt on Jackson’s part.

R. Chandler has also claimed that he isn’t in this for money. Yeah sure. Why not give the book away for free then? Apparently he expects to profit off of being an agent of someone who has obviously broken the confidentiality agreement from 1993.

The big deal about this latest media whoring is that we don’t get to hear Michael Jackson’s recordings. We don’t get to see Michael Jackson video(s) concerning this case. We don’t get to read court documents telling Jackson’s side of the situation. We also don’t get to read sworn testimony from a number of people who, sources say, have an incredibly different story to tell than the one ‘Uncle Ray’ is now trying to sell the public.

One leaked document is the psychologists report, where the 1993 accuser sounds totally rehearsed and where the psychologist is asking leading questions.

That psychologist, said to be Richard Gardner, committed suicide last year, and was the subject of controversy and contempt from his colleagues.

The last attorney to cross-examine Gardner, Louisiana attorney Richard Ducote, has basically said that Gardner is a fraud. Ducote is quoted as saying that the main theory on which Gardner traded, Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS), is “bogus”.

In a report from June 1 2003, Ducote says that Gardner had not had hospital admitting privileged for 25 years. Ducote also quoted Dr. Paul Fink, the former president of American Psychiatric Association, who said that Gardner and the asinine PAS theories are a “pathetic footnote” in psychiatric history. Ducote continued to rail against Gardner by saying:

Gardner and his bogus theory have done untold damage to sexually and physically abused children and their protective parents. PAS has been rejected by every reputable organization considering it.

 

In a Florida case in which I was recently involved, when the judge insisted on a Frye hearing, Gardner simply did not show up.

 

Perhaps because he finally realized that the entire nation was on to his scam, he committed suicide on May 25. Let’s pray that his ridiculous, dangerous PAS foolishness died with him. (see “Father” of P.A.S., Richard Gardner commits suicide)

Talk about a lack of credibility! Obviously Gardner is unable to be interviewed concerning R. Chandler’s claims. He is rumored to be one of the “many” shrinks Chandler shopped around for.

And this is one of the shrinks who talked to the 1993 accuser, and the one who ‘Uncle Ray’ cites in his “documents”.

Another thing R. Chandler does is question the recordings and eye-witness accounts of Geraldine Hughes, Evan Chandler’s first attorney’s legal secretary. And in a failed effort to discredit her, he raises many more questions than he answers.

What of Hughes’s accounts? She isn’t a wayward family member who no longer speaks to her allegedly abuse nephew, like Chandler is.

She certainly has absolutely nothing to gain from telling her account, as she’s been all but ignored by people who refuse to even consider Jackson is actually innocent. She’s also had problems with bookstores like Barnes & Noble stocking her book. I bet Uncle Ray won’t have such problems.

Chandler says of Hughes’s book, for example, “The book contained numerous inaccuracies and omissions of fact. For instance, Hughes failed to mention that child pornography was found at Jackson’s home in 1993”.

This of course is a totally asinine statement. Possession of child pornography is a FEDERAL offense. It has been law since 1977, as referenced by The Protection of Children Against Sexual Exploitation Act of 1977 (see Pub. L. No. 95-225, 92 Stat. 7 (1978) (current version at 18 U.S.C.S. § 2251 (1999)). ).

If they would have found child porn at Jackson’s house in 1993, he would have been up on FEDERAL child porn charges, which he has never been. Finding child pornography in someone’s house is why we see R. Kelly in FEDERAL court in an orange jump suit.

So Chandler is obviously lying about this, and sources say, a number of other points he’s written about in this latest attempt to cash in on Jackson. Moreover, one could ask why this book wasn’t written 10 years ago and why has he waited until a very crucial time to release it.

Satisfactory answers have not been forthcoming. Hughes has previously said she is willing to testify in court if need-be. There have been no such admissions from Chandler that we are aware of. So what is ‘Uncle Ray’ so afraid of concerning her eye-witness testimony?

___GQ Magazine & What the legal secretary saw___
One source of factual information, about which Dateline hasn’t done a report, is Geraldine Hughes. Hughes, as mentioned above, was the sole legal secretary for the 1993 accuser’s first lawyer. That lawyer, Barry Rothman, has a sordid past sources say.

This was before civil attorney Larry Feldman stepped into the picture with his shrink, Stan Katz, in tow. Hughes, in her book Redemption: The Truth Behind the Michael Jackson Child Molestation Allegations describes Rothman as being very overbearing, evasive, and basically a deadbeat.

He has a very shady past; at one point claiming a former employee stole $65,000 worth of office equipment that didn’t exist, according to Hughes. This is a lawyer, mind you.

These sources also report that Rothman certainly isn’t above concocting a plan to extort money from someone. But Hughes provides much more insight into the 1993 “case” that any of the public has known before; and certainly much more than Dateline NBC was willing to reveal.

She says she once walked in on Rothman speaking alone with the 1993 accuser in his office. She writes in her book that this secret meeting took place in Rothman’s office just before he was taken to see a therapist where he made allegations of abuse against Jackson:

…I had the opportunity to meet the 13-year old boy on two separate occasions while working with Mr. Rothman. The first meeting was unexpected. I stumbled upon the 13-year old boy by surprise in Mr. Rothman’s office behind closed doors as I was preparing to leave work…

 

Without thinking, I opened his office door to say goodbye, and to my surprise, I saw the young boy around 12 to 13 years old at the back of Mr. Rothman’s office. I knew he was the Chandler boy because that was the only case, to my knowledge, that Mr. Rothman was working on which involved a child. I was, however, very surprised to see the boy in Mr. Rothman’s office unaccompanied by a parent.

 

The boy, likewise, was surprised when I opened the door. Mr. Rothman snapped at me for entering unannounced. I had not even seen the boy enter Mr. Rothman’s office, nor did Mr. Rothman announce that he was meeting with a child. It appeared as if the meeting between Mr. Rothman and the boy was a secret.

 

I glanced at the boy for a second and pretended as though everything was normal before leaving the office. The boy had a puzzled look on his face when I walked into Mr. Rothman’s office. That made me very suspicious of this meeting between Mr. Rothman and the Chandler boy.

 

I had the most overwhelming feeling that this meeting had some significance to the child molestation allegations and not the custody case that was also going on between the boy’s parents. This meeting between Mr. Rothman and the Chandler boy took place just before the boy was taken to see the psychiatrist who later reported the sexual molestation charges against Michael Jackson.

(Section 2.2 The 13 Year old Boy; Redemption: The Truth Behind the Michael Jackson Child Molestation Allegations; pg 44-46 || Suspicious Secret Meeting with 1993 accuser BEFORE abuse allegation)

Hughes saw a number of suspicious situations, which she detailed at the time in her daily journal. She says the 1993 accuser’s father wanted to make it appear as if the allegations were valid by having a third party—like a therapist—report it instead of filing a false police report.

This had been rumored for years by a number of sources until Hughes confirmed it. It was advice from his lawyer at the time, Rothman (Hughes’s boss), and it was used to shield Chandler from later being prosecuted for filing a false police report incase their little plan didn’t work. She writes:

Dr. Chandler made it look like he simply took his son to a psychiatrist and it was the psychiatrist that stumbled upon the child molestation allegations. Nothing was further from the truth.

 

Taking his son to the psychiatrist was well thought out and calculated because Dr. Chandler had received detailed information from Mr. Rothman [accuser’s father’s first lawyer] about the ramifications of using a third party to report child abuse. Mr. Rothman advised Dr. Chandler as to how to report child abuse through a third party and without liability to the parent.

 

The [Penal, Civil Procedure, and Civil] Codes that Mr. Rothman supplied Dr. Chandler explained in great detail all the ramifications of reporting child abuse/molestation…through a third party who was reputable, believable and by someone who would effectively make the reporting of said allegations look credible. (Section 3.5 Third Party Disclosure; Redemption: The Truth Behind the Michael Jackson Child Molestation Allegations; pg 84-85 || Psychiatrist Used in order to Make Abuse Allegations Seem ‘Credible’)

So what was the “plan” and why didn’t Dateline do an in-depth story about it? Well, according to the words of the 1993 accuser’s father, he was going to “ruin” Jackson if he didn’t get what he wanted.

You can hear an excerpt of the conversation between the 1993 accuser’s father, Evan Chandler, and his step-father, David Schwartz here: Chandler Caught on Tape What the 1993 accuser’s father said was detailed in that Oct 1994 GQ article by Mary Fischer, who R. Chandler also takes shots at:

“I had a good communication with Michael,” Chandler told Schwartz. “We were friends. I liked him and I respected him and everything else for what he is. There was no reason why he had to stop calling me. I sat in the room one day and talked to Michael and told him exactly what I want out of this whole relationship. What I want.” …

 

Elsewhere on the tape, Chandler indicated he was prepared to move against Jackson: “It’s already set,” Chandler told Schwartz. “There are other people involved that are waiting for my phone call that are in certain positions. I’ve paid them to do it. Everything’s going according to a certain plan that isn’t just mine. Once I make that phone call, this guy [his attorney, Barry K. Rothman, presumably] is going to destroy everybody in sight in any devious, nasty, cruel way that he can do it. And I’ve given him full authority to do that.”

 

Chandler then predicted what would, in fact, transpire six weeks later: “And if I go through with this, I win big-time. There’s no way I lose. I’ve checked that inside out. I will get everything I want, and they will be destroyed forever. June will lose [custody of the son]…and Michael’s career will be over.”

 

“Does that help [the boy]?” Schwartz asked. “That’s irrelevant to me,” Chandler replied.

 

“It’s going to be bigger than all of us put together. The whole thing is going to crash down on everybody and destroy everybody in sight. It will be a massacre if I don’t get what I want.”

 

Instead of going to the police, seemingly the most appropriate action in a situation involving suspected child molestation, Chandler had turned to a lawyer. And not just any lawyer. He’d turned to Barry Rothman.

“It will be a massacre if I don’t get what I want.” Uh huh. “And if I go through with this, I win big-time.” Yeah, sure. “There are other people involved that are waiting for my phone call that are in certain positions. I’ve paid them to do it.

Everything’s going according to a certain plan that isn’t just mine.” Okay. One would think THIS “certain plan” would warrant further investigation from Dateline, as well as the heartless way in which Chandler dismissed his son by saying it’s irrelevant to him whether or not this “certain plan” helped him.

‘Uncle Ray’, try as he might, couldn’t explain this away. Here’s a few questions that Dateline could have asked: Why would a person, whom just found out his son may have been allegedly molested, worry about getting what HE [the father] wants out of it? Why is he talking about winning “big-time”?

Who were these “other people involved” waiting on his phone call? What positions were they in? Who did HE pay and what did HE pay them to do? What was this “certain plan” and who else was involved in concocting it? Why is it irrelevant to him how this helps his son?

E. Chandler asked Jackson for a new house after initially asking him to pay for an addition to be built onto his home at the time, according to sources.

Remember, it’s already been reported that the mother of Jackson’s current accuser also asked Jackson for a new house in a town close to Neverland before she ran to Feldman and made claims of abuse. From Hughes’s book:

Dr. Chandler did not, however, let his jealousy towards Michael Jackson stand in the way of asking him to build an addition to his [Chandler’s] house, supposedly so he could have more room while visiting his son.

 

Michael Jackson briefly entertained the idea, but when he found out that his acquisition would not be approved by the building inspectors, Dr. Chandler then suggest that Michael Jackson simply buy him a new house.

 

Dr. Chandler was already trying to capitalize on his son’s friendship with Michael Jackson. It appears his mind was already calculating a way of reaping some type of profit from his son’s friendship with Michael Jackson.

(Section 2.3 Dr. Chandler – The Father of the 13 year old Boy; Redemption pg 50-51 || see 93 Accuser’s Father’s Plan to ‘Ruin’ Michael Jackson)

Hughes also details how the two families, the Schwartz family (1993 accuser’s stepfather and mother) and Evan Chandler (1993 accuser’s father) turned on each other; each filing a complaint against the other. In a civil lawsuit filed in August 1994, Evan Chandler v. June Chandler Schwartz and David Schwartz, Chandler made accusations against the step-father and his ex-wife.

The ex-wife, June Schwartz, fired back by saying Chandler only made these accusations against her (and possibly Jackson) in an attempt to get out of paying back-child support.

Remember, she was the one with custody of the 1993 accuser and was getting child support from Chandler—which he stopped paying. Hughes reports in her book that the step-father cross-complained against Chandler for violation of privacy and the “intentional infliction of emotional distress”.

He also made a startling admission in his cross-complaint: he says he didn’t believe Jackson molested the 1993 accuser:

June Schwartz answered the complaint by asserting that the action was brought in bad faith, without probable cause and in an attempt to avoid payment of past due child support.

 

She further asserted that said action was being brought to promote his own hope for celebrity status and a cruel plan to gain control over the assets of the parties’ minor child by manipulating the child’s affection.

 

…David Schwartz cross complained against Dr. Chandler for invasion of privacy, violation of Penal Code 632, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. In his statement of facts Mr. Schwartz contended that in the summer of 1993, the Schwartz family was torn apart by Michael Jackson’s interference in the family.

 

Schwartz further stated that he did not think Michael Jackson had molested his stepson. Mr. Schwartz stated that on July 71993, he received a call from Dr. Chandler wherein he was abusive, belligerent and violent. He stated that it was not uncommon for Dr. Chandler to become violent.

 

Mr. Schwartz said the reason he recorded his conversation with Dr. Chandler was because Dr. Chandler told him he had thoughts of killing the entire family, including the children, and that Mr. Schwartz recorded the conversation out of fear concerning Dr. Chandler’s threats to kill the family, including Mr. Schwartz… The case was dismissed with prejudice.

(5.1 The Civil Lawsuit; Redemption pgs 134-136 || see 93 Accuser’s Family Turn on Each Other)

Hughes further cites the Schwartz v Chandler lawsuit filed against Evan Chandler for assault and two counts of battery:

David Schwartz filed a complaint against Dr. Chandler for damages—for brain damage, two counts for assault, and two counts for battery. Mr. Schwartz asserted that on July 9 1993, at Dr. Chandler’s house in Brentwood, Dr. Chandler approached him in a menacing manner with a closed fist and threatened to strike him with his hands and feet.

 

He stated that Dr. Chandler wrestled him to the ground and began to kick him and spat on him. Mr. Schwartz further asserted that once again while at Mr. Feldman’s office in August of 1993, there was another altercation in which Dr. Chandler punched Mr. Schwartz in his temple, causing him to lose consciousness. June Schwartz filed a Declaration in support of her husband. … The case was dismissed on January 29, 1996.

(5.1 The Civil Lawsuit; Redemption pg 134-136 || see 93 Accuser’s Family Turn on Each Other)

Why were the two families at each other’s throats? Why did the stepfather say he didn’t think his stepson was ever molested by Jackson? Why did the 1993 accuser’s mother say that she believe Chandler was doing this to get out of making any more child support payments?

We certainly won’t get any satisfactory answers from Dateline, that’s for sure. Hughes also quotes directly from the testimony of Anthony Pellicano, who was a private investigator during the 1993 investigation.

He is quoted as saying in the defense’s Motion for Stay of Discovery and Trial that the 1993 accuser’s father and lawyer “demanded” $20M in the form of four $5M picture/screenwriting deal.

R. Chandler has to be very careful here because of the amount and the type of information that Jackson’s investigators found out about the 1993 accusing family at the time. This information was made reference to by Hughes in her book:

The unfortunate aspect of changing attorneys and not going to trial was that all the initial investigation work that Mr. Fields and Mr. Pellicano had dug up never made its way into the courtroom.

 

Mr. Pellicano had gathered incriminating evidence against Dr. Chandler and Mr. Rothman which could have won Michael Jackson a victorious outcome in court.

 

However, Michael Jackson was not willing to endure the public scrutiny of his private life and affairs. It was my contention that had Michael Jackson gone to trial, he would have won. (pg 106)

If that’s the case, then this information is still sitting out there like a ticking time-bomb waiting to go off. If this keeps up, someone may not be so willing to uphold their end of a confidentiality agreement that has already been broken many times over by the Chandlers.

Hughes cites court documents, motions, and gives the ruling on said motions in her book as well. It’s clear that the judge overseeing the 1993 pre-trial actions where making some very bad calls.

For example, Jackson’s attorneys filed a motion to halt the civil proceedings until the criminal case had been resolved. This is common procedure now.

Back then, it was at the whim of the judge; a judge who obviously thought Jackson was guilty without seeing one shred of evidence presented in his court yet. What this would have done was to allow prosecutors to ‘sit in’, so to speak, on the civil proceedings, gather all of Jackson’s exonerating evidence, and change his criminal case (witness testimony, etc) in an effort to short-circuit Jackson’s evidence.

It would have been the equivalent of prosecutors stealing files from Jackson’s attorney’s offices…mildly akin to what Sneddon’s done recently by raiding the offices of a defense attorney’s private investigator. Hughes writes in her book:

Because of the Court rulings, Michael Jackson was at a disadvantage in having to prepare for trial within 120 days in a case that involved massive witnesses. The police had seized all of his personal records and would not provide copies nor even a list of what they took. 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 favor of the 13 year old boy.

E. Chandler’s original attorney, Barry Rothman, unsuccessfully sued Jackson because he was dumped by Chandler for Larry Feldman. Rothman claimed it was Jackson’s fault he was fired. Because Rothman refused to be subject to deposition, a Motion to Compel by the defense was granted and Rothman was fined $850.00.

Nothing ever came of Rothman’s claims. Where are the 2-part Dateline series about this information? What exactly are these people afraid of shedding light on?

__What story’s for sale this time?___
‘Uncle Ray’ himself has already given interviews where he’s previously made some questionable statements that contradict the story he’s trying to sell now. In a June 16 1995 article in Entertainment Weekly, Chandler (Charmatz) is quoted as saying:

Charmatz says his brother and nephew bear Jackson no ill will: “They all loved him-that was why it was so hard to come to grips with what was going on. It’s too bad to see his career take the hit it did and we all hope he gets it back. They don’t hold any malice in their hearts toward Michael. I think they understand what’s happened in his life and how he’s an even bigger victim of abuse.”

Huh? They bear Jackson no ill will? They all hope he gets his career back? What the hell?? This is completely different than what he’s saying now about Jackson.

R. Chandler has also sought to blame Jackson fans for alleged “death threats” they received back then. He, of course, provides no evidence to backup this claim either. And no charges were filed as a result of any one of these alleged death threats.

Since we now know prosecutors in THIS “case” relied heavily on the 1993 investigation to obtain current search warrants and to convince the grand jury to hand down an indictment against Jackson, ole ‘Uncle Ray’ just may become a witness.

What is terribly disgusting is the overriding inability for any of these people—not Jordan Chandler, Raymond Chandler, Evan Chandler, June Chandler-Schwartz or David Schwartz—to put their freedom where their mouths are and come to court to testify.

NONE of these people have sworn to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth in any capacity where they can (and will) be fully cross-examined by Jackson’s attorneys. It’s quite easy to hide behind the cloud of the media and spout nonsense.

It’s quite another to subject yourself to the penalty of perjury and jail-time for your “information”. Just ask Blanca Francia. As sources have said, it is reports like Dateline’s which separate investigative journalists from warmed-over tabloid hacks hungry for the next bunch of unfounded trash about Jackson.

In the end you have to be careful. Shysters can sell you the Brooklyn Bridge if you don’t ask questions. And those hard questions have yet to be asked of anyone with the last name Chandler…or should I say Charmatz.

-MJEOL