Michael Jackson Death Hoax Investigators

Hoax Investigation => General Hoax Investigation => Other Odd Things => Topic started by: Hopeless on May 18, 2010, 03:54:14 AM

Title: The spider bit ...mentioned in the Autopsie report ?
Post by: Hopeless on May 18, 2010, 03:54:14 AM
I have thought about the spider bit and found some weird things :
Michael in front of the court house has a white sock at his left foot...they say he had a spider bite, but the pictures you found from the bite are at his right leg, not foot ! There you don't need a sock and it's the wrong leg !
I am sure that such a big thing made a scare or a darker pigmentation and i surch the autopsie report and yes the dark pigmentation was mentioned exactly at the area we saw it, at his right leg !
I don't know who was the wright MJ, but i wondered about the differences...left foot, right leg !
I have some problems to open the sides so i edit the pictures in the next minutes.

http://floacist.wordpress.com/2007/06/1 ... l-jackson/ (http://floacist.wordpress.com/2007/06/10/vitiligo-photos-michael-jackson/)

http://www.zimbio.com/pictures/a5cFl_LS ... t3fzyMyVsG (http://www.zimbio.com/pictures/a5cFl_LSP6e/Jackson+s+bodyguards/0t3fzyMyVsG)

Here the pictures from the autopsie report...left side, his right leg, left to see there is a notice i can't read exactly...2...inches area hyperpigmentation ?

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/ye ... son19.html (http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2010/0208101jackson19.html)

It was the same area we could see at the pictures, but why MJ has his white socks at the wrong leg ?
Weird at all...who is dead ???????????
Title: Re: The spider bit ...mentioned in the Autopsie report ?
Post by: XspeechlessX on May 18, 2010, 04:55:52 AM
Maybe the picture/video you saw was flipped?  :?
Title: Re: The spider bit ...mentioned in the Autopsie report ?
Post by: Hopeless on May 18, 2010, 05:01:25 AM
That's my first thought, but there was so much difference pictures shows him in front of court...all shows his left foot in white sock and much different pictures from him showing his spider bit...all his right leg with the bit.
 :o
Title: Re: The spider bit ...mentioned in the Autopsie report ?
Post by: Bee Bee on May 18, 2010, 12:51:26 PM
Hmm, that's weird, I've never thought about that. Makes me think of those horror stories about it not being a spider bite. But then again, there are photos of the wound/scars, and I don't think you'd get a scar of that type from a needle. But I'm not a docter.  :?
Title: Re: The spider bit ...mentioned in the Autopsie report ?
Post by: TruthBeTold on May 18, 2010, 04:03:07 PM
You have been completely brainwashed about the use of doubles by Michael. Now you confused as to whether it was really Michael who was bitten. Of course it was Michael that was bitten..this whole double shit needs to stop, yes, maybe 1 double, but not as many as you may think when you read certain peoples blogs.
Title: Re: The spider bit ...mentioned in the Autopsie report ?
Post by: Hopeless on May 18, 2010, 04:10:16 PM
I am sure it's a spider bit. In front of the leg, i have no idea to inject something there....i had never heard so, there is no vene.
But who has the bit and who was at court whit the other swollen foot ?
 :?
And it made me helpless to read at the autopsie report that they mentioned the darker pigmented area at the same place where we could see the spider bit...in front of his right leg...
If i had a longtime deap and open wound, it will be a dark pigmented area for years...i have neurodermitis and sadly know how it was when the skin was open for months....when it closed there be darker skin and after years it gets better and better.
Title: Re: The spider bit ...mentioned in the Autopsie report ?
Post by: Hopeless on May 19, 2010, 05:01:21 AM
Such wounds make dark pigmentation at first but they became lighter every year.....after 7 years i wonder if if was always seen.
What if the man with the spider bit died earlier ?
Maybee 2004 ? After 2 years it was seen as a dark pigmentation area, i am sure.
The autopsie report was discussed before...it seems like the date was changed and it has a old seal. That seal was taken untill 2004 or 2005. i am not sure now.
 :o
SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal