Katherine Jackson missing and Pellicano connections...New video from Twiggy

[2good2btrue]

Well, amongst all the contraversy today, I want to make sure that this does not get missed.  Twiggy from MJHOAXlive has this really important information. 

She uses a voice changer, but I knew it was her immediately..

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=_nCTwHzTaWA#![/youtube]

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=gDSf8q7vsxE[/youtube]

Anthony Pellicano at the Mic and Howard Weitzman to his right

EVER SINCE ANTHONY PELLICANO HAS GONE
TO FEDERAL PRISON HE ISN'T TALKING..

IS THAT ALL ABOUT TO CHANGE??

WAS MICHAEL JACKSON FRAMED? THE UNTOLD STORY. By Mary A. Fisher GQ, October 1994

(portions of interview)

On November 23, the friction peaked. Based on information he says he got from Weitzman, Fields told a courtroom full
of reporters that a criminal indictment against Jackson
seemed imminent. Fields had a reason for making the statement:
He was trying to delay the boy's civil suit by establishing
that there was an impending criminal case that should be tried
first. Outside the courtroom, reporters asked why Fields had
made the announcement, to which Weitzman replied essentially
that Fields "misspoke himself." The comment infuriated Fields,
"because it wasn't true," he says. "It was just an outrage.
I was very upset with Howard."

Fields sent a letter of resignation to Jackson the
following week."There was this vast group of people
all wanting to do a differentthing, and it was like
moving through molasses to get a decision,"says Fields.
"It was a nightmare, and I wanted to get the hell out of it."
Pellicano, who had received his share of flak for his
aggressive manner, resigned at the same time.

With Fields and Pellicano gone, Weitzman brought in
Johnnie Cochran Jr., a well-known civil attorney who
is now helping defend O.J.Simpson. And John Branca,
whom Fields had replaced as Jackson's general counsel
in 1990, was back on board.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Interview-with-Geraldine-Hughes


You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

[RK]

Thanks for posting 2Good......Pellicano, Fields and Weitzman. How I've longed to understand exactly who was behind that initial set up of Michael in '93.  Twiggy said this is far bigger than we all thought. I think she has that right.

[Ijustcantstoplovingu]

Thanks for posting 2Good......Pellicano, Fields and Weitzman. How I've longed to understand exactly who was behind that initial set up of Michael in '93.  Twiggy said this is far bigger than we all thought. I think she has that right.

 :icon_eek: :icon_eek:  :icon_e_surprised:

[loveratheart4mj]

Dear God i hope this is the "See You In July" that Michael was talking about. I am so tired. I just want him back amoung us. Just to be able to see him enjoying his family and being able to enjoy a normal as can be life for him. Please come home soon Michael.

[RK]

Thanks for posting 2Good......Pellicano, Fields and Weitzman. How I've longed to understand exactly who was behind that initial set up of Michael in '93.  Twiggy said this is far bigger than we all thought. I think she has that right.

 :icon_eek: :icon_eek:  :icon_e_surprised:

No....Not naming anyone in particular here....'cept maybe Weitzman...and he was working on behalf of some other big fish or should I say sharks.

[blankie]

.... :icon_rolleyes:..what makes me think a lot is that in these days there  are many  news about family members.... :icon_rolleyes:.statements , facts.... :ghsdf:.......great movement.... :michael-jackson: :icon_e_wink:

[Shamone Jackson]

Didn't I read somewhere recently that this Pellicano guy say that Michael did something much worse than what he was accused of?

[MJonmind]

Seems a little vague and unclear to me.  :icon_eek: Seems like a lot of guessing on her part, that could be totally wrong about these people.

[~Souza~]

There is nothing new about this information, it's public knowledge and in my blog from February 2010: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login which most people unfortunately never read because it will take you hours to go through. She is guessing in those involved like anyone has to since there is no way to tell, but this is beyond Weitzman, She should have looked higher up than this.

As for Branca, we should not forget that Branca allegedly asked 10% at start (according to Harvey Levin way back in 2009/2010) which surprised many, since the normal rate lies around 20-25%. And if Michael really appointed them by 'life' and there would be no way for the family to appoint someone else, they could have put their fees much higher and make way more money from the start. Even IF the rate went up over the years because they forked in more and more money, it's still not surprising. They say they put out stuff Michael wouldn't agree with. How do we know that and what was so aweful? I enjoyed the Michael album, This Is It was beyond entertaining for hoaxers, non-believers cried when they saw it and its sales were amazing, The Vision DVD is a nice collection of videos, whatever people say about it and Immortal is a success that many fans seem to enjoy a lot. Branca's job here is to fork in as much as he can for the estate and he is doing a great job with that.

ALSO, we know that Michael is alive and I am pretty sure Branca knows that as well. Is Branca a snake? Maybe, but sometimes you need to have snakes on your team to catch the bigger snakes. I find the accusations towards Branca ungrounded and I think people should look higher up the ladder than some estate executor. Widen their horizons so to speak. My bet is that the family is attacking Branca on purpose since day 1, maybe so that certain institutions and individuals might think the estate will be on their evil side and approach them. If the family was really so against Branca, why are they all so happy and smiling on the TII premier, saying how wonderful it is when they know who was involved to get it out? They should have boycotted everything from the start, not just the Michael album.

I am not saying that I am 100% right, I am just pointing out that it isn't always as it seems and it should be clear Michael made sure there were a lot of smokescreens in the past decade when it came to his finances. How can a man be worth over a billion in 2003 have serious financial issues in 2005? Is he such a bad businessman? Did he really have only three bank accounts? Or is it possible he knew what was going to happen and blew some sand in people's eyes? I am not saying Michael never made mistakes, but I do not believe it was all as bad as they want us to believe.

[Australian MJ BeLIEver]

Thanks for posting 2Good......Pellicano, Fields and Weitzman. How I've longed to understand exactly who was behind that initial set up of Michael in '93.  Twiggy said this is far bigger than we all thought. I think she has that right.

Have to say that I agree

If CM is acting as the fall guy here and the hoax references 93 on several instances, then as hideous and malicious as Sneddon is / was - I do believe he was a relatively a small fish in the bigger picture. I swear to God, I hope all this comes out at bam / post bam!

And doubledutch a BRILLANT blog and worth the effort to read! ;-) I am a fan Souza!

[~Souza~]

Thanks for posting 2Good......Pellicano, Fields and Weitzman. How I've longed to understand exactly who was behind that initial set up of Michael in '93.  Twiggy said this is far bigger than we all thought. I think she has that right.

as hideous and malicious as Sneddon is / was - I do believe he was a relatively a small fish in the bigger picture.

Sneddon is just a puppet. An evil one, but a puppet. Big question is: WHO gains the most by getting rid of Michael Jackson?

Interesting is the link Sneddon has with David Schwartz, who was Jordie Chandler’s stepfather during the 1993 allegations. Normally that could be a coincidence, but the fact that during his testimony at a pre-trial hearing Sneddon admitted to having met with the Janet Arvizo before the second accusations makes us think this was all planned. But what would Sneddon gain from all this? Did he hate Mike? And why? Justice was not a motive, because both cases were doomed to be lost by him, because he had NOTHING. Fame could be a motive, but who wants to be known for nailing the most famous and loved person in the world? That seems a little strange. So it must be money. Since we don’t believe that Sneddon’s paycheck was that big, he must have been paid by other parties. But by who? Who would gain enough by getting rid of Mike?
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

[marumjj]

2good2btrue Thanks, I appreciate the work of Twiggy. I will take advice from Souza and read the blog, I really had forgotten. Thanks for sharing.
                               
                                   :bearhug:

[Australian MJ BeLIEver]

Completely agree on sneddon being a puppet.

Big question is: WHO gains the most by getting rid of Michael Jackson?

I have personally wondered this for some time. I pray to God to comes out after Bam, I really do. More to the point I hope they are made to pay. But I sometimes wonder if there will ever be true justice here.


Here is a Q for you Souza, that I have been wondering some time and now that we are discussing this, its a perfect opportunity to ask. Do you think MJ knew before 93 his head was wanted? Or, that his head was even wanted by the people / person / powers behind sneddon? If not, at what point in time do you think it was before it became apparent to him that Sneddon was just a small fry in this situation and that he was a tool in a bigger agenda? Post 93, there was a clear change in MJ regards to his military / mutiny style campaining backlash against the molestation / media camp. (I am talking about via songs, music videos - the angry MJ emerged & rightly so) But yeah keen on your thoughts on this.


EDIT: interested in anyone elses opinion on this too, if you have one. don't know if this is venturing into off topic discussion, so if it is, MOD's please advise.

[~Souza~]

Here is a Q for you Souza, that I have been wondering some time and now that we are discussing this, its a perfect opportunity to ask. Do you think MJ knew before 93 his head was wanted? Or, that his head was even wanted by the people / person / powers behind sneddon? If not, at what point in time do you think it was before it became apparent to him that Sneddon was just a small fry in this situation and that he was a tool in a bigger agenda? Post 93, there was a clear change in MJ regards to his military / mutiny style campaining backlash against the molestation / media camp. (I am talking about via songs, music videos - the angry MJ emerged & rightly so) But yeah keen on your thoughts on this.

I absolutely think MJ knew prior to '93 that they wanted his head on a silver plate. I think it started at least in the early '80s, when those 'JW' elders were watching his every move. Why would a religion involve themselves that much in a witness's work, unless they wanted to keep an eye on him for other reasons and simply control his work. They could have just let him do his work and make his videos, and release a statement afterwards that they did not agree with his work or wanted to be affiliated with it. But they watched his every step and in the end controlled what he released. Why?

What many don't know, is that every religion is infiltrated and are being watched by secret societies. If you think your church is not, then think again. This is why I do not want to be part of any organized religion. Michael was of course a witness to watch extra carefully due to his fame and influence on the public. I bet he knew that there was more behind this extra interest in him and his work and I am pretty certain that is the reason he left, because why else would he leave while still sharing at least most of the JW beliefs? He left in the late '80s to give them less control over him. THAT is in my opinion one of the main reasons. Michael knows you don't need a label, or belong to any organized religion to have a relationship with God, so he felt safe leaving, although he probably didn't like that he had to.

After leaving, he became more vocal and more agressive in his work. BAD already gave a taste, Dangerous and HIStory leave little to imagination. But since they couldn't control him anymore through his religion, they had to come up with other ways to get to him and control him and his work like infiltrating his personal life and his businesses. 1987-1988 is an important point in his life and triggered MUCH change. He left the JW's, he left home and bought a ranch where it was hard to get to him, isolating himself. He became politically vocal, his appearance changed drastically, he started to use lots of make-up and masks and ever since that time he was a target and he must have known that. Sneddon was just someone without any morals in the right place at that time. Santa Barbara has many people with influences high up the ladder and lots of $$$, so it shouldn't have been too hard to get Sneddon on board. Michael knew they were after him, but I doubt he ever suspected they would get to him that way. But he always knew Sneddon was just a puppet. Even those who think they are highest up the ladder, are in fact not. They think they have all control, but they as well are being deceived and are puppets of an ancient, ugly, evil and selfish creature. When they will find out that they were deceived and used, it will be too late and they will go down with the very one they worship now.

[Australian MJ BeLIEver]

I take on what your saying as your entitled opinion.

Just clarifying, are you saying MJ was accused of child abuse because of JWs? That they initiated the lie.