Please enable JavaScript in your browser preferences and then Reload this page!!!

Michael Jackson Justice: Branca, Mottola, Green, Malnik and Ratner

God: Reconnect to Him

The Conspiracy against God is about "The Word", and the profaning of His Holy Name within us. Adam fell in the garden, breaking the direct connection to God. Jesus, the "last Adam" was a quickening Spirit, the Word made Flesh, and the only one with whom we can re-establish our relationship with God. Michael's story is still unfolding. He is the one who is, is not. But Jesus is the only name given under heaven by which we must be saved. Many are trying to rewrite HIStory. We were given a help to instruct us. Learn more "here".

Thursday, July 29, 2010

Branca, Mottola, Green, Malnik and Ratner



July 27, 2020 – Branca, Mottola, Green, Malnik and Ratner


On June 26, we left off with this blog entry, outlining the lawsuits surrounding Michael and the Ayscough and Marar Law firm. Reference

Some really funny things have happened since then. Yesterday, I was away on personal business most of the day. Ironic that things really seem to “pop” on those days and several things came to my attention. But for now we will stay focused on this topic.

There are many blogs out there writing different things about Michael Jackson or the issues surrounding him and his murder. Some blogs popping up rather recently have taken a defense behind the lines of John Branca and Al Malnik of all people with some very convincing resources like the New York Times.

In investigating these links one thing seemed common on the couple of resources that listed John Branca has having been Michael’s attorney between 2003 and 2006. One was a piece written in the New York Times, another a defunct link to the L.A. Times was used as a source, and as another a Roger Friedman, gossip columnist was “relied upon” as a trusted source. In each of the two newspapers I checked out, the NYT link said Branca could not be reached in an Nov. 2003 article, only months after Branca was fired. This was probably because Branca could not speak for Michael, because Branca was not his lawyer at this time. Any blog lauding the “saving” of Michael Jackson by Al Malnik is suspect to MOST sensible Michael Jackson fans. No one from Michael's camp at the time is or can be quoted as Branca still being his manager. Misinformation passed on to other journalists (as usual)appears a a few columns.


This same blog also lists a falsified copy of court testimony in which supposedly attorney LeGrand is questioned by Tom Mesereau about the investigations done into the people surrounding Michael at the 2005 trial, and LeGrand exhonerates Branca while implicating Wiezner and Konitzer. The real court document found at this source says something quite different. Source

Branca and Mottola are mentioned in this one which falls along the lines of what Michael had mentioned in quite a few public statements available on Youtube and also from Michael’s own family members. I would think that Michael and his own brothers would know best who was after Michael to destroy him than some anonymous, Sony-slanted blogger. The court testimony will tell you that Branca most certainly was NOT employed by Michael Jackson during 2004 and 2005.

I thought the campaign trying to discredit both news sources and bloggers and fans alike very interesting and the propaganda seems to be increasing. This could be why: Sony is losing billions. Could it be the death of Michael Jackson wasn’t the winfall they had planned? Source


Other documents I have noticed are either from one gossip columnist (a hired hand?), PDF documents converted from convincingly recreated word documents citing links that no longer can be accessed or don’t exist, and sources linked to John Branca documents.

And for one particular blog to extol the virtues of a mob connected conspirer of Michael’s, all one has to do is read about Al Malnik himself to confirm what kind of person he is. Here is a good background on Malnik and his ilk. Source Take a look at Michael’s face during his stay with Malnik. Some very interesting expressions on Michael’s face, don’t you think? Yes, he looked real happy . . . for a rape victim.

Michael with Al Malnik Gang


Michael in Misery


Another Smiling Face


On this same blog one of these photos appeared:

"Michael's Team???"


Pretty “inside” photo wouldn’t you say? The caption under this picture is “Michael’s Team”. I recognize John Branca sitting obscured on the left side facing and Mark Garagos standing, talking on the phone. There are a whole bunch of people in this room. There is one thing missing in “Michael’s Team” . . . Michael himself. This looks more like a meeting of those conspiring to force Michael into involuntary bankruptcy.

The reason Raymone Bain never mentioned John Branca in any of her press releases is because John Branca was not employed by Michael at that time. There is no press release by Michael of ever hiring John Branca back . . . none. Only one errant NYT article mistakenly trying to contact John Branca for info on Michael during the trial. Another news source calls John Michael’s “previous” lawyer. Source

A good article on John Branca is here ,

A site listing Michael’s lawyers (top ten, notice Peter Lopez, one of the last hired, is on this list). Source where it says further down:

“There is also a $25 million lien against it held by Fortress Investments, created so Jackson could buy out his former attorney, John Branca, from a five percent interest in Sony/ATV Music Publishing.”

This same blog said:

“I want to discuss the refinancing of Michael's loans in 2005, which helps us to understand and transition into 2006. "Jackson, who was then awaiting trial on criminal child molestation charges, authorized his advisors to negotiate a solution that would have erased his debts and provided him with income of about $10 million a year...As part of the agreement, Sony Corp.” . . .

Then said three more paragraphs down:

“Reports state that Branca was making in the vicinity of $20 million from the proceeds of his 5% (some state 2.5%) of the ATV”

Maybe Michael balked at the deal because John was not his attorney, and because Branca’s stated $20 million a year proceeds from only 5% share of that same catalog would obviously pale in comparison to the income Michael made on his 50% share. Does it make sense then for this blogger to try to tell us what a great deal Michael would have had on a paltry ten million a year from selling Sony half his share? I think not. I would link to the blog pontificating on these fallacies but I really do not want to bring any more attention to it. This shows Michael knew what they were trying to do to him, he knew how to make a business decision and he was not fooled by the offer.

This link below shows a search on Michael Jackson firing John Branca in 2003. Absolutely no proof that he was ever hired back. Source

Timeline shows absolutely NO proof Branca was ever hired back. Search through years 2004, 2005 and 2006. Only in 2009, in June, does it show any mention of Michael “meeting” with Branca and this is a decidedly generic source, reporting on what was in the news and on press releases.

This link goes to a Friedman article in Fox News describing the debacle over returning Michael’s passport after the trial so he could leave the country. No mention of Branca, who should have been helping him in all this turmoil, IF he was working for him or cared about him.

Transcripts of Interview with Katherine Jackson on the Today Show with Rita Cosby (the nice lady who tried to misquote Michael after interviewing him briefly after the Al Sharpton Press Conference where Michael blasted Mottola). No mention of Branca and you know, for someone who was supposedly working for Michael from the latter part of 2003 through mid 2006 (leaving of his own accord), just where was he during five months of the biggest and most excruciating trial of Michael’s life? Where were you John? Bet you and Mottola had a hard time picking each other’s jaws up off the bar when those verdicts came down mid-toast.

This Friedman article also makes no mention of Branca while Michael is trying to get his passport back from sexual harasser to the pop stars, Tom Sneddon.

Just take a look at everything in this link. There are many Roger Friedman articles in here over the course of the trial and not one of them mentions John Branca being Michael’s lawyer. Not one.
Source Trial quotes: Quotes from trial. Bain is quoted quite a few times in articles but no mention of John Branca. Bain herself does not even mention John Branca.

Larry King Live Transcripts of Interview with Tom Mesereau. This was interesting for two reasons . . . One Raymone was working with Tom on Michael’s case according to Tom M. and two because he revealed that Sneddon and “wined and dined” Debbie Rowe to “get her to say what they wanted her to say” but Debbie Rowe defended Michael on the stand.

An interesting discussion was sent to me in regard to the conspiracy on this source:

Discussion of John Branca, Trudy Green, Howard Kaufman, Charles Koppelman, Al Manik, Tommy Mottola, and Brett Ratner.

In another Roger Friedman article on Fox News, he comments on the firing of Raymone Bain and Randy Jackson being relieved of financial duties. He also speculates on who would next represent Michael, sarcastically suggesting as one of the possibilities “Bubbles the Chimp”. Source That doesn’t sound like someone who thinks Branca still represents Michael.

This information is for you to decide. Just know that there are people out there PAID to put this misinformation out there. They don’t even have to be convincing. They just have to divide and conquer. The truth is there. Discern documents carefully. Anyone can make a PDF file.

Also consider that those trying to discredit these blogs, namely myself and MJJ-777.com are the ones trying to sell books, not us. I have no monetary connection to Michael and I am not and do not plan or writing a book. My blog is free.

This just goes to show you just how important it is for Sony to save their reputation and win the P.R. war after contributing to Michael’s misery and death. There are billions at stake. Branca and co. have much to hide. So does Judge Melville.

Remember . . . Michael’s own family wanted the executors challenged. They have been legally bullied by the very money those executors control. Judge Melville appointed an attorney who represented Branca against Katherine (Howard Weitzman) and who is being investigated for raping the Cobain estate, as a co-executor for the children against Katherine.

These are the people we were dealing with. Don’t let yourself be moved. They are still just people. They lie and they have a BIG motive to lie.

Keep looking through and you will find the truth.

39 comments:

  1. Bonnie, thanks again for another detailed article. A link from one of your links above took me back to the Page2Live from the Palm Beach Post interview with Al Malnick, datelined as the day after Michael's death. The article reads that Malnick said he signed some papers in 2003 naming himself as the executor of Michael's estate. I wonder which attorney's office he was at when he signed those papers, who else witnessed this, and other details about this incident. I think most people have chalked this up to braggadocio lying on Malnick's part. But what if it's true. Usually an executor being named is part of a will or trust document, which could lead to a later MJ will than the 2002 one filed with the probate court in L.A. On the other hand, the executor does not sign the will or trust documents naming him as such, and the article says Malnick says he signed something.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Bravo Bonnie! This is a wonderful expose, and one I very much agree with. However, I'd also like to point a little tidbit out to you. Let's take a time travel back to when the plan for acquiring of the ATV/Beatles catalog began. Here's a snippet for you, timeline: **September 1984. John Branca flew to Philadelphia to meet with Frank DiLeo and Michael about the Victory tour's problems, John casually mentioned the availability of the ATV catalog. Michael wasn't sure what kind of music ATV represented.

    "Well, it happens to include a few things you might be interested in," John teased.

    "Like?" Michael asked.

    "Northern Songs."

    Michael became excited, "You don't mean THE Northern Songs, do you?"

    "Yeah, Mike," John said. He couldn't contain his enthusiasm. "We're talking The Beatles, man. THE BEATLES."

    In face, Paul McCartney had tried to buy ATV in 1981. He asked Yoko Ono to purchase the publishing house with him for $20 mil ($10 mil each), but she thought that was too much money and declined. Because Paul didn't want to spend the $20 mil himself, the deal fell through.

    As Michael skipped about the room, whooping and hollering, John warned him that there would be stiff competition in a bidding war for such popular songs. "I don't care," Michael declared. "I want those songs. Get me those songs, Branca."

    **Source: "Michael Jackson: The Magic, The Madness, The Whole Story, 1958 - 2009", Pg. 335--by J. Randy Taraborrelli (forgive the reference, but it's the best one out there regarding this issue anyway)

    Now my thoughts are this...It most certainly wasn't only Michael who was aware of the value of the ATV/Beatles catalog. John Branca himself seemed to have done quite a bit of research about it as well, and worse...it was Branca who was responsible for all the "fighting, wheeling and dealing" behind Michael's acquisition of the catalog in the first place.

    Still following me? Now, let's just say this...As we all know, Michael got that catalog, and we all know how valuable it is. Well, so does Branca. Plus, let's throw in the fact that it was HIS "work" (and only MJ's money) that caused Michael to "win." Now, knowing how valuable that catalog is...and the perhaps "tiny commission" that MJ paid Branca for his long hours and so forth to obtain it, let's say for the sake of both motive and arguement, it was NEVER Branca's intention to even share this catalog with Sony Music. I believe it is entirely possible, that it's Branca's intention to have it for himself, while in the meantime he'll sell Sony up the proverbial river just as well as he did Michael, in order to get it. Granted, it may be long shot here, but I don't think it's that far-fetched. Branca is as intelligent as he is aggressive which makes him quite dangerous. Perhaps even more so than Sony.

    ReplyDelete
  3. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Another thing here...Why is it that whenever a "deal" is in the making, John Branca is in the thick of it, even when supposedly NOT in MJ's employ? Also, remember...Mark Geragos and (get this one...) Brian Oxman (now atty for Joe's suit against AEG and Murray) were also a few of MJ's lawyers who had been fired for one reason or another as well. Very suspicious...

    ReplyDelete
  5. from all the research i did abt branca in jul-oct 2009, i concluded this - branca was fired in 2003 and never rehired. he was also fired from sony/atv board of directors in 2006 (which branca claims was his voluntary resignation ----BIG FAT LIE).

    ReplyDelete
  6. I know of which blog you speak and I must admit to scratching my head about the information being distributed from there. The one on Branca being loyal to Michael and that LeGrand had exonerated him had me puzzled for sure because I had read something totally different. I have even come across a site that is trying to discredit you in regards to Branca info and the Thomas? double blog. Do you know anything about former Attorney Genereal, Benjamin R. Civiletti, in regard to Michael.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hi Bonnie – thank you for another very informative and educational blog. While I was searching to help answer the question you asked “why Colony Capital is interested to buy Michael’s share and Sony’s share of the catalog”, I stumbled on this blog that praise John Branca and the good friendly relationship Michael had with him. I immediately thought this blogger is from Branca/Sony camp.
    Here are some of the things that don’t make sense:
    1 - Colony Capital/Barrack buys distress properties with no regard to those who want to hold their properties for sentimental reasons. Okay, if your business is in distress and you have limited income to cover your expenses and it is up for sale, why is that the business or the person who wants to buy it should consider if the seller has some sentimental feeling to hold on to the property? If there is some sentiment involve from the seller side, don’t sell it until you go bankrupt and the creditors come and take it. That will resolve the sentiment question. I think this blogger is trying to show Colony Capital is involved in murdering Michael but the reason he gave is bogus to me.
    2 – Michael fired John Branca in early 2003 and hired him late 2003 and worked until 2006 until he quit himself. The blogger provides a link for this article as a proof that says “some source claiming John Branca negotiated the 60 minutes interview with Ed Bradley”. Mind you, the article said “some source” and did not say John Branca negotiated and here is the source.
    The blogger said so many staff to make John Branca an angel who protected Michael for so many years. I wonder why he did not protect him from those who conspired to kill him if he was not one of the conspirators.
    Bonnie – I still couldn’t find the answer why real estate investor want to involve in music business unless he wants to expand his empire in every arena or knows very well the stress Sony put Michael and wants to strip it from them. But my question is there any stipulation in the will that John can sell it if he wants too?

    ReplyDelete
  8. This is a little off-topic, but thought you may enjoy it. Last night, I saw Diane Dimond on TV, narrating various film clips of former Presidential daughters and their weddings, including Tricia Nixon, Lucy Johnson, Lynda Johnson, and Carolyn Kennedy. This is a tie-in to Chelsea Clinton's wedding this Saturday. She was effusively promising more exciting reports to come. I thought to myself, this is something I can totally agree with! Diane Dimond has found her perfect niche at the network, wedding reporter! Please stay there, Diane, safely away from the real news. I wish you were a society reporter during Michael's trial.

    ReplyDelete
  9. John Branca's father died today.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Rhoda - Al Malnik did not sign any papers. I know someone who knows this for a fact. If he signed papers she would have come across them. There are lots of reports of things out there. Malnik may have a forged document or is just lying. Good point on the signing of wills and trusts. You would think Malnik would KNOW this, being a lawyer and all. But this could also be a story to divert. Not worth paying attention to without a document to view.

    Ladyaquarius - I would consider the source where that is concerned. JRT liked to adlib (aLOT) in his book. With that said, I think that is a very interesting theory about Branca not sharing the catalog with Sony. But Branca was there when Sony bought into it in 1995. Remember Michael was still fighting off Sneddon and was married to LMP at the time. Let's take this a step further . . .

    Someone wrote to me tonight about a theory of Branca's plan to purchase the Sony/ATV catalog USING Michael . . . Michael's money to purchase Something John was moving to eventually control then own. You bringing the possibility of Branca cutting Sony out in the future is interesting.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Bonnie- I agree! Again, I'm sorry for using the JRT reference to the planning/acquisition of the Catalog, but it did set the proper tone and light the fires in perspective (even if it is ad-libbed) for what I call, "the precious." (think the obsession of obtaining the ring...The Lord of the Rings for a moment) ;)

    ReplyDelete
  12. Bonnie- "But Branca was there when Sony bought into it in 1995." Yes, indeed he was. But now...he too appears from all angles here to be a key player in the "Conspiracy" to bring Michael down. Now, in order to gain the trust of Sony (MJ's "enemies"), how else could he achieve such, than to advise MJ in the selling of nearly half of that Catalog? Today, MJ is dead, and his debts are for the most part paid off thanks to his now being (even in death) "the billion dollar man." This in turn means, that since MJ is dead, the Estate (Branca) is now in full command of all things MJ including that Catalog. Even more interesting, Sony paid an unprecedented $250 mil for Michael's vaulted (previously unreleased) music. Sony's butts are literally on the line, now aren't they? If these recordings DON'T sell, and with Sony Music's parent company--Sony Electronics posting huge losses, well...do some math. I'm sure you can see what I am here.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Ladyacquarius - Oxman and Geragos were also mentioned creditors in the Ayscough complaint, and look who Geragos is in the same room with in that picture above.

    SandhyaDeepak - I agree with you. On Branca being fired from Sony/ATV board, do you know why? and do you have a link?

    jomc12 - LeGrand did not exonerate Branca, you are correct. People are getting really bold when they start falsifying court transcripts and putting it online! In regard to someone trying to discredit me, let them. If they are coming after someone like me, we must be doing something right.

    Here are a couple of cached pages in regard to Michael and previous State Attorney General Civiletti. http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:ez9BAYgsrgYJ:today.msnbc.msn.com/id/19486369+%22Attorney+Genereal,+Benjamin+R.+Civiletti%22+%2B+Michael+Jackson&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us (copy and paste) and http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:XLjMgedugCEJ:celebsnow.net/%3Fcat%3D291+%22Attorney+Genereal,+Benjamin+R.+Civiletti%22+%2B+Michael+Jackson&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us same article.

    Former U.S. Attorney General Benjamin R. Civiletti info is here: http://www.venable.com/venable-announces-senior-management-changes-managing-partner-jim-shea-becomes-firm-chair-longtime-chair-benjamin-civiletti-to-focus-on-investigationsgovernance-practice-karl-racine-named-managing-partner-05-03-2006/

    Interesting . . . former U.S. Attorney General. But he is with Venable.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Mesrak (Mimi) -

    1. I look at what Colony has done and IS doing. They are holding onto Neverland. Why, I don't know. Colony had not motive to kill or go after Michael. They didn't own a catalog, had no rights to it even if Michael defaulted on the loan (thanks to Sony clause) and if they were so brutal, they would have sold Neverland. From everything I have seen, from paperwork trails I have followed, Colony has done nothing wrong. They helped keep Sony/ATV out of Sony hands by purchasing that loan, so . . . from what I see they did good. More to the story I'm sure, but that is what I see.

    2. That blogger is deluded. Branca spent not one day at that 2005 trial. He had five months to prove his friendship. But why would Branca show up for something in which he was investigated for and implicated in conspiring in?

    Branca did not negotiate that 60 Minutes deal. The trial had not even started yet when this was taped.

    I had thoughts of Colony revenge-purchasing the ATV from Sony, but it wasn't even up for sale. Could Branca sell it? I suppose so. But his motivation in all this IS that catalog. He would have to either sell it to himself or sell it to Sony. He had an opportunity to sell that 25% off of Michael's share back to Sony but didn't do it. It may be because he knows he is being watched.

    Rhoda - I can't think of safer place for Diane Demon. Maybe she and pal JRT can do farm reports when they get closer to retirement.

    Yes, I had read that too, that Branca's father died. I hope they give him enough time to tend to that.

    ReplyDelete
  15. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Bonnie- I realize that Branca hides in the picture, which leads me to another sidedish of inquisitive amusement as to why "Team Papa Joe" (with Oxman at the legal helm--will he fall asleep in court on Joe, like he did Michael in 2005 too?) so suddenly switched gears from going after the Estate (Branca) for a monthly stipend to suing AEG/Murray for wrongful death. Worse, ONLY Oxman is screaming that MJ was a drug addict. You don't hear this coming out of any of MJ's other previous attorneys. Enemies or not. I find that a tad curious too. But, even more so the fact that Oxman isn't going after the Estate (Branca) anymore. Is it possible that Branca scared him off??? Definitely... This in turn leads me to believe that the entire AEG/Murray trial will end up being a total farce. It's all "smoke-screen" for people to take their eyes off of the dealings of the Estate (Branca) during that time, in addition to delaying and drawing out the Manslaughter trial. Anotherwords, it's all "sauce for the goose."

    Oh, one more thing...the Estate has also been making payments on the Colony loan regarding Neverland. It's figured that if MJ keeps making money, it'll be approximately only 2 yrs. (at most) that the debt to Colony will be repaid, and guess who will own Neverland? The Estate (Branca). This in turn, will likely leave Branca open for "other things." Cough, cough...Hint...hint. Stay tuned!

    ReplyDelete
  17. Lady - Very good points you brought up. Here is some interesting trivia for you all . . .

    Who in this whole game has said words to the effect of:

    "The truth is going to come out..." "We know who it is and the truth will come out".

    "I will tell you exactly who it is"

    "You will know the truth"

    Murray
    Joe Jackson
    Tohme Tohme
    Katherine Jackson
    LaToya Jackson
    Jermaine Jackson
    Peter Lopez
    Randy Jackson

    I would say that these people all have the same script from the same director. Just which director are they getting their direction from?

    ReplyDelete
  18. Poor dear Michael: "For the moment, he remains a man without a country, quite literally, and perhaps one without the cash for a new down payment...

    ReplyDelete
  19. From what I read lately, Colony has controlling interest in NL; the estate may have an "interest" but Colony controls. Barrack claims he is waiting for the market to right itself and he will put NL up for $100,000,000; in the meantime, they have spent a few million fixing the place up. Another story I read is there is talk of turning it into an "amusement attraction" with some reminiscences of Michael (the attraction part). His distressed property fund which purchased NL is down 60% this year, according to an article in the WSJ, so Barrack is looking to NL for "redemption" for his shareholders.

    ReplyDelete
  20. A little info about Branca - 2005 Trial

    I followed the trial quite closely. During that time that team meeting was widely reported, there was a press announcement, pictures, videos etc.

    Anyway that aside, there's another piece of evidence that demonstrates that at least for the trial Branca was on Michael's side.

    He was listed as a possible defense witness - you can see that for yourself in the released court documents below - see page 34 http://www.sbscpublicaccess.org/docs/ctdocs/121304motcompeldisc06.pdf

    As he was listed as a possible defense witness he wouldn't be allowed to attend any court hearing for any reason(to show support, his friendship, his loyalty even if he wanted) other than testifying.

    hope this helps to put the pieces together to solve the puzzle

    ReplyDelete
  21. This is all very deep and way over my head!

    So I won't comment on anything or anyone, specifically.

    But....

    I will keep Reading and Watching and Waiting.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Also I have a question. How did this other blog has falsified LeGrand's testimony?

    This the links to the ALL court transcripts (which was collected during the trial and have been around sometime) - http://www.box.net/shared/09zmi31anq#/shared/09zmi31anq/2/9455516

    Legrand testified on May 13 download that one.

    In the transcripts LeGrand says that they found no evidence supporting the claims against Branca and he would be doing a great wrong if he said otherwise.

    Mesereau also states that the report showed that Sony was depositing money in some offshore account for Michael's behalf.

    Can somebody please explain to me what is falsified? Thank you very much.

    ReplyDelete
  23. my2cents,

    I saw page 34 of that document and Branca's name is there for a possible Defense Witness, like you said.

    But, where is Macelley Caulkin's name?
    He is NOT on the list and he did indeed, testify
    for Michael as a Defense Witness.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Thanks for this Bonnie. I don't trust anyone who was around Michael during the time of the 05 allegations and anyone after that. They all sound fishy and all of them have much to hide, like you said. I don't believe Branca was a good guy or anyone else for that matter. I really can't wrap my head around why people think he might be a good guy in this situation. Do they forget he is running everything now? And if we was a good guy, why is he making deals with the people who killed him? Branca is in the same pool, the same circle with everyone who is making money off of Michael after they killed him. HOW IS THIS BEING THE GOOD GUY!? I don't get it, I really don't. I do not trust him, one bit!

    ReplyDelete
  25. Oh Bonnie...you should write a blog about the judge who threw 70 year old Richard Line into jail with no reason at all and what Richard may know about Michael's death. I really would like to know. Sounds very interesting.

    ReplyDelete
  26. @Josie

    During the trial the prosecution was allowed to bring in prior acts and they provided witness saying that Michael molested Maculay Culkin, Wade Robson, Brett Barnes.

    Culkin was added as a witness after 2 Neverland employee's testified saying that they saw Michael molesting him at the arcade.

    see the other link with the all court transcripts. Culkin testified on May 11. During his testimony he says that he never planned to testify and he came afterwards seeing the things being reported on TV and people thinking about those things as true.

    ReplyDelete
  27. @michaelmagic - Richard Fine is the name of the attorney sitting in jail in LA for exposing the payoffs to sitting judges.

    All info about Richard Fine can be found on the website of William Wagener, the Santa Maria reporter who was in court EVERY DAY of Michael's trial and the only reporter who, FROM THE START OF THE TRIAL, reported Michael as innocent. Google William Wagener's YouTube channel; he has much information on that travesty of a trial and wants to make it public. The prosecutor Tom Sneddon is intrinsically entwined in Michael's downward slide since 1993.

    ReplyDelete
  28. @my2cents,

    Thank You.

    Now I understand.

    ReplyDelete
  29. People, John Branca was investigated during this trial. According to MY source John Branca was not a witness for the defense, LOL! I'm sorry, but this is getting ridiculous. These people are reaching.

    Richard Fine was brought up on a past blog and I do keep referring to him throughout these blogs. I was told that Richard Fine had the key to Michael's justice . . . proof that judges took bribes including California's sitting judges.

    On my blog going up late tonight, I have some revelations for you in regard to the people coming over here to post false court testimony that is contradictory to what happened. We are learning some information so hang tight. I can't release yet.

    ReplyDelete
  30. These people are very tricky. The defense witness list? Also lists the Arvizos and Bashire amongst other "Prosecution" witnesses. This means he may be questioned, not that he was witnessing for the defense.

    Nice try.

    ReplyDelete
  31. @ Bonnie

    I'm looking forward for your post about the falsified court testimonies.

    However I'll be honest I'm confused by your last posts that you say "people" coming here to post falsified testimony, "people" are very tricky etc. By "people" do you mean me personally? (your posts seems to refer to my posts). If yes, please say so openly.

    If yes, I'll also want you to know that I haven't falsified information. Like I said I followed the 2005 trial very closely. At that time superior court of california had a website (http://www.sbscpublicaccess.org/) created for Michael as the case was determined to be "extraordinary" and they released the daily transcripts at another website (www.exemplaris.com). the official transcript website was closed in 2007, several fansites / fans still publish those official transcripts.

    I believe them to be the full, complete and correct transcripts and if I'm mistaken in anyway and they are falsified I'm waiting for you to enlighten me.

    In regards to the defense witness list I merely provided you a little information that you can see for yourself, interpret and use any way you want. Branca never testified so we will never know what he would have said. and you are right, for example Debbie Rowe was on the prosecution witness list but her testimony helped Michael., therefore we cannot conclude that Branca would provide all good things for Michael's benefit. But at the same time Branca's name on the list can explain why he wouldn't or couldn't attend the court hearings.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Bonnie – I read the interview transcript of Tom Mesereau with Larry king after Michael’s trial ended on the CNN link you gave us. On that interview Tom made a very astounding revelation how the prosecutors handled the case. He said ( I am paraphrasing it) the prosecutors DID NOT DO a thorough investigations of the accusers and in general about the case. If they had done that, the truth of Michael’s innocent was right there in front of their face. We keep saying and those people you listed are saying the TRUTH WILL COME OUT on Michael’s death. How do we know the prosecutors are doing the necessary investigations that will lead to the truth to come out. Based on what we saw concerning Michael’s case in the past, they fail to do what was required. Are there any other investigation going on beside what the prosecutors are doing that will help the case or we have to rely on their job. I am sorry to ask this question because I can’t be able to see how the truth is going to come out with them handling it.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Bonnie, I have hundreds of bookmarks. Let me try to find it. If I cant I will put all my MJ investigation bookmarks in my blog.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Mimi - Because the people within the justice system in California are not the only ones "investigating" After what happened in 2005, do you really believe they would leave this in the hands of LAPD or the D.A.? Nahhhhh...

    Prosecutors are not doing an investigation. THEIR investigation is "over". This is something else. Think about it, it will come. I don't want to post this here.

    2cents - No, not you personally . . . the people putting out this information that you are trying to use as proof on this page. I have insiders I talk to. Branca is no friend. Period. And the transcripts links you posted says it all http://www.sbscpublicaccess.org which sends you to exemplaris which says this:

    Exemplaris Service Has Ended

    The RealLegal Exemplaris service has ended on December 31, 2007. Attorneys or other individuals wishing to purchase transcripts should contact the court reporter in the court or district where the trial or hearing was held. We are very grateful for those official court reporters who have supported Exemplaris in the past.

    We are working with our partners at Thomson West to provide official court transcripts to the legal industry. As this solution gets closer to launching we will keep people informed.

    Please don't hesitate to contact any member of our team with your feedback or questions. We can be reached at (phone number). Shall I call them?

    I'll let you know what they say on Monday.

    The link the transcripts I have are posted on several blogs, but it is late, I am tired and you can do a search on this blog to find them easy enough. Thank you 2Cents for your time. :o)

    ReplyDelete
  35. here is the link ( not the one with complete info though). http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,191760,00.html

    other links which insist how much michael wanted branca out : http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,201294,00.html

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,203916,00.html

    ReplyDelete
  36. Bonnie, donno if u came across this link. exactly before the completion of 7 yrs, Micahel is dead and there is anew deal by Sony with the executors.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,58153,00.html

    ReplyDelete
  37. Sandy - Thank you for your links. Especially the last one. You look at the date of that article and that takes Michael's "masters" to 2009. They were supposed to revert back to him in July of 2009 . . . guess what happened?

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,191760,00.html
    The link above . . . read this carefully. Branca was already out, but his 5% share was bought out. Branca did not "quit" Michael in 2006, he was released from Sony/ATV. The CONCLUDED Branca's 20 year association with Michael, but he had not been working at Michael's lawywer since 2003.

    See how they twist things?

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,201294,00.html Again this link talks about Michael buying out Branca's share, which he did. This is confused sometimes with Michael's attempt to buy out Sony's share in early 2005 as his trial was getting under way, but he opted for cash during his trial instead in the refinancing deal.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,203916,00.html Buyout. And did you notice this guy's snide remarks, slanted towards Sony? Like Sony didn't put Michael where he was. I hope that whole company goes under.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Bonnie, I made an error in my comment. Branca was not fired from Sony/ATV BOD, he resigned.

    He claimed he resigned from being Michael's legal counsel in 2006( will try to find this link for u), while he resigned from Sony/Atv BOD. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,159518,00.html

    ReplyDelete
  39. I posted a comment last night before I read this entry. I think it is interesting that I saw the expression of violation in Michael's eyes just like Bonnie (and probably all of you) even before I read this entry (July 29'S). I was saying that it looked like "visual rape". I just mean it is so apparent how cornered Michael felt.
    We are all drawn to Michael for obvious reasons, one being that we have something in common with him...that is an intuitive edge not everyone has. I think Michael would want us to continue using this ability along with our creativity and love to show us the way to the truth by looking deeper, as you are Bonnie, and thinking outside the box as he did.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.