First, let me say I do not hate Lisa Marie Presley and I do not want anyone thinking that based on what I have written below. I would describe my feelings towards her as "indifferent". In the past I felt a lot of sympathy for her and assumed anger, a tough exterior and a broken heart fueled most of her comments and actions taken towards Michael. As of current, I am not sure what to think anymore--I thought this most recent show on Oprah would have been a bit of a "tribute", filled with heartfelt emotions, sadness and sympathy--I felt very cold after watching it and the only word I kept recalling was "drugs"--though never have drugs been discussed as a problem by her--until now.
I have decided to take a circumferential view at all the things she has said in the past about Michael and compare it to now while giving my commentary in the mix. It is a semi-open letter to Lisa only because in some instances it is just easier to address it as if I were telling Lisa my feelings. I do not expect her to read my blog though if she did I would have no regrets.
My commentary is bolded and included within "~~~".
I. "Living with Michael Jackson"
Rolling Stone Magazine – April 2003
Like everybody else, she saw Martin Bashir’s interview with Michael Jackson. “I watched it and cringed,” she says. “I had the same reaction everybody else had — it was like watching a train wreck. It seemed like it was overly cruel — the guy [Bashir] had his agenda and was after him. I don’t make a habit of feeling bad for that guy [Jackson], because he kind of likes to push that sympathy button sometimes, and I don’t really go for it anymore, but that time I did. I was, ‘Oh, no, you really just got screwed.’ It honestly looked to me like, it would be like somebody walking into a convalescent home and just antagonizing someone and having it on film the whole time.”
LA Times – April 2003
“I did see the British program, and it does look like he was set up,” she responds. “But, no, I could never feel sorry for Michael Jackson.”
Enough Rope – March 2004
A: In the Martin Bashir documentary on Jackson, did you recognize him as the man you’d been married to?
L: No, but I thought there was agenda there. You can edit eight months’ worth of footage to look any way you want it to look. But I never saw any behavior like that when I was with him or if I did it was so brief. There were so many sides to him but they seemed to want one particular side in the documentary. The whole thing, to me, was like someone going into a hospital and badgering a patient. It was like he was antagonizing him and it was cruel. Unnecessarily. And that’s screwed up.
Oprah - October 21st, 2010
O: By 2005 was when he was on trial with the second charge. Your feelings at that time were what?
L: He was calling me about it and I said “Please keep your head together, please. If this goes to trial, please hold it together.” He said, “What are you talking about, what do you mean?” And he said, “You mean drugs?” And I said, “Yes.” Because all I saw was random things coming out, whether it was Martin Bashir and all these interviews, and in those interviews I saw him intoxicated. I didn’t see the Michael that I knew in that Martin Bashir interview. He was high as a kite, from what I saw and from what I knew.
O: Really?
L: He was either too speedy or he was sedated. It wasn’t the Michael that I knew.
O: The shocking things, he said some pretty shocking things in that Martin Bashir interview, particularly about how he felt about how it was okay to sleep with young children.
L: I think he said that stuff sometimes to be defiant, because he got so angry at having been accused. He was such a stubborn little rebel at times and he was like a child and he would just say what he felt everyone didn’t want him to say. I don’t feel like he had a straight head during those things and I think that they were edited in a very, very manipulative nasty way.
~~~I hate how suspected drug abuse is now thrown into this mix when never, ever before has it been mentioned.
How could you not feel sorry for this man when he opened up his life to the world, to try and have them understand him, only to be manipulated and made out to be some type of monster when that is the furthest thing from the truth? He was not a saint but he was not Satan, either, and that is exactly what the media attempted (and attempts, still) to turn him into--a predator, a liar, a fake. His legacy and career were already damaged from the allegations in1993--this documentary destroyed the remaining cheerfulness in his life when he did nothing to deserve such pain.
So now in his death, it goes from "he was set up" and Bashir having an "agenda" and seeing the cruelty of what happened to him even if there was a lack sympathy, with no mention of drugs, to "he was high as a kite, from what I saw and from what I knew." I have seen "Living with Michael Jackson" and I cannot agree with him appearing to be "high as a kite" or "sedated". There were times he did seem agitated but that could be attributed to just about anything. Even if medications were at any point altering his mood in some way, the use of medications for legitimate medical purpose is not abuse or addiction and Michael did have medical issues which required medications from time to time. This observation of him "intoxicated" nothing more than a distant assumption, one I do not feel should be made at this time or any time in the future.
To the best of my knowledge, Bashir has never mentioned drug use (which would be shocking for him to omit that if he saw or thought such) and numerous other individuals around him have denied ever seeing him intoxicated or having a problem with medications including Tom Mesereau, Dr. Patrick Treacy, David Nordahl and Cherilyn Lee, among others . We must remember that he was being filmed for this fiasco, he was the center of attention for this documentary, it was "show time". Christian Audigier has also mentioned that at times he believes Michael would "show out"--he never saw any signs of a problem when they spent time together. Bashir picked up on Michael "performing" during "Living with Michael Jackson" here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xCKixAtO5M&feature=related
To insinuate he was under the influence during the filming of "Living with Michael Jackson" is especially devastating to me given at that time he was a single parent to three children and spent time with other children as well. The safety and well-being of his children as well as other children were of his top priority--children and their well-being were everything to him. Nothing could pain me more than to have his parenting of his precious children under form of scrutiny when he was, to me, the most loving, caring, doting and devoted father to his children and a wonderful surrogate father/brother to other children as well. His children were his life--not drugs. Perhaps this was not to be insinuated but the conclusion can and will be drawn now based on such statements by people who know no better--and there are plenty of them out there.
I know that I will be saying this over and over again in this blog but before one speaks about medications and such topics as use, abuse, addiction, dependence and pharmacology they need to know what the medications are in the first place. Individuals who assume he had an addiction problem assume there was problem yet can give no specifics because nothing is concrete. He died from a drug called propofol that has NO relation to pain narcotics. Its effects are limited to a short duration of time--the time in which you are unconscious. There is no lingering "high" or "low", no linger craving or withdrawal. There is no correlation to what may or may not have been occurring in 2002-2003 and to how he died in 2009--so why make such assumptions that do nothing to benefit him or his legacy?~~~
II. The Allegations
Oprah - October 2010
O: You know, I’ve asked you this and I have to ask it again, even though it’s an uncomfortable subject, but whether or not you had ever seen any inappropriate behavior between Michael and young children?
L: Are you asking me again?
O: I’m asking you again.
L: The answer is absolutely not, in any way. I did not see anything like that.
O: So you never saw anything and to this day you don’t believe any of those charges were true?
L: No. I honestly cannot say, the only people who are going to be able to say the truth are him and whoever was in that room at the time it allegedly took place. I was never in the room, it wouldn’t be fair for me to… I can tell you I never saw anything like that.
~~~Margaret Maldonado does a better job at defending Michael in her book, in my opinion. One of Margaret's recollections about her sons spending time with Michael in November 1994 is such a beautiful story. "Who helped you with your homework?", she asked them. "Uncle Michael!!!" Where are your stories Lisa? We would love to hear stories like that from you.
Being that you lived with him, were married to him, that you allowed your children to spend time with him--people are quick to pay attention to what you have to say about the allegations and will give your word some credibility and authority. I cannot believe you would ever cast doubt upon the man you married, especially given what we all (that is, the readers of my blog) know about Evan Chandler and the Arvizos, that is, the facts about them and their deceitful ways. Did you know Michael at all, Lisa? I think you did, better than you realize. You analyze him too much--I know Oprah kept pushing the agenda but you should and could have put her in her place for Michael's sake. Who do you love or care about more? Oprah or Michael?
This timid, half-assed defending of Michael regarding the allegations does not do this man justice. These allegations are partly the reason this man is lying in a grave somewhere and his children are now parentless. These allegations are why I and millions of others did not give this man and his music a chance to come into our hearts while he was alive. He came into my heart once it was already too late and that makes me sick to admit that but people need to understand the implications of how these allegations affected his life and now linger into his death.
Let your "cousin" Oprah (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v9lSDI0KS3I) try to ask me what I think about the allegations someday and I will tell her that I'd bet my life on Michael's innocence, then I would tell her to give Tom Mesereau and possibly Geraldine Hughes a call and drop it for once and all and just accept that Michael Jackson was not a child molester nor a pedophile. She should read up on the facts, interview the two I just mentioned above, and help spread the truth about him, not dehumanize him or remain defiantly aloof to the truth so she can score ratings. Not everyone accused of molestation is a molester. Evidence proves Michael was extorted. We are his voice now and we owe it to him to get the truth out whenever possible and to never back down so at least some of the ignorance can be eradicated.~~~
III. The 2005 Trial
Enough Rope – March 2004
A: And when you look at that man now, and I’m not asking you to say what’s going on now because you can’t possibly know, but when you look at him, how do you feel about him? Do you feel sorry for him, do you feel for him still?
L: I, I you know ta- I can’t, it’s really bizarre, I feel nothing. It’s just, I watch just like anyone else when anything’s going on and I have the same reaction and wow or you know holy shit or whatever, it’s whatever people are doing I’m doing the same thing. That’s, well with nothing attached any more, which is, it took a long time but that’s where it’s at now.
Toronto Sun – April 2005
How does she avoid media coverage of the Jackson trial? “It’s really, really easy,” she says. “For one thing, I’m very busy. I’ve probably slept six hours in the last four days. If the radio’s on with it, I don’t listen. If it’s on TV, I don’t look. I’m so bored with it, I’m so done with it, I can’t even look - I’m not with him, nor have I been for a very long time.”
Larry King Live – April 2005
K: A supporter? And now you’re neutral?
L: I’m just benign really.
Oprah - October 2010
O: When was the last time you spoke to him?
L: Coherently good conversation? Sometime in 2005. It was a very long conversation. I was so removed from him and he could feel it and he could hear it. And I think that’s one of the things that killed me in the end too was that I was very distanced and he was checking to get a read, he was trying to throw a line out to see if I would bite emotionally and I wouldn’t. I was pretty shut off at that point. I don’t even know how I managed to be like that but I was. He was asking me, he wanted to tell me that I was right about a lot of the people around him, that it had panned out to be exactly what he and I had talked about years ago. He asked if I still loved him and we went into a whole thing about that and I told him I was indifferent and he didn’t like that word and he cried. He was trying to find out where I was at and how I could become so detached. Then the final part of the conversation was him telling me that he felt that someone was going to try to kill him to get a hold of his catalogue and his estate.
O: So he actually gave you names?
L: He did. And I’d rather not say them. But he expressed to me that his concern over his life.
~~~First, I hope you have gone to the police with these names.
How could you feel nothing for someone whom you once thought you would spend the rest of your life with? It is words like these that make me realize why he spent more time with children rather than adults. He knew children loved him and he loved them equally, innocently. Love should not be conditional.
So who cut who out of their life? You kept saying he made people "disposable"--including yourself. He was calling you. He was reaching out to you in times of stress. You were seen spending time with him off and on for years after the marriage was over so you were not "disposed of" by any means. He tried to reach out to you, make things work out for years after the divorce and you shut him out in 2005 apparently because you did not care anymore about him at that time, not even enough to offer him some sort of sympathy as a fellow human being who was hurting and suffering at the hands of others.
The trial that Michael had to endure reminds me a lot of a soldier who has been off to war. They come back a changed person, likely suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder. They are hurt and traumatized, exposed to a facet of life few will ever see or feel. They want to reach out to someone, anyone familiar and whom they love. Imagine a solider reaching out to an ex-wife wanting some sort of solace after he had been through the war. Michael needed someone to tell him they loved him, someone he trusted--and loved. He was denied what he sought so desperately--just to know someone cared about him and loved him, still, after all he was going through and had gone through during that time. It was always important to him that he be loved--that is why he did all that he did in life and there were many times in his life he did not feel he was loved. I cannot imagine the pain he would have felt questioning if anyone in the world still loved him with no one there to tell him yes. What did Michael do to deserve any of this pain? Nothing.
I personally could never tell someone who went through what Michael did that I did not love him, even if that love had evolved over time into some other type of love. I do not blame him for trying to figure out why you were so detached because I do not understand it either. Someday it will hit you like a ton of bricks and it will hurt because he is not here for you to reach out to anymore. He can never call you again for you to have that second chance to try and patch things up. He really is gone. If only we could turn back time, as Cher once sang...
The image of him crying after being told you felt "indifferent" will forever be burned in my mind as one of the saddest and lowest moments of his life, especially for someone who cared about everyone else but himself. After all, he ended up doing "This Is It" for mankind, for the world, the children--not himself. In the end, it led to his death no matter how you look at it. All the things he went through in life, he never gave up his will to live, even when he felt abandoned and alone. That is true strength.
I do not know how Michael survived the trial. It must have been the love of his children that got him through the ordeal.~~~
IV. HBO Appearance - 1995
Newsweek – April 2003
"No, it wasn’t mutual. He was in the hospital, and I couldn’t figure out what was wrong with him. I started asking questions, and it was always a different story. He said I was 'causing trouble' and 'stirring up problems.' He told me, 'you’re making my heart rate go up,' and asked me to go home, and I said, 'Good. I want out.' This person is one of the biggest entertainers out there. He is not stupid. He’s very charming when he wants to be, and when you go into his world you step into this whole other realm. I could tell you all about the craziness – all these things that were odd, different, evil or not cool – but it still took me two and a half years to get my head out of it.
Playboy - June 2003
P: It was reported that you asked him for a divorce while he was in the hospital recovering from “exhaustion.”
L: Not true. There was a bit of a showdown in the hospital, and I didn’t understand what was wrong with him. I didn’t know what he was up to. When I started asking too many questions about what was wrong, he asked me to leave. This is the real story. He said, “You’re causing trouble.” The doctors wanted me to go. I freaked out, because it was all too familiar. When he got out, I called him and said, “I want out.”
Oprah - October 2010
O: Okay, so in May of 1994 when you were married to him or during the time that you were married to him, did you suspect a drug problem?
L: Honestly, I didn’t really suspect and catch on until just before I filed for divorce. There was just an occasion, an incident, where he had collapsed and he was in the hospital.
O: This was for HBO?
L: Yeah, there was an appearance he was supposed to make.
(In December 1995 Michael Jackson collapsed onstage while rehearsing for an HBO concert special in New York. His doctors said Michael was suffering from a viral infection. Lisa Marie flew to his side in the hospital where he stayed for six days.)
L: Everybody flew to the hospital. And, um, it was very confusing what was wrong, because every day there was a different report. I couldn’t tell what was happening. Dehydration, low blood pressure, exhaustion, a virus, so I couldn’t really get a straight answer as to what was happening with him. I think we were all a little bit in the dark. At that point I think I really got from various indications I believed that was going on then.
Dr. Alleyne - July 2009
http://www.michaeljackson.com/uk/node/820899
“Mr. Jackson was in critical condition,” Alleyne said. “He was dehydrated. He had low blood pressure. He had a rapid heart rate. He was near death.”
Alleyne gave the order to have the defibrillator ready if needed to treat the abnormal heart rhythm of the most famous entertainer with the best rhythm on Earth.
After about an hour or so that December dusk, Alleyne said he had Jackson stabilized with intravenous fluids and other treatment, and transferred Jackson to intensive care.
After about 72 hours, Alleyne and Jackson's publicists and others realized they had to give a press conference. So Alleyne worked with Jackson's people to go over what could be said, what to stay away from but still tell the truth. Alleyne was blunt with the world, saying Jackson did not have any immune system problems because rumors about AIDS were swirling. He was blunt that Jackson had no drugs in his system.
News accounts from 1995 show Alleyne and his then-partner, Dr. Bob Glennon, talking about Jackson's condition to convince the world that Jackson was, in fact, critically ill.
~~~Scientology's View of "Drugs":
http://www.scientology.org/faq/scientology-and-dianetics-auditing/is-it-okay-to-take-any-sort-of-drugs-when-you-are-in-scientology.html
"Drugs are essentially poisons. The degree they are taken determines the effect. A small amount acts as a stimulant. A greater amount acts as a sedative. A large amount acts as a poison and can kill one dead."
This statement could not be any further from the truth (notice it correlates with the depiction of him being "high as a kite or sedated" during "Living with Michael Jackson"). Depending on what receptors within the body a drug interacts with determines how a drug effects a person physically. Some drugs will only stimulate. Some will only sedate. Some will do neither or may do one or the other depending on the individual. Dosing has nothing to do with it. Some drugs are dangerous but are necessary for livelihood and survival. Anything put into the body can be labeled a poison, including some of the foods we eat. No one will sit there and tell me that someone with schizophrenia should not be treated with antipsychotic medications or a person in pain should not be allowed to take pain medication.
I cannot help but see how Scientology would be appealing to former addicts and/or those who have seen the effects of what addiction can do to a loved one. I also cannot help but see Scientology thinking everyone has a drug issue and blaming all problems in life on some type of drug abuse/addiction issue when in some cases such does not exist. Is this what is happening to Michael now especially because of the confusion regarding his death?
In my opinion, this sort of view on medication can be very hurtful to people who suffer from legitimate issues (including Michael who suffered from physical pain and injuries over the years) and can cloud people's view of what is "addiction" really is. I have seen too many times where people suffer and even die from loved ones' fears they have become or will become an "addict" to a substance that can be used to treat their ailment. This type of misunderstanding is an epidemic across the country.
You were an addict once yourself before you become a Scientologist Lisa. You should be able to know when there is a problem, with certainty, and should have seen things throughout the marriage, day after day that were indicative of some sort of problem. You stated to Oprah, " I didn’t really suspect and catch on until just before I filed for divorce. There was just an occasion, an incident, where he had collapsed and he was in the hospital." You said this one incident caused your divorce yet you had no idea a problem was even there during the marriage--you only assumed an addiction apparently in retrospect, especially given his manner of death (which I will get into shortly). You also stated, " At that point I think I really got from various indications I believed that was going on then." You "think" is not good enough. Assumptions should not be stated as facts and not be allowed to be taken as fact. This reminds me too much of how people handled the molestation allegations--they assumed this or that and determined it MUST be fact. NO. That is not how facts are established. How can you make an assumption like this about someone whom needs to be defended from all the bullshit out there about him?
It is hard to comment on what did or did not happen in the hospital since I was not there but I cannot help but imagine there was no straight answer because of the tension going on between the both of you beforehand. A "wall" had been established by anger by both of you. I think it would only be natural when something does not make sense to assume the worst, especially when you have witnessed the "worst" yourself as a child--the fear of that happening to someone else, especially one you care about, is always lurking in the back of the mind.
What Dr. Alleyne discusses sounds very logical, that he was dehydrated due to a virus (ex. gastrointestinal virus) in addition to physical activity in preparation of the special and this caused some serious electrolyte imbalances (ex. low potassium) due to the loss of fluids which then caused his heart to go into a dangerous rhythm which would cause loss of consciousness. Dehydration/arrhythmias can cause low blood pressure (one usually loses consciousness if their blood pressure is too low). It is a known fact that Michael pushed it too hard sometimes. This was man known to be intravenously fed while on tour because he could not eat and lost too much fluids just from performing. On June 29, 1999 he kept performing despite a catastrophic failure in the props for "Earth Song" in Germany:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pq4hi8Ep7qk&feature=fvsr
Karen Faye has said from the incident that he told her afterwards:
"You know Turkle, the only thing that I heard in my head, was my father's voice saying to me, MICHAEL, DON'T DISAPPOINT THE AUDIENCE!"
He was not a machine--he was merely a mortal man but at times he pushed himself harder than he should have.~~~
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Nikki said, "After all, he ended up doing "This Is It" for mankind, for the world, the children--not himself. In the end, it led to his death no matter how you look at it. All the things he went through in life, he never gave up his will to live, even when he felt abandoned and alone. That is true strength."
ReplyDeleteYes, Michael did have bigger things in mind for the TII concerts as you said. It wasn't purely for himself, however, and forgive me for bringing this up, but another more sinister reason also loomed large for doing the concerts and that was the very real threat of financial ruin. As we all know Michael was reported to be $400 million in debt at the time of his death. There are entire cities in the mid-western U.S. that have that kind of debt! It's staggering and I'm sure was overwhelming Michael's finances to the point of crippling him financially.
Over the last 3 years I believe he was making an effort to get back on top of his finances again. One example was Neverland. He was able to get a deal settled on that property a few years ago with Colony Capital through Tohme Tohme to buy the debt (around $24 million). He was given some breathing room with that deal but that was only the beginning. The financial squeeze was far from over.
The Encino property, where his mother and some other family members live, and the home he grew up in from the time he was 10 years old until he was 27, was in danger of being forclosed on with in a few weeks after his death. With the resurgance of everything Michael over the last year and several months, that obigation has now been settled.
Like you said, Michael never gave up the will to live, but he came close. In the year immediately after the trial, his world appeared to go into a tail spin. Employees at his ranch weren't getting paid and many other bills were coming past due. The state of California sued him for not paying his workers for several months and letting employment insurance lapse. The state won the case. 2005 to the beginning of 2006 were probably the lowest points in Michael's life. He clearly didn't stay at that low point and he did start to work on getting his affairs back in order. He still had a long was to go but I think he was very determined to make it happen.
I agree with what you said about his children. I also believe it was because of them that he had the motivation to start turning that corner, whether it was making it through the trial or working toward making TII happen. There is a sadness to this, but sometimes I get the impression he really was living his life for them, and only them, in the last several years of his life. He loved them dearly and he wanted them to be proud of their dad and not just because of what he did in the past but what he was going to do in the present and in the future.
I can't begin to tell you how much my heart goes out to him and his children. June 25, 2009 still feels like yesterday to me....:-(
It's a up hill fight when you have MJ family and pass ex saying he was an addict.
ReplyDeleteBut if people are smart they will see the truth, I have been to the doctor and got so much drug for one halement that if I where to die I would be lable an addict.
Some one write the other day that what happen to MJ was not normal but satanic I have to agree we judge him so hard for what we do everyday in our life, if those wall could talk people would see we are not the different from MJ we look in the mirror and don't like what we see so we try to distort it with lies.
I feel pity for those people who judge MJ and found him guilty of been a human the one that they don't want to see we our self.
What is the saying hell have no fury like a woman scorned that is Lisa, how dear MJ go have children with the likes of Debbie Rowe while she was writing him letter saying was ready to give him nine children.
After all she is a king daughter. Make no mistake Oprah and lisa both know what are doing using MJ for there own evil gain,
But where I come from they say God na sleep him a see and he his the final judge.
Love and peace keep fighting I am with you.
Testing I don't see my comments
ReplyDeleteHi Sandy,
ReplyDeleteYou are right. I think the reason he finally agreed to the shows was because of his financial situation. I mean, I think initially he saw good things out of the tour, or moreover he tried to look at it optimistically though in my opinion he never wanted to tour again, then when he started to lose control of the situation where his entire livelihood was at stake then it became, in my eyes, a death trap but he was going to keep trying. Michael had too much responsibility put on him from such a young age. It had gotten to the point where he was sinking and no one was helping him and the thing is he was NOT sinking because of his own fault. This was a man sued on an almost daily basis by, and let's be blunt now, by psychotic individuals who never even laid eyes on him, he was sued by companies who had no dealings with him personally, he was having money shuffled from him left and right. People were swindling him. Michael knew the business, he knew how things should go, he did not suddenly become a poor businessman. Yes, he earned money from the catalogs but it was going to lawsuits and greedy businessmen surrounding him and not into his pockets to blow. I am just now seeing the scope of what all was happening to him and it is horrifying.
"There is a sadness to this, but sometimes I get the impression he really was living his life for them (his children), and only them, in the last several years of his life. He loved them dearly and he wanted them to be proud of their dad and not just because of what he did in the past but what he was going to do in the present and in the future."
Sandy, that is the truth, pure and simple.
Hi Bridgett!
ReplyDelete"What is the saying hell have no fury like a woman scorned that is Lisa, how dear MJ go have children with the likes of Debbie Rowe while she was writing him letter saying was ready to give him nine children."
That is the truth! But you know, I thought Lisa would not continue to be scorned after his death. I mean, she is either scorned or cold as ice. I don't know which one. Just seems she obviously didn't love him unconditionally as he did. That is one of the greatest shames--he deserved that, not just from fans, but from a wife, too, especially.
It is a battle but it is worth fighting. I won't stop. Sad thing is, I am not fighting because I am in denial--this is how I am seeing things from my perspective with careful research. I believe it to be the truth or I would never say it, no matter how much I love Michael. I see too many times where people assume the wrong thing, they either assume it because they don't have all the facts or in Michael's case because it is just easier to think the worst of him because the majority currently thinks the worst of him and assumptions are easier to follow then facts. It is laziness.
What happened to Michael is pure evil. It is hard for me to say "evil" but I don't know what else to call it, I am not a very religious person at all but what happened to Michael, when you really think about it, it makes you literally ill, especially now with him gone because you wish you could go back in time and help him, erase the pain, try to make it better and know he is better now, know he is better by him telling you he is better. I look at him and see a failure of the human race, I see a failure of good prevailing evil, I see a man tortured, a soul tortured and I hate that, I hate that he never got a break. It is very depressing to see all the horrible things that happened in his life and to think he had to endure that and basically did so alone. It makes you really wonder where is the love in people anymore? How can we be children of God when God is suppose to be love? A lot of people seem to lack love--and a soul.
As far as I am concerned Oprah for sure and apparently Lisa are just using him now like 99% of people. I never knew people were that self-serving. There is no way a person should be able to discuss Michael and not want to help him and his image first and foremost.
Hello Nikki, I'm putting this comment here in response to SandyK's comment and your response to her concerning Michael's "living for his children" in the last few years of his life. That is so, so true. He had no one else, really. For Michael to go to the Cascios in 2007 after returning from abroad, rather than to any member of his family in California or Vegas, speaks volumes.
ReplyDeleteRegarding "living for his children", I want to say (although not the subject of this blog) that I do not for one minute believe Michael Jackson would have allowed himself to be "knocked out" by the use of propofol by Dr. Murray for six weeks before the fatal dose as Murray has said. Does anyone honestly believe that Michael would have allowed himself to be unavailable to his children (being "out" on propofol) during every night for six weeks? This man who was hailed even by his detractors as a great father.
So here's what I believe and I'm sticking to it: Murray had been dispensing the benzodiazopenes to Michael for several weeks with some success, Michael was sleeping.
Nikki, correct me if I'm wrong, but ativan and midozalam, when properly prescribed and taken as directed, are used for anxiety and as a sleep aid, and if Michael's children needed him, he could have been awakened.
And I believe that on that fateful night, while Michael slept under his usual dose of ativan, et al., Dr. Murray deliberately overdosed Michael on propofol. How difficult would it be for Murray to empty the vials of propofol, leave the empty vials where they could and were found, creating the impression he had been dispensing it to Michael for "weeks", when really what Murray did was give him one giant shot. At whose direction? Will we ever know?
I base this conclusion on everything I have voraciously consumed concerning Michael Jackson in the past sixteen months and prior. He would never have put his children in such a precarious position as to knowingly be knocked out (in a coma if you will) every night.
This may sound overly simplistic. Sometimes the truth is right there, even if acknowledgment of that truth causes pain.
Hi June,
ReplyDeleteYes, I agree. I often think about how Michael never stayed with anyone in his family. I wish I knew more about the dynamics of what happened and why this was. There is no doubt that Michael loved his family and had been close to certain members at one time. What happened? I do not think he cut himself off because of drugs--no way. I think it was something else, I almost feel like saying I know it was something else, maybe more than one "something else". It makes me so, so sad for him. How did a man who gave millions upon millions of dollars to others find himself basically homeless? All he had was his family, that being his children, in the end it seems. I cannot imagine him roaming like he did and anyone not wanting to be like Michael, come stay with me, let me take care of you. It was like he was looking for a place to belong and there was no place.
I agree June. I know Michael wanted to be able to get sleep for the tour because he HAD to do it. He could not back out. I am also sitting here wondering about the use of that IV catheter in his leg. Michael hated needles. Anyone who says otherwise does not know Michael. Klein, though a questionable source on most topics, did say Michael was needle-phobic and I believe that 100%. Also, Mark Lester, former actor now osteopath, said Michael was so afraid of needles that he could not even deal with acupuncture. He tried to do acupuncture on Michael twice. He also said Michael could not deal with the "popping of bones". I believe Mark. If you need a source on that, let me know and I will post links. I can't recall if Dr. Treacy said anything about Michael being afraid of needles, too. I keep remembering Murray wrote for topical lidocaine, but for himself, a script for himself. I am sure he used it on Michael. Thing is, did Michael know this?
Ativan is an anti-anxiety medication. It is used for insomnia as well, but usually it is limited to about a month for insomnia because people can accidentally become dependent on it (not addicted). Michael did have the bottle of Ativan tablets written by Murray in April--he still had 9 leftover tablets. There is NO reason Michael did not take these medications. Instead Murray poked and prodded him all over, giving him IV formulations when he never, ever should have had such! If an IV formulation worked, like Murray claims on the 23rd, then an oral tablet would, too! Then we see the script for Valium on the 20th, the oral Ativan, those should have been given, NOT IV meds.
Midazolam/Versed is like Ativan but it is very, very strong. I think of it like a mix between Ativan and propofol. There is a oral formulation of Versed but I have never seen it used. The IV formulation requires strict monitoring and resuscitation equipment on stand by just like propofol because it, too, can make someone stop breathing all by itself! Then, to think Murray gave it AND propofol together?! As for what I have seen, Versed is only used for short-term sedation of procedures where the patient stays awake but is really, really groggy. It causes them to forget what happened to them. It is not used for anxiety or insomnia like Ativan because a) it is so strong/dangerous, b) the retrograde amnesia, and c) it is almost exclusively available IV. I guess the oral formulation could be used for such but it was not used with Michael. Someone who has taken Ativan could be awaken but with Versed, it would be more like they could be stimulated but likely not coherent if enough is given and they would not remember anything for the duration of the duration of action for the medicine. That is something bothers me so badly, Murray giving Versed when it is short-acting--it would not last the duration of the night. He gave three benzos apparently Michael did not take these like candy--left over tablets/capsules from December?? Please. Odd that Murray wrote for the Restoril in December when Lee says Michael only casually mentioned insomnia to her in January and February. It was not until April that his insomnia was impacting his well-being and life.
ReplyDeleteI personally cannot visually imagine or accept Michael being awake that morning. I cannot imagine him not being able to sleep the whole night than by almost 11:00 am he FINALLY gets propofol. If he was awake that morning then I think he was ready to start the day, he should have been ready as usual, and that, if it happened, would make me distraught because he'd known what happened to him. However, given that it is hard to overdose on propofol I think the benzodiazepines had to have had an effect on him somehow which means they would have compromised his breathing and he'd been sedated. It isn't hard to flush meds down the toilet, like you say (maybe that is why one bottle had a tear in it). Our best way to know how much propofol Murray did or did not give is to get the hair sample results. So many sources claim Murray was giving propofol 6 weeks--some say it was only 2 weeks that he was staying overnight, though. This makes sense as he was still apparently practicing medicine in Las Vegas (hence the patient phone call) and his letter claiming he was to leave the practice June 15th (yet he had no signed contract with AEG hmmmm). He never gave up his practice in Houston. I still want to know why he was driving his sister's car from Texas and why this man was bumming off people like his sister in Houston and mistress in Santa Monica when he should have at least been able to pay for a hotel.
ReplyDeleteEither Murray let him die, IMO, or someone else came into the room, unknown to anyone else, and did it. If so, then why isn't Murray claiming this? To even think he is blaming Michael is pathetic--that is impossible.
There is one thing I think I know for sure and that is Michael would never have put himself into a position where he thought he would end up dying and leaving his children behind. If he asked for propofol then I think he really believed he would be fine if he was monitored, who would think a doctor would not monitor you? I do not think wanted to die, no matter how daunting the prospects of trying to do the concerts. His love for his children was too strong. He would never let anything get in the way of him not being here for his children. Only way this happened was to render him without control of the situation where he physically could not do anything to stop it.
1.Lisa strikes me as being too sharp to be so clueless.
ReplyDelete2.She seems too bitter because of disappointment, anger, regret, guilt, for various reasons at varios times, but bitterness seems to be a consistent constant.
3.i sicerely hope that the good times Michael enjoyed with her were worthwile for his sake, as she has done nothing i can see since to honor the Man.
Dr. Patrick Treacy discusses Michael Jackson (Part 2)
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iPEXT8qEc-g
In this video he discussed the Conrad Murray trial
4:30 Dr. Treacy says mud will be thrown at MJ's name during the trial
5:08 They start discussing the medications
8:16 Dr. Treacy: "I've been in that situation myself with Michael and he refused it."
8:23 "I have some other evidence that may be potentially vital."
8:57 "I have some graphic evidence as well."
10:06 Says in the 6 or 7 months he saw Michael only wrote him a couple prescriptions, no medication for insomnia, only prescriptions for "bland things" e.g. colds.
11:13 Says he never saw any drugs in Michael's house.
11:24 "Any time I ever seen him he was in his full mentality, was never sluggish or anything. Just sort of warm, loving and fun."
I wish Dr. Treacy would have spoken to us more about why Michael refused it. Maybe he will after the trial (or during it if he is a witness).
ReplyDeleteI believe one of Michael's security team members also stated (at the hearing) during his time working with Michael he never saw any medication vials and never picked up any prescriptions in alias names, either (medications in vials would include propofol, Demerol, etc.).
There are so many who were around Michael who have also said they never saw any signs or symptoms of drug abuse/addiction: the Cascio family, Tom Mesereau, David Nordahl, Mark Lester, various bodyguards, etc. Cherilyn Lee said she saw no signs of drug abuse, either. I especially take the statements of medical professionals like Lee and Treacy (as well as Lester who is a osteopath) with more weight than those who have no expert knowledge in the field of medicine such as Lisa, the Jackson Family, etc.
Great post enk!
Nino, Lisa seems horribly bitter and I would think (or hope) she would be over the bitterness now that Michael is gone but apparently not. What is sad is to me she obviously had a special place in Michael's heart and continued to have a special place in his heart for many years, certainly well after their divorce. I know he made comments that seem opposite of that but I think he was lying. How could he have trusted her to actually love him again when she basically turned her back on him before? I personally do not think Michael trusted women easily--he gave her a chance and she blew it and a man like Michael would not give someone multiple chances because of his lack of privacy. He was too afraid of the repercussions of being hurt in a romantic relationship. Just my opinion...