Tuesday, May 17, 2011

(No So) Newsworthy News of the World--Cocaine Claim Down the Drain Part I

The tabloid trash is never done piling up especially when it comes to Michael Jackson. The astoundingly accurate (not) "News of the World" published an article utilizing ancient information that does not pertain at all to Michael's death--I suppose Murray's defense team just found this information that has been available for years (perhaps with the assistance of Nareg Gourjian, former partner of Mark Geragos who at one time defended Michael against the 2003 molestation allegations--should that not be an ethical problem there?). Never fail that such is a tabloid when information is taken and twisted to fit a definite agenda which is typically a negative and false one--while charging people to view it, too.

This will be a two-part series with Part II being posted shortly. I will begin by breaking down this article, quoting the bits from NOTW (News of the World):

NOTW states:

"A SECRET police file which reveals Michael Jackson had cocaine in his UNDERPANTS could mean the superstar’s doctor Conrad Murray walks free. Murray, accused of involuntary manslaughter, believes the bombshell dossier will convince the jury that the singer was hooked on drugs and responsible for his own death."

Secret, eh? It was actually reported first by another British tabloid in November 30th, 2005 when there was rumors that Santa Barbara DA Tom Sneddon was going to try to charge Michael with drug trafficking (nothing ever came about from those threats likely from a lack of evidence). I will not link to the tabloid but will provide the link below which discussed the tabloid article:


Here is the actual cocaine report I came across several months ago. The toxicology report is on page 20 and 21:


Here is Tom Mesereau's response to this toxicology report:


It states, beginning on page 12:

"Underwear and Cocaine--Mr. Jackson's underwear was found in a laundry bag, along with the bed sheets. This underwear had bloodstain and cocaine. A forensic lab for the Prosecution tested this underwear. NO cocaine, however, was found in the blood.

Mr. Jackson has vitiligo (sp). A medical injection he receives causes him to dispense blood. The underwear with the bloodstain reflects this fact.

It is unknown how and why the cocaine was found on the underwear. It may be evidence of contamination. In the alternative, someone may have brought cocaine during a fundraising party at Neverland in September 2003, where hundreds of people, including well-known celebrities, were present.

In short, neither the underwear nor the cocaine found on the underwear (and not in Mr. Jackson's blood) has probative value to any of the charged crimes in this case."

This conclusion stated by Mesereau is valid because when cocaine is ingested, be it orally, intravenously or nasally it is metabolized by the body. The major metabolites of cocaine are benzoylecgonine, ecgonine methyl ester and ecgonine. Had the cocaine been detected from within the body these metabolites should have been detected, too. Just as the underwear was contaminated externally, one should consider that your own money is contaminated with cocaine, too:


Where did this cocaine come from? I can only guess. It could be a random contamination by someone who meant no harm. However, one apparent guess where the cocaine could have came from could be the Arvizos who attempted to extort Michael just as they extorted JCPenny. As far as I know Star Arvizo is the only person to ever say "cocaine" and "Michael Jackson" in the same sentence. The following link is a reported message from Star in which he refers to Michael as a cocaine user:


It was from this cuckoo clan (and Chris Carter who will be discussed in detail in Part II) that the bogus claim of drugging with alcohol began to swirl. Michael was found not guilty on all charges in 2005 including all alcohol-related charges (recall from Lynton Guest's book Walter Yetnikoff reiterated this claim about alcohol to be unbelievable). Given Tom Sneddon's tactics and desire to "get" Michael however he could there is no telling how far he would go to try and get Michael someway, somehow. Could his team have planted the cocaine? Maybe. We will likely never know, though.

Apparently after Michael was found not guilty of all charges brought against him in 2005 Sneddon tried to go after him yet again, as mentioned previously, Sneddon attempted to go after him again months later for medication use and "drug trafficking". Michael's attorney Brent Ayscough said, "Mr. Jackson uses an amount of prescription drugs, but does not take anything illegal or obtain anything in an illegal manner." Apparently Ayscough was right--nothing came about from Sneddon's new pursuit:


NOTW continued on to say:

"The police reports – from a child molestation investigation in 2003 – also reveal officers found 500 BOTTLES of prescription medication at his Neverland ranch. The documents will play a key part in defending Murray, who allegedly gave the singer a lethal jab of the sedative Propofol. Last night a source close to the case said: “These dockets are vital to Murray’s defence. They help show the jury the depth of MJ’s drug issues and how he may have never stood a chance of saving him.”

I have yet to see reports of 500 bottles in any court documents--I have photos of FOUR bottles (with multiple photos taken of them) along with some receipts and such. Photos of these bottles will be posted and detailed in Part II. As for the "depth of MJ's drug issues and how he may have never stood a chance of saving him"--this is the most pathetic lie I have ever seen in my life. Please recall the autopsy report which found Michael to be an overall healthy man who died from an acute, sudden condition created yet untreated by another person, a doctor, mind you. Please also take a close look at Table 3A which listed all of the medications found. If you disregard everything brought in by Murray that was administered by Murray to Michael while he was unconscious then you have what appears to be normal prescriptions with the apparent use of those prescriptions not being of any concern.

Here is a link to the most complete autopsy report on the internet:


Furthermore, Murray was NOT saving Michael from or treating him for a drug addiction--Murray was rendering Michael comatose at night, "treating" Michael's insomnia which was likely an element of systemic lupus. The only "saving" Murray needed to do was to keep Michael breathing--that was priority number one. Michael's death had NOTHING to do with personal drug use--past or present. It had to do with Murray's actions (giving IV benzodiazepines, giving propofol) and inactions (refusing to provide assisted breathing, hemodynamic medications and monitoring devices of any caliber and/or usefulness). The following are what I call Murray's Three Strikes:

Strike One: Murray gave IV medications that you NEVER give for sleep. Why?

Strike Two: Murray had NO life-sustainable equipment/medications (except flumazenil which is ineffective against propofol intoxication) and lacked the vast majority of necessary monitoring equipment needed (and it is questionable as to if he used the few pieces he had) to keep Michael alive. Why?

Strike Three: Murray, for whatever reasons, REFUSED to prepare for immediate help or to get help as soon he problems become apparent. He may have even left Michael, or even worse, witnessed him die. This is evident in the fact that Michael was dead for at least 20 minutes to over an HOUR before paramedics arrived. Michael was only 4 minutes from UCLA. How on Earth could someone, a doctor, NOT at least cover this step this when I just covered strikes one and two which one should not dare even attempt! WHY?

NOTW goes on to state:

"It is not known how they got there. He may have dropped it on his undies as he fought to get high – although some heavy users are even known to take drugs in suppository form. The Santa Barbara County Sheriff documents also reveal traces of painkiller Demerol, sleeping aid Promethazine, powerful headache drug Normeperidine and morphine substitute Meperidine were discovered in Jacko’s pants. Tiny amounts of blood were also found – believed to be the result of a Demerol jab in his groin.

Cops found more than 500 bottles of drugs prescribed in the names of the star, staff at the Californian ranch – and even under aliases. Sedatives and anxiety drugs Percocet and Xanax under other patients’ names were discovered in safes, cabinets, shoes, wardrobes, the playroom and toilet."

Again, I have not seen reports verifying 500 bottles of anything found anywhere. Someone let me know if I this is correct. I do not think many "drop their undies" to get high, either--most people do not inject themselves in the ass, for starters. Plus, if someone seeks to get high they seek a vein, typically a vein they can hit themselves. A real addict, to achieve a real "high", uses a vein as this is the way to a) achieve the effects the fastest and b) to achieve the peak of the effects. Furthermore, the bleeding apparently came from the buttocks, not the groin. Shots given in the buttocks are given into the muscle, not a vein. The idiots at NOTW claim normeperidine is a powerful headache drug--wrong--it is nothing more than a metabolite of Demerol. Meperidine is the generic name for Demerol--another no-brainer for someone who does a little bit of research. Suddenly "undies" become pants in this article--I have seen nothing about pants being tested and as mentioned above the blood was from injections related to vitiligo skin treatments and may have been the result of a shot such as a steroidal injection which is synthetic hormone. Just because he had Demerol in his blood does not mean the blood in the underwear was a direct result of a Demerol injection nor does it signify an addiction to Demerol, either.

As for the bottles in reference, I went through and analyzed the information found here (no need to click on the link as I will provide the photos in Part II):


I will post the photos and provide much more insight in Part II which will be up very shortly.


  1. Just like you said Nikkie the Cocaine was found on the underwear and not in the blood! Someone definitely put it on it. In my opinion it definitely could be someone from Sneddon's team or the police themselves! They already did something like that. They fabricated phone records and he made Gavin Arvizo to hold a magazine so his fingerprints will be on it. There was no cocaine in Neverland they never found it and they didn't find "500 bottles of drugs" in Neverland. You clearly can see all what they took from Neverland in the report of SBSD. They never said there were 500 bottles!

    The fact that Demerol was also found in the blood that DOES NOT mean Michael was addicted to Demerol during that period. There are many many many people who were addicted in the past but still use the drug especially if they have a medical problem which requires them to use it. Even people who were addicted to alcohol drink alcohol on occasions. That does not mean they are still addicted!

    Michael had countless of reasons to use it. He had Lupus a horrible horrible painful disease which causes other diseases as well. The fact there was Demerol in his blood does not mean he was abusing it.

  2. So,so true Nikki. I cannot believe the smear campaigns against Michael by not only Snot, I mean Sneddon, but by so many others. Michael was many things,but never someone who deserved this. He tried so hard to do as much good during his life. And did do so much good during his life, that all these snakes are doing,is creating a negative name for themselves.Thank you for always working so hard to clear his name.Your wonderful research is doing just that.

  3. keeping Part I,waiting for part II, thanks Nikki

  4. I read somewhere the bag where those undies where fiund had clothes of guests at neverland. Obvious contamination, anyone?

  5. Hey guys, I will give more detailed answers hopefully tomorrow...

    Anonymous--I think you are right. It may have been an accidental contamination, just look at how contaminated money is (and not every bill is used to snort)--then again, who was in Neverland with enough cocaine on them to leave detectable traces of it on other clothing items? I mean naturally one should assume accidental contamination but given the nature of Sneddon's decade-long pursuit and the comment from Star I cannot rule out the possibility someone may have planted the cocaine for a positive result at some point in time. I cannot believe Mesereau, and now people like myself, are having to address and reiterate that it was in fact a contamination of some sort and not an indication of drug abuse by Michael.

  6.  Hi Nikki, I can't seem to log in. This is from Monica.

    Out of all of the household items and the clothing laying around in laundry areas, bedrooms, etc. I find it interesting that those bags of clothing just so happened to be ones connected to DNA and drugs. Michael's home was huge. It hadn't quite donned on me from this perspective before. After reading your post I considered the odds of this "fortuitous" finding for Sneddon...practically a treasure trove. It's difficult to imagine the only clothing/linens tested would be THE ones that would bring forth so much finger pointing from Sneddon's team. I'm not sure Nikki, do you know if any other clothing or linens were sent out for toxicology? Seems all too convenient that that one batch fit the bill.