Reddit Reddit reviews My Friend Michael: An Ordinary Friendship with an Extraordinary Man

We found 2 Reddit comments about My Friend Michael: An Ordinary Friendship with an Extraordinary Man. Here are the top ones, ranked by their Reddit score.

Arts & Photography
Books
Music
Musical Genres
Popular Music
My Friend Michael: An Ordinary Friendship with an Extraordinary Man
Check price on Amazon

2 Reddit comments about My Friend Michael: An Ordinary Friendship with an Extraordinary Man:

u/IntegrityNotIncluded · 72 pointsr/OutOfTheLoop

Yikes. Literally none of this is accurate (as demonstrated by you using The Sun as a resource).

  1. The child supposedly molested in Monaco was Jordan Chandler, who isn't part of Leaving Neverland.
  2. Gavin and Star Arvizo are the two children who accused Jackson of supplying them with alcohol and pornography. (Your Smoking Gun link erroneously lists them as siblings of Frank Cascio, who categorically denied saying anything in his 2011 book.)
    1. As to the first claim, no witnesses ever saw Jackson serve alcohol to the minors, though some (witnesses Rijo Jackson and Simone Jackson, bodyguard Shane Meredith) have caught the Arvizo boys stealing bottles of wine from Jackson's wine cellar in his absence.
    2. As to the second claim, a search warrant of Jackson's house located mountains of adult, legal, heterosexual pornography, which was promptly spun into "grooming" charges. On one occasion, Star explicitly identified a magazine Jackson had apparently shown to him and his brother, despite said magazine having been issued months after they'd last seen him.
  3. Descriptions of Jackson's penis by the aforesaid Jordan Chandler did not match.
    1. Jordan claimed Jackson was circumcised, which he wasn't. (Arguments are often made that an uncircumcised penis can appear to be circumcised when erect, but given that Jordan had supposedly seen Jackson's genitalia "so many times and from every possible angle" [page 210], you'd think he'd know.)
    2. Dr. Richard Strick, a medical professional hired by the authorities to attend the strip search, was never shown Jordan's description and was only told afterwards that it was a match.
    3. Correctly identifying distinct marks or disfigurements on Jackson's naked body would constitute probable cause for the LAPD to file charges against Jackson, yet they never did.
    4. According to Jordan's uncle Raymond Chandler, Jordan offered a second description to family attorney Larry Feldman, which apparently required extended periods of refinement and adjustments before they "eventually arrived at" [page 210] one that matched.
    5. Prior to the search, Feldman stated that given the sporadic nature of Jackson's skin disorder, "anything [Jordan] says is irrelevant" because "if he's right he's right, and if he's wrong, we've got a simple explanation!" [pages 202-03].
    6. Feldman filed a claim that posed the potential of having the photographs of Jackson's penis barred from evidence.
    7. During the 1994 grand jury trial, authorities were "attempting to determine whether Jackson has done anything to alter his appearance so that it does not match a description provided to them by the alleged victim," which they logistically wouldn't otherwise do.
  4. No child porn was found at Neverland. Authorities refuted that claim years ago.
  5. Authorities confiscated 26 photography books from a library of thousands, three of which — The Boy, Boys Will Be Boys, and In Search of Youth Beauty — contained photos of nude children in non-sexual and non-explicit fashion. While questionable, it isn't illegal, especially considering the other photography books contained explicit forms of nudity and sexuality with adult men and women. Such material is the only vague link to child pornography found at Jackson's house: an impromptu November 2003 raid and seizure of Jackson's personal items, including computers and various safes, found absolutely nothing.
    1. Also, care to offer a source that these books were located in a secure filing cabinet? I can't seem to find such claims anywhere in the 2003-05 court documents.

      This is why it's important that people read the actual court transcripts and interviews instead of relying on tabloids and half-assed documentaries.

      EDIT: Silver! Hell yeah! Thank you!
u/skyhighfall · -1 pointsr/WTF

> He had his perversions but that does not equal definitive guilt of acting on those impulses.

You're basically saying he's a pedophile, we just can't tell if he acted on it. A pedophile because of some books no jury has ever found damning even though they've seen them all?

Yes, the kids who knew him have written books, here you go:

http://www.amazon.com/My-Friend-Michael-Friendship-Extraordinary/dp/0062090062/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1372962600&sr=8-1&keywords=my+friend+michael+frank+casio