How to spot a lie—Brian Oxman Part 8

Here is an interview given to ITN on June 26: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48RjrkQYCIA&feature=fvsr.

It is a pretty short interview (only three minutes in length), but there is one major thing I want to bring up. These “How to spot a lie” posts do more than just point lies; they detail what each person exactly said in his/her interviews and point out inconsistencies. I’ve always believed that the way to figure this out is by looking at the months leading up to the death and the days immediately after. To me, this was the time people would most likely slip-up before getting their stories in sync.

Over the course of listening to the Brian Oxman interviews, one thing immediately stuck out to me weeks ago, but I shrugged it off as nothing. It happened again, and still I decided that it was nothing. But, it happened again, and I can’t keep shrugging it off as nothing. Coincidences are normal, but too many show a pattern. Here is what I have been seeing:

Part 5: http://hoaxornot.blogspot.com/2010/04/how-to-spot-liebrian-oxman-part-5.html
Again, I mention starting at 0:15 Brian Oxman’s calls and how he had re-worded his story of what happened. He did not say “from the hospital”, and this time it made a lot more sense, but it was still almost the same as what he said in Part 5. He had just cleared up the mistakes.

Part 6: http://hoaxornot.blogspot.com/2010/04/how-to-spot-liebrian-oxman-part-6.html
Again, I mention starting at 0:15 Brian Oxman’s calls and how he had re-worded his story of what happened. He did not say “from the hospital”, and this time it made a lot more sense, but it was still almost the same as what he said in Part 5. He had just cleared up the mistakes.

Part 8:
1:17 “I got a phone call from Randy Jackson’s assistant. He is the youngest of the Jackson brothers and the assistant told me that Michael had been taken to the hospital. I got a hold of Randy. I said, ‘Randy, what’s happened?’ He said he didn’t know he was on the way to the hospital and to meet him there. I got there first. It was chaos. When he walked through the door, we just hugged one another. He was crying he couldn’t speak. I couldn’t speak. He went into the next room and that was then followed a few minutes later by Jermaine coming into the hospital. His tears were streaming down his faced. I hugged him. I said, ‘Jermaine’ and he could not speak to me and I knew what happened and Jermaine then went into the other room.”

Does this sound familiar?

What has really bothered me about these accounts is that it seems just like a story. Every time he talks about this, he seems to basically recite the exact same thing. Though he should say the same story every time, it should not be word for word. It might just be me, but it seems to be rehearsed.

Liars have speech that is too "perfect". People are not tape recorders. Our memories are imperfect. Normally, when people trying to recall the truth, they make minor mistakes in memory -- they often need to circle back, fill in details they have forgotten. But liars are different. They sound like tape recorders. Every detail is remembered. And every detail is recited in perfect chronological order. Liars make fewer speech errors than those telling the truth, and they rarely backtrack to fill in forgotten or incorrect details… Ever notice how many politicians can recite a speech the same way each time, never missing a beat, even pausing for effect at the exact time, time after time. Not to say they are all liars but the skill of repeating a story exactly the same each time is one of the main ways to spot a liar.

By: Sara Ott from: http://www.collectivewizdom.com/LiarLiarpage3.html

Believe.

How to spot a lie—Brian Oxman/Bryan Stoller Part 7

The interview with Oxman and Stoller starts at 3:45. Here is the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhr9x45nnSA.

3:50 Does Bryan Stoller look a little twitchy to you? Watch him while Brian Oxman talks. He keeps rubbing his hand and shaking his head “no”.

4:45 Stoller says he saw Michael about a month ago and he was very weak. He talks about being about to feel Michael’s bones. Three months previously, though, when Michael made his This Is It announcement, Dermot O’Leary described him as muscular and buff. That is a big difference from Stoller’s description.

5:30 Oxman talks about Michael’s drug use. At 6:10 he says that all of the family members have talked about it. “I’ve talked about it with Randy. I’ve talked with Latoya, with Jermaine, with Mrs. Jackson.” Jermaine said in Part 1 that he knew nothing about drug use. How can Oxman have warned Jermaine, but Jermaine has never heard anything about drugs? Someone is lying.

It’s a very short interview, but there are major differences in the demeanor of Brian Oxman and Bryan Stoller. Oxman seems stiff and unemotional. He answers most of the questions before Stoller has a chance to get a word in. Stoller, though, is very fidgety. Unlike Oxman, he is always twitching his leg or moving his fingers: classic signs of agitation.

Believe.

How to spot a lie—Jermaine Jackson Part 2

Here is part 2 of Jermaine’s interview with Matt Lauer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLSG2MWOyEA&annotation_id=annotation_909300&feature=iv.

0:50 He talks about the Jackson 5. By talking while moving his hands, he shows that he is confident in what he is saying.

1:20 He says there were plans of Jackson 5 concerts after Michael’s shows in London.

1:50-3:10 He says that Michael was ready physically for the London shows. He mentions seeing Michael and the children at their parents’ house not too long ago and how excited Michael was for the shows in London.

5:00 “A lot of people that really said the most awful things about him, they realize now how much they love him.”

Believe.

How to spot a lie—Jermaine Jackson Part 1

This is Jermaine’s interview at Neverland Ranch with Matt Lauer. It is the first interview with a family member after Michael Jackson’s death. Check out part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-9Vm25hgu8.

0:25 Check out his eyes. They flicker to the right while he talks.

0:30 “It’s very tough”, he says while shaking his head “no”.

0:45 “We lost our brother,” he says while shaking his head “no”. He continues with, “Our…Our…”, then glances to the right searching for something to say. Then he goes on to say that “it is unreal; it is unbelievable” while looking right and shaking his head “no”.

1:05 Matt Lauer says that Katherine Jackson told Jermaine that Michael was dead. He keeps glancing to the right. When he says he rushed to the hospital, he shakes his head “no”.

1:40 He says he went straight to his mother. In the previous interviews with Brian Oxman, Oxman says that when Jermaine arrived a little after Randy they hugged and cried, before Jermaine walked into the room where his family was.

1:55-2:40 He keeps glancing to the right.

3:25 He says “He [Allah] is taking him back,” and shakes his head “no”.

4:40 He says Michael was against abusing medication, and says that he would be hurt if he was. He continues by saying that he doesn’t know for sure if Michael was or was not. According to Oxman, though, he says the family knew about it and he warned them about this happening. Jermaine doesn’t act like he knows anything about this.

Believe.

How to spot a lie—Brian Oxman Part 6

The next day, Brian Oxman gave a similar interview to the one previously. This one was on the Today Show on NBC with Meredith Vieira. Here is the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJV2OhPclWw&feature=related.

0:15 “I got a call from Randy Jackson’s assistant. She told me that he was being taken to the hospital.” Notice that he says to this time and not from.

0:23 “I called Randy. I said, ‘Randy what is happening.’ He says, ‘Brian, I don’t know. I’m on the way to the hospital.’ I said, ‘I’ll see you there.’ He said, ‘This is serious.’” Basically, this is what he said before, but this time it makes sense and is in chronological order.

Believe.

How to spot a lie—Brian Oxman Part 5

Later on June 25, Brian Oxman gave an interview with CBS. Check it out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4gB7TQXXI0&feature=related.

0:10 “I am heartbroken.” Then, he smiles.

0:20 “I got a call just a little before noon that Michael had been taken from the hospital by Randy’s assistant who gave me that call.” From the hospital? Before noon? The 911 call wasn’t made until 12:21.

0:30 “I then came over here and talked to Randy. I said, ‘Randy what’s happened.’ He says, ‘I don’t know, Brian. I’ll meet you at the Medical Center.’ We got here and when I saw him, we just hugged.” This is really weird. Read it word for word carefully. He starts out by saying he “came over here and talked to Randy”. At 0:05, here is said to be the UCLA Medical Center. According to him, he is talking to Randy at the Medical Center, and Randy says that he will meet Oxman at the Medical Center. OK, um…that’s interesting. Somebody messed up.

0:20-0:55 He gives this really heartbreaking speech about how he saw the brothers and they hugged and cried, and it make you feel really sad until he says “I am heartbroken” while smiling. Why in the world is he smiling?

1:10-2:45 He talks about drug use, again. He keeps saying that he doesn’t know what caused this and that we shouldn’t jump to conclusions. Isn’t that what he is doing, though? No one know if it is drug use or not yet, but he keeps bringing the topic up.

Believe.

How to spot a lie—Brian Oxman Part 4

Here is the second official interview that Brian Oxman gave on June 25th: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCMOLWUAdME.

I barely saw anything of interest, but check it out, you might see more than me.

1:50 He talks about drug use and calls it “excessive”. This is just my observation, but he seems to bring this up in every interview that he gives.

3:15 Did he shake his head “no”? That’s interesting since he is talking about how well the police and district attorney is going to look at this case.

4:05 Oxman says, “I only know that I feared being here on this day talking to you and talking to others.” This is just kind of a weird statement. If you read it word for word, it sounds like he knew this would happen today and he feared having to give interviews. Maybe he worded it wrong? He could have instead meant that he feared something like this would happen and that he did not want to be there when it did.

Believe.

How to spot a lie—Brian Oxman Part 3

This is part 1 of an interview that Brian Oxman gave to MSNBC: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3y__ZXL45Zc&feature=watch_response_rev.

1:30 He says he warned of the use of prescription medicines in the past (2 years ago), but says that he is not sure if medication caused this. According to him, we shouldn’t jump to conclusions.

3:15 Oxman is asked to comment on the fact that it has been said that he doesn’t speak for Michael Jackson. He says that he is not speaking for anyone but himself.

4:10 He explains his previous statement on CNN about this being worse than Anna Nicole Smith’s case.

4:50 While he is talking a Sheriff’s helicopter is landing nearby. Is it the same one that takes Michael to the coroner’s office?

5:10 He says there was no warning of this happening. Michael had been eating well.

6:20 He says that medication was getting in the way of Michael rehearsing and getting in shape. Afterwards, he says that he does not know what caused this, that it could be a natural cause and that he doesn’t want to jump to conclusions. If he does not want to jump to conclusions, then why keep talking about drugs and how he was afraid of this happening.

Believe.

How to spot a lie—Brian Oxman Part 2

This is the CNN interview that I mentioned previously. He gave this almost immediately after he gave the impromptu interview. Here is the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARi_uuit3Hg.

0:30 “What kinds of detail are you hearing from doctors.” He says that he hasn’t spoken to the doctors, but he has spoken to the family members and they don’t know anything. Again, I ask myself the same question. It is about 2 hours after he was officially pronounced dead. How do they not know anything?

1:25 “Can you confirm to us that he is dead?” He responds by saying that no one has confirmed anything with him. All he knows is that the family is crying.

1:55 “Who was with him at the time?” He believes that Frank DiLeo was there, but he is not positive.

2:40-3:40 “Do you know what kind of physical condition he was in?” According to Oxman, he was in good physical condition. The only thing that bothered him was the discussion of Michael one day dying. Oxman says that today was not unexpected, because of the drugs he was taking and compared to Anna Nicole Smith’s case, this is much worse.

3:40 He says that Michael had trouble keeping up with the other dancers due to his injuries and use of medication.

4:45 “So Brian, you’re telling us that you were able to observe some of these rehearsals and you found him to be in a somewhat weakened condition?” He quickly replies, “No, no. He was in fine condition. We never saw him in any kind of weakened condition.” Didn’t he just say that injuries and medication were getting in the way? He can’t have it both ways. Either he believes that Michael was on drugs or he doesn’t.

So according to Oxman, Michael was in a very good physical condition, but also taking more drugs than Anna Nicole Smith. How is that possible?

Believe.

How to spot a lie—Brian Oxman Part 1

This is an impromptu interview given by Brian Oxman on June 25th: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBw9DX2ucBs.

Check out a few slip-ups that he made:

0:00 “Do the children know what happened?” Oxman responds “Not that I know of, not that I know of. They are with the nanny.” First of all, weren’t they at the house when all of this happened? Didn’t some reports say that Prince thought that his father was playing around or that Murray wanted Prince to come help him? Secondly, didn’t they follow the ambulance to the hospital? According to Latoya this is when she and Paris went in to see Michael’s body and Paris gave him the necklace.

0:30 “Do you know who called 911?” Oxman replies, “From what I was told, Frank DiLeo told 911, but that is unconfirmed. I don’t know.” Someone told him that it was Frank DiLeo? That’s weird.

1:50 “Do you think that this is an affect of Farrah Fawcett passing?” Oxman replies, “I can’t say that for sure. I know that he loved Farrah Fawcett. I do know that he is in difficult condition.” The person who posted the video says that it was taken about 4:30pm. Michael Jackson was pronounced dead at 2:26pm. Maybe he didn’t know? Well, Jermaine did not make the announcement until 6:15pm, so it’s a slight possibility. Something else to think about: What was going on from 2:26pm until 6:15pm? Getting back to the facts, Michael was pronounced dead at 2:26pm, and at 4:30pm Brian Oxman did not know that he had passed. That is still strange to me. If you were as hugging family members as Oxman claimed to be doing in other interviews, you would think that he would have been there when a doctor broke the news to the family. If he was not, you would think that a member of the family would have told him or he could have guessed from everyone’s mood. I don’t know, but I just think that that is really weird.

If you are like me, you need to know for a fact that this interview was at 4:30pm on June 25th and not before. The easiest part is proving that it was June 25th. If you noticed, one of the interviewers mentioned Farrah Fawcett’s death. Now the hard part is to prove that this took place at 4:30pm. During the video Oxman keeps saying that he has to find the CNN van. The show on CNN that he was interviewed on (Lou Dobbs tonight) started at 4pm and he did not come on immediately. Thus, this gives him time to be interviewed on the street at approximately 4:30pm, and then show up at the CNN van afterwards. Even in the CNN interview he says he can’t confirm Michael Jackson’s death, but, as I said before, I would think he would know something since (according to him) he was very close to the family during this time, and they would have known something by now.

2:10 Oxman says that there was a drug problem and that the family was worried about it also. Big contradiction to what Kenny Ortega said.

Believe.

How to spot a lie—Kenny Ortega Part 4

Here is a more recent interview with Kenny Ortega: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdKbXZng89g. It is from February 2010 by Lovefilm.com.

This is what I see:

0:05 Throughout this part he keeps shaking his head “no”. He says it was made for the fans, and then he shakes his head “no”. He says it was made for their depth to understand and appreciate what Michael was doing was doing with the show, and then he shakes his head “yes”. The real interesting part is when he says Michael set out to do a show, and then shakes his head “no”, but then stops when he says it was for the fans. I’ve always said that I believe This Is It was never meant to be a concert show, that it was meant to be a movie, and it seems like Kenny Ortega agrees.

0:35-0:50 I’m not sure what to make of this part. He shakes his head “yes”, then “no”, and then he shrugs. Maybe he believes that the film won’t show what all the goals were. Later, though, he says he hopes fans see what went into the development while shaking his head “yes”, so I’m not sure what to make of the head shake “no” and the shrug.

1:25 He says, “This wasn’t a project I set out to do”, while he shakes his head “yes”. He then continues shaking his head while he says, “Certainly, This Is It was.” What other projects are we talking about? Concert vs. movie? Whatever project he said he did not set out to do, he really did according to his head shake.

Believe.

De Nieuwe Uri Geller—Hoax or not?

I, like a lot of other people, wondered if possibly the guest judge would be Michael Jackson. It just seemed to fit. I thought it answered his secretiveness on the previous show and his lack of response when asked if it was Michael Jackson over the internet. I didn’t get my hopes up too much, but I thought that there was a strong possibility.

Now, I know that there are many people out there that are mad at Uri Geller, because they believe that this was all a hoax to raise the number of viewers. His secretiveness about this mystery person was just to raise peoples’ hopes so they would watch the show.

Now, I’m not sure what to make of this. If he was truly supposed to have a mystery guest, the reason given behind this man (he slips up and says “he” and “him” instead of “this person” on April 9) not coming is strange to me. The reason given? This person is too controversial and the questions that surround him would not be appropriate for kids watching the show. Uri Geller’s exact words are, “It would not have been right to show this to kids watching De Nieuwe Uri Geller.” This? He had said before that he wanted to hypnotize the guest. Is that the “this” he was talking about? Come on, kids watching the show have probably seen worse than a hypnotization of a controversial person. I mean, before The Joker’s most recent act he almost always did something with blood and gore. Isn’t that worse?

Viewers are given a warning:

Waarschuwing!
De meeste optredens in deze show zijn levensgevaarlijk alleen
goed getrainde, professionele mentalisten kunnen deze uitvoeren
Doe dit
thuis nooit na!

Warning!
Most performances in this show are
dangerous, and only highly trained professional mentalists can perform them.
Do not try this at home!

If this doesn’t keep people from letting their kids watch the show, then I don’t see how a hypnotization would upset them.

I just wonder if he will ever have this mystery guest on the show, because I would love to know who it was supposed to be.

Believe.

How to spot a lie—Ben Evenstad, Brian Oxman, and the last photograph

So as most people know, Brian Oxman came out a few months ago and said that the last photograph that National Photo Group took of Michael Jackson was a fake. He said that instead of it being Michael lying inside the ambulance, it was Michael laying on a stage, and that Ben Evenstad and Chris Weiss somehow photoshopped it.

Let’s look at these interviews again. First, Ben Evenstad’s interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5VR-HSc2aM4.

0:35 He talks about his friendship with Michael Jackson and shows pictures of them together.

1:00-1:30 Check out Ben Evenstad’s eyes. He keeps looking up and to the right. The only time he looks to the left is when he is remembering Chris’s name. If he was trying to remember this entire event he would be looking up to the left.

2:45 He is asked if there was an issue with selling the photo. Check out his eyes again. Every time he pauses to think of what else to say, he glances up and to the right.

4:05 “Chris and the other people that were there that day and the other d…and uh, are a part of that agreement are going to make a lot of money.” After he slips, he quickly looks off to the right and keeps repeating “and uh” until he has come up with something to say.

If you watch him throughout the entire interview, you will notice that he hardly ever looks at the interviewer. He either looks to the right or he looks down at the ground and never keeps eye contact for more than a few seconds. To me, he seems extremely nervous.

Second, Brian Oxman’s interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbGrrNyMpZY.

0:30-1:05 “The photograph that it is taken from is Michael laying on a stage with his head leaning back.” Did you catch the head shake “no” at the end of that?

0:45 “It could possibly be a real picture, but I’d give it a 99.9% chance that it was photoshopped.” He shakes his head “no” throughout this part as well. 99.9% chance that it was a fake? Where have we heard that before? Uri Geller said that there was a 99.9% chance that his mystery guest would show up and he didn’t. Interesting, but you decide if it is connected.

0:55 He says, “It is a fake”, while shaking his head “yes”.

The biggest question to me is that if Brian Oxman knew that the photo was not real why did he wait eight months before saying that it was a fake? Better late than never, I guess. Still, I do believe that the picture is a fake, but I don’t believe that it is a photoshopped version of Michael lying on a stage. I mean come on. If you can make the picture that was shown at 0:40 in the Brian Oxman interview look like the picture in the ambulance, good for you I’d love to see it, but the angles are completely off, and I don’t see how it will work. Instead, I believe that over the course of those “other days” the picture was staged, because without that picture many more people would be questioning his death.

Believe.

How to spot a lie—Kenny Ortega Part 3

This interview is with Oprah Winfrey. Here is part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mj8S0gchIM&feature=related.

2:00 Oprah asks, “Have you been able to process that he is gone?” Ortega, smiling, responds, “Little bits, he’s still so much alive for me. Thank God.” That’s weird. Michael Jackson has been dead for about 4 months. I would think that it would have hit Kenny Ortega by now, and that he would not be smiling.

2:10-2:20 Oprah eyes dart up and to the left while she recalls watching the movie.

2:20 Ortega says, “He is so present in the film that you can forget that he is still not with us.” Check out his face after he says that. Once he registers what he said, he licks his lips, blinks rapidly, and then smiles. The first two are signs of anxiety.

2:30-3:10 Oprah says that she heard that Michael would call him in the middle of the night and shout out ideas. Watch Ortega when she says, “fireflies”. He says “yes”, but shakes his head “no”. He then goes on to explain what “fireflies” means, hardly looking at Oprah, until he gets to the part about looking up the word “bioluminescent”. Once he finishes he shrugs his shoulders. Maybe that is not what “fireflies” truly means. If you noticed, he kind of changed the subject. Oprah asked what it meant, referring to what it meant to Michael and why he wanted them, but Kenny Ortega turns it into how fireflies represent Michael Jackson.

4:05 He says they started rehearsing in late April. Check out his eyes while he is thinking of that, they are up and to the right. He is lying!

4:25 Oprah says “Weren’t you close to going to London.”Ortega responds, “We were about eight days away.” Check out his posture, he starts to get real fidgety.


Oprah interview part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tuEKB47gaF8&NR=1.

1:50-2:50 He says Michael Jackson was healthy, no drug abuse. There are no signs that he is lying.

5:30 Oprah asks if there were any concerns. Ortega shakes head “no”, but says “yes”.

Believe.

How to spot a lie—Kenny Ortega Part 2

The next interview is Kenny Ortega on BBC news: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zam7KJwTMjM&feature=related.
This interview is much shorter, but this is what I see:

1:47 He is asked if it is strange watching the This Is It and knowing Michael has passed. He shakes his head “no” and says, “He thought it was going to be.” He keeps on by saying that it was “helpful being in there with Michael”. Take that how you want to, be it spiritually of physically, but he could have worded it better.

3:20 He says there was nothing wrong with Michael’s health that Michael called and said, “Kenny, this is it, we’re going to do it. This is the one.” Ortega continues to say “and you saw how quickly….”, before the interviewer cuts him off. How quickly what?

4:30 “You see him working with everybody, invested in every aspect. You see him choreographing, and directing. You see him as a filmmaker, as a musician, as an entertainer.” Filmmaker? He is rehearsing for concerts not filming a movie.

Believe.

How to spot a lie—Kenny Ortega Part 1

The first interview I want to talk about is Kenny Ortega’s interview with CNN from October before the release of This Is It. Here is the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PUgdBcjrlo.
Breaking it down, this is what I see:

0:30-1:00 Kenny Ortega is asked what his reaction is to Michael’s death. He answers telling how it was good that everyone was together when they got the news. He keeps glancing off to the right especially when talking about the people that were collapsing and wandering the halls. He constantly stutters and the only time that he really looks at the interviewers is when he says, “Thank God we were together” and goes on talking about the rehearsals.

1:00 He is quick to say that Michael was fine. There is no stuttering and he is looking directly at the interviewers.

1:50-2:50 He is asked about Michael not sleeping. When he responds about the ideas that Michael said were coming to him, he keeps glancing up to the left as if he is remembering the event. There is very little stuttering and he is looking at the interviewers.

3:30-4:00 He says Michael was healthy and in the shape he wanted to be in. He stutters very little.

4:15-7:10 He talks about the film and Michael as a person. As when he mentions Michael’s health, there is no stuttering and he looks directly at the interviewers.

7:10-end I think this is the most interesting part. When he says that Michael’s life did not have to end this way he glances quickly to the right and stats stuttering and looking around for something to say. He reacts to this question in almost the same way as he did to the earlier questions at 0:30 about Michael’s death. He says that he believes Michael’s death was unnecessary and he is going to leave it at that for right now. To me, that is the weirdest statement ever.

Kenny Ortega knows something he isn’t telling. Every time the interviewers brought up Michael’s death, he became nervous as stuttered so much it was hard to understand him. When they talk about Michael being in great shape and the film, This Is It, he has no problem answering the questions and at times he seems happy and excited.

Believe.

Lies and Liars

To gauge a lie, people do not necessarily listen to what you say, but how you say it. Though a person may be able to lie through their teeth, body language will normally give him away.

The easiest way to spot a lie is to watch a person’s eyes. While a person talks and answers questions, his eyes will move involuntary. When remembering an event in the past a person’s eyes will dart up and to the left. This is because he is using the left side of his brain (the side that retains memories), and his eyes involuntary move to easily access the memory and correctly answer the question. If, on the other hand, a person’s eyes dart up to the right, then he is lying. This is because he is using the right side of his brain (the creative side), and making up a story.

Besides the eyes, watching a person’s face and his expressions as he says something will often show what he truly means. These signs include:

• Looking away to prepare answers or excessive eye blinking
• Avoiding eye contact, or excessive eye contact. Most people hold eye contact with the person they are talking to, but they don’t stare him down.
• Looking uncomfortable—touching feet, legs, arms, or the face.
• Shrugging shoulders after a statement show he doesn’t truly believe in what he is saying
• Shaking head “no” while saying “yes”, or vice versa
• Hesitating before speaking or repeating a question. Sometimes even answering too quickly shows a person is lying.

Keep this in mind as you watch some of the interviews back. You will be interested by what you find. Coming soon: How to spot a lie—Kenny Ortega

Is Michael Jackson’s Will Fake?

Interesting videos made by MUZIKfactory2 on youtube. They raise some interesting questions. Check them out here:

Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kvu301ATe_0&feature=related
Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXjSmUUJuPo&feature=related
Part 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVGHcdZEHIs&feature=related

Michael Jackson’s Funeral—Set Lights

Most likely you’ve seen this picture before and wondered what that floating light was. There still is not a good explanation for it.

To me, it looks very much like this light.

If you take a look at the light above, it doesn’t look like it has any supports holding it up. I would assume then that it must be hanging from the ceiling. Like the This Is It light, the light at the funeral looks like it is floating. We see no supports under it and no supports above it even though it looks like wires would attach to the two white dots on the top of the light. The only problem to that theory is that the funeral was outside. What could hold the light up then? Something has to, because lights don’t float. So, was the funeral actually indoors? If you zoom in and compare, they look pretty similar.

Along with this strange floating light, other lights similar to the ones in This Is It are used.

The Funeral:

This Is It:

These lights look to me exactly like the lights used in the last four pictures of the funeral. So, the big question is where were these lights? Were they still inside the Staples Center or were they brought to Forest Lawn?

Coroner’s Report

Big thanks to Anna K. and Brandi (Dklayne), they have broken down the Coroner’s report and pointed out the strange inconsistencies. It really gets you thinking. Check out their post here:

http://annatomyofahoax.wordpress.com/2010/02/12/oh-god-hes-taking-propofol/

Conrad Murray Charged with Manslaughter

As most people know, Conrad Murray has been charged with manslaughter and has pleaded not guilty. This is probably one of the biggest tests for believers of the hoax, because it will either help solidify your opinion or break it.

I don’t like putting hope on dates, because when nothing happens people lose faith. I am not physic so I don’t know when Michael Jackson will come back, but I believe that this is the beginning of the end of the hoax. For some people, they have already lost faith. For others, their faith is hanging on by a thread while they wait for something amazing to happen. I know many who have lost faith, but I’m still hanging on waiting for everything to be revealed. Hopefully, this will be soon.

Most people believed that if Murray was charged the hoax would be over, because there would be no way that the Jacksons would let Murray go to jail for killing a man that is still alive. I agree, but keep in mind that Murray has not gone to jail yet. He has had to pay $75,000 bail, but he is not sitting in a jail cell. Plus, this court date has bought everything more time. Think of this like the burial, everyone started wondering why there was no burial, so the Jackson’s had one. Similarly, everyone was wondering why Murray had not been charged with murder since the case seemed to be so obvious. What better way to buy time, than to have a court date. Now, people actually believe that justice is being served.

As of now, Murray is a still free man. He just can’t prescribe anesthetics and he had to surrender his passport. On April 5, Murray is due back in court. Something is going to have to happen soon since this case does not seem to be going away. Either Murray will be arrested or Michael Jackson will reveal himself, but for whichever reason the hoax will be over. This can’t continue the way it has. Something is bound to happen soon.

Keep the faith. Sit back, relax, and let this play out.

2010 Grammys—Part 2

I realized not too long ago that when I previously talked about the Grammys, I left out the most important part, the children’s speeches. Let’s start with Prince’s speech first.

Prince:
“Thank you, thank you. We are proud to be here to accept this award on behalf of our father, Michael Jackson. First of all we would like to thank God for watching over us for the past 7 months and our Grandma and Grandpa for their love and support. We would also...We would also like to thank your fan...the fans. Our father loved you so much, because you were always there for him. Our father was always concerned about the planet and humanity. Through all his hard work and dedication, he has helped through many charities and donated to all of them. We would also like t...Through all his songs, his message was simple: love. We will continue to spread his message and help the world. Thank you. We love you, Daddy.”

Notice he says “We would also like to thank your fans”, before he quickly tries to correct it. Did he practice this speech talking to his father? That would be the only way he would accidently say your instead of the. If he had practiced with other family members, he would not have practiced with the word your, because he wasn’t thanking their fans he was thanking his father’s.

Paris:
“Dad...Daddy was supposed to be here... Daddy was gonna perform this year, but he couldn’t perform last year. Thank you, we love you, Daddy.”

Now some people take that to mean that Michael was going to end the hoax at the Grammys by performing, but was somehow unable to make it. I don’t believe that, but what I find extremely interesting is that the Grammys took place on January 31, but Michael Jackson had a concert planned for January 29 as well as February 1. Hypothetically, let’s say he tried to make the flight to LA and back in between his concert schedule. That would mean he would leave London on January 30th probably. He would then perform at the Grammys. I would assume that he would perform during the part that was televised live. This was from 5-8:30pm LA time. Let’s just say he opened it at 5 PM, and then left the Staple Center and drove to LAX. This would take approximately 30 minutes. Then, he immediately got on the plane and headed for London. Flight time is 11 hours 30 minutes. He would arrive in London at 5 AM Los Angeles time which would be 1 PM London time. It takes about an hour without traffic to drive from either Gatwick Airport or Heathrow Airport to the O2, so he would arrive at the arena at approximately 2 PM London time if everything goes perfectly. I don’t know when the concert was set to start, but it still is cutting it kind of close to me. Even if he tried, I would think that he would be exhausted from jet lag and the long flights.































(Pictures of drive time)

If anyone knows when the concert was supposed to start on February 1, 2010, I would love to know.

Twitter--ALLJACK5ONS

I just found this weird tweet by the Jackson's. Here it is:






"It's important to raise our followers so we can share truths to fans over the coming months of media madness. That is very important to us."

That is a strange thing to say. Maybe the hoax is coming to an end that would surely be media madness.

2010 Grammys

Last night I watched the Grammys, and probably like most of you, I caught the fact that Michael Jackson was not mentioned along with the stars that passed away in 2009. Diana Jean did a great job summing this up in her blog, so there is no use for me to do the same. Here is her blog:
http://dianajeann.blogspot.com/2010/02/michael-was-not-in-in-memoriam-segment.html

Something else I noticed during the Grammys though was that the lyrics to Earth Song did not exactly match to the original. I’m not saying that it was meant to be a clue or that it ties into the hoax. I don’t really think so. Celebrities are human just like us. They make mistakes too. But I just wanted to point it out since I know that someone else is going to later, and they are going to make a big deal about something so minor.

Original Lyrics:
I used to dream
I used to glance beyond the stars
Now I don't know where we are
Although I know we've drifted far

Smokey Robinson:
I used to dream
I used to glance among the stars
Now I don’t know where we are
All I know is we’ve drifted far


Original Lyrics:
Can't you hear them cry
(What about us)
Where did we go wrong
(ooo, ooo)

Jennifer Hudson:
Can’t you hear them cry
(What about us)
What is wrong with us.
(ooo, ooo)

Each difference is very minor, so minor that it doesn’t even change the meaning of the song. They probably just messed up the lyrics. They are on stage in front of thousands of people so of course they are going to get nervous and mess up.

I have also heard people comparing other performances to Michael Jackson and This Is It. Now, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but let’s be realistic, not everything has to do with a hoax or Michael Jackson. It is a coincidence that the themes are similar or that the names are the same, not everything is meant to be a clue. I agree that the first thing I thought when I saw Beyoncé and her backup dancers was “They don’t really care about us”, but I didn’t seriously believe that we were supposed to make a connection, it just happened to be the first that popped into my head. On the reverse, say we were supposed to make the connection, what do you think the people at the Grammys said to Beyoncé, “You can’t perform unless your dancers look like Michael Jackson’s soldiers”? It just seems a little far-fetched to me.

The only thing I really and truly thought was strange was the fact that he was not mentioned with the others that passed on. That’s twice now if you count the fact that he is not mentioned on TMZ’s website.

Believe what you want to. Maybe the lyrics contain a hidden meaning, and maybe Beyoncé is giving us clues along with P!nk and other artists, but I seriously doubt it.

Michael Jackson’s Funeral--Movement

I know that I said before that everything was too still to be real and that nothing moved. I still can’t find a single tree swaying in the wind, but I think that I just saw a car moving in the background.










7:05, at this link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qlnGWwU7_8

It is too small to tell for sure what it is, but it is definitely moving. I’m just still confused as to why the trees are not swaying in the wind.

This isn’t even close to all of the strange things that took place at that day. I would love to hear your opinion.

Michael Jackson’s Funeral—No Wind

Firstly, I want to say that it is going to be kind of hard to put all of this information into a blog post. Don’t take what I say as the truth. I will provide all of the links I used, so please verify what I say and make up your own mind.

Now the first time I saw the burial, I had a feeling that something was wrong, but I could not place it. All I remember thinking was that the background looked like it was a green screen. I didn’t know why I thought that and I had no really tangible evidence so I dropped it and moved on. When I was re-watching the videos this week, I thought the same thing and now I think I may have some evidence that backs up a green screen theory. It might not be 100% proof, but it sure will get you thinking.

Green screens are a good way to show a background or an image and make you believe that you are actually in a real place, but actually it is just a picture. A lot of the sets for This Is It used green screens. They showed images from a graveyard to thousands of soldiers and were pretty convincing. The only bad thing though is that they don’t necessarily show movement, sometimes they just show a still image. If you look closely at the footage where the service is actually set up, you will never see a single tree move in the wind. I didn’t, but if someone finds one that does let me know.

For those of you out there right now who think that I’m insane, let me prove that it was actually pretty wind the day of Michael Jackson’s funeral. Here is the proof, go to this link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPMQv7bmESw&feature=channelmESw&feature=channel

Check out the tree on the left at 4:39…










The tree in the center at 5:10 (the tree on the left in the previous shot)…










And at 5:45, watch the cameramen’s equipment…










If you continue to watch at 6:05, the camera pans around to a large tree in the background.

Here is another video to watch, if the previous one was not enough:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GeAzO_QY7w&feature=relatedom/watch?v=7GeAzO_QY7w&feature=related

At 0:25 the camera zooms on an American flag…

If you continue to watch, at 2:40 the wind really picks up and the flag can’t stop moving. After the video pans away from the flag, you can see the fountain water moving with the flag still moving in the background.

So if it was as windy as it looks from the road, then why can’t you see any wind at the ceremony site?
Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qlnGWwU7_8

Part 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJIqyaJhZx0&feature=related

Everything looks so still, too still to be real.

What confuses me though is that I just proved that every detail matches up with Forest Lawn Cemetery in Glendale, and now I’m saying that I think the background was a green screen. It can’t be both can it? We hear helicopters overhead and even see footage from them, so wouldn’t we have seen the green screen if there was one? I don’t know what to think. The burial was just really strange in my opinion, so more to come later.

What do you think? Was it a hoax or not?

Michael Jackson's Funeral

I’m sorry I haven’t posted anything in a while, but I’ve been extremely busy. You wouldn’t believe how much stuff I had to do. But, besides that there really hasn’t been anything new to comment on that someone else has not already brought up until I spotted something strange as I was watching the funeral again.

So, the burial has been questioned from the beginning. Some say everyone was way too happy. Others have read the lips of the people there who talk about Michael being alive. I don’t know if either one is completely true. Acting happy does not also mean that you are not grieving. Some people view funerals as a chance to celebrate a person’s life. Everyone is different. Also, I can’t read lips and I try not to base an argument on what I think someone said. Lip-reading is something that you can very easily mess up. Words can be mistaken and so forth. Even if someone mentions the name Michael, they could be talking about someone else as far as I know. Michael is an extremely common name; millions of people probably have it. Neither you nor I know the full conversation that was said; only the person speaking and the person they are speaking to do. So, I’m not going to use these examples to prove that Michael Jackson is alive; they are too unreliable.

First, I want to point out that the burial actually took place at Forest Lawn Cemetery. Here is an overhead shot that we are given during the ceremony:

To make sure that this was legit and actually Forest Lawn, I pulled up a photo on Google Maps. Here it is:

Both match up perfectly. The roads are the same and the building matches up to the one in the previous picture. Not enough proof for you? Here are some other shots (the first one is Google Maps and the second is from the burial footage):

The gates and road are the same. If you zoom in on both you can see that the building on the other side of the gates matches up.

Here is another similarity:

In the upper right corner you can see a cross in the background. So I tried to find out if a church was nearby and in that direction from the gates and there is one.

Point A in the lower right corner is the front gates and you can see that in the upper right corner there is a church with a cross on top. It fits. It is at the right angle and as you can see in the second picture it is the same as what you see from the gates.

Every building and every tree matches completely with how it is in actual life. So, I must conclude that the funeral actually took place at Forest Lawn, right? There is not the slightest mistake, but I still could not shake the feeling that something was not right. I have had this feeling since I first saw footage from the burial. Now, I think I know what is wrong with it. Here is the funeral if you want to watch it again.

Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qlnGWwU7_8

Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1LoTWVvGl6I&feature=related

Part 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJIqyaJhZx0&feature=related

Part 4: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jDme8OkhBVA&feature=channel

Part 5: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qlTFgsaMMjU&feature=channel

Part 6: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPMQv7bmESw&feature=channel

Part 7: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GeAzO_QY7w&feature=channel

Part 8: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LwUgrttAmRA&feature=channel

Maybe you will see it too. I’ll post what is wrong tomorrow after I get it typed, but right now my thoughts are kind of jumbled.

beLIEve

Was Conrad Murray’s Child Support Trial fake?

There has been much speculation over the fact that Dr. Conrad Murray had a trial for Child Support in October, but it is now January and there has been no hint of a trial for the death of Michael Jackson. Was this trial fake or are people starting to believe there is a hoax in everything?

First of all, let’s separate the facts from the rumors.

Who is suing Dr. Conrad Murray?
I have seen many people say that Murray is being sued by Nicole Alvarez, an actor who could be a relation to Alberto Alvarez, the body guard who called 911, since they share the name of Alvarez. This is not true. Nicole Alvarez is not suing Conrad Murray. She is his current girlfriend who recently had a child earlier this year with him. The person that is suing him is Nenita Malibiran, a nurse who had a child with him 10 years ago. She claims Murray owes her $13,000. Besides that, not much is known about her, and I can’t seem to find a picture of her.

Was the money he paid with real or did it feature the face of Gilda?
Some say the $700 he paid in Child Support during his trial were not legit $100 bills. That instead of featuring the face Benjamin Franklin, they featured the face of Gilda. Gilda, an old black and white film, features a man faking his death. A scene from this film was featured in This Is It during Smooth Criminal.

Here are the bills Murray paid vs. a normal $100 bill vs. Gilda:

Here they are a little better compared:

See what you want to see, and believe what you want to believe, but I don’t see any similarity between Gilda and the money. Many people out there may disagree with me, but I see the same clothes, hair, nose and mouth as in the picture of Ben Franklin, not the picture of Gilda.

Was the trial fake?
I’m not 100% sure, but I truly don’t believe that it was. Could it have been? Yes, I’ll give you that. But, what would have been the point and why a Child Support case? Just because Murray has a hand in this hoax does not mean that everything he does is related to it. Even if Michael Jackson’s death was not a hoax, Murray can have a Child Support trial even when evidence is being gathered to charge him with murder.

Update: On Monday January 4, 2010, Murray paid Nenita Malibiran $1,003, and he is due back in court in July.

Bend theories to fit facts, but don’t bend facts to fit a single theory.