Square One: New Evidence in Michael Jackson Case - NEW DOCUMENTARY

wwetv100

Rising Star
BGOL Patreon Investor
That’s what i got from it but that’s me....
Shit I got that from the first chick 2mins of speaking

I guess the way the promo is it gives the impression it's another film attacking him, but the title states what the film is doing. It's going back to square one where all the mess started to show Michael was extorted and it does so with people who were there in the lawyer's office conjuring up ways to get Michael to pay money. The legal clerk who worked with the law firm allegedly states Jordan Chandler was in the office being coached and that for this particular client the lawyer did all calls or meetings in hiding or behind closed doors unlike his other cases as if they wanted no witnesses to know what they were really planning. It even states how the father drugged his son to get him to make a confession.

It also has audio of the father admitting he was going after Michael for money(in addition to the audio that was online for years where he admits he was going to ruin MJ). The film also explains how the civil case where Michael paid the money(which they say he didn't want to) was messed up because it left his defense strategy opened up for the criminal case(which was the real plan of the civil case) which ended up not happening because they didn't have enough evidence to go to court(they tried to find other kids who would admit Michael molested them, but couldn't to add to the Chandler case). The legal clerk explains that people just assume that the civil case and pay out excused Michael from the criminal case, but the two had nothing to do with each other.

Square One tries to show that if the original case was a straight extortion than the following accusations may be questionable as well because the original accusation is what changed people's perception of Michael which allowed following accusations to seem credible.
 

Mask

"OneOfTheBest"
Platinum Member
I guess the way the promo is it gives the impression it's another film attacking him, but the title states what the film is doing. It's going back to square one where all the mess started to show Michael was extorted and it does so with people who were there in the lawyer's office conjuring up ways to get Michael to pay money. The legal clerk who worked with the law firm allegedly states Jordan Chandler was in the office being coached and that for this particular client the lawyer did all calls or meetings in hiding or behind closed doors unlike his other cases as if they wanted no witnesses to know what they were really planning. It even states how the father drugged his son to get him to make a confession.

It also has audio of the father admitting he was going after Michael for money(in addition to the audio that was online for years where he admits he was going to ruin MJ). The film also explains how the civil case where Michael paid the money(which they say he didn't want to) was messed up because it left his defense strategy opened up for the criminal case(which was the real plan of the civil case) which ended up not happening because they didn't have enough evidence to go to court(they tried to find other kids who would admit Michael molested them, but couldn't to add to the Chandler case). The legal clerk explains that people just assume that the civil case and pay out excused Michael from the criminal case, but the two had nothing to do with each other.

Square One tries to show that if the original case was a straight extortion than the following accusations may be questionable as well because the original accusation is what changed people's perception of Michael which allowed following accusations to seem credible.


When the girl said Jordan Chandler was the child among them in those business discuss setting ....I said “oh shit”


The whole ordeal is and was foul
 

wwetv100

Rising Star
BGOL Patreon Investor
When the girl said Jordan Chandler was the child among them in those business discuss setting ....I said “oh shit”


The whole ordeal is and was foul

Yeah objectively speaking, but since it's a celebrity I think in general some people just feel "oh well he's rich anyways no big loss" especially in 1993. The problem is the 90's had turned into a media circus and was a precursor of social media today. Soon after was the circus that was the OJ case, the east coast west coast war, Bill Clinton scandal and so on.

News and media became just as much entertainment as those "reality tv" shows like Jerry Springer, Maury Povich, Jenny Jones, Geraldo, Ricki Lake and so on. A great example that shows the shift in how ratings turned it from just reporting to glamorization is Jerry Springer's early shows in 1991 with the serious tone.

To the ratings bonanza with all theatrics and glamorization in the shows in 1996 and so on.
 
Top