Killing Two Birds With One Stone: Theresa Gonsalves Asked Me To Take This Pic Of Her And Aphrodite Jones Posing Together
Well, here it is: Time to cover the events of Friday morning, August 27th. The morning began with my sit-down with Aphrodite Jones. As I’ve already hinted, this was by far my most challenging interview and I only hope I can do justice in covering everything that was said. What I am presenting here is a combination of what was said during the course of our interview and, also, the notes I took during her Q&A session.
Most of you, by now, have probably seen the clip that was recorded of Aphrodite answering my first question, which was about Michael’s physical decline during the trial. This was something I had gone into the interview with a keen curiosity about, because as I read through Conspiracy, one of the things that struck me most was her day-to-day observations of Michael throughout the trial. As she reminded us during her Q&A, “imagine you are sitting right there” (pointing towards a chair in the far left row) and Michael Jackson is sitting right about here (as she pointed to a chair in the center, front row) and from that angle, you’re able to observe this person every single day as his whole life is paraded in front of him.”
Since they routinely rotate the videos out on the Fanvention homepage, it isn’t available there anymore (at least not at the moment) but you can still access it on Youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1f6i6c2jBA
For me, some of the most fascinating details were simply learning what it was like in that courtoom on a daily basis. She said there were about 2400 members of the media there. Of course, every day of the trial meant walking through the frenzy outside the courtoom-fans yelling and screaming on one side; haters, protestors and demonstrators on the other, and the media, of course, there for a feeding frenzy. Michael was usually brought in through another entrance, which necessitated him entering the courtoom from the opposite direction as herself and most of the media people entering. This led to one of Michael and Aphrodite’s few actual, face-to-face encounters. “It just so happened we were going through the metal detectors, facing each other, and both looked up at the same time.” You know that feeling you have sometimes, like when an elevator door opens and you walk into it thinking it’s empty, and all of a sudden someone pops out of it; that little momentary feeling of being startled; taken aback? Aphrodite said the “metal detector” incident was very much like that; that she and Michael both startled each other, jumping at the same time. But beneath the humor of the moment, she could tell he was very scared.
“At the time, I just thought he was scared because he was guilty. I assumed he was scared for what was going to happen to him. I learned later that it was not for that reason at all. He wasn’t scared because he was gulty. He was scared because he was afraid of what the people of Santa Maria would think of him. He was scared of how they would view him because of this.”
Every day, fans would line up for the lottery, hoping to be among the lucky ones who would get to go inside.
“The courtoom had 30 seats for the public,” she said, and noted that the room itself was smaller than the room where we sat for the session. “I was the last one to get a seat.” There were many days when even Jackson family members did not have seats. On the day of the verdicts, “Janet graciously gave up her seat and watched the proceedings from the closed-circuit TV upstairs.”
Inside the courtoom, the rule was “pure silence” except for those on the stand and the attorneys addressing them. No one was allowed to have recorders, cell phones, laptops or any other devices. Reporters had to make all of their notes by hand.
“We were in prison. Literally, in prison. You couldn’t talk, you couldn’t whisper. You could hear a pin drop.”
Clearly, if there were those thinking they were going to get to witness a star-studded extravaganza with Michael Jackson at the center of it all, they were in for a rude awakening once inside the courtoom doors. This was a serious matter. A man’s life was on the line. And Melville ran his courtoom in accordance.
"He Always Stood When The Jury Walked In"-Aphrodite Jones
If the oppressiveness of the courtoom itself wasn’t enough, there was simply the wear and tear of the grueling schedule each day, which took its toll on everyone. “Every day, it was up at 6am, be in court by 8:30, sit there until 2:30 in the afternoon, nothing but maybe a 10-minute break here and there. This wasn’t like a normal trial, where you’re there at 9:00 and you break for lunch for like an hour and a half and then you reconvene until 5…no, it wasn’t like that.”
Placing her hands on her chest, she said, “It wore ME down, and I wasn’t even the one on trial. Now add to that the fact that you’re not sure what’s going to come out of this, you don’t know if you’re going to be found guilty, if you’re going to go to prison, and you start to understand, this is what Michael was going through. And you’re damn right it took its toll.”
But on the day the verdicts came down, she said she actually saw the change in him. It was as if all the burden and all the weight of the past months-you might say, even the past two years, for that’s how long his ordeal had been-was suddenly lifted. Even now, her face still glows and her voice radiates the excitement and pride of that moment. “He straightened himself up, held his head high, and he floated out of that courtoom like he was walking on air.”
Oddly enough, however, even after sitting through all the testimony, observing Michael every day and listening to all the bs from the Arvizos, she says she still thought he was guilty-until the day the verdicts came in. This shocked me, because certainly if you read Conspiracy, and take it as gospel, your first impression is going to be: How could anyone sit through all of that, and not believe he was innocent? I had gone into this interview thinking there had to have been some defining moment; some moment when the light bulb went off. But, no. Aphrodite Jones insists she thought he was guilty right up until June 13th, 2005. When pressed for a reason why, she could only admit that it was her own bias that kept her from seeing things clearly. “I went into this thinking he was guilty. I mean, he already had these other allegations from 1993, a whole bunch of money had been paid, da-da-da-da-da…and yes, my impression throughout the trial was, yes, he’s very sweet; yes, he’s very humble; yes, he’s very polite, but probably guilty as sin.”
“So what changed your mind?”
"The Day Those Verdicts Came In, He Straightened His Shoulders, Held His Head High, And Floated Out Of That Courtoom Like He Was On Air"-Aphrodite Jones
“The day the verdicts came in, he was voted “Not Guilty” on 14 counts. And I just sat there for a moment and it hit me. I thought, Wow. These men and women on that jury heard and saw what I could not.”
Coming out of the courtoom, she was stopped by a reporter who asked her if she thought the jury had got it right?
“I had a split second to give my answer, and I thought about it, and before I even knew it, I said, ‘Yes. I do.”
From that moment, there was no turning back. It was only then, in hindsight of the “Not Guilty” verdicts, that she began researching and documenting the case-requesting and reviewing transcripts, watching endless hours of video footage (which had to be done in the records room; she did not have the luxury of being able to take the tapes home to view at her leisure); asking the clerk over and over to pause, rewind, etc. It was a grueling and tedious process of examing and analyzing the case in hindsight. But when all was said and done, one thing stood clear: The jury did get it right. Michael Jackson was innocent.
One of the questions I had was where she had gotten the information that Marin Bashir had intentionally set up the scene in his documentary of Gavin holding Michael’s hand and laying his head on his shoulder.
“Where did you hear that?” I asked.
“That came from two of the attorneys who represented him {Michael}. (Later, in her Q&A, she added their names with an aside wink-”Thomas Mesereau and Brian Oxman”).
“Yes, from what I heard, Martin Bashir was saying to Gavin, ‘Why don’t you lay your head on his shoulder, blah blah blah, and Michael said, ‘I hardly knew this kid.’ He hadn’t seen him in two years!”
“I get the feeling-and some people have said-that a lot of this had more to do with the fact that Gavin felt resentful of Michael when he sensed Michael was pulling away and distancing himself from him.”
“Oh, absolutely! Mesereau asked Gavin point blank, ‘Why are you so upset with Michael?’ The kid said, ‘Because Michael wasn’t there at Neverland.’ Michael was distancing himself because this family wanted him to be their daddy, and Michael wasn’t interested in being this family’s daddy.”
Not surpringly, she also doesn’t think much of the two jurors who later claimed they were “coerced” into their “Not Guilty” votes.
“When you take an oath to be a juror, you are sworn to uphold that jury’s decision. They were going after book deals. I just thought, ‘How dare they! How dare they make a mockery of our judicial system, because that’s what they did.”
Since she had detailed much of Adrian McManus’s testimony in Conspiracy, in which McManus described seeing June Chandler in Michael’s bedroom on several occasions, and having had the opportunity to observe June Chandler’s testomony in court, I asked Ms. Jones what was her take on the theory of a possible affair between Michael and June?
With a reminder that Adrian McManus’s testimony (who was one of several disgruntled ex-Neverland employees; in fact, she had stolen one of Michael’s sketches of Elvis, claiming she found it in the trash) is nothing to build a substantiated claim on of any kind, she said, “I think June wanted to have an affair with him; I don’t think he necessarily wanted to have one with her.”
I had thought to follow up by mentioning what Ray Chandler had quoted his brother as saying in his book (that he hoped June would divorce Dave and hook up with Michael) but we were extremely pressed for time, so I had to move on to the next question.
The next question was a tough one, but I felt it needed to be addressed and clarified once and for all. I wanted to know how she addressed those cynics and critics who accuse her of being biased in her book and who refuse to take her work on Jackson seriously because they think she was simply “smitten” with him or is simply another fangirl. In a way, I was a little apprehensive about asking the question. I knew this was going to be a sensitive issue, and I had a brief flashback to what Oprah said when she was asking Michael about his cosmetic surgeries: “It’s hard to get them back once you tick them off; it’s hard to reel ‘em back in.” but by the same token, I knew she had to be aware that those criticisms are out there. And once it becomes a credibility issue, I think it is important. After all, critics and haters love nothing more than to have any excuse to discredit those journalists who are trying to get the truth about the Jackson allegations out there.
“First of all, I’m a professional journalist. I’ve had a 30-year-career as a journalist, I was a syndicated columnist, I’ve been with some of the biggest celebrities in the world. My interest in the Jackson case was simply because I thought he was guilty. Was I struck by his demeanor in the courtroom? Yes. Was I impressed by it? Yes. Smitten? No…maybe for a second. Maybe for a fleeting second, I was smitten. But that was not why I wrote the book. I wrote the book because it was a book that needed to be written. Michael Jackson wasn’t just an entertainer; he wasn’t just a performer. He was someone who had a message for the world. How many pop stars do you know who actually use the platform they’ve been given to make some change in the world, to do some good? Michael was using his platform. He was using it to say we’re in trouble environmentally; he was using it to get a message out to the world.”
"Was I Smitten With Him? No....Okay, Maybe For A Fleeting Second."
In other words, she was saying, in essence, that it was the allegations that destroyed Michael’s good works and stifled his message. I “got” that. I “got” that it was about exonerating his name by putting the truth out there, and not just because she was “smitten” or a “fangirl.”
While on that train of thought, I asked about the small handful of other journalists, such as Mary A. Fisher, who have also gone against the grain by standing up for Michael and reporting the facts of the two cases? I had wanted to ask if she kept in contact with any of them, but somehow the conversation drifted off on a tangent about some of Michael’s hypocritical “friends” who are all giving interviews now, but couldn’t be bothered in his time of need. We were talking about Michael’s fans, and I remembered she had once made the comment, in her book, about Michael’s fans being smart. “They’re smart enough to see through the BS,” I said, and Aphrodite agreed: “Yes, they are smart.” But on that note, we also talked about the increasing division among the fanbase, and how it is doing more harm than good by undermining our best efforts-for example, how fans have become divided between those who support Karen Faye, and those who don’t. Or the TINI’s vs. the fans who don’t necessarily support those theories. But I dropped a bomb she wasn’t expecting when I mentioned the latest source of division-Charles Thomson. She was absolutely shocked about that.
“WHAT?! You’re kidding me! Oh, and he’s such a sweetheart, too…WHY are they attacking him? He’s written so many great articles about Michael.”
I said I only knew some things I had heard from various boards, about The Lowlynewshound controversy and so forth, but she cut me off before I could even make headway. “Oh, please,” she said, digging furiously among the contents of her bag until she had extracted a copy she just happened to very handily have on hand of the Andrea Peyser article, in which Peyser, of course, is ranting on and on about The Saratoga Dance Hall Of Fame honoring “a pedophile.”
Holding the awful article up as an example, she said righteously, “Do you see this? THIS is what you guys need to be concerned about. THIS is what we need to be fighting.”
I “got” that, too. That while MJ fans are so busy fussing and fighting amongst ourselves, the Andrea Peysers of the world are getting their foothold in. But sadly, while people like Peyser seem to have no problem getting heard, it seems that at every turn there is some obstacle to getting the positive truth about Michael out there.
Aphrodite Jones Said We Need To Be Concerned With Who Our Real Enemies Are-People Like Andrea Peyser
During the Q&A, Aphrodite said she was going to show us “rare, exclusive” footage that had only been previously seen in the courtoom; footage, she said, that was part of a pilot for a TV special she hoped to air (I presume on the Jackson allegations, though at that point, my notes got a little schizophrenic so I can’t recall if that’s exactly what was said). But as she began to describe this footage in more detail, several of us began to put two and two together and knew she was referring to the Arvizo rebuttal footage. People began to ask if what she was about to show us was the rebuttal tape (or part of it) and someone mentioned having seen it before. Aphrodite Jones seemed a bit puzzled and thrown off by that, because she couldn’t understand how so many of us could have already seen the footage when it’s never been officially released. Someone spoke up and mentioned the Larry Nimmer DVD, The Untold Story Of Neverland.
That was when Ms. Jones, quite visibly upset with the whole subject, told us that Larry Nimmer “isn’t funny.” She told us Nimmer had taken it upon himself to use the footage without permission; that he had “stolen” from the court and ‘stolen” from her, and that the estate had ordered a cease and desist of the film he showed at the film festival a few months ago for that reason.
Well, that was quite a shocker, as you can imagine, because as you all know, the Untold Story of Neverland, just like Conspiracy, is one of the few positive things out there, and it seems that, once again, something that is positive is doomed to be tied up indefinitely with litigations as to who owns what and who stole from who, while in the meantime-yep, Andrea Peyser and her ilk will have no problem churning out a dozen more articles that will have no problem being printed and read.
I understood, of course, where Aphrodite was coming from about the footage. No one likes to feel they’ve been undermined, undersold, or plain out robbed. But still, for the fans, it’s disheartening to realize that it’s getting harder and harder to even know who to trust anymore. Harder even to know who “the good guys” really are. And if “the good guys” are fighting amongst themselves, just like with the fans, how are we going to get anything positive accomplished?
Oh, but it gets worse. Several of you wanted to know about the status of Conspiracy, which of course is now out of print. I asked the question in our interview, and it was also asked during the Q&A. Is the book ever going to be reprinted again? Sadly, the answer is: No. “Not unless I can find a publisher in China,” she said.
The truth of the matter is an ugly situation that happened with the book’s publisher, I-Universe, last summer. “The book was reissued when Michael died, but they used a reduced resolution,” she said, explaining that the new edition was of an inferior and shoddy quality. Then she was told that they weren’t going to continue the book because, “they said they hadn’t made a profit from it.” On her end, she says, “I never saw the checks.”
I asked if, given the renewed interest in Michael Jackson since his death and the surge of new fans, she might consider re-submitting it to the major New York publishers?
"The New York Publishing World Doesn't Want It. They Still Don't Want It. Even Now"-Aphrosite Jones
“The New York publishing world doesn’t want it. They still don’t want it. Even now.” She went on to quote an editor who actually said, “Not another MF Michael Jackson book!”
That is the sad reality. No one wants to publish a Michael Jackson book unless it’s garbage. Yes, you would think there would be a market for an explosive book that tells the truth about the allegations. But they only want a book about the allegations if it’s filled with lies and salacious speculation. “Even now,” the words reverberated. What hope is there for the future? For any time? Perhaps one could argue from a business perspective (since publishers only think dollars and cents) that editors believe only fans will buy a book like Cosnpiracy. But heck, our money’s green, too. And there are a LOT of us.
However, I got the distinct impression that she has simply grown weary with the struggle. She has been fighting the good fight since 2007 for this book, with unfortunately very little to show for the effort, other than, of course, a dedicated following among Jackson fans. I’m sure that has to count for something. But when you’re a professional journalists with many other stories to tell, I guess there does come a time when you may feel enough is enough.
“I’m not going to bring the book out again unless it’s a completely updated, revised edition,” she said, indicating that she does plan to write a new book pending the outcome of the Murray trial. In the meantime, I guess the best advice I can give anyone is to hold on dearly to those copies you have.
All in all, it was a lot to wrap my hands around and I was left feeling vaguely depressed, defeated and sad, wondering again why it’s so EASY for all the garbage to get out there, but so very, very hard for even one simple thing that is positive about Michael?
I think these were the questions a lot of us were left with. I’m sure Michael must have wondered the same thing, when all he’d ever wanted was to entertain and make people happy. The most emotional moment of Ms. Jones’s Q&A was when she talked about going to see the Jackson house with Jennifer Batten on Thursday.
Choking back tears, she said, “I just stood there looking at that TINY little house, and thinking, This person went from THIS house to a 2700-acre estate. Imagine working that hard, achieving everything you ever dreamed, and suddenly it’s all taken away from you. Even your home…your HOME. Thomas Mesereau told him, after the trial, ‘You’ll have to leave here. They don’t want you here. These people don’t want you here (pointing her finger, emphasizing Mesereau’s words) and if you stay here, they will never leave you alone.’ So yes, everything he worked his whole life to achieve was taken from him.”
At that point, there was hardly a dry eye in the room. Some wept openly. It was a very intense moment; even now, it is difficult to type this, and to recall that moment. It makes you realize just how raw emotions are, still. I’ve said many times, it is not the grief over Michael’s physical death that hurts the most. It’s living with the injustice of what was done, and continues to be perpetrated. I can’t speak for everyone. But for me, I know the physical loss is something I can come to terms with, eventually. But the rest of it?
Never.