Thursday, May 19, 2011

Brett Barnes redux: Michael Jackson's most special 'special friend'

ETA 1-1-2012:

According to an August 27, 1993 news article in the British newspaper, The Independent, then eleven-year-old Brett Barnes said the following during the Anthony Pellicano-orchestrated media blitz put together to 'defend' Michael Jackson after the leakage of his being investigated for the abuse of Jordie Chandler:
Matters appeared to worsen for Jackson yesterday when an 11-year-old boy appeared on NBC television in California and admitted sharing a bed with him. Brett Barnes, an Australian from Melbourne, said Jackson had kissed him 'like you kiss your mother', but insisted nothing untoward had occurred.
The boy, who was interviewed with his mother and sister, met Jackson 18 months ago and recently accompanied him on a visit to London.
He described how he was questioned by detectives, who have confirmed that they are conducting a criminal investigation into the entertainer. 'They were asking questions like, 'Do you sleep in the same bed? Do you think he buys the toys to make you not tell things?'
'But it's not true,' the boy continued. 'He didn't do anything like that. He didn't touch people in a different way than he should . . . He kisses? Yeah, like you kiss your mother. We slept in the same bed? Yes, I was on one side of the bed and he was on the other. It's not unusual for him to hug, kiss and nuzzle up to you? Yeah, just the fun stuff.'
Brett's media appearance--ten-year-old Wade Robson also made a statement--coincided with the accidental broadcasting of Jackson's propensity to share his bed with young boys. To note, no one in the media knew of Jackson's sleepovers until Brett mentioned them on national television.

Stranger still is that a key Jackson player, Pellicano, thought it would be advantageous to 'refute' Jordie Chandler's allegations of having been sexually abused by bringing out unrelated young boys who merely corroborated the fact of 35-year-old Jackson's inexplicably 'touchy-feely' behavior with his 'special friends'.

It is not hard to imagine that, in accordance to the evidence in this entry, that the 'nuzzling', kissing, and hugging in bed that Brett experienced with Jackson led to the boy's own sexual abuse.



ETA May 23, 2011:

As already known, during the discussion of Michael Jackson's pedophilia issues, only his detractors and accusers are examined and/or raked through the proverbial coals. Michael Jackson's actions, behaviors, decisions, and/or rationales are never looked into. It is like the debate is in a court-of-law where he is given a presumption of innocence, though we are not in a courtroom. Even though this way of framing the debate is neither logical nor accurate and very convenient for Michael Jackson fans, it is currently the way it is.

As such, this is an additional note about the people on the train, an additional boost to their already solid credibility.

According to a story published in the March 7, 1992 Sunday edition of The Gazette newspaper, via The Washington Post, Michael Jackson was in attendance of an award event in Washington DC on Thursday, March 5, 1992. If we take note of the couple on the train's statement taken by police, the woman stated she had heard "questionable noises" between Michael Jackson and a darker-skinned male juvenile on Saturday, March 7, 1992. This train was leaving from Chicago, Illinois, eventually continuing on to California. 

Because of the closeness in dates, some may question the legitimacy of their statement to police. But this is faulty.

Washington DC is about 12 hours away from Chicago. If Michael Jackson left following the event, or even the next day, Friday, he would have more than an ample amount of time to catch a train with 'cousin' Brett Barnes, his staff, and buy up a total of four compartments departing from Chicago.

After all, this is exactly the type of thing celebrities do, either while on tour or jet-setting for both publicity functions or simply for pleasure.

Like Jolie Levine, these witnesses to Michael Jackson's pedophilic behaviors are unimpeachable. Unfortunately, if they did not know Brett's identity, their statement was essentially dead on arrival.

_________________________________________________________________________________


This will not be the first time I have written about Brett Christopher Barnes, an Australian-born mixed-race man who ostensibly fell into the category of Michael Jackson 'special friend'. It was in my previous blog entry about him that I delineated why I believe there exists more than enough reasonable suspicion his 'special friend' status coincided with him being yet another of Michael's sexual abuse victims.

This will merely build upon that earlier entry, as we wade through the fruit of additional research and evidence.

At the first whiff of my claiming Brett was a victim of Michael's, my detractors will, of course, point out that Brett Christopher Barnes articulated a defense for Michael Jackson, denying that any sexual molestation by Michael against his person had ever occurred. He did this on not one, but two occasions, the second of which was delivered under penalty of perjury from the witness box during Michael Jackson's child molestation and conspiracy case in 2005.

So much did Brett Barnes care about Michael, they contend, that he went so far as to quit his job as a casino roulette dealer just to 'be there' for his friend.

I agree that Brett Barnes' display of altruism was, indeed, an expression of the love he had for Michael. But one question obviously rises from his actions: what kind of 'love' was it really? The fans will, naturally, claim that it was platonic, even familial or brotherly, but I doubt this explanation.

Brett Christopher Barnes was in love with Michael Jackson.

That 'altruism' was sacrificial in nature—of course, not that abandoning his post as 'casino roulette dealer' for Michael Jackson's well-being was akin to dropping out of a university but the sentiment was the same. His selflessness can only be adequately explained in that it was based upon intense romantic feelings for Michael Jackson, ones undoubtedly fostered by a decade of sexual contact.

I imagine this declaration of mine seems salacious, maybe even slanderous. I disagree. All one must do is look at the breadth of evidence in support of it. 

Friday, May 6, 2011

A note on comments and the future of 'Desiree speaks...so listen...'

For anyone following the blog, here is a heads up: tentatively, at least, I have decided to not permit comments on future 'Desiree speaks...so listen...' blog entries.

My reasoning for this is quite simple. Having allowed people to voice their opinions freely in the past, some, as in this entry's comment thread, for example, have abused that privilege.

I should note to anyone that has read these threads that, typically, I do not delete or block comments from anyone who sees fit to leave them. That is not in my nature.

For that reason, it pains me to have to block all of them.

I realize that some may view this as cowardice or that this executive decision is due to the fact I would like to run my blog like some fascist regime. No, neither are true and that is an important point to understand.

I have decided to do this because I worry that people will mistake this blog owner's interactions with commenters as exceedingly negative or hostile when that is not how I am, nor is it how I choose to be. I consider myself a peace-loving individual, although, because of my personality, I will never not engage in intellectual exchanges or discussions, especially if I feel a position ought to be challenged. 

That is an inalienable personality trait of mine because I am naturally curious and naturally ideational.

The aforementioned comment thread degenerated because someone felt the need to be rude, bombastic, and disrespectful to me and my hospitality; they decided to derail a post for their own political purposes, even when it was not necessary. Frankly, that will not be tolerated. Differing opinions will always be allowed but if one must resort to name-calling in lieu of defending their viewpoint, that is something I will just not permit.

The reality is that most people who read this blog don't comment on it anyway; those in the comments represented about 10 percent of the regulars who actually read my entries. I find it sad that the many who have chosen to read the blog do not want to engage in the exchange of Jacko-related information, and I feel almost like people have siphoned off my efforts and my research without even the courtesy of reciprocity. 

This recent dialogue, I feel, will only make people less apt to leave comments or participate in a discussion due to the blatant mischaracterizations and falsities about myself and my use of information by this longtime reader, who, for the record, I had no problem with until this recent episode. 

Perhaps I am being overwrought but I feel it has put a very unfortunate and unfair negative energy over this entire blog.

Essentially, there is no point of my having comments anyway, both given the nature of this blog content and the reality of Internet lurking. I could have said 'Comment, or Die' but what would that have done? Those who are fearful or easily intimidated will never speak up; it is something that I cannot easily understand because, again, my personality is not this way!

Also of note, this blog is coming to a very grateful end. It is time because I am no longer interested in this subject, at least to the point that I would not be able to update people about the goings-on in the World of Jacko in as effective way as I could when I was more interested. There are days that I do not go into my editor to even work on several-months-old entry drafts because I have just no intrinsic drive to write on this stuff like I used to. I feel completely dejected and unfulfilled.

I will, however, make the effort to finish what I have left, as long as interest remains. And it is as follows:

  • An entry on Michael Jackson and Brett Barnes' relationship, with document links and other analyses;
  • An entry on Michael Jackson's books, including a pictorial of The Boy: a photographic essay;
  • A two-part entry discussing the meaning of Michael Jackson's 1994 settlement;
  • An entry on Jason Pfeiffer (although Jason now has his own site and perhaps would be better at discussing his point-of-view than I would);
  • An entry discussing Joy Robson's 2005 testimony, which seemed to lend more than enough reasonable suspicion that Wade Robson was a intimate 'special friend'

The above list is only tentative and may be missing some potential posts. Trial coverage on Dr. Conrad Murray could also make the list, if my interest does not continue to ebb.

Again, I did not want to make this into something lachrymose, nor do I want anyone to think I am doing this out of fear or anything else. 

If anyone would like to comment on my entries, you can always email me. 

I thank everyone--past, present, and maybe future--for having read my blog. 

~ Desiree