Jan 21 2011

A Dossier on Dirty Diane (Dimond) – Part Two

Category: JusticeSeven @ 1:39 pm

Be Careful Who You Believe

Be Careful Who You Believe

We owe him an honest view of who he was. We will owe him that until we finally sweep away the crap of sensationalist headlines and clearly see why those who love him know more about him than any expert or journalist who claims to have probed his life. Those journalists and experts do not know Michael Jackson. But if you love him, there’s a good chance that you do.

-Howard Bloom

To return to Part One, please click here.

In Part One, I talked about Dirty Diane’s history of involvements in various plots to destroy Michael Jackson over the years. But she was not acting alone. Far from it. This woman had many partners in crime besides Victor Guiterrez and Tom Sneddon. Michael often referred to a conspiracy, at least one. Credible authors, credible journalists, fans and Michael’s family and friends were aware of a media conspiracy, even if they couldn’t necessarily name all the players and their connections. But fans have named some of them and connected them. I’m going to do so here as well. It’s been obvious that since the 1980s, there were those who sought to destroy Michael Jackson, and they were all working together. And Dirty Diane was a primary player among them. The graphic I’m about to share below is from the magnificent ‘Veritas Project‘.  Some of you have seen it before. For you, it’s a review. For others, it’s a first-time glance at some members of a particular group of piranhas sniffing around in Michael’s life and monitoring his every move so that they could use anything they could find to destroy him.

The Conspiracy

The Conspiracy

Here is a summary explaining briefly the roles each of these people played in various plots over the years to destroy Michael (SOURCE: http://mjjr.net/content/mjcase/players.html):

Sneddon and the Chandlers

(1) District Attorney Tom Sneddon, who attempted to bring charges against Michael Jackson in 1993 and who is now prosecuting the current case against Jackson, is on the faculty at the Santa Barbara College of Law. Ray Chandler, (2-3) the uncle of the boy who accused Jackson of sexual abuse in 1993, studied law at the Santa Barbara College of Law and is currently a real estate lawyer.

(4) Dave Schwartz, the stepfather of Jackson’s first accuser, is the founder of Rent-a-Wreck, a car rental agency that is represented by the public relations firm Tellem. After Jackson was arrested in 2003, Tellem offered Tom Sneddon their services – for free.

The Chandlers’ Former Attorneys and their Ability to Find “Victims

(5) Civil lawyer Larry Feldman represented Jordan Chandler, the boy who accused Michael Jackson of sexual abuse in 1993. (6) Feldman sent Jordan Chandler to see psychiatrist Stan Katz for an evaluation.

(7) In 1993, Jackson’s former maid Blanca Francia was deposed by civil lawyer Larry Feldman for the Chandlers’ lawsuit. In the deposition, Francia claimed to have seen Jackson act inappropriately with other children, including her own son. She later recanted these statements but members of the District Attorney’s office often refer to Francia’s son as an alleged victim of Jackson’s.

(8) After getting in contact with Larry Feldman, John Arvizo accused Michael Jackson of sexual abuse; the boy was then sent to see Dr. Katz (9). Note that less than four months earlier John Arvizo and his family had vehemently defended Jackson on numerous occasions.

Feldman is not the only former attorney for the Chandlers who can’t seem to stay away from the Jackson case. (10) The Chandlers’ first attorney Gloria Allred has also made it her life mission to seek out other accusers. We’re sure her efforts are solely motivated by justice and have nothing to do with the cut of the settlement that she would inevitably receive if one of her clients were to successfully sue Jackson.

(11) In February 2003, after seeing a documentary that put a sinister spin on Jackson’s relationship with John Arvizo, Gloria Allred contacted Tom Sneddon and demanded that he investigate Jackson. At the same time, “media psychiatrist” Carole Lieberman also filed a complaint against Jackson. Sneddon responded to Allred and Lieberman’s complaints by stating that although he would take the matter seriously, he could not reopen the Jackson case without a cooperative victim.

Months later, John Arvizo told Larry Feldman that Michael Jackson sexually abused him. Once again, Allred missed out on the opportunity to represent a Jackson accuser. As for Lieberman, she made sure to advertise on her website that she was the first psychiatrist to demand that Jackson be investigated.

(12) Not to be one upped by Feldman and Katz, Allred and Lieberman teamed up on another collaboration – an accuser named Daniel Kapone. After being treated by Dr. Lieberman, Kapone suddenly remembered having been abused by Jackson when he was just three years old. Once Lieberman helped him recover his “repressed memories,” Allred signed on as his attorney. Unfortunately for Allred and Lieberman, it was later determined that Kapone had never even met Michael Jackson.

1993: The Media

(13) During the 1993 case, many of Jackson’s former employees cashed in on the allegations by selling salacious stories to the media. The most visible opportunist from the 1993 case was the aforementioned Blanca Francia, Jackson’s former maid. She first sold her story to Diane Dimond during an interview on Hard Copy and later collaborated with Chilean journalist Victor Gutierrez on his book Michael Jackson was my Lover.

(14) Aside from providing Blanca Francia with a platform for her sensational stories, Gutierrez and Dimond had something else in common; they were both were sued by Jackson for spreading a false story about him in the mid-90s. During an interview on Hard Copy, Gutierrez claimed to have seen a videotape of Jackson molesting one of his nephews; Dimond later repeated his story on a local radio station. It was eventually proven that no such tape existed and Jackson filed a lawsuit against Gutierrez and Dimond for defamation of character.

2003: The Media

While the mainstream media has been collectively irresponsible in their coverage of the Jackson case, NBC seems particularly intent on ruining Jackson’s reputation by hiring several well-known Jackson detractors to cover the case. The following people either have an axe to grind with Jackson, have spread false rumours about him in the past or have connections to the Santa Barbara District Attorney’s office. Take a look:

(15) Despite the fact that Jackson sued her for spreading an irrefutably false story about him, NBC hired Diane Dimond to cover the Jackson case in 2003. (16) Dimond also admittedly receives information from the District Attorney’s office and there has been much speculation regarding the nature of her relationship with Tom Sneddon.

(17) Tim Russert, the senior vice president of NBC News, is married to Maureen Orth, a journalist who has written three slanderous articles about Jackson for Vanity Fair magazine. Two of these articles were written about the case and were full of half-truths and rumours.

(18) NBC hired Jim Thomas as a special analyst; Jim Thomas is admittedly good friends with Tom Sneddon.

(19) NBC produced two salacious Dateline NBC specials about the Jackson case. The most recent one featured interviews with Jim Thomas and Ray Chandler and was heavily slanted in favour of the prosecution’s version of events. (20) The special was produced by none other than Victor Gutierrez, who was hired by NBC to cover the Jackson case even though he still owes Jackson $2.7 million dollars from a defamation of character lawsuit that Jackson filed and won against him. Conflict of interest anyone?

Gutierrez and the Chandlers

(21) Many have speculated that Victor Gutierrez collaborated with Evan Chandler, the father of Jackson’s first accuser, to write Michael Jackson was my Lover. The book contains personal photographs of Jordan Chandler and court documents that only somebody directly involved in the case could possibly have access to.

(15) Victor Gutierrez and Ray Chandler recently worked together on the Dateline NBC special, which Gutierrez produced.

Conclusion Is it merely a coincidence that all of the people who have accused Michael Jackson of acting inappropriately with a child are connected to one another? Every accuser, every professional who has worked with each accuser, every tabloid hack who has reported negative stories about Jackson – literally all of the players involved in both the 1993 case and the 2003 case are related to one another.

Is it a conspiracy?

Whether you believe it is a conspiracy or not, Dirty Diane’s role is certainly exposed. Now, conspiracies don’t have to be organized as many people think. These people don’t have to necessarily meet regularly in some secret location to plot what they’re going to do. Let me share with you a couple of definitions of ‘conspiracy‘: 1) A group of conspirators; 2) A joining or acting together, as if by sinister design. No secret meetings or secret plots are required. The plot of these conspirators was quite obvious and hardly any secret.

Meanwhile, the media completely ignores Charles Thomson, Aphrodite Jones, Mary Fischer, Tom Mesereau and many others who have a different take on who and what Michael Jackson was and who often call the media out on their one-sided reporting on the matter. Just like Dirty Diane, the media aren’t interested in any facts or information that doesn’t fit the meme and propaganda they’ve been parading before the public for years. After all, giving these other authors, journalists, attorneys, and friends a platform would certainly expose the baselessness of the profitable lies the media(loids) have been peddling about Michael Jackson for decades and which parasites like Diane Dimond have built their careers from.

If you’ve any doubt about the media’s orchestrated efforts to destroy Michael Jackson, consider this recent story from Charles Thomson who interviewed Ken Yesh, an extra from the ‘One More Chance‘ video which was shot before Neverland was raided. According to Yesh, in the weeks following that one-day shoot and the Neverland raid, he was horrified to read a newspaper article in which “sources” claimed Jackson had been swarmed by young boys on the set. However, Yesh had been present all day and there was no one under 18 on the set. You can read the full story here: http://charlesthomsonjournalist.blogspot.com/2011/01/jackson-music-video-extra-tabloid-lies.html

The media’s endless persecution of Michael Jackson is not just an assault on him; it’s an assault on society, decency, democracy and human rights. And anyone who doesn’t take it seriously is a fool, because what they did to Michael Jackson begs the question: who’s next? It could be anyone.

Michael’s Children, Omer Bhatti, and other alleged phantom “victims

Dirty Diane still believes that Arnie Klein is Paris and Prince’s biological father. Of course she has no proof. But then she’s never needed proof for any of her claims. Even though Prince clearly has vitiligo, she still believes Klein is his father rather than Michael. It would certainly seem that Prince’s vitiligo is proof positive who his father is, unless Arnie Klein or whatever other man anyone claims is Prince’s also has this rare skin disorder, which seems highly unlikely. But this obvious fact doesn’t agree with Dirty Diane’s opinion and perception of Michael, so she ignores that.

Young Blanket/Young MJ - quite a resemblance

Young Blanket/Young MJ - quite a resemblance

Prince's Vitiligo - Like Father, Like Son

Prince's Vitiligo - Like Father, Like Son

Dimond relies on an extremely questionable claim from a tabloid article that Grace Rwawamba, the nanny, said she had to “keep the children away from Michael” and that Michael “mixed drugs and couldn’t take care of them“.

First of all, even if that were true, no one else has ever seen any evidence of that or made any such claim. Many people, including those referenced on this site, have seen Michael with his children and they saw no evidence of any drug use. Further, they all exclaimed what a fine and attentive father he was, completely taking care of them with a nanny only appearing occasionally.

Secondly, Nanny Grace Rwawamba herself has said this tabloid story from the London Times that Dimond quotes is a lie. You can read where Grace herself has denied the story. And if you’re interested, you can read here how this tabloid story allegedly came to be.  Briefly, it is stated that it was put out by a vulture named Daphne Barak who duped and manipulated Grace just after Michael’s death while Grace was still very emotionally distraught over the loss. Ms. Barak was undoubtedly paid handsomely by the tabloid for her duplicitous trick and for the resulting salacious story.

So once again, like most of Dimond’s “sources” for her assertions about Michael, this one also isn’t completely credible and is once again based on tabloid garbage put out by a vulture similar to Dimond herself, who is also in the same business – and it’s not “journalism“. It’s character assassination.

Dimond also had claimed that the children wouldn’t be given to Katherine Jackson because she is not well. But they were given to Katherine Jackson and in fact she still has sole custody of them. I guess Dirty Diane was wrong. Again.

Dimond has also tried to insinuate that Omer Bhatti was a ‘victim‘ of Michael. From an article posted a year ago:

ET special correspondent Diane Dimond has new information on Omer Bhatti, the young man who reportedly spent years by Michael Jackson`s side and has been rumored to be the King of Pop`s son. 

Despite the rumors about 25-year-old Bhatti, Ricky Harlow, who was signed by Jackson to MJJ Records in 1996, and spent time with the two at the Neverland Ranch, says it isn`t so. 

”They had a father-and-son type of connection,” Harlow says, “but I never thought he was his biological father. They met when Little Michael did a contest impersonating Michael Jackson in Europe in the mid-1990s.” 

Unconfirmed stories say that Bhatti`s mother was a caregiver for “Blanket” and that his father was one of Jackson`s chauffeurs, but People.com is reporting that Bhatti was a fixture in Jackson`s life since he was approximately 11 years old. He was referred to as “Little Michael” and “Little Monkey” by those close to the superstar.

“Here are some little-known facts about Omer,” Dimond says. “He was at Neverland during the 2003 raid and was questioned extensively by police. He was questioned again in preparation for the grand jury. “I learned during those interviews that Omer became agitated and nervous when the officer asked him whether Michael had ever given him `Jesus Juice` or shown him pornography.” 

Dimond continues, saying, “Two independent law enforcement sources have told me that they always treated Omer as a `victim` of Michael`s.” But Ricky Harlow tells People.com that he has only good memories of his time at Neverland.

Once again Dimond ignores the facts and Omer’s own words in favor of her own opinion and casts allusions based on those opinions with zero fact to back them up. Whether or not Omer was treated like a victim is irrelevant. Every boy around Michael Jackson was treated like a victim by Dimond and her fellow accomplices, yet proof that any of them actually were abuse victims is virtually non-existent. That is why Michael was acquitted on every count against him in 2005 – sheer lack of evidence of any crime having been committed and because every witness from the prosecution was destroyed within minutes by the defense. In other words they had no case against him.

Now, if Omer’s relationship with Michael is as Harlow states (and I have read from other sources that they had a father-son type of relationship for many years), then of course Omer was uncomfortable being asked such ridiculous and salacious questions about Michael! That certainly doesn’t seem unusual at all and it certainly does not make him a ‘victim‘ of Michael. Omer was and still remains close with the Jackson family. I highly doubt that would be the case if he were one of Michael’s “victims“.

Dimond also disregards sister LaToya’s explanation for having declared her brother guilty of the allegations years ago. LaToya clearly explained that her abusive ex-husband (who started out as her manager) had forced her (lest she be beaten) to do a Playboy centerfold, and to declare her brother guilty of the allegations against him (again, lest she be beaten). He was clearly exploiting her and was also going to force her to do porn films. That is when LaToya left him and filed for divorce. Now, having been in an abusive relationship myself, I will attest to the fact that this is certainly a possibility and could easily explain why LaToya did these and other things that were so out-of-character during this time. Many women will do all sorts of things to appease abusive husbands and boyfriends before finally deciding to leave. LaToya says herself in the video that this is not an easy thing to do. I know from personal experience that she is right. It’s very difficult to extract oneself from an abusive relationship, particularly if you are married or otherwise bound legally to that person, like LaToya was. Sometimes, it can take years. That is fact and there are myriad statistics to back it up.

Yet despite this, Dimond asserts:

Some people now say they don’t believe La Toya’s statements (and indeed she later seemed to step back from them) but I and many others close to the situation believe LaToya was one of the few who spoke the truth.


1) “Some people say” is not a valid argument;

2) Just because Dimond “believes” something doesn’t make it fact, and doesn’t make it true. Dimond clearly has trouble distinguishing her own personal beliefs and opinions from actual fact. This is the very basis of her lack of credibility.

That comment above was part of a response to a question on Dimond’s website. The question was:

I have spent several months pouring over the trial transcript and Michael Jackson’s FBI Files. I do not find the “more” allegations of molestation you speak of. Can you direct me to the legal document to find these other allegations?

Dimond’s Answer:

You won’t find any “legal documents” about ALLEGATIONS. After years of my own investigation, after dozens of in-depth interviews with music industry sources, service industry sources, after talking to those closest to Michael Jackson it became clear that whenever there was a parent with a complaint a large check would be written by Mr. Jackson. I know, I know – you or I wouldn’t accept money if we thought our child had been mistreated or molested – but I remain convinced that many did exactly that, afraid to go up against the Jackson machine.

Even Michael’s own sister, LaToya, admits she and her mother saw large checks (she mentioned a million dollars) Michael had written to the parents of strangers. When confronted Michael called it “charity” – but LaToya insisted her family knew it was to pay off his problems with little boys.

Some people now say they don’t believe La Toya’s statements (and indeed she later seemed to step back from them) but I and many others close to the situation believe LaToya was one of the few who spoke the truth.” -DD march 2010

At least Dimond admits that she has no proof of these “other” alleged phantom victims and she admits that the assertion there were any at all are simply allegations. And allegations without proof are not fact. Again, that’s why Michael was acquitted in 2005. Allegations + no proof = acquittal. It is really that simple.

As regards these checks Michael wrote to the parents of strangers: Who doesn’t know that many desperate parents contacted Michael needing help for their children and that he would send them money – for life-saving treatments or surgeries? He paid for funerals of children he didn’t even know because their families could not afford it – such as David Ruffin, the child whose deranged mother tossed him off of a bridge. He paid for the little Farkas boy’s liver transplant. He called it “charity” because it was charity. That was Michael. He kept extra money in his home to give to parents or those in need who contacted him desperate for help. If Dirty Diane chooses to demonize Michael’s kindness in this way even after the facts have been fully seen and explained, then that tells us more about Ms. Dimond that it does about Michael Jackson. One can only imagine how miserable it must be to be such a cynical, hateful shrew.

To further illustrate Dirty Diane’s rabid vendetta against Michael in her own words, here is a quote directly from her:

If someone calls me in another 10 years and someone tells me they’re going to raid whatever house he lives in then, I am there. -Diane Dimond

The article containing this quote was written on 6/16/2005, just days after Michael’s acquittal. Sadly for Ms. Dimond and her other media assassins who helped hurl Michael into an early grave, she’ll never get first dibs on the next raid on his home. She’ll never get to be there again as 70 police and sheriffs bang down the doors in wee morning hours, terrorizing his children and tearing apart his home looking for something – anything – to turn into a baseless allegation against him.

One of my readers wrote Dirty Diane and asked her if she really said such a rabid hateful thing. The reader also respectfully asked Dimond to be fair in her reporting on the Conrad Murray trial. The person asked that if Dimond is somehow involved in reporting during the Murray trial that she kindly refrain from using statements about drug addiction and molestation which have nothing to do with the trial of Murray (keeping in mind Dimond’s stated disavowal of support for Murray as she expressed in this caustic reply to another reader). Her response? It was simply as follows:

I’m not interested in what you think. -Diane Dimond

This is hardly the type of response one would expect from a professional journalist to a reader of his/her work. But then Dirty Diane isn’t a professional journalist. She is a tabloid trash peddler hellbent on maintaining the career she built by destroying Michael Jackson. She knows her diatribes and allegations against Michael Jackson are baseless, not rooted in fact at all, and that they’re driven by any hearsay that suits her own personal opinions and feelings even when facts are staring her directly in the face. And she further knows that she cannot support her assertions. Thus, the arrogant, caustic nature of her replies. They smack of insecurity. This is how bullies operate. They are typically very insecure people who tear other people down in order to feel better about themselves – and they don’t like being confronted with their behavior.

Remember that article I wrote about abusers? The above response (“I’m not interested in what you think.“)  from Dimond is a prime example of ‘blocking & diverting‘ behavior. It is the behavior of a bully – an abuser.

More Phantom ‘Victims

In a posting on her website just days before his memorial, Dirty Diane continued to do her best to insinuate that Michael was a molester, implying that he had molested the Eletab brothers, whose photo with MJ she included in her post right next to the following paragraph:

In public Jackson flaunted his fascination with male children. Even after his narrow escape from prosecution in 1993, for which he paid out about 30 million dollars to avoid a trial, he flamboyantly continued to pose with and travel with unidentified young boys.

And once again, her smarmy insinuation has been thoroughly discredited – by the alleged “victims” themselves. These boys were featured in yet another 2005 hit piece Martin Bashir did on Michael just before the trial began in 2005. Yes, LWMJ wasn’t enough, Bashir had to do a second hit piece on him just to drive the daggar into Michael a little further. In this daggar of a film called “Michael Jackson’s Secret World“, these two boys both clearly denied themselves that Michael ever touched either of them inappropriately. Both brothers (Akhmed and Juju) emphatically denied any wrongdoing by Michael. They went out of their way to defend him in an interview after Michael’s arrest in 2003 and again in a British documentary which Martin Bashir cherrypicked to include in this 2005 hit piece.

Here is what Juju and Akhmed said during the documentary:

Juju (clip from British documentary):  When I slept on his lap, he wasn’t like touching me on the parts, I was just sleeping with him and he was hugging me, doing nothing to me.

Martin Bashir (narrating): 9-year old Juju met Jackson the summer before last, and spent the night at Neverland with his brother and other children.  He’s also joined Jackson on trips to Toys “R” Us.

Juju (clip from British documentary):He’s like the most best person I’ve ever met because he’ll buy you anything you want.  Anything.

Martin Bashir (narrating): Juju’s family has known Jackson for 9 years, since his older brother Akhmed became one of Jackson’s young friends.

Akhmed (clip from British documentary): When I asked my parents if I could spend the night, they were like “Yeah, sure” because they know he’s not a child molester, and all that stuff is crap.

Hanadi Fattouh (Juju’s mother) (clip from British documentary): I never felt any weird thing about him.  I will never believe what they say.

Juju (clip from British documentary):  When I told my friends, they were surprised, but they thought he was gay, but he really wasn’t so I told them “I’m not going to be your friend anymore if you keep saying that!”

Martin Bashir (narrating):  Juju and his brother say nothing sexual ever happened between them and Jackson.  The current accusations have done nothing to shake this family’s faith in him.

Hanadi Fattouh (clip from British documentary):  I know he’s been accused 2 times already, but I never believed it, and I trust Michael, and I’m always going to be beside him.

Drugs and Alcohol

Dimond says ‘vials and prescription drugs‘ were taken from Michael’s nightstand after his death. Yes. And what does that prove exactly? Those drugs were propofol and the drugs listed as having been found in the home in the coroner’s report. None of them were opioids or painkillers and most of them were not taken as directed ie: Michael was not a pill-popping addict. He wasn’t even a compliant patient with antibiotics, much less anything else.

For instance:

Diazepam (Valium) was prescribed for anxiety. It was found in blood samples only at time of death. The prescription was issued June 20th, 2009 for 60 tablets, 10 mg. 1/2 to 1 tablet every 6 hours. Dr. Murray prescribed this. But there were 57 pills left –meaning he only took 3 of these pills. If he took one pill every 6 hours as prescribed, then in one day he would have taken 4 pills. He was not even taking these pills as prescribed.

Does that sound like an “addict” to you? It seem pretty clear that Michael was not a pill-popping addict nor was he ‘mixing drugs‘. Many patients take more than one drug from their doctor. Does that mean they’re ‘mixing drugs‘? Well I guess so. My mother takes blood pressure medicine and a water pill. I guess by Dimond’s standards, she is a drug addict. In this case as in most cases, the doctor (Murray) is the mixer, not Michael. Most of the drugs found in MJ’s nightstand and his home were prescribed by Conrad Murray. The only ones not prescribed by Murray were Benoquin and hydroquinone, which are creams prescribed by Arnie Klein. Michael was not even taking the drugs Murray gave him as prescribed. This is not ‘addict‘ behavior.

Now, this drug (Diazepam aka Valium) can also be prescribed for withdrawal from alcoholism. However, that does not mean that every time it is prescribed it is for that purpose. This does not mean that it was prescribed to Michael for that purpose. It wasn’t. It was prescribed to him for anxiety. The fact that this drug was prescribed to Michael may be one reason Dimond latched onto her ridiculous ‘alcoholic’ claim. Let’s look more closely at how this drug was prescribed to Michael. It becomes clear that it was prescribed to him for anxiety, not alcoholism. I’ll go further into debunking Dimond’s claims that Michael was an alcoholic further down the page. First, let’s look at the Valium:

  • The Valium dosage for alcohol withdrawal is 10mg taken 2 to 4 times in the 1st 24hrs then 5mg 3 to 4 times daily.
  • The Valium dosage for anxiety is 2 to 10mg taken 2 to 4 times daily.
  • Murray prescribed 10mg tablets with RX directions at a dosage of 5mg to 10mg (1/2 to 1 tablet) 4 times daily (every 6 hours).
  • The dosage prescribed by Murray is for anxiety NOT alcohol withdrawal.
  • It’s also interesting to note that in the period between 11/6/08 (first meds on form 3A of the autopsy report) to 06/24/09 – a total of 231 days – Michael was legitimately prescribed 210 sedative tablets but the coroner/LAPD recovered 115 of those tablets. That means he took less than half of what was prescribed for him. Is this ‘addict‘ behavior? Not by a longshot, actually.
  • Let’s look at another example: In the period from 11/6/08 to 04/17/09 – a 163 day period – the only sedatives were Temazepam (quantity 30) prescribed by Murray. Three of these pills were recovered. That means Michael took only 27 pills in all that time.
  • Note too that the bulk of the prescriptions are from 4/18/09 when those rehearsals started and likely the anxiety/stress and insomnia increased. There are none in May. Why is that, one has to wonder. Enter Murray with the propofol?
  • Also, the Valium (Diazepam) was prescribed on 6/20/09 – the very day of that meeting at the house with Ortega, Murray, Phillips, and Dileo. Is this mere coincidence?
  • All the dosages prescribed to Michael were within the recommended guidelines, some less. All were prescribed for use at bedtime, except the Valium Murray prescribed 6/20/09. Michael only got sedatives from two doctors: Metzger (Board certified Rheumatologist) and Murray. This is likely why the DEA found there was no evidence of overprescribing or doctor shopping by Michael Jackson.

Nurse Cherilyn Lee stated that Michael wasn’t on drugs. So does Patrick Treacy, who was his doctor for months in 2006-2007 in Ireland. Below is a video of Cherilyn Lee: (she mentions propofol — but also says MJ wasn’t on drugs)


Contrary to media propaganda, propofol is not addictive. Furthermore, we’ve examined the popular claim that MJ was an active addict here: https://www.mj-777.com/?p=2921 and here: https://www.mj-777.com/?p=4172.

I never saw Michael with the effects of doing any kinds of drug or alcohol or anything like that, and I saw him all different times of the day. Early in the morning, late at night, all during the day. He was always totally normal. Totally there. -David Nordhal, Michael’s personal artist and friend for over 20 years

Claims that Michael was a drug addict or alcoholic are being made not based on fact, but rather to suit several agendas:

  1. the media’s agenda to profit off of salacious stories surrounding Michael’s life and death and to blame him for his own murder (that sells better)
  2. AEG’s agenda to receive an insurance payout for Michael’s death
  3. the defense’s agenda to shift the blame onto Michael for his own death and away from Conrad Murray. Conrad Murray has even employed a PR firm to help with this propaganda.
  4. And of course Dirty Diane has built her career off of criminalizing and demonizing Michael Jackson and thus her agenda is to continue successfully doing so as the trial ensues. Herself and her media friends will seek to put Michael Jackson on trial instead of Conrad Murray. As I’ve mentioned, there is much profit and gain to be had by doing so.

There is also an interview with Dr. Patrick Treacy who says he never saw Michael using nor did he prescribe Michael any drugs (other than for colds and the like) for the many months he lived in Ireland. He also said that Michael would never allow propofol to be given to him without an anesthetist or without using proper procedures (which Murray did not follow – remember those standards of care).

Here is just one of those interview segments:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60F4P1LPTzk&feature=related – Skip to 2:41, then to 8:21 and again to 10:06 in this video to hear Dr. Treacy address the subject of Michael and drugs.

There is also a story Dr. Treacy shared wherein Michael had a procedure done at his office and Dr. Treacy offered Michael a painkiller and Michael refused it, choosing instead to endure the pain. Does this sound like a ‘drug addict‘ to you? This is directly from Michael’s doctor while he was in Irelend. I’d think he’d know better and be a much more credible source than some tabloid story which had been extracted via duplicitous means. But apparently Dirty Diane Dimond would rather believe the discredited tabloid story than Michael’s own doctor.

Also, Dr. Treacy related that the media had offered him five figures (money) to “dish dirt” on Michael Jackson and he refused. (skip to around 6:18 in the video). The same happened with others close to Michael including his make-up artist Karen Faye and his guitarist Jennifer Batten. All of them had been offered very large wads of cash to tell salacious stories to the media (they didn’t need to be true stories – just salacious and negative). All of them declined. This is how our mainstream media operates and Dirty Diane Dimond is very much a part of it.

As for Michael being an ‘alcoholic‘ as Dirty Diane claims, medical fact does not support that claim at all. This is from the autopsy report:

The Liver is red-brown and the capsule is thin. The consistency is soft and the cut surface is smooth.The liver is normal in structure. Hepatocytes
( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hepatocyte ) show no inclusions or lipid droplets.

NOTE: There is no significant parenchymal necrosis or inflammation. This is medical jargon but it is important to note. There was no significant necrosis (essentially tissue death) or inflammation of the liver. Now, here’s what is said about alcohol and the liver:

Alcohol is hepatoxic, even in the presence of adequate nutrition. A single weekend of drinking may be all that’s necessary to produce a fatty liver…..the size of the liver may increase, and enzyme levels may be elevated. Liver biopsy may reveal polymorphonuclear leukocytes and necrosis near the central vein…..necrosis appears where the oxygen tension is lowest. Whereas fatty liver and alcoholic hepatitis are reversible, cirrhosis is not. It develops after continued necrosis and scar formation. The cirrhotic liver tends to be small and hard.

Conclusion: Michael’s liver was soft, showed no inclusions or lipid droplets and no significant necrosis or inflammation. If Michael had been an alcoholic or a drug addict, that would simply have not been the case. And that is sheer medical fact.

Sources supporting this conclusion: Autopsy report and the following page: http://bit.ly/i5IfIe

Now, Dirty Diane can continue to claim that Michael Jackson was an alcoholic and a drug addict, and that he therefore could not care for his children, and that there were “other victims who were too scared to come forward” — but the facts certainly do not support her claims. As per usual, Ms. Dimond bases her assertions about Michael Jackson on hearsay from uncredible and often un-named sources with their own personal agendas, rather than on actual fact. She further routinely relies on the claims of those whose opinions (not knowledge) agree with her own about Michael Jackson. Those facts or opinions which do not agree with her own are discounted. This is not journalism — that is a severe case of cognitive dissonance. And Dirty Diane Dimond is not a journalist.

To sum this up: Dirty Diane’s opinions and personal beliefs about Michael Jackson, as well as those of discredited sources with their own personal agendas, have no bearing on the facts about Michael’s life, or his death.

And in case anyone thinks Michael’s family have remained silent about Dimond, that’s not the case. Michael’s parents, Katherine and Joe Jackson, whose innocent son Dirty Diane has spent decades destroying in order to build her own “career“, have shared their thoughts on this woman. No parent would appreciate this kind of parasite feeding off of the life, livelihood, and subsequent death of their child. The Jacksons are of course no exception.

Keep an eye on this space.  There may be more. To return to Part One, click here.

_ _ _

{ Many thanks to The Veritas Project, my friend Karen, MJJ Justice Project, Deborah of Reflections on the Dance, and David Edwards of MJ Vindication, for their help in gathering information for this piece. -Seven }


28 Responses to “A Dossier on Dirty Diane (Dimond) – Part Two”

  1. Doris Bohun says:

    Hi Seven,

    I totally believe in Michael’s innocence. America must purge its mindset about adults sleeping with children. Back where I come from, adults and children sleep in one room for no reason other than to share space!

    However, my curiosity takes me to the “why” of Diane Demon’s hatred for Michael. Could she perhaps be a paedophile herself, that she falsely projects it on Michael, so that she can convince herself and others that she does not have this problem? Her viciousness and vile are unfounded but legendary. One has to wonder why.

    Doris Bohun

  2. Alicia says:

    If Michael drank alcohol every night there would be damage in his liver. I don’t see anything wrong with his liver in the autopsy report.

  3. Marcela says:

    Thank you so much Seven for sharing!

  4. hesouttamylife says:

    She is a piece of work. I despise her and her holier than thou opinions. She simply refuses to see Michael as an adult who experienced firsthand the lonliness and solitude of a child who rarely received a fatherly embrace, a hug, the oppprtunity to bond. Of course he would be super sensitive to these neglects and be hard pressed as much as humanly possibly to ensure that no other young boy would be made to feel as unloved and emotionally neglected as he did as a boy. It was only his nurturing, caring personality and his highly sensitized compassion for children who were hurting or in emotional pain that led him to try to make them feel that their lives, their happiness, their childhoods need not go lacking for normalcy to experience the wonderment of human affection. There is nothing sinister or sexual in that. She is a slime ball whose mind is in the gutter and whose heart is obviously as cold as ice. Had it not been, she would be able to empathize not only with Michael, but also with the delima of the many children that Michael Jackson, alone and unselfishly, innocently cared for and about. May she burn in hell for what she did to Michael Jackson in his life. And may we unequivically put an end to what she obviously is seeking to continue doing to him even after death. Not on my watch. She’s got to be stopped and I feel that soon, it’s going down.

  5. Rosario says:

    Thank you Seven for sharing your in-depth dossier on Dirty Diane. Great research, great job — I learned a lot. I’ve never paid attention to her but now I know why many fans call her Demon. Her viciousness and hate-filled life directed toward the destruction of one man will eventually lead to her downfall. That’s just the law of nature — viciousness and hatred are not sustainable emotions. People and entities who have made it their mission to destroy Michael thought that they had succeeded when Michael faded from the limelight after the 2005 trial and eventually succumbed to his death. What they were not prepared for was the rise of Michael’s army of love all over the world who became a formidable force and were determined to vindicate Michael’s name, ensure the respect he deserves, and preserve his legacy of love and musical excellence–yes, a force to be reckoned with. They now know they have not won and are desperate and bitter and are now resorting to desperate measures and tactics. Stay strong and united for Michael. God bless.

  6. melinda says:

    diane diamond should stop her nonsense !!! She is out of control !!! and needs to stop harassing prince , paris and blanket saying that they are not his ! Does she know that they are biracial ? No she doesn’t want to know the real TRUTH right in front of her eyes !

  7. Deborah Ffrench says:

    A stunning post.

    Many many people should be not only ashamed — but legally culpable.

  8. carina for mjj says:

    Seven, very well said what you said re “conspiracy”.It is only natural that people with
    the same goal and interest aggregate and gravitate towards each other,weather this interest is good or bad ( in this case malevolent),your graph of such an informal group
    will lay the basis for future analyses and book(s) about Michael.The trial of murray still lays ahead.

  9. meigadas says:

    Good job, Seven!!

  10. Maria says:

    Media killed MJ. Nobody could withstand such attacks. Michael was a good, sensitive, funny, sweet, lovely man. Americans should be ashamed.

  11. Susan T says:

    Seven, my sincere thanks to you and everyone involved in researching and putting together this exhaustive piece. It is daunting to understand that it will take many, many efforts like this one being pushed into mainstream media to catch the attention of a lazy and indifferent populace. But, don’t let the enemy overwhelm you.

    Look at what action motivated by love can do? It removed the boards from Michael’s name at an elementary school and spoke so loud and so powerfully that a huge television conglomerate couldn’t drown it out and was forced to confront its fiendish madness. These are not small victories. They are monumental and what we need to hold on to as we face the next major battle–the trial of Murray.

    We know our motivator isn’t money–it’s justice powered by love! When your heart knows the truth, nothing can stand in the way of expressing it.

    So shall it be written; so shall it be done!

    God bless you!

    Love, peace and light!

  12. Sue Springer says:

    Thank you, Seven, for all your hard work. Please keep up this wonderful work, we are all supporting you. The only way we will be able to stop tabloid stories, is to bring out the truth and stop giving the tabloids a voice. That means to stop buying them, stop watching their channels (TMZ, E, etc.). When the market dries up, they have no choice but to return to honest reporting. And people like DDimond will be forced off the stage. I fear we have a long way to go, but with honest, factual articles such as this and those of others like Charles Thomson, the general public will begin to see the falacy of forming opinions from information bought and purchased by tabloid bloodsuckers. Good work, and God bless. Love and peace.

  13. Solar says:

    In the United States of America, a country built on laws, the assumption is “innocent until proven guilty.” Slinging wild, vile and baseless accusations against a person CANNOT make that person guilty. The hard fact is that Michael Jackson was always innocent. He was NEVER proven guilty and it was NOT due to any technicality. Countless hundreds of pages of testimony clearly proved, in black and white, that Michael was INNOCENT all along!

    In fact, the prosecutor Sneddon blatantly tried to sabotage the case, doing everything in his power to force a guilty verdict. In one instance in court, Sneddon brazenly handed a magazine to a key witness, who was giving testimony on the stand, so as to plant the fingerprints of that witness on the magazine, and thus surreptitiously create “evidence” against Michael!

    But, unfortunately for Sneddon, God was watching too, and the jury’s rightful and unanimous verdict was “NOT GUILTY!” This is the end of the story for normal law abiding people. BUT then there are these other people, like demon Diane, witch-hunter Oprah, and snake Sneddon, who will continue kicking and screaming all the way to hell before they will ever face the HARD FACT that Michael was ALWAYS INNOCENT, and there is absolutely nothing they can say or do that will ever change that!

  14. Carolyn says:

    Thank you Seven for continuing to expose those involved in bringing MJ down. Diane Deranged is definitely one of the top players. Someone on ET or Extra referred to this person as an ‘expert’ on the Jackson family during MJs memorial. I was stunned, and appalled. I can hardly wait for her to start to reap what she has sown. I marvel at how obsessed this cretin is with Michael Jackson. He is now gone and she is still denigrating him. Unbelievable.

  15. Teva says:

    Excellent & neccessary work.

  16. Seven says:


    THANK YOU for that information! I have modified my post to include it. I vaguely remembered the controversy surrounding those recordings of Grace’s comments and the resulting salacious story about it but couldn’t remember all the details and did not have the links. It is especially important to have the tabloid story that Dimond quotes as well as the backstory of the situation. It is all of course very questionable and for Dimond to state these things as fact when they are clearly very doubtful is quite disingenuous. And she calls herself a journalist? Pretty funny.

    Thank you.

  17. Gavin Saunders says:

    Bravo Seven and all those who are capable of critical thinking who must have helped in compiling this amazing and comprehensive list of the underhand tactics.

    It is my hope that one day the plight of Michael Jackson will one day serve a great purpose, perhaps just as important as the material ways he tried to help those he became aware about who were in need.

    Child abuse is such a horrid and repellent crime that one would only need to have it inferred about them to have it destroy their lives. In my opinion Jackson’s vulnerability would have been obvious to anyone even remotely connected to his circle and this is slowly emerging even to the general public.

    His enemies had access to the terrific power of a corrupted media. That he survived this onslaught for as long as he did is testimony to the power of love and his deep faith; he must have had to rely on a higher sense of justice many times.

    In learning what I could about the man after he passed away I have despaired at the workings of our system and the inequity of the influence the media has in our world.

    It disgusts me that the public must spend endless hours of research if they wish to know the truth about something just to counter the self-interested bias that is being pushed out constantly; not something the average person would be even have the time to do should they happen to suspect skullduggery. This is what we have been conditioned to think our journalists are doing for us and unfortunately is the reason I was clueless about the shameful facts in this instance.

    Luckily one good thing that has come from a certain sector of the TV generation is the enormous army of sleuths capable seeing past the manipulations and who happen also to be deeply motivated to clean up the insidiously infected mess that the media has become.

    It seems we will have Michael Jackson to thank for the re-emergence of an ethical press one day in the future.

  18. meigadas says:

    Thank you so much Seven for your dedication to vindicate MJ`s name. we ( fans and supporters) need people like you. I always enjoy your site, and the way you present the facts, but on that case i have a doubt about Grace Rwaramba; can we really be sure that those words attributted to Grace are real? I remember when those words were published i found them really suspicious. When after this i did a research on the web about Grace Rwaramba, i found this:
    They were the only two websites that made an explanation about these “words” allegdedly atributted to Rwaramba.
    On Choprah`s blog you can also find this post, which try to explain the truth about grace`s words. DirtyDimond is quoting an interview made by Daphne Barak`s Times of London article.

    Leaving aside Choprah`speech about MJ`s addiction,it´s a very interesting post. As it is the fact that you can find the original article: http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/music/article6591237.ece
    What dou you think about it? I really do not what to think

  19. Ellen says:

    Thank you so much for this fascinating piece about the conspiracy to destroy Michael Jackson. What I would really love is for this to be created into some kind of documentary to be aired on mainstream TV. The millions of people who truly love Michael always believed in his innocence and goodness. It is the rest of the people out there who continue to believe the lies and atrocities that have been constant in the media who need a wake-up call. Michael has suffered unjustly and too deeply in his life for these facts to be kept under cover. How can a documentary of this magnitude be produced and who can we turn to and trust to do it? The world has lost a magnificent human being and the truth must be told.

  20. Seven says:

    Hi Okunuga,

    Thank you! 🙂

    As for Grace I think I wrote NanNy Grance – not NanCy Grace. Grace was the Nanny so I all her “Nanny Grace”. (because I don’t like to try to type Rawamba – call me lazy!)

    I know NanCy Grace is another one of those terrible media assassins – different person.

  21. budsgirl11954 says:

    Much love to you Seven, you have done a hellavu job – beautifully and powerfully written. Sometimes when I think about the title of Michael’s movie, I think about how much those three little words are used in life, when an issue needs to be addressed, or some kind of profound change is about to occur…. I think the millions of us “die-hard” supporters, (Yes I will own it) of Michael are making a shift into a approach to this issue of his character being assailed. Rather than being defensive about what they wrote WE are going on to work from an offensive position. By detailing Dimonds duplicities in her writings and obfuscation in her anti-MJ rhetoric WE are taking a stand!

    This Is It

  22. Suzy says:

    Thank you, Seven.

  23. okunuga says:

    Hi seven I just want to say thank you for all the great efforts you have been putting in your work for the total vindication of michael jackson,you are appreciated but i`ll like to make a correction the nanny`s name is not nanncy grace but grace rwanbada or something like that. anyway thanks a lot for what you have been doing may god continued to bless you for all that you`ve been doing.

  24. Dialdancer says:


    I am not the gossip mag/TV type. Don’t get me wrong I can get real when discussing Mr. Gorgeous Michael Jackson with the girls, but reading about human mistakes and intimate lives as entertainment, no.

    Recently another MJ Supporter asked about a book called Tabloid Baby for some data research. I went to the library, found it and was quickly caught up in it. It is not about the famous and the Media’s treatment of them so much it is about the persons who created this monster. It is more about the politicking, manipulation and backstabbing btw them. It is also about the fact they knew back in the mid 80’s exactly what they were doing and did so without regard the future decline in conscious and conduct of our society. It is a true story with real names. Trash, but true.

    They thought we were chumps for believing in their stories and programs. It was only TV. Bragging about having no ethics, persons admitting to having others they could pay to lie, constantly used the unnamed sources bit when creating a lie. After reading this book I rank sewer rats higher on the food chain.

    This is how they work: A story is created in the USA and then sent to a UK affiliate who will with great relish and gutter like verbalization make it worse and publish it. Then the NY office of the network will pick it up as a re-print publishing it as what the world is talking about and then finally Hollywood affiliate will publish it. That way US Tabloids cannot be blamed for starting the story. (Makes me wonder about the Discovery Channel program). I wondered if it was conceived and approved in the USA and sent to the UK to cover their ass. Dimond got her start by blackmailing her way into the big time.

  25. Seven says:


    You know I’ve thought about that too. If these people expended as much time and energy (and money) doing good in the world it would be a much better place and SO much could be done to help SO many people!


    THANK YOU for reminding me of that. I saw it yesterday and it needs to be slipped in there somewhere. You are right. It IS an assault on Democracy and on human rights! It’s bullying, and abuse – and the destruction of innocent human beings for profit and personal gain and it’s NOT OK in any civilized society.

  26. Sue M says:

    Interestingly, I happened on an article in Charles Thomson’s blog that supports your evidence of the media’s orchestrated efforts to bring down Michael Jackson. Thomson interviews Ken Yesh, an extra on the “One More Chance” video which was shot for one day before Neverland was raided. According to Yesh, in the weeks following that one-day shoot and the Neverland raid, he was horrified to read a newspaper article in which “sources” claimed Jackson had been swarmed by young boys on the set. Yesh had been present all day and there was no one under 18 on the set. You can read the full story at http://charlesthomsonjournalist.blogspot.com/2011/01/jackson-music-video-extra-tabloid-lies.html

    The media’s endless persecution of Michael Jackson was not just an assault on him; it was an assault on democracy. And anyone who doesn’t take it seriously is a fool. Thank you so much for continuing to put this important story in the glaring light it deserves.

  27. Joyce says:

    I have finally caught up and finished reading Part One and Part Two of your Diane Demented(Dimond)posts. I just can’t bring myself to call her Dirty Diana, even though it definitely suits her and I understand the connection. I hate the thought of anything that came from Michael’s beautiful, creative, mind and spirit being at all associated with her.

    I think I had read bits and pieces of some of this information at different times, in different places, but to see it all summarized and all the connections made so clearly and informatively in one place was truly eye opening and heart breaking.

    If all of these “blood suckers”, who unfortunately pass for journalists, lawyers, etc in the world we live in today, would take even one tenth of the amount of time, energy, and money that they have spent on destroying the spirit and life of Michael Jackson, and put it towards doing something that might actually have a positive effect on our world, think of what could be accomplished! If only… maybe they could have contributed to even one of the many humanitarian efforts that Michael championed; maybe they could have helped to save the life of even one child in need.
    They are so filled with and blinded by greed, envy, and hate, it is all they are capable of producing– more hate and venom.
    Unfortunately, there are way too many people out there who seem to thrive on all the negative and are so easily sucked in and brainwashed by the constant 24 hour barrage of media hype and falsehoods.

    Thank you Seven and many others for continuing to present the facts. The more of us who share in this knowledge and pass it on may eventually wake more people up to the truth. We have already made our voices heard with the uncovering of the Gardner School Sign and the cancellation of the horrid Discovery show. Maybe there is hope for this world yet! For now, Michael’s words, music,and dancing will continue to make me smile and will inspire me to never give up.

  28. sue says:

    Thanks seven great article and diagram is very powerful x