Insanity X Lives (-X1) Blanaid X Lives



X1: Now while I am not the great legal mind of the 21st century, I see what is clearly going on here… There are lots of stories/false stories floating around out there. I am just trying to figure out what they all mean in legal terms. I mean I recall statement that was made about Murray being with a call girl and I just wondered legally how that would affect the case. I am also wondering where this information came from. There has not ever been one verifiable source to come out and say yes I know for a fact he was with a call girl because I saw him with my own eyes. Now if there are any Jackson insiders that have this bombshell revelation and know this to be a fact wouldn’t it stand to reason that they would become a witness for the prosecution?

I know that if I had this information I would be on the next plane to LA to tell the police what I know-so that we could gain some Justice 4 Michael! If this statement is true it goes to the timeline concerning the day Michael died. Being that there is so much information out there we must really see what it means in terms of legality and if it will stand in court testimony-will it ever even make it to court? Yes, this is worth the exploration…



Geraldine Hughes: Conrad Murray needs to tell the truth. If the truth was known about what really happened the early morning hours before Michael Jackson died, he should be charged with murder, not manslaughter.

Samantha Jelly: "Speculation and conjecture by a party can NOT be considered TRUTH and is merely considered hearsay, and not admissible in a court of law. For such facts to be presented as truth, they would have had to have been presented by way of legal documentation, such as, police interviews, witness statements and/or sworn testimony, and other confidential information ON THE RECORD.

Hearsay Evidence Code

California Evidence Code 1200-1205

1200. (a) "Hearsay evidence" is evidence of a statement that was

made other than by a witness while testifying at the hearing and that

is offered to prove the truth of the matter stated.

(b) Except as provided by law, hearsay evidence is inadmissible.

(c) This section shall be known and may be cited as the hearsay


1201. A statement within the scope of an exception to the hearsay

rule is not inadmissible on the ground that the evidence of such

statement is hearsay evidence if such hearsay evidence consists of

one or more statements each of which meets the requirements of an

exception to the hearsay rule.

1202. Evidence of a statement or other conduct by a declarant that

is inconsistent with a statement by such declarant received in

evidence as hearsay evidence is not inadmissible for the purpose of

attacking the credibility of the declarant though he is not given and

has not had an opportunity to explain or to deny such inconsistent

statement or other conduct. Any other evidence offered to attack or

support the credibility of the declarant is admissible if it would

have been admissible had the declarant been a witness at the hearing.

For the purposes of this section, the deponent of a deposition taken

in the action in which it is offered shall be deemed to be a hearsay


1203. (a) The declarant of a statement that is admitted as hearsay

evidence may be called and examined by any adverse party as if under

cross-examination concerning the statement.

(b) This section is not applicable if the declarant is (1) a

party, (2) a person identified with a party within the meaning of

subdivision (d) of Section 776, or (3) a witness who has testified in

the action concerning the subject matter of the statement.

(c) This section is not applicable if the statement is one

described in Article 1 (commencing with Section 1220), Article 3

(commencing with Section 1235), or Article 10 (commencing with

Section 1300) of Chapter 2 of this division.

(d) A statement that is otherwise admissible as hearsay evidence

is not made inadmissible by this section because the declarant who

made the statement is unavailable for examination pursuant to this


1203.1. Section 1203 is not applicable if the hearsay statement is

offered at a preliminary examination, as provided in Section 872 of

the Penal Code.

1204. A statement that is otherwise admissible as hearsay evidence

is inadmissible against the defendant in a criminal action if the

statement was made, either by the defendant or by another, under such

circumstances that it is inadmissible against the defendant under

the Constitution of the United States or the State of California.

1205. Nothing in this division shall be construed to repeal by

implication any other statute relating to hearsay evidence."


Geraldine Hughes: The truth is, Conrad Murray left the premises completely after putting Michael Jackson under Propofol to meet with a call girl. When he returned, it is speculated that Michael Jackson was already dead.

Samantha Jelly: "Regardless if Murray was meeting with a call girl or out in the hallway, the fact remains that he was NOT in the room with Michael. Again, without concrete evidence or witness testimony that he left the premises, the claims are refutable and considered nothing more than speculation and hearsay. With regard to the aforementioned speculation of Michael Jackson being already dead; the time of death is determined by the coroner-the forensics team then assesses other forensic evidence. It can quickly be proven or disproven that he was already dead at that point. (Reference above Hearsay Evidence Code)"

Geraldine Hughes: Everything he did afterwards was to cover his tracks. He has given two timelines. He told the police that he gave Michael the Propofol at 10:40 a.m. and when he returned from the bathroom at 10:50, he found Michael not breathing and immediately began CPR. However, the problem with that story is that the 911 call was not made until 12:21 p.m. Then his girlfriend told police that she was talking to Murray at 12:05 p.m. and at approx. 12:13 p.m. he dropped the phone and was doing CPR on Michael. The problem with this alibi (from his girlfriend) is that at 9:00 a.m. Murray's employees in Texas were removing boxes from storage, and the paramedic stated that when they arrived at 12:30, MJ appeared to had been dead for hours. They would have, under normal circumstances, taken Michael to the coroner's office, but Murray insisted that they take him to the hospital.

Samantha Jelly: "By law, since Murray holds the MD degree, the patient care is deferred to him, rather than the paramedics on scene. He holds senior rank, and if he is on scene and does not pronounce the patient dead, the paramedics must continue resuscitation attempts until at which time a doctor in charge pronounces the patient dead"

"With regard to speculation:

Personal Knowledge/Speculation (FRE 602)

The personal knowledge requirement is simply that a witness must have personally seen, heard, or otherwise sensed the event or situation they are testifying about. For example, if the witness was at an intersection and saw the color of the light when an accident occurred, she could testify about the color of the light. But if the witness was in a store during the accident and only later “learned” what color the light was in a conversation, she doesn’t have personal knowledge of the light color. She would have personal knowledge about what the person told her in the conversation, but that is not enough to give her personal knowledge of the light color."

"With further regard to hearsay:

Hearsay (FRE 801-807)

“Hearsay” is an out of court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted by the statement. For example, if the witness testifies that someone said “the light was green when I went through,” and you offer the testimony to show that the light was, in fact, green, that’s hearsay. Also, it doesn’t matter if the witness is the declarant; their prior statements are still hearsay if the statements meet the definition and aren’t excepted. Basically, if someone will testify “she told me xyz,” you need to think of why that’s either not hearsay, or is an exception to the hearsay prohibition. The easiest is probably party opponent (801(d)). This means the person who made the original statement is the opposing party (or an agent, etc.). Any witness, even the opposing party, can be asked about statements the opposing party made."

"Hearsay exceptions that apply even where the declarant is available:

* Excited Utterances: statements relating to startling events or condition made while the declarant was under the stress of excitement caused by the event or condition. This is the exception that may apply to the 'police officer' scenario listed above. The victim's cries of help were made under the stress of a startling event, and the victim is still under the stress of the event, as is evidenced by the victim's crying and visible shaking. An excited utterance does not have to be made at the same time of the startling event. A statement made minutes, hours or even days after the startling event can be excited utterances, so long as the declarant is still under the stress of the startling event. However, the more time that elapses between a startling event and the declarant’s statement, the more the statements will be looked upon with disfavor.

* Present Sense Impressions: A statement expressing the declarant’s impression of a condition existing at the time the statement was made, such as "it's hot in here", or "we're going really fast". Unlike an excited utterance, it need not be made in response to a startling event. Instead, it is admissible because it is a condition that the witness would likely have been experiencing at the same time as the declarant, and would instantly be able to corroborate.

* Declarations of present state of mind: Much like a present-sense impression describes the outside world, declarant’s statement to the effect of "I am angry!" or "I am Napoleon!" will be admissible to prove that the declarant was indeed angry, or did indeed believe himself to be Napoleon at that time. Used in cases where the declarant mental state is at issue. Present-state-of-mind statements are also used as circumstantial evidence of subsequent acts committed by the declarant, like his saying, "I'm gonna go buy some groceries and get the oil changed in my car on my way home from work."

"Hearsay exceptions not excluded by the hearsay rule if the declarant is unavailable as a witness.

* Dying Declarations: and other statements under belief of impending death: often depicted in movies; the police officer asks the person on his deathbed, "Who attacked you?" and the victim replies, "The butler did it." However, case law has ruled out this exception in criminal law, because the witness should always be cross examined in court; however, there is an exception to this exception for criminal cases: even though generally inadmissible to matters relating to criminal law, the exception has been carved out for actions relating to homicide cases[Fed. R. Evid. 804(b)(2)].

* Declaration against Interest: A statement that would incriminate or expose the declarant to liability to such an extent that it can be assumed he would only make such a statement if it were true. It would be assumed that one would lie to further one's interests, so a statement against his interests (such as exposing oneself to criminal or civil liability) likely would not be made unless it were true.

* Prior Testimony: if the testimony was given under oath and the party against whom the testimony is being proffered was present and had the opportunity to cross examine the witness at that time-often used to enter depositions into the court record at trial.

* Admission of Guilt: if you make a statement, verbal or otherwise, as an admission of guilt of the matter at hand, that statement would not be regarded as hearsay. In other words, self-incriminating statements (confessions) are not hearsay.

* Forfeiture by Wrongdoing: the party against whom the statement is now offered (1) intentionally made the declarant unavailable; (2) with intent to prevent declarant testimony; (3) by wrongdoing. In plain English, if you get rid of a witness, statements they made can be used against you."


X1 Blogger

Geraldine Hughes: If Murray was telling the truth, then why is he lying, why did he change his timeline, and why was he on the phone during the time Michael was under Propofol. Another fact was that Murray had the heater turned up so high in Michael's room that the paramedics called it sweltering, when Michael hated sleeping in the heat. He slept with his bedroom window fully opened and would not let anyone close it.

X1: With respect to Heat and Time of Death via Forensic Pathology:

*This is a complex science and for a Coroner and a Forensic Pathologist to explain-as the time of death, body temperature, heat, and other factors will be surrounding this for certain.

#1. For the average person-other than the paramedics which arrived on the scene to state that the heat was sweltering-and how this would adversely affect Michael, at such a critical state after death-without any degree in forensic pathology would be inadmissible. This is according to what Ms. Jelly has stated above. With further regard to the paramedic profession- they are not trained to analyze forensic pathology-paramedics are trained to save lives. The paramedics were in the actual room and I trust they felt it was warm-as for any second hand information I cannot state the same.

#2. However, did they actually take a temperature of the room that the death took place in so that they can know in terms of the degree which varying heat could have affected Michael’s state? To have any conclusive evidence on how the heat factor affected Michael (if there was any/if these were not also false reports) we would need point our attentions to the discovery to determine just what the forensic pathologist stated. To further add to the time line and the time of death all of these factors need to be assessed before coming to a logical conclusion regarding anything. All the facts are required here.

#3. For anyone to factually state that Michael’s preference was to not sleep in heat they would have to have known him on a very personal level. This means the interactions of this individual would have to be someone who occupied a residence with Michael at some stage-a close friend or family member.

#4. Moreover, there are other factors that can affect the time of death like the positioning of the decedent or if they had clothing. We may presume whatsoever we like; however, without hard and conclusive forensic evidence to support any allegations they are just hearsay.

**Not unless there is information being leaked from the investigation. Or an insider has relayed such information. In any case if the proper authorities have not been notified in advance of this and if this is at all factual-the individual (s) that made the actual statements need to come forward and verify this. This person would become an actual witness for the prosecution and subject to a cross examination by defense.

X1: How would someone know these details and for certain be able to state what the heat did to Michael unless they're a forensic pathologist or a coroner? Here are the definitions below for the various individuals that may have had contact with Michael:

Coroner: Main Entry: cor•o•ner Pronunciation: \ˈkȯr-ə-nər, ˈkär-\ Function: noun Etymology: Middle English, an officer of the crown, from Anglo-French, from corone crown, from Latin corona Date: 15th century: a usually elected public officer whose principal duty is to inquire by an inquest into the cause of any death which there is reason to suppose is not due to natural causes-compare medical examiner


Medical Examiner: Main Entry: medical examiner Function: noun Date: 1877: a public officer who conducts autopsies on bodies to find the cause of death Physician-reviewed articles on medical examiner on Healthline

Forensic Pathology: is a branch of pathology concerned with determining the cause of death by examination of a cadaver. The autopsy is performed by the pathologist at the request of a coroner usually during the investigation of criminal law cases and civil law cases in some jurisdictions. *Forensic pathologists are also frequently asked to confirm the identity of a cadaver. The word forensics is derived from the Latin forēnsis meaning forum.


Forensic Science: (often shortened to forensics) is the application of a broad spectrum of sciences to answer questions of interest to a legal system. This may be in relation to a crime or a civil action. Besides its relevance to a legal system, more generally forensics encompasses the accepted scholarly or scientific methodology and norms under which the facts regarding an event, or an artifact, or some other physical item (such as a corpse) are ascertained as being the case. In that regard the concept is related to the notion of authentication, where by an interest outside of a legal form exists in determining whether an object is what it purports to be, or is alleged as being. The word forensic comes from the Latin adjective forensis, meaning "of or before the forum". In Roman times, a criminal charge meant presenting the case before a group of public individuals in the forum. Both the person accused of the crime and the accuser would give speeches based on their side of the story. The individual with the best argument and delivery would determine the outcome of the case. This origin is the source of the two modern usages of the word forensic – as a form of legal evidence and as a category of public presentation. In modern use, the term "forensics" in place of "forensic science" can be considered incorrect as the term "forensic" is effectively a synonym for "legal" or "related to courts". However, the term is now so closely associated with the scientific field that many dictionaries include the meaning that equates the word "forensics" with "forensic science".


Geraldine Hughes: It is my guess that he gave Michael Jackson a lot of propofol to keep him sedated long enough to go out and come back. When the propofol wears off, that is when the person wakes up. Therefore, because he was going to meet with a call girl, he wanted to make sure that Michael Jackson remained sleep until he returned. That's why he gave him so much and the coroner's office confirmed that Michael was swimming in propofol. He didn't bet on him dying because he is a Cardiologist, not an Anesthesiologist. Therefore, putting people under is not his area of specialty.

For the reasons stated above, Conrad Murder (Murray) should be charged with murder, not manslaughter. There are enough facts and evidence to prove that all though he acted recklessly, his actions were so negligent that it should be considered murder.

X1: Yes the entire blog was a guess this is my point. Sedation differs from anesthesia; they are not the same thing! Psychotropic medications are different also! Here are the definitions for the words below:

Sedative: Main Entry: 1sed•a•tive  Sedative: Pronunciation: \ˈse-də-tiv\ Function: adjective  Etymology: Middle English, alleviating pain, from Middle French sedatif, from Medieval Latin sedativus, from Latin sedates Date: 1779: tending to calm, moderate, or tranquilize nervousness or excitement.


Anesthesia: Main Entry: an•es•the•sia Pronunciation: \ˌa-nəs-ˈthē-zhə\ Function: noun Etymology: New Latin, from Greek anaisthēsia insensibility, from a- + aisthēsis perception, from aisthanesthai to perceive — more at audible Date: circa 1721 : loss of sensation with or without loss of consciousness.


General Anesthesia: Main Entry: Function: noun Date: 1881 : anesthesia affecting the entire body and accompanied by loss of consciousness— general anesthetic noun


Psychotropic: /psy•cho•tro•pic/ (si″ko-tro´pik) exerting an effect on the mind; capable of modifying mental activity; said especially of drugs.


X1: Michael was given many different drugs on this day. The source provided below will take you to a listing regarding what was given to Michael. I will not further elaborate on all of the drugs with the exception for one-Propofol as this was the drug that indeed caused his death as we know it to be from the various reports. To conclude this if you are giving out information-please be advised to research it so that you are not giving misinformation! How can you comment on something when your facts are not correct? There are many different factors involved when you are trying to piece everything together. It is just confusing if you reference a drug type as something it is not or issue a statement which you have no intention for providing a source for! Here, we have a fine example of something-that from the outside appears to be quite conclusive and convincing. However, if you look closely and examine the words you realize - there is very little- if at all any substantial and of contextual merit here.



Brand: Diprivan

Propofol is an intravenous drug that slows the activity of your brain and nervous system. It is used to help you relax before and during general anesthesia for surgery or other medical procedure. Propofol is also used in critically ill patients who require a breathing tube connected to a ventilator. Side effects may include: seizure (convulsions), weak or shallow breathing, or fast or slow heart rate. (Photo by Frederick M. Brown/Getty Images)

*Here is the link to the various drugs they claim that Michael was taking:


*Propofol can be given as a general or regular anesthetic. It is very versatile in nature here is a reference to the Propofol (INN, marketed as Diprivan by AstraZeneca) is a short-acting, intravenously administered hypnotic agent. Its uses include the induction and maintenance of general anesthesia, sedation for mechanically ventilated adults, and procedural sedation. Propofol is also commonly used in veterinary medicine. Propofol is approved for use in more than 50 countries, and generic versions are available. Chemically, Propofol is unrelated to barbiturates, and has largely replaced sodium thiopental (Pentothal) for induction of anesthesia because recovery from Propofol is more rapid and "clear" when compared with thiopental. Propofol is not considered an analgesic, so opioids such as fentanyl may be combined with Propofol to alleviate pain. Due to its amnesic effects and appearance as a white liquid, Propofol has been humorously dubbed "milk of amnesia" by doctors drug as I know it:


Book Excerpts Taken From: Forensic pathology of trauma: common problems for the pathologist By Michael J. Shkrum, David A. Ramsay:


All references to Geraldine Hughes are excerpts from her blog it can be found at the following url:


*All word definitions come from (Online Dictions) with the exception of those denoted.


Conrad Murray Involuntary Manslaughter-Jurors, Truth, Justice 4 Michael, and the American Way Meets the World

Blanaid X-Blogger Correspondent
BX: On June 14, Conrad Murray will arrive in court again; this time for his preliminary hearing- on April 5 a judge got assigned to the case.  The date for a preliminary hearing was set.  That judge is Michael Pastor.  During the hearing the Hon. Michael Pastor will decide of there is enough evidence or probable cause to charge Conrad Murray as per the complaint raised by the DA – of Involuntary Manslaughter.  The charge will be formalized,  once all the evidence has been finalized-. the trial will begin.   A jury will be formed who will find Conrad Murray guilty of the charges raised - or not guilty.  Now there are many voices – fan's voices - heard which say that Conrad Murray is guilty, not of Involuntary Manslaughter but of Murder II.  In any case, with the current charge of Involuntary Manslaughter he should receive at least the maximum sentence Californian law provides - 4 years in prison and no probation.  Much has been stated about the reasons why the DA charged Conrad Murray of Involuntary Manslaughter and not Murder II:

"Some jurisdictions still use the term malice aforethought to define intentional murder, but many have changed or elaborated on the term in order to describe more clearly a murderous state of mind. California has retained the malice aforethought definition of murder (Cal. Penal Code § 187 [West 1996]). It also maintains a statute that defines the term malice. Under section 188 of the California Penal Code, malice is divided into two types: express and implied. Express malice exists "when there is manifested a deliberate intention unlawfully to take away the life of a fellow creature." Malice may be implied by a judge or jury "when no considerable provocation appears, or when the circumstances attending the killing show an abandoned and malignant heart."
BX: The question is - would there be enough evidence to convince first the judge at the preliminary hearing and then a jury-that there was malice aforethought - in this case, implied malice? 
"A person who unintentionally causes the death of another person also may be charged with murder under the depraved-heart theory.  Depraved-heart murder refers to a killing that results from gross negligence.  For example, suppose that a man is practicing shooting his gun in his backyard, located in a suburban area.  If the man accidentally shoots and kills someone, he can be charged with murder under the depraved-heart theory, if gross negligence is proven." 

BX: The latter is what Brian Oxman and Joe Jackson and many others are talking about.  The case centers around the question if Conrad Murray showed gross negligence which could result in a charge of second degree murder - whereas currently he is charged with Involuntary Manslaughter - "Manslaughter committed during an unlawful act that isn't a felony; or during an otherwise lawful act which might produce death, in an unlawful manner, or without due caution and circumspection.  Another way of describing Involuntary Manslaughter is an unintentional killing resulting from reckless behavior or criminal negligence." 

There are several initiatives under way now trying to get the District Attorney to change the charge against Conrad Murray to Murder II - letter writing initiatives - and we have seen the fans outside the court house on April 5. However, on June 14, the judge will decide if there is probable cause for Involuntary Manslaughter - and if he admits this charge, the trial procedures will begin.  This will eventually lead to a jury being selected.

X1 Blogger
X1: It will be difficult to find an impartial jury.  Will a change of venue be in order? This is a good question to pose here.  The majority of the WORLD has the read articles, seen reports on TV and, many have seen supporters and fans the like-waving their signs and banners stating Conrad Murray is a MURDER!  It is of the utmost importance that an impartial/non biased jury be formed.  The jury must not be tainted-meaning NOT subjected to (or) under the influence of what has been stated and written via a journalistic tabloidish- medaloid approach.  The potential jurors most certainly cannot be bedazzled and starstruck by the influence of Michael Jackson's celebrity status. 

**Fans have stated they will conceal the fact that they are fans just to be eligible for a seat in the jury; therefore, they may be selected as candidates on the jury!  Everyone on that jury will be placed under extreme scrutiny by the defense team!  It is highly unlikely that a juror which is a Michael Jackson fan will stay hidden for very long.  This might just damage the trial and quite possibly lead to a mistrial!

*Please folks Justice for Michael is very important here!  It is of major importance that an unbiased jury is formed - this is Michael's greatest chance to receive justice! 

***There is also a gross misconception and a severe lack of comprehension regarding what the carriage of justice represents. Justice is blind!  Justice does not look at the defendant.  Justice seeks the truth, however imperfectly and unsatisfactorily (LIKE IT OR NOT)-justice is impartial! Fans should support the ideal of a fair trial with an unbiased jury - as this will mean the ultimate truth and justice for Michael.

A judge may cancel a trial prior to the return of a verdict; legal parlance designates this as a mistrial.

*A judge may declare a mistrial due to:
  • The court determining that it lacks jurisdiction over a case,
  • Evidence being admitted improperly,
  • Misconduct by a party, juror, or an outside actor, if it prevents due process,
  • A hung jury which cannot reach a verdict with the required degree of unanimity
  • Disqualification of a juror after the jury is impaneled, if no alternate juror is available and the litigants do not agree to proceed with the remaining jurors.
A declaration of a mistrial generally means that the court must hold a retrial on the same subject.

**An important exception occurs in criminal cases in the United States. If the court erroneously declares a mistrial, or if prosecutorial misconduct forced the defendant into moving for a mistrial, the constitutional protection against double jeopardy bars any retrial.
X1: There has also been plenty of speculation surrounding the former wives of Michael Jackson.  Several media reports have alluded to stating the former wives of Michael Jackson will be testifying at this trial.  

*Please reference the url below:

X1: What will Debbie Rowe's testimony during this trial?  Will Debbie be speaking as his wife and NOT Michael's nurse?  As of current, HIPPA law stipulates the following regarding medical records and the deceased:

HIPAA speaks of two instances that allow access to a deceased's medical files. One, the personal representative designated by a will or appointed by a court to settle the deceased's affairs may gain access to medical files. Second, a relative may receive medical information about the deceased if the information has a bearing on the relative's health.

X1: What would occur if the defense contacted several of Michael's former physicians and medical providers. If testimony was requested from them would Doctor Patient Privilege be applicable?

Waiving the Privilege
The doctor-patient privilege does not automatically go away when a patient dies. As with most questions involving wrongful death, however, the laws on this issue vary from state to state. In the absence of the patient, the person who represents the deceased typically has the power to waive the physician-patient privilege; this may be the spouse, parent or child of the deceased. In some cases, the privilege may be waived because the plaintiff's lawsuit centers on the medical condition of the deceased, when the medical information is key to how the case will be decided.

Naturally, if your lawsuit includes allegations against a doctor or hospital, the defendant may be reluctant to release the necessary medical records. The laws of your state will have rules to deal with this situation, and having a lawyer in your corner can make the process move more smoothly.

X1: Also, would this below be considered as the testimony of one Lisa Marie Presley for The People of The State of California vs. Dr. Conrad Murray???

*He Knew by Blog Entry by Lisa Marie Presley:

"He Knew."
Years ago Michael and I were having a deep conversation about life in general. I can't recall the exact subject matter but he may have been questioning me about the circumstances of my Fathers Death. At some point he paused, he stared at me very intensely and he stated with an almost calm certainty, "I am afraid that I am going to end up like him, the way he did."

I promptly tried to deter him from the idea, at which point he just shrugged his shoulders and nodded almost matter of fact as if to let me know, he knew what he knew and that was kind of that. 14 years later...I am sitting here watching on the news an ambulance leaves the driveway of his home, the big gates, the crowds outside the gates, the coverage, the crowds outside the hospital, the Cause of death and what may have led up to it and the memory of this conversation hit me, as did the unstoppable tears. A predicted ending by him, by loved ones and by me, but what I didn't predict was how much it was going to hurt when it finally happened.

The person I failed to help is being transferred right now to the LA County Coroners office for his Autopsy. All of my indifference and detachment that I worked so hard to achieve over the years has just gone into the bowels of hell and right now I am gutted. I am going to say now what I have never said before because I want the truth out there for once. Our relationship was not 'a sham' as is being reported in the press. It was an unusual relationship yes, where two unusual people who did not live or know a 'Normal life' found a connection, perhaps with some suspect timing on his part. Nonetheless, I do believe he loved me as much as he could love anyone and I loved him very much.

I wanted to 'save him' I wanted to save him from the inevitable which is what has just happened. His family and his loved ones also wanted to save him from this as well but didn't know how and this was 14 years ago. We all worried that this would be the outcome then.

At that time, In trying to save him, I almost lost myself. He was an incredibly dynamic force and power that was not to be underestimated.

When he used it for something good, It was the best and when he used it for something bad, It was really, really bad.

Mediocrity was not a concept that would even for a second enter Michael Jackson's being or actions. I became very ill and emotionally/ spiritually exhausted in my quest to save him from certain self-destructive behavior and from the awful vampires and leeches he would always manage to magnetize around him. I was in over my head while trying. I had my children to care for, I had to make a decision. The hardest decision I have ever had to make, which was to walk away and let his fate have him, even though I desperately loved him and tried to stop or reverse it somehow.

After the Divorce, I spent a few years obsessing about him and what I could have done different, in regret. Then I spent some angry years at the whole situation. At some point, I truly became Indifferent, until now. As I sit here overwhelmed with sadness, reflection and confusion at what was my biggest failure to date, watching on the news almost play by play The exact Scenario I saw happen on August 16th, 1977 happening again right now with Michael (A sight I never wanted to see again) just as he predicted, I am truly, truly gutted. Any ill experience or words I have felt towards him in the past has just died inside of me along with him.

He was an amazing person and I am lucky to have gotten as close to him as I did and to have had the many experiences and years that we had together. I desperately hope that he can be relieved from his pain, pressure and turmoil now.  He deserves to be free from all of that and I hope he is in a better place or will be. I also hope that anyone else who feels they have failed to help him can be set free because he hopefully finally is. The World is in shock but somehow he knew exactly how his fate would be played out some day more than anyone else knew, and he was right."

*Presley and Jackson were married from 1994 to 1996.




X1 Blogger Will Now Feature Blanaid X & Samantha Jelly



As previously stated, today's hearing was merely a formality, originally to set a date for the Preliminary Hearing, and later, to discuss the revocation of Murray's medical license. That did not stop representatives from countries around the world, making their voices heard in Los Angeles today. At times, the emotion was absolutely overwhelming, leaving many, speechless. From a legal perspective, nothing that happened today surprised me. I fully expected Murray to retain his license to practice medicine. Specifically, because this request had been previously denied, and because he has outstanding child support obligations, as well as having to bankroll his defense. Now, many of you are saying, "Let him get a public defender, like anyone else who cannot afford an attorney" But remember, no matter what OUR personal feelings are, Murray has simply been CHARGED with a crime, not convicted of anything yet. A defendant has the right to retain private counsel if they can afford it and choose to do so. As long as he keeps working, he can afford it. The court cannot deny him that right. Ultimately, however, I do expect to see some permanent sanctions placed on his license and for the scope of his medical practice to be somewhat limited.

The next hearing on June 14th, will not only address the medical license matter, it will also be the Preliminary Hearing date. This hearing is a standard part of the legal trial process. By the time this hearing takes place, the defense must be in full receipt of all disclosure that the prosecution plans to use against the defendant. This means that all the evidence the State has against Murray, must be turned over to his attorneys by the time this hearing occurs. This allows his lawyers to determine which strategies to employ when putting together his defense. This is important to ensuring a fair trial. A fair trial is paramount in this case, because if there is a question of ethics, or there are technical mistakes, it can result in a mistrial, which would be disastrous for the prosecution. At this hearing, the judge will decide at that point if the evidence warrants the case proceeding to trial. (This is a no-brainer in this case...there is plenty of evidence, but this is a necessary formality in accordance with our Justice system) Once the Preliminary Hearing is complete, a date for the trial, (along with jury selection dates) will begin. During the course of a court case, often other small technicalities may come up in between this time, and time will be scheduled for judges to rule on any other matters that may need to be addressed beforehand.

While today's hearing was not earth shattering in terms of justice being served, it was part of the journey. This is what we must focus on as we all enter into this quest for Justice for Michael. Step by step, we WILL get there. When I looked around today, the corridors, out the windows, hearing news reporters speaking foreign languages, and just observing people, I realized something. Michael is STILL doing it. He is STILL bringing people together. STILL uniting people for a cause. I saw people from other countries who had no clue that the other existed yesterday, sharing a common cause, and sharing overwhelming emotion today. I saw pain, I saw sadness, I saw smiles , I saw laughter, I saw anger and I saw tears, but above all, I saw US, I saw the L.O.V.E, and I saw the Warriors, and in THAT, I saw Michael.

Stay strong Warriors, and keep the faith. We have won the battle, but the war is not over yet.

Love Lives Forever.

Samantha Jelly


I am just sitting back watching the media frenzy as the broadcasts and the tabloid publications continuously evolve and surmount! They are going for the gold here-this is about$$$$! Plain and simple cash in on the case and Michael is generating plenty of revenue even for people that would otherwise be making NO money of the kind! People that have otherwise faded to black have now surfaced with new and shocking revelations-out of the wood work-all of a sudden.. The banter resumes with the true intent hidden in the shadows-ANYTHING FOR MONEY$$$ DOLLARS MAKE SENSE!

The vultures are swarming-swarming they are-to get a piece of anything that they can get. The irony of this! For those that know me well know that I predicted this time and era regarding what is transpiring. You see X1 is NOT delusional and I see the EVIL THAT MEN DO! Murray has now according to tabloid reports taken to saying that Michael injected the fatal dose of Propofol on his own! It has been stated that while Murray took a brief intermission for personal reasons- Michael awakened and injected himself with the fatal dose!

Now I do not know about you-I know about me! I know that my common sense tells me that this is not possible. I do NOT need to be a fancy lawyer to figure this out! I do not need to pass the NYS Bar examination to see that Michael was given many different pharmaceuticals on this particular day. In fact he was given so many that the tabloid reports allude to what they claim to be factual-that he had over 100 times the amount of pharmaceuticals required in his system! So how did we go from this to Michael injected himself with the fatal dose? Whosoever these people are they must think X1 is illiterate or stupid!

The simple fact that anyone would try to sway public opinion to believe this non-sense is asinine at the very least! I am waiting for the real time updates from the tabloids which will try Murray in a court of public opinion! I am waiting to see how they prepare the supporters and fans for what the final outcome of this legal charade will be. I am waiting for them to announce what jail sentence Murray will do with respect to the time factor! I am waiting for Michael to be the catalyst for change regarding doctors and prescription drug peddling!

*Yes I think also that the WORLD is waiting don't you???




Personal Reflections Of X1


Michael was about a message!  It took a while for this great epiphany of a revelation to be imparted upon me; however, I heard it...  I heard it so loud that it changed me when I did!  I do not recall when this first happened-when I actually started to pay attention to the lyrics of songs.  I have always been involved in music.  When I was a boy and my mother had me take piano lessons, later I morphed into a  hip hop DJ, afterward I did personal music production for a while.  This is where I think I began to pay attention to the lyrics and the effect that music has on humans.

I have always been different.  Being Black in the 1970's in NYC--going to private school and, having things that other children of my culture could not afford automatically made me different!  As a direct result  I was automatically drawn to anything different. Often times growing up in NYC I would listen to the music of Michael as a child.  I can remember my mother playing Michael along with her favorite oldies music.  I would get up and dance up a storm as soon as anything MICHAEL or JACKSON 5 came on!  During holidays like Christmas, New Years and, Easter this was common place--the family celebration. The madness in the music had gotten to me. I am just as guilty as the rest-status nonexempt.

It seems that for many years I did not realize there was a message in the music.  I was too caught up in the wonderment of the sound and the feelings it produced to ever really hear or for that matter feel the words in the music.  Now a days it is common place for people to sing a song and NOT even recognize its message! *With Michael he was an eye opener!  As I got to my teens and Michael's music of the 1990's became a call to the masses I heard it! I am a product of Generation X....A.K.A. The wasted generation. X is also the first letter of my middle name. I have always been referenced this way since a young child.

What I have learned from this in short is that people often listen-however, they DO NOT HEAR! I have learned to have an open mind and be aware of what I consume.  You know, I hear many people say they love Earth Song.  **I have not seen many of them do anything to promote awareness regarding this and try to stop or speak out about the destruction of our planet that is occurring. I cannot fathom how people can say that the are for Michael and not promote anything that is about saving the planet or togetherness of us as a people!  How can people sit by and witness starving or sick children or people and go about their everyday lives as usual--without any attempt to assist them!

I just DO NOT get it~!  I guess I just Will NOT either.  Pardon me, I apologize sincerely I do-in FACT get it!

What this is here is the:

*"It does not affect me policy and I am NOT concerned!"  I do get it, one day this might knock on the door for the people that have ignored Michael's message in the music and they will wish that someone hear them and have mercy!

We live in very serious times and if there is no message then we are really lost.  Life is not all wonderful.  I am sorry to be the one to break this news to you.  So while you are sitting there having the time of your life some child is orphaned in Africa or some other nation and their mother or father is dead because of poverty, war, famine or disease!  This was the message--do not be so selfish and only have considerations for ones own welfare.  We live on this planet together--it is a GLOBAL Village in case you have not noticed.  If you sit back and watch this take place and do not raise your voices in objection to it then you are just as guilty as the people that have made this all possible!

*Yes, there was a message in the music and I heard it Loud and Clear did you?

**If NOT just what did you hear?



Michael The Man And The Media/Team IXL WHAT'S IN YOUR WALLET?

We at TEAM IXL realize what the media has done to slander Michael-OH YES.  Because of this we take part in a series of actions to express our disdain.  It seems that the media-via biased reporting has waged a war on Michael in Life as well as Michael-his children and, his Family in death! 

Being against this we created a formula which is a strategy of sorts-if you will.  This page was initially created to support the petition IN MEMORY OF MICHAEL JOSEPH JACKSON PLEASE STOP FACEBOOK HATE GROUPS. 

*It turns out we were very wrong about this-sorry:(

This page has morphed into something we could have NEVER Imagined!  By reducing media clicks on tabloid sites we stop the frenzy of the masses to get the information from these sites!  Instead FB'ers can come to this page and find many of the stories here instead of going to those sites and supporting the sponsorship which supports the tabloid media!





*This above is very important-if we hurt the pocket we then state for the record what is acceptable in terms of the types of stories that are being printed regarding Michael.  Now I am not into censorship!  What I am into is reporting the entire truth not leaving out certain facts that will slant a story in a different direction. 

What the majority of these outlets do is slant the story in a negative way-the analytical perception is up to the individual absorbing and processing the material.  For instance take the story regarding the bleaching creams found in Michael's residence.  **You did NOT see the references to his medical condition that was announced to the ENTIRE WORLD via the autopsy!  What you saw was just the bleaching cream-NOT why it was being utilized!  Now, I am one to look into what is done and why!

* I think this page has taken the underlying cause which is a smear campaign full of vicious and corrupt intent and brought it to the forefront by exposing this.