The Tell-Tale Splotch: Debunking MJs Fact Vault
Aug 31, 2021
Physical evidence in sexual assault cases is often scarce, with evidence primarily relying on the victim's testimony. When Michael Jackson faced accusations of molesting a 13-year-old Jordan Chandler in 1993, Jordan described discoloration on Jackson's lower torso, including a dark blemish on the underside of his penis.
The fact that Thomas Sneddon, the lead prosecutor in the 2005 trial, was willing to present these photographs and Jordan's description to a judge and jury in one of the highest profile trials in history, should be more than enough to convince the average adult that there was, at the very least, a very strong match.
However, there are Michael Jackson supporters, commonly known as "stans," who heavily feature in this blog, propagating extensive misinformation and conspiracy theories to bolster Jackson’s "innocence."
One Michael Jackson stan, who identifies themselves as Michael Jacksons Fact Vault (@MJsFact_Vault) on Twitter, staunchly believes that Jordan Chandler’s description did not align with the photos that were taken. This individual has compiled numerous examples of fellow law enforcement officers (and a few tabloid sources) contradicting Thomas Sneddon’s 2005 declaration.
So, what's the truth? Well, let's find out.
Below you'll find quotes and screenshots from MJs Fact Vault Twitter account, with my response below each one.
MJs Fact Vault states:
Let's start with their own book, written by Evan & Ray Chandler "All That Glitters" Page 210
"Numerous distinctive markings & discolouration on Michaels privates"
View original tweet here.
Before we start, it's important to note that only law enforcement officials have seen Jordan Chandler's description and the photographs of Jackson's genitalia. Any speculation about a match or mismatch by those outside of law enforcement is unfounded. While it's reasonable to assume that Raymond Chandler would have been informed by his brother about the intimate details as described by Jordan, his account does not contradict Thomas Sneddon's 2005 declaration.
MJs Fact Vault likes to focus on the dark blemish located on the right underside of Jackson's penis. However, Thomas Sneddon is clear that Jordan described discoloration on his "lower torso, buttocks, and genitals, including a particular blemish on his penis."
I'll start with point 3 and point 5 of the declaration.
3. In the course of LAPD's investigation of the allegations, Jordan Chandler was interviewed by Los Angeles Deputy District Attorney Lauren Weis on September 1, 1993, during which interview Detective Ferrufino and a court reporter were present. Jordan was asked to relate information concerning his reported relationship with Michael Jackson. In the course of the interview Jordan Chandler made detailed statements concerning the physical appearance of Michael Jackson, in particular the coloration of and marks on the skin of his lower torso, buttocks and genitals, including a particular blemish on his penis. Jordan was asked to draw a picture of Mr. Jackson's erect penis and to locate on that drawing any distinctive marks he recalled. Jordan did so. The drawing was signed and dated by Jordan Chandler and was attached as Exhibit 1 to Detective Ferrufino's report in LAPD Case No. 930822245.
5. I have reviewed the statements made by Jordan Chandler in his interview on December 1, 1993. I have examined the drawing made by Jordan Chandler at Detective Ferrufino's request and the photographs taken of Defendant's genitalia. The photographs reveal a mark on the right side of Defendant's penis at about the same relative location as the dark blemish located by Jordan Chandler on his drawing of Defendant's erect penis. I believe the discoloration Chandler identified in his drawing was not something he could or would have guessed about, or could have seen accidentally. I believe Chandler's graphic representation of the discolored area on Defendant's penis is substantially corroborated by the photographs taken by Santa Barbara Sheriff's detectives at a later time.
The rationale behind Thomas Sneddon's focus on that specific blemish is straightforward. Requesting Jordan to draw Jackson's entire lower torso, buttocks, testicles, and penis, and identify every area of discoloration he recalled, would not only have been unfair to Jordan (just a child, remember), but also excessively complex. By zeroing in on a single blemish, particularly one located directly on Jackson's penis shaft, it strengthens the argument that Jordan would not have known or guessed about such a mark unless he had seen Jackson's penis, most likely in an upright erect position.
According to court documents, Jackson had a Jacuzzi in his private quarters (as well as an outside pool), and Wade Robson himself testified that he used the Jacuzzi with a seminaked Jackson. If Thomas Sneddon had focused on areas of discoloration around Jackson's waistline, either in 1993/1994 or in 2005, Jackson's defence team could have argued that Jackson "innocently" used the Jacuzzi with children, including Jordan Chandler, attributing this as the source of his knowledge about the discoloration. By eliminating that scenario and focusing on the dark blemish on the underside of Jackson's penis, any doubts that could have been raised by the defence were effectively dispelled.
MJs Fact Vault states:
The Smoking Gun wrote their article "The Tell Tale "Splotch" in 2005, where they reference the Linden Affidavit.
Linden noted that Jordan said Michael had ONE splotch on his penis which is a light colour, similar to the colour of his face.
View original tweet here.
It's peculiar that MJs Fact Vault would venture near The Smoking Gun website, given its placement in the tabloid category and its array of less than favourable stories about Jackson. Nonetheless, on some occasions, The Smoking Gun does post screenshots or links to official documents obtained from the police, among other sources. However, they did not share any screenshots or links to the Linden Affidavit.
Mjfacts.com might offer a straightforward explanation for this. It's entirely possible that The Smoking Gun did receive a heavily redacted copy of the Linden Affidavit and filled in the missing details themselves. Nevertheless, none of this truly alters the key points.
MJs Fact Vault is using this line as proof that Sneddon was contradicted:
"Chandler gave them a roadmap to Jackson's below-the-waist geography, which, he said, includes distinctive "splotches" on his buttocks and one on his penis, "which is a light color similar to the color of his face."
So, what were they referring to? Based on the wording, it is highly likely that The Smoking Gun is referring to his penis as being a similar colour to his face, not the splotch. However, there is a clear indicator that MJs Fact Vault may have overlooked. Tom Sneddon describes the blemish as a dark colour, and a dark-colored blemish would only be visible on a lighter-coloured penis.
For the sake of argument, let's assume The Smoking Gun was indeed referring to the blemish as being a light colour. Would that mean Thomas Sneddon was contradicted? No, it wouldn't. Once again, the photographs and description were made within a few months of each other. They have remained consistent and unchanged, and have not been handled by anyone outside of law enforcement. Even if The Smoking Gun had claimed the splotch was fluorescent green, that doesn't make it true. Tom Sneddon reviewed the photos and description before attempting to submit them as evidence in 2005. His assessment should carry more weight than a entertainment website.
MJs Fact Vault states:
Tom Sneddon the Santa Barbara District Attorney said the photos revealed "a mark on the right hand side of the defendants penis at about the same relative location as the dark blemish located by Jordan Chandler in his drawing".
View original tweet here.
I believe that MJs Fact Vault is making reference to individuals such as Raymond Chandler and even Ron Zonen, who was Tom Sneddon’s right-hand man during the 2005 molestation trial.
For instance, in a recent documentary titled "The Real Michael Jackson" by Jacques Peretti, Ron Zonen states that Jordan Chandler was able to accurately describe a distinctive mark on the underside of Jackson’s penis.
Watch the below video.
So, was Thomas Sneddon’s 2005 declaration contradicted by one or more of his own personnel? No, it wasn’t. MJs Fact Vault seems to have poor reading skills. In his declaration, Tom clearly states that Jordan Chandler was asked to draw a picture of Michael Jackson's "erect" penis.
Jordan was asked to draw a picture of Mr. Jackson's erect penis and to locate on that drawing any distinctive marks he recalled. Jordan did so. The drawing was signed and dated by Jordan Chandler and was attached as Exhibit 1 to Detective Ferrufino's report in LAPD Case No. 930822245.
The very definition of “erect” is: 1. upright in position or posture 2. raised or directed upward.
Source: dictionary.com/browse/erect
MJs Fact Vault seems unable to comprehend that Jordan Chandler created a two-dimensional drawing of Jackson's "erect penis," specifically detailing the underside. MJs Fact Vault believes that Thomas Sneddon was referring to the right central position of Jackson's penis, but this argument is weak, given that the average girth of a flaccid penis is only 9.31 cm. It's plausible that the dark blemish was visible from both the right underside and right central side.
Here’s an example illustrating that the underside of a penis has both a left and right side.
During the photo shoot, Michael Jackson did not have an erection, he was directed to elevate his penis in an upright position, specifically the underside, for comparison with Jordan Chandler’s two-dimensional erect drawing.
MJs Fact Vault states:
Dr Richard Strick, who was in the room when the photos were taken states the genitalia were oddly discoloured with light & dark skin. He doesn't mention any mark or marks. Strick was told there was a match.
View original tweet here.
Watch the Fox News video below.
Once again, MJs Fact Vault appears to struggle with reading and comprehending definitions. In reference to the first point, MJs Fact Vault attempts to assert that Thomas Sneddon only stated there was one mark on Michael Jackson's penis, and that Dr. Richard Strick directly contradicted him by claiming there were multiple areas of discoloration.
As previously demonstrated, Thomas Sneddon clearly indicates that Jordan described discoloration on his “lower torso, buttocks, and genitals, including a particular blemish on his penis.”
The distinction between discolouration and marks did bring a smile to my face. MJs Fact Vault, in a desperate attempt to defend a dead celebrity, is seeking to redefine the English dictionary. Both discolouration and marks related to the skin are perfectly acceptable. In fact, you can use various terms such as blemish, mark, patch, spot, blotch, and splotch to describe any area of discolouration on the skin.
Source: dictionary.com/browse/discoloration
MJs Fact Vault states:
Lead Detective Bill Dworin, has never claimed to have seen both photos & description, but claims the genitalia was unique bc of discolouration again no mention of a "mark" or "marks".
View original tweet here.
Bill Dworin, a lead investigator from the LAPD, has handled thousands of child sex abuse cases. To the best of my knowledge, he has been featured in at least two separate documentaries, where he affirmed the accuracy of Jordan Chandler's description.
This is a direct quote from the video posted by MJs Fact Vault:
"He [Chandler] described Jackson's genitalia, it was unique because of the discolouration. And then we obtained a search warrant to photograph Jackson to cooperate, what the child had said. When photographing Jackson's genitalia, it did cooperate. In other words, the boy saw Jackson naked. Does that mean Jackson molested the child? No, but it adds to the credibility of the child."
Watch the video below.
Bill Dworin also provided a comprehensive interview to nbcnews.com, where once more he elaborated on how Jordan Chandler's description was accurate, and how he was found highly credible by all who interviewed him.
Dworin:
“Everybody who listened to this child, ‘cause he’s not only interviewed by my officers, he was interviewed by Department of Children and Family Services, he was interviewed by the district attorney’s office at a later date, we were all satisfied he was a very credible witness.”
Bill Dworin also provides detailed insights into the so-called "art books" discovered on Jackson's property, containing nude images of children, something Jackson falsely denied owning in the 1995 Diane Sawyer interview.
So, what conspiracy is MJs Fact Vault trying to spin? Bill Dworin was clearly an active member during the investigation, evaluating evidence found during the 1993 raid.
Is MJs Fact Vault implying that only Tom Sneddon handled and viewed the photographs after they were taken and developed? Were they locked away in a vault, inaccessible to other law enforcement officials, including Bill Dworin, the child molestation expert? This appears to be the conspiracy that MJs Fact Vault is promoting.
In fact, according to the declaration, Jordan Chandler disclosed his description to “Deputy District Attorney Weis and LAPD investigators on December 1, 1993.” Unless MJs Fact Vault believes that Bill Dworin was an impostor, it is reasonable to conclude that he was actively involved in assessing whether Jordan's description matched the evidence or not.
MJs Fact Vault states:
Diane Dimond "Pinkish Splotches" Diane was rumoured to have a close "relationship" with the Santa Barbara District attorney Tom Sneddon & Victor Gutierrez.
View original tweet here.
It's astonishing that this particular individual is using "tabloids," "scumbags," and "liars" to defend Jackson. Any other time Diane Diamond and others are "proven liars" who have financially capitalized on tarnishing Michael's reputation for decades.
So, what was Diane Diamond's alleged "truth"? I'm uncertain, and the screenshot provided by MJs Fact Vault cannot be located in its original format online. Even if it is authentic, did Diamond contradict Thomas Sneddon by describing the splotches as a pinkish colour instead of dark?
Likely not. MJs Fact Vault still neglects to recognize that Jordan described discolouration on his lower torso, buttocks, and genitalia, including the dark blemish on the right underside of his penis. Only the blemish on the right underside of his penis was described as a dark colour. It's entirely possible that the other mentioned varied in colour, including a pinkish tone.
When the declaration was signed by Gerald McC. Franklin, it confirmed that Jordan's description of blemishes on his lower torso and penis was accurate – not just the distinctive dark blemish. As previously mentioned, that particular blemish was highlighted as something he couldn't have guessed or accidentally seen.
On May 25, 2005, I served the within PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO ADMIT EVIDENCE THAT JORDAN CHANDLER HAD KNOWLEDGE OF, AND ACCURATELY DESCRIBED, DEFENDANT'S DISTINCTIVELY-BLEMISHED LOWER TGORSO AND PENIS IN 199T, ETC. on Defendant, by THOMAS A. MESEREAU, JR. and ROBERT SANGER, by transmitting a true copy thereof to Mr. Mesereau at his confidential Santa Maria Fax number, and by personally delivering a true copy Mr. Sanger's office at the address shown on the attached Service List.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed at Santa Barbara, California on this 25th day of May, 2005.
Gerald McC. Franklin
Despite Diane Diamond’s close ties to the district attorney, she never had access to the description or photos. She has never been in a position to state with absolute certainty what colour they were or their precise positioning. It's ironic that MJ supporters would preserve a screenshot she allegedly made and treat it as the ultimate truth, when at any other time she would be labelled as a shoddy journalist.
MJs Fact Vault states:
Victor Gutierrez's book Michael Jackson Was My Lover, page 159. Victor had close connections with the Chandlers, Evan is mentioned in his book a many many times, Victor was also Diane Dimonds best source.
View original tweet here.
I've never read Victor Gutierrez's book, and it's unlikely that I ever will, but I'm well aware that it presents Jordan and Jackson's relationship as a love story, rather than outright abuse.
In any case, MJs Fact Vault quoted this:
"Michael is circumcised. He has short pubic hair. His testicles are marked with pink and brown marks. Like a cow, not white but pink colour."
See the screenshot in full here: photos.app.goo.gl
Once again, this is very similar to the previous post concerning Diane Diamond. It's immaterial what was asserted in Victor Gutierrez's book, and Evan Chandler, Jordan's father, was not a covert collaborator, regardless of the proclamations by supporters of Jackson. Victor Gutierrez never had access to Jordan's account or the series of photographs that were taken.
On a more disturbing matter, the screenshot that MJs Fact Vault posted, also includes references to Brett Barnes being masturbated and needing Vaseline apply to his anus for constipation. Therefore, are we to believe that Victor Gutierrez book is factually true in its entirety, or should we discard the parts that challenge Jackson's innocence? We eagerly await your insight, MJs Fact Vault.
MJs Fact Vault states:
Former district attorney Lauren Weis. Telephone Stories Podcast "A particular mark on the underside of his penis."
View original tweet here.
Okay, this is what is said:
Interviewer:
With former deputy district attorney, Lauren Weis, whether or not Jordan Chandler's description of the blotches were correct or not?
Lauren Weis:
Correct. Not just the genitalia, but a particular mark on the underside of his penis, which the victim described... and we had information that that Michael had always maintained that he was never seen naked in front of any of these children.
Listen to the audio below.
I’m not really sure what conspiracy MJs Fact Vault is trying to spin here because Lauren Weis audio statement is 100% consistent with Thomas Sneddon’s 2005 declaration, which states multiple areas of discolouration, including the dark blemish on the underside of his penis. It seems that MJs Fact Vault may be seeking to assert that Lauren Weis stated the mark was on the underside, while Thomas Sneddon claimed it was on the right side. However, as previously noted, Jordan created a two-dimensional "erect" drawing that was compared to Jackson's penis.
While there is often speculation among Jackson fans that the entire Santa Barbara and Los Angeles police departments were corrupt, it's worth noting that Lauren Weis not only served as the deputy of the sex crimes division of the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office from 1979 to 2002, but also went on to become a Superior Court judge in Los Angeles. If she stated that Jordan's description matched, you can be fairly certain that it did.
MJs Fact Vault states:
Sgt Gary Spiegel who was also in the room when the photos were taken. "While on Mr. Jacksons left side he observed a dark spot on the lower left side of Jacksons penis."
View original tweet here.
It appears that MJs Fact Vault has finally uncovered a contradiction at the ninth attempt. Or maybe not.
Sgt. Gary Spiegel, the officer responsible for photographing Michael Jackson’s genitalia, has not made his declaration publicly available. MJs Fact Vault has taken a quote from "Be Careful Who You Love" by Diane Dimond – yes, it seems that "untrustworthy" book is being referenced once again.
It is highly unlikely that Diane Dimond received any official document from Sgt. Gary Spiegel, but it is conceivable that she was provided with certain information by local law enforcement regarding the description. However, without access to Sgt. Gary Spiegel's public declaration, it is impossible to verify its content against what was stated in her book. This discrepancy may stem from a simple mistake concerning the left and right, or it's plausible that Diane Dimond had to speculate and made an error in the process.
Furthermore, MJs Fact Vault has only presented a screenshot of the specific content it wants readers to see. Directly following the quote, Diane Dimond states:
"It's unclear whether Sergeant Spiegel actually had time to snap a photograph of the mark he saw. But law enforcement sources, as well as Chandler family sources, said that the dark patch on Jackson's genitals was found exactly where young Jordan Chandler said they could find such a mark. It's important to note that the dark spot was only visible when the penis was lifted -- as during sexual arousal."
Source: catdir.loc.gov
So, Diane Dimond openly acknowledges that the information she received was incomplete, as Tom Sneddon’s 2005 declaration confirms that the underside of Jackson’s penis was indeed photographed.
What is unequivocal is that MJs Fact Vault has undermined their own credibility by sharing this final quote. Throughout their Twitter feed, they have consistently asserted that the dark blemish was consistently located on the right central side, not the underside. However, with quotes such as “Dr. Strick asked Mr. Jackson to lift his penis” and “I observed a dark spot on the lower left side of Mr. Jackson’s penis,” along with emphasizing that Thomas Sneddon stated that Jordan’s drawing was of Jackson’s “erect” penis, it's apparent that MJs Fact Vault has contradicted themselves.
The greatest irony is that upon reading the "The Body Search" chapter from Diane Dimond’s book, it becomes evident that Jackson not only felt humiliated at having his genitals photographed, but also displayed extreme hostility, which later transformed into blind rage. One might assume that such an ordeal would have convinced a man who purportedly did not have a sexual interest in children to cease sleeping in the same bed as them. However, Jackson continued to do just that.
MJs Fact Vault states:
With so many versions of the same thing, was there really a match? #MJInnocent #SquareOneMJ
Indeed, there was a match. There are no multiple versions or discrepancies within Thomas Sneddon’s 2005 declaration; there is only one version. MJs Fact Vault aims to convince you that there are multiple accounts, yet they themselves seem to misunderstand the definition of “erect” or that discoloration on the skin can also be described as marks, splotches, and blotches, among other terms.
The most lamentable aspect is that MJs Fact Vault could have utilized Twitter to shed light on the complexity of child sexual abuse. However, they have instead opted to glorify a dead man who evidently had an unhealthy obsession with being in one-on-one scenarios with young boys.