Interview with Cadeflaw

In 2009, not long after the death of Michael Jackson, a group of women met on through a Michael Jackson community, on Amazon.com. They found they had many things in common, including a deep concern for how Michael had been unfairly portrayed throughout his life by the media. Realizing the impact this would have on his legacy, they banded together and formed the idea to try and have a law passed in California that would make it illegal to defame the dead. Cadeflaw was born.

In this interview, Lauren and I spoke with several Cadeflaw members. It came as no surprise to either of us to learn that they have conducted intelligent research into what is needed to have a law like this passed, and their organization is well-structured. They are also 100% committed and dedicated to seeing this project through to the end.

Valmai:  Could you tell us how and when Cadeflaw was formed, and how you initially came to be involved in this project? Obviously Michael was the main inspiration behind it, but were there other factors?

Karen:  Back in 2009, when Michael passed away, quite a few people (myself included), had a really hard time with his death. We really didn’t know what to do with our grief. We found a group on an Amazon thread called, “Why are we still crying about Michael Jackson?” Through that thread I met a lot of wonderful people. We talked back and forth, while holding our hearts on our sleeves for Michael. 

Everybody wanted vindication for Michael, and I happened to see an article that you had written, called Truth vs. Sensationalism, which really sparked something in my heart. Mary Brookins and I spoke, and we decided if we wanted to do something, we had to stand up and do it now. If we got enough support, we were going to try to file a class action suit against the media. I contacted my attorney, and I was told that a class action suit was not going to handle the problem.

I gave that information to Mary, and we decided to attempt an anti-defamation effort. Mary prepared The Michael Jackson Legacy Anti-Defamation Law to present to California legislators.

Mary:  Initially, it was Michael, but we believe it’s wrong to defame the character of any deceased person. They can’t defend themselves—and my personal mission is to help those left behind who suffer emotionally and financially, to protect and preserve the legacy of their loved ones. I think this law will provide them with that.

Defamation offends the deceased's relatives; it exposes the family to public hatred, contempt, ridicule;  it blackens the memory of their loved ones; and it provokes a breach of peace between people. That’s what drives me to be active and to stay active with this.

Jennifer:  Yes. I came across this idea, and I put some deep thought into it. I wanted to see what the ladies were doing. I thought that this would be something I would be very blessed and proud to be a part of.
It’s not just Michael; there are other stars who have passed away that the media have done this to also—perhaps not on the same scale, but it hurts me to see this. So that’s why I am here.

Valmai:  Well, that’s how the tabloids/media-loids earn their ratings and make their money, not just in California, but everywhere. In California, the star capital of the world, they have a well-spring of celebrities at which to point their cameras and write about, truthfully or not. They expose people’s private lives on magazine covers, on TV, in newspapers, and on the Internet. I know these people are still alive, but the legacy they will leave behind will be tainted.

Barbara:  Part of that is that we have allowed the media to go too far. We enabled them, and they have no regard for anyone, including children.

Valmai:  Yes, and like you said, we have enabled them; we have allowed them to get this far, and somewhere we have to take responsibility for that.  

Barbara:  Yes, we are making poor decisions about our medicine, what to purchase, what schools to send our children to—everything that involves our lives—off of their misinformation. Because we don’t stand up to them, they continue to do it, and they continue to use the First Amendment and the Shield laws to protect themselves.

Valmai:  Karen, we understand that you went to California last year, and met with Tom Mesereau. Can you tell us what his advice was?

Karen:  I was going to California in October, 2010, to visit my daughter, who is in the military. I decided I was going to see Tom Mesereau while I was there. I got in touch with his office and after a number of calls, Mr. Mesereau called me and we set up an appointment in November, 2010.

Mr. Mesereau is the most eloquent, elegant man I have ever met. He was extremely kind, and he gave me 45 minutes of his time free of charge. He was kind enough to look through our anti-defamation law petition. At that time, he noticed that there were a few things that needed to be changed in the wording of the petition letter. He advised me that he is a criminal defense attorney, not a defamation attorney, which of course, I understood. He did, in fact, change some of the wording, and we had a very nice conversation. Mr. Mesereau gave me his phone number, and told me if he could help in anyway, he would talk to us at any time. He is very much a proponent for the First Amendment, which we are not trying to change. What we are trying to do is change what is now the law in California, which states:

CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 1.  DECLARATION OF RIGHTS
SECTION 2.  (a) Every person may freely speak, write and publish his or her sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of this right. A law may not restrain or abridge liberty of speech or press.

And, this is what we’re going for—the abuse of that right.

I did go to another attorney when I was in California, Mr. Michael Harris of Rogers and Harris, Esq. He handled the defamation case for the Errol Flynn family for his Estate. He agreed with Mr. Mesereau that it would be a challenge to attempt an anti-defamation law, because as it stands, a deceased person cannot be defamed. He recommended, as Mr. Mesereau did, that we retain a constitutional attorney.

When I returned from California, I gave all this information to Ms. Brookins, and she prepared the Cadeflaw Petition, which is the baby of the Anti-Defamation Petition.

We don’t want to stop freedom of speech. I served in Vietnam, my husband served in Vietnam, my daughter has been in the Gulf wars; I do know what freedom of speech is. Nobody’s asking to curtail freedom of speech. What we are asking for is accountability for its abuse. This is not just about Michael Jackson. We use Michael’s name, but it has to be for every man, woman, and child.

Lauren:  Did you do any research on any previous efforts in regards to this issue? Apparently, there was a similar case in New York that came close to passing, but didn’t. Did you take a look at that case at all?

Mary:  Yes, we’ve done quite a bit of research. The New York case was in 1987. It involved a young, black teenager who accused a New York police officer, and a State Trooper, of a racist attack; a rape.
The gentlemen maintained their innocence, and the police officer who was implicated, committed suicide.  In fact, he wasn’t implicated until after he committed suicide. The Grand Jury in New York ultimately rejected the teenager’s claim. The reputations of the men were completely destroyed, as well as the memory of the deceased officer. The New York Assembly pushed for a posthumous defamation law, which was supported by Mario Cuomo, the Governor at that time. The Assembly encountered a lot of negative feedback from news organizations and the media. The communication industry found a way to stop the proposal for the law, and there was no attempt made to re-enact the proposal. There were many more cases, but the law was never changed. That just gives me more incentive to keep this ball moving, and to do everything in my power to get a law passed, because it’s time something was done.

Valmai:  Do you know what other states have a law like this?

Mary:  Colorado, Idaho, Georgia, Louisiana, and Nevada.

Lauren:  And has anybody made contact with a group(s) that might have been successful in those states?

Mary:  My hope is that more people might support this, and help in doing the work and research that needs to be done. No one gets paid to do this, and you have to be very special to be a part of a group like this, because it’s going to take a lot of hard work.

Valmai:  Is the petition, or proposal, modeled after another one in particular? Who would actually draft it? Would an attorney have to do that?

Mary:  Not necessarily. Barbara Owens did a marvelous job writing the petition letter that we posted on our site, and we have a young lady from Southern California, Julie Noel, who is an attorney, and who has expressed interest in writing this bill. We don’t have a model yet.

Lauren:  How do you see the anti-defamation law co-existing with the First Amendment?

Mary:  It can co-exist very well, absolutely. Look at California’s Article 1, Section 2. This law would not attempt to restrain, or abridge the liberty of speech. When we defame the character of a deceased person, it affects their descendants, the people who are left behind. By proxy, through an Estate, there is an obligation to sustain the US Government, and an Estate can sue be sued. A deceased's civil rights are being violated because, as in Section 1, any opinion that does not reflect the truth should be considered abusive, harmful, and offensive. Defamation of the deceased therefore interferes with the enjoyment, happiness, and one's inalienable rights. It says the same thing in the Constitution. So, it would exist very well with the First Amendment.  Say, write or speak what you want, but one must be held accountable, and if you cannot prove what you are saying is the truth, then the family should have an opportunity to bring an appropriate lawsuit or cause of action on behalf of themselves and the deceased person.

Lauren:  How would you define defamation? Who would decide what defamation is, and what is not?

Mary:  There are things said about others that are absolutely true, and if you’ve done your research and can prove your statement, then it is not defamation. It is defamation when you can’t provide proof for your statement.

While I’m alive, I can challenge the untruth, but if I’m deceased, my children should have a right to file suit against you, because what you are doing is blackening my memory. I deserve to have my legacy preserved and protected. If no one else is going to try and change that, then we are.

Valmai:  If there were such a law, would it only be the family who could sue?

Mary:  No. As far as the guidelines are concerned, an Estate should have the right to file a posthumous law suit. Once a person passes, the Estate may have an opportunity to earn money, and continue to be financed. If the deceased is defamed to such an extent that people will not purchase any material associated with that person, then that adversely affects the heirs. For example: there are those who will have nothing to do with Michael Jackson, because they absolutely believe everything the media has said in the past, and continues to now. The masses receive their information from the media, and if the masses choose to believe the untruths published by the media and other sources that may not be credible: this could rob the estate and heirs of income that might have been earned. Michael Jackson left behind three children and elderly parents, who may have in the past, and are still now, dependent upon his estate for their financial support.

Lauren:  What about the issue of financial damages? Public media enjoys the financial gain from the defamation of a person through stories, lies, innuendo, etc. Perhaps the only thing they would understand is a financial penalty?

Mary:  It may be too early to address that issue. Once the law is passed, any financial damages would be decided by the court. I would think it would apply to the media, or anyone who denied a person’s civil rights, living or deceased.

Valmai:  Can you outline the steps needed to put this law into place?

Jennifer:  Obviously, it begins with the idea; the bill must be written and needs an author. Once written, it would be sent to the Legislative Council in California. There are two houses in that state, the Senate and the Assembly.  Depending on which legislator authored the bill, it would go to that house first. It takes 30 days to pass, and then it is forwarded to the Rules of Committee, presented, and testimony is heard in support or opposition. There is then a hearing, where the bill is read three times. The bill can be passed, defeated, or it can be amended. Then it would go back to that house, and the process is repeated.

It is then presented to the other house, and the above steps would be repeated again. If the bill passes both houses, it goes to the Governor. The Governor has three choices:  he can sign the bill, allow it to become law without his/her signature, or he/she can veto it. If it becomes law, it is given a chapter number by the Secretary of State. 

Valmai:  If the Governor decides to veto the bill, can it be re-introduced?

Jennifer:  Yes. If a percentage of both Houses, which I believe is two-thirds, votes for it, the Governor’s veto can be overridden. Then, it would go into effect the first day of January of the following year.

Lauren:  Have you contacted any legislators in California?

Barbara:  We prepared a list of all the Senators and Assembly members; addresses, phone numbers and their e-mail addresses; we have contacted them, and expect to have more response once we have more California residents involved. We need more ‘foot soldiers’ willing to present petitions and request signatures from registered California voters. Online signatures would support the written petition.

Valmai:  Do you know how many California residents are involved at the moment?

Mary:  I’m not sure exactly; I think about fifteen Californians has signed the change.org petition, but we need more. Many have signed the initial online petition, but there is no way to contact them. The petition site is not allowed to give out information about endorsers, except the name they gave, and the geographical area they posted. 

Jennifer:  It weighs more having a written petition rather than an online petition, in California. The written one with actual signatures, which I have—and my job out here is to get people involved—has about thirty signatures on it.

Barbara:  We do have people in California signing the online petition, but what we really need are more foot soldiers like Jennifer, to circulate the petition and get handwritten signatures.

Jennifer:  Yes, that is a huge part, because California voters have to sign the petition for it to be passed.

Valmai:  So, it’s not the quantity of signatures so much as it is how many of those who have signed the petition live in the State of California.

Jennifer:  Correct, but the online petition showing the support we have in California, also makes a difference.

Valmai:  Would you see this as the biggest stumbling block in getting this law put in place? How are you going to get support from California residents?

Jennifer: That actually is the hard part. I need to get more people here involved; get a team together locally—and in Los Angeles specifically, and also throughout California—that can help to get signatures and spread the word. We need signatures and we need support.

Valmai:  There has to be a lot of Michael Jackson supporters in California, surely?

Jennifer:  Yes, there are—but we need dedicated people fans or non-fans, because this isn’t just about Michael Jackson. Obviously, we are going to get more support from his fans, but we need people who are really dedicated because it takes a lot of time to go out and get these signatures, spread the word, and make contact with different media. That’s the hard part, finding people who will take this upon themselves and show up when I need them to.

Valmai:  I guess I do not understand why some fans aren’t giving this their support.

Sharon:  Keep in mind, not everyone responded to Michael in the same way. Not all fans or supporters see the same need as we do.

The stumbling block in getting support begins with the heavy burden of Michael’s image. The media still blacken his name, though perhaps not as badly as in the past. Some are a little more subtle about it these days.

When you come up to a group, go to work, or go to church or wherever and begin to discuss what we are doing, people say, “Yes, we’ve heard about this. This is for Michael Jackson.” So then you have to explain that this is inspired by Michael, but not necessarily just for him, and no, Michael did not do this, Michael did not do that. This is where the other Michael Jackson supporters come in: those who are spending time attempting to educate the public on what did and did not happen, and those who are rebutting negative articles. It takes support from a lot of different directions to make this happen.

And quite honestly, some people aren’t there as much now. One-third of the United States has been devastated by storms, so people’s minds are more on survival, on losing their jobs, and their husbands are screaming at them for gawking at Michael for the last 2 years, so, there are all kinds of reasons why there is not as great a support now. And there are still also a lot of fans who are more prone to fan-sy—type reading rather than advocacy forums, so some of these fans just do not know what we are doing.

Valmai:  Yes, but it still makes it harder for you finding those dedicated people you need.

Sharon:  Yes, yes it does.

I would also like to address something you brought up about the First Amendment and whether the anti- defamation law could co-exist with it. When we first drafted the law, one of the things that came up immediately was that people would not support it because it violates the First Amendment. That is an excuse. 50 states already have an anti-defamation law in place for the living, and one in five, for the dead. Our one happens to be new for just this particular state.

When defamation takes life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and your ability to earn revenue—and in case of people who are gone, those whose products or family will be earning revenue—that ability may be hindered because of false stories about their loved ones.

Lauren:  This question has to do with the web and social media sites. Do you see the dissemination of information the way it is now versus 5 or 10 years ago as being helpful to this cause? And another question I would like you think about is, say this was passed as a law. It would only apply to people who lived and died in California, and it would only apply to what comes out of this state or what is said in this state. You could go to Nevada and say what you wanted. Because of how information is spread now, how would this affect in any great way either Michael or anyone who happens to be in California?

Sharon:  When we get this law passed for the State of California—with primarily Michael being the inspiration, and also there being so many people of wealth and fame who really seem to get hammered by what is put out by the media in this state—it will empower people. More of them will stand up and begin to address issues inside and outside of their state.

Hopefully, this law will become U.S. wide. There is no reason why anyone should be able to profit by lying or deceiving viewers and readers who are taking in information and using it to make judgments and decisions. These people get away with this without suffering the consequences, and they have to be responsible for their actions. Once we get this passed, and it will take awhile, it might get picked up by another state. Hopefully, there will be multiple groups in each state looking at what’s happening in California, and they might say, “Okay, if they can get this done there,we can do it in Iowa.”

Valmai:  There are a lot fans and non-fans, who are angry with the media and their continuous slander, particularly toward Michael. Do you plan to tap into that?

Mary:  Even though many are angry, most do not understand the importance of this law and what it means. I think a lot of people believe their First Amendment rights will be infringed upon, so we have to educate people on what this law is about. Hopefully, in doing this interview, and through the one we did with Billy Johnson from Yahoo! Music, we can get the word out there.

My question to people is, are you angry enough to be moved to action? Are you angry enough to get up and do something about it, not just talk about it?

We tweet a lot to get the word out, and one of our main tweets is, stop the abuse of the First Amendment rights. Don’t allow people to hide behind this amendment to promote hate. We ask people to visit our website and watch our video, then tweet about it. So, we are hoping to get those who say they’re angry, to move toward action with us.

Valmai: That’s a good answer and a very good question also.

Lauren:  Have you contacted, or had any support from Michael’s friends or family? Is the estate aware of what you are doing?

Mary:  Absolutely! There are a lot of names on the first petition that we’re not familiar with,because used their fan monikers, and this gave us concern. That’s why we changed the petition so that people would have to give their real names. Teddy Riley, an American singer-songwriter, musician, keyboardist and record producer, signed the petition in all caps, as if he wanted the world to know he had signed it. He has also tweeted and retweeted about Cadeflaw. We have the support of Dr. Patrick Treacy, a cosmetic physician and humanitarian from Dublin, Ireland; Charles Thomson, freelance writer/reporter specializing in music and celebrity journalism; Billy Johnson, music director, freelance writer for many media outlets, and presently Senior Program Director-Urban/Video Programming Lead for Yahoo Music, and Lynton Guest, freelance writer for magazines/newspapers, singer and author of several books, including the Trials of Michael Jackson.

Jennifer Batten, guitarist, songwriter and producer who worked with Michael for many years, supports Cadeflaw and the petition, and we’ve had many tweets and retweets by Genevieve Jackson [Michael's niece], and Omer Bhatti, singer and friend of Michael Jackson. Cadeflaw has been retweeted by Akon and Billy Johnson. Billy doesn’t claim to be a friend of the family. He is a major media source from California who has been around for awhile, but he does support the entire family.

I’m pretty sure, with Genevieve and Omer tweeting about us, that the family is aware of what we are doing. I have also notified the estate in several ways. I have faxed, emailed and sent a registered letter to John Branca about what we are doing, and I have also sent a registered letter to Katherine Jackson. From John Branca’s office, I received a signed certified receipt noting the letter had been delivered. A registered letter sent to Mrs. Katherine Jackson at the Hayvenhurst address in Encino, was not returned, but no signed return receipt has been received as of yet. However, no one can say they have no knowledge of this project because they do. We haven’t had a response to either letter, but they are aware of it. We have also been sending tweets to Jermaine, Jackie, Tito, Marlon, Randy, La Toya and Janet Jackson since November of 2010. Since we all follow these Jackson family members, we know they have observed our tweets.

Valmai:  You are now a registered, nonprofit corporation, and you are able to collect donations. Can you tell us what this money will be used for?

Jennifer:  Well, we will pretty much use the money for whatever is needed to get this law passed. Most of the money will go, hopefully in the future, toward a Constitutional attorney. Having an attorney is the key, so the rest of the money will go toward anything else we need to get the law passed. And when it’s over, if there is anything left over, obviously it will go to charity.

Mary:  In California, it will cost between $30,000 and $50,000, to hire a Constitutional attorney, so that is why our goal is $50,000; but whatever it takes, that’s what we will do.

Valmai:  Is this $50,000 just to retain an attorney, and start him or her working on this?

Mary:  No, that’s for the entire process from beginning to end.
People may think I am a dreamer, but I work what I dream, and I am hoping that an attorney might come forward, say that he likes what we are doing, that he believes in it, and that he will do this for free.

Lauren:  I would just like to ask a question that goes back a little bit. In California, we have what they call, the Initiative process. Have you looked into that, or has it been mentioned at all?

Jennifer:  I am aware of it, but, no, I haven’t mentioned it.

Lauren:  There are a number of laws here in California that are passed just on the number of signatures gained from the population. In any of your discussions with legal experts, have any of them mentioned this Initiative process? Is this another route you could take?

Jennifer:  It is another route, yes, and it’s something that we need to go into more depth with. Basically, if you have enough signatures, you can pretty much get it done. In California, that's 8% of active voters, which I believe is at least 400,000 people.

Valmai:  How are you going to collect donations? Will you set up a PayPal account?

Mary:  We already have a PayPal account, and we also have an account with a bank in Florida. So, all people have to do, is go to our website at www.cadeflaw.com  to make their donation. They can either use their real name or donate anonymously. 

Lauren:  It sounds like a lot of money, but it is possible to raise that much. Last year there was a push to develp a garden for Michael at the museum where he was inducted into the Dance Hall of Fame. Though the project fell through, there was an anonymous donor who gave $20,000 toward the garden. So, how can we help in this effort? What can we do?

Jennifer:  Well, you are actually already helping by doing this interview. Its helping us get the word out first of all, and by doing that, it’s drawing attention to what we are doing. That’s really what we need right now: attention through social networks, different websites, and the media to make more people aware and offer their support.

Valmai:  Is there anything anybody wants to add?

Mary:  Yes. I just want thank you Ms. Owens and Ms. Trainor, for giving us this opportunity, for believing in us, and for supporting us. God bless you.

Valmai:  Well, thank you, Mary. Anything that we can do to help get the word out there, we will do it.

Beginning in August, Cadeflaw will have a permanent column in this publication in which they keep us updated on their progress, and ways in which you can offer your help and support.
If you live in California, and have the time and dedication to assist Jennifer Marino in gathering signatures for the written petition, please email her at unitedinluv@yahoo.com

You can also find her on Twitter under All4LoveJen

For more information about Cadeflaw and to offer your support or to make a donation, please visit these sites:

Website: http://www.cadeflaw.com/
Blogspot: http://lovemeansactionformichaeljackson.blogspot.com/?spref=tw
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/California-Legacy-Anti-Defamation-Law/165053683513202?ref=ts

Petition Sites:
Cadeflaw Italian Petition: Guilia Passaro
http://www.petizionionline.it/petizione/protect-and-preserve-the-legacy-of-those-deceased-proteggiamo-e-preserviamo-leredita-dei-defunti/4300

Cadeflaw US Petition
http://www.change.org/petitions/protect-and-preserve-the-legacy-of-those-deceased-those-left-behind-can-still-be-hurt

Initial Cadeflaw Petition
http://www.petitiononline.com/MJJ2010/petition.html

Information on the California Constitution, Article 1: Declaration of Rights:
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_1

Information on the California State Assembly, legislative procedure:  
http://www.assembly.ca.gov/clerk/billslegislature/Leg_Proceedure.pdf

                        


Promotional Video #1:  http://youtu.be/ndND5pNv7UY  Cadeflaw Advocates, 2010

By Valmai Owens© 2011. All Rights Reserved.
No reproduction without permission from author.

This interview appears in the publication Dot to Dot: Keeping Michael’s Legacy Alive,

http://mjtpmagazine.presspublisher.us/
and its content is the property of the authors and the Michael Jackson Tribute Portrait. Articles and exclusive interviews are copyrighted; therefore there should be no republication without permission. You may email edito@michaeljacksontributeportrait.com with any requests for republication. If permission is given, credit must be given to the author, Dot to Dot: Keeping Michael's Legacy Alive and the Michael Jackson Tribute Portrait.

A Powerful Truth

It was Mothers Day, and fields were still lying under water from weeks of severe storms and torrential rain. I took a moment to sit outside on the front porch and drink in the afternoon calm. The breeze had gentled, and the sun had begun its journey toward the end of what had been a perfect spring day. I noticed how still the water was and how it captured the landscape floating as a beautiful, yet imperfect image. It was a scene awaiting an artist’s brush.

As usual, in moments of solitude, my mind drifted toward thoughts of Michael, and how often his image has been captured by cameras and words, more often than not, as a distorted and blurred picture of the man he really was. This image has been sold to the public as fact, and a mirrored reflection has become a truth tainted with lies. The true picture of Michael has been lost to all but those who were close and loyal friends, his family and the fans who believe in him without doubt.

Truth! Fact, reality, genuine, that which is true. We do not need to see in order to believe. Our belief in Michael is based on faith, and knowledge born through that faith of the man behind this reflection of negativity. This is a powerful truth; a truth that empowers us to validate his name and legacy, and answer those who persist in portraying Michael as someone to be ridiculed and accused. It is time for false perceptions to be laid to rest, and for the world to open its ears to our voice.

Truth will set you free. A powerful truth will change the world. It has already begun!

By Valmai Owens© 2011. All Rights Reserved.
No reproduction without permission from author.

This interview appears in the publication Dot to Dot: Keeping Michael’s Legacy Alive,

http://mjtpmagazine.presspublisher.us/
and its content is the property of the authors and the Michael Jackson Tribute Portrait. Articles and exclusive interviews are copyrighted; therefore there should be no republication without permission. You may email edito@michaeljacksontributeportrait.com with any requests for republication. If permission is given, credit must be given to the author, Dot to Dot: Keeping Michael's Legacy Alive and the Michael Jackson Tribute Portrait.

To Bully or Not to Bully:That is the Question

Out of all the articles I wanted to write for this month’s issue, this was not one of them, but the gutter mentality of school-yard bullies who use the online arena to viciously and cruelly attack those connected to Michael Jackson’s world, and this includes attacks by fans themselves, is a continuing and disturbing trend. Some exchanges I have read recently have disgusted me with the humiliating, degrading, abusive and foul verbiage. It literally made me cringe.

Perhaps some people just don’t care or realize that by engaging in this sort of behavior, not only does it diminish their worth in the eyes of others, but also the worth of their victims. This is exactly what Michael Jackson had to deal with from the media and others throughout his life. And we are angered by it aren’t we? Don’t we rebut and counteract where and whenever possible? Why then, do we think it’s acceptable to put others through the same suffering Michael had to endure?

I sense certain arrogance in some people. It leads them to believe that their opinion is the only one that counts, their voice is the only one that should be heard and their truth is the only one that should be believed. If you don’t agree with them then obviously you have it all wrong and to all intents and purposes, you don’t know what you are talking about. This just doesn’t occur within the fan community, but also in other sectors and industries and is often a key factor in the disintegration of family, matrimonial and work relationships, friendships, governmental structure, religious groups and all manner of human relations.

We have all disagreed with someone else’s opinion at some point in time. We might argue and get a little hot under the collar, but most of us don’t declare open season on that person by calling them names, ridiculing and sometimes threatening them for not agreeing with us, especially in a public arena. For those who do, the question is why?

It is a misconception that most bullies have low self-esteem. Research has shown that most people who bully have an average or even high self-esteem and they often share similar behavioral and personality characteristics. They show aggressive behavior patterns, they like to dominate others, they need to be in control and win, they feel no remorse and refuse to accept any responsibility for their behavior. It also appears that bullies believe they will get some sort of social mileage or recognition for the act and in turn become very popular. As most of the bullying I have witnessed has occurred on Twitter and Facebook, I am inclined believe there is truth in this.

The social-cyber bully uses their new found status and followers to “freeze” out or humiliate other individuals and groups who oppose their opinions, beliefs and viewpoints. Sound familiar? But, nobody truly respects a bully and although they may have followers, they have no real friends. Nobody trusts a bully.

Sadly, with this behavior occurring within the fan community, it reflects a distorted image of us as a whole; an image we are trying to maintain as one of intelligent and rational people. If we continue to allow our buttons to be pushed, if we continue to interact with these people by countering their attacks, by using retaliative measures, then we are giving them what they seek and that is attention!  We can’t afford to sink into the quicksand of their mindset and hinder the serious work we are engaged in.

I understand very well how hard it is to keep emotions in check when feeling so strongly about something dear to the heart. Emotions strain to break free; feelings rise up and rebel against the control our minds try to have over them. But, as ambassadors for Michael Jackson and “Keepers” of the truth, (and ambassadors is exactly what we are) then we have a duty to Michael himself to remain composed and not cross the line that he himself drew for us by the way he conducted himself throughout his life. Yes, Michael had his moments of justifiable anger and outbursts, but his anger was never sent forth with damaging intent. He didn’t have in him to be mean-spirited.

Bullying is an unacceptable behavior and observing or participating in it leaves a bad taste in everybody’s mouth, including those who observe Michael Jackson fans and develop a distaste for them and him by association.

And what do we do about the bullies? Ignore them, block them and report them. Delete their comments and make none of our own toward them. If we cut off their food supply they will eventually starve from lack of popularity, look for other feeding grounds or decide to change their diet.

Further reading on bullying:

http://www.michaeljacksontributeportrait.com/article.php?article_id=321
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rev-barbara-kaufmann/bullying-not-just-for-pla_b_807389.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rev-barbara-kaufmann/arizona-shooting-violence_b_809250.html

Pledge of Peace:
http://www.michaeljacksontributeportrait.com/article.php?article_id=238

By Valmai Owens© 2011. All Rights Reserved.
No reproduction without permission from author.

This interview appears in the publication Dot to Dot: Keeping Michael’s Legacy Alive,

http://mjtpmagazine.presspublisher.us/
and its content is the property of the authors and the Michael Jackson Tribute Portrait. Articles and exclusive interviews are copyrighted; therefore there should be no republication without permission. You may email edito@michaeljacksontributeportrait.com with any requests for republication. If permission is given, credit must be given to the author, Dot to Dot: Keeping Michael's Legacy Alive and the Michael Jackson Tribute Portrait.

Interview with Michael Bearden

I had the privilege recently of interviewing Michael Bearden for Dot to Dot. He is widely known  as Michael Jackson’s musical director for the This Is It tour, but I discovered he was much more than that.

Michael has worked, performed and recorded with some of the great artists of our time, has composed numerous film scores, is a consummate musician and arranger,and is currently musical director for Lopez Tonight on TBS. As impressive as his credits and gifts are, Michael remains humble. In this interview, he shares a refreshing view on his friend Michael Jackson, and a very human element of “celebrity.”

Valmai:  Michael, you are a very accomplished keyboardist, arranger, composer and musical director. Can you tell us how and when your career began in the music/entertainment industry?

Michael:  The first time I ever played or performed music in front of people was probably around the age of 11 or 12. I played for neighborhood events, personal parties and other things like that. I realized very early on that getting paid for something I would do for free was a path I wanted to pursue more. With much hard effort, perseverance and a lot of dues paid, I eventually progressed to where I am now. It’s been an amazing journey so far and I don’t have plans to stop any time soon.

Valmai:  Who was the first major artist you performed with or recorded for?

Michael:  The first major artist I worked with was Ramsey Lewis. I was very young when I met him- probably around 15 or so. He took a liking to my potential and me. I would go to his house and sit with him on the weekends when he was available. I learned a lot just by being around him. He probably doesn’t even remember those days. I also met and was mentored by Herbie Hancock around that time. He was and still is a major influence on me.

After I left Chicago and moved to D.C., I met Stevie Wonder. I was able to meet him when I was 18. He invited me on stage with him when he was just passing through D.C. and I got my first taste of what a true genius is like.

My first big break after I left D.C. and moved to Brooklyn, NY, was with the legendary flutist, Herbie Mann. With Herbie, I traveled the world and was exposed to many huge artists in the business. I was able to work with many of them because of Herbie’s influence. Fortunately, it hasn’t stopped since.

Valmai:  There is a long impressive list of artists you have either performed with or recorded for including Sting, Whitney Houston, Michael Jackson and Aretha Franklin, to name a few. What were those experiences like for you?

Michael:  All of my musical experiences are different. However, the one thing that remains consistent throughout is that child-like feeling I get anytime I work with a new artist or an artist I’ve worked with before. It’s still a lot of fun for me. Hopefully that will never change.

Valmai:  What did you learn professionally and personally from working with some of these artists that has enhanced your career and life?

Michael:  Great question! I learned many things from working with these artists. What I see consistently is that every artist I’ve worked with just wants to be loved. It sounds corny, but it’s true. The art they create is not necessarily the same as the human being who creates it. I learned from Herbie Hancock years ago that to be a great artist, you must first be a great human being and citizen of the world.
Yes, even MJ and I talked about how he longed for a greater sense of normalcy in his life. It is true that many artists seek attention and some sort of validation. There is no debate about that, but at the end of the day I go back to my original statement; we all just want to be loved.

Valmai:  I’m sure you have experienced some very memorable moments on stage, but are there any that stand apart from the others?

Michael:  There are so many memorable moments on stage for me. Too many to mention here, but I’ll point out two.

A few years ago, I was on stage performing with several different artists at Michael Jordan’s celebrity golf tournament in the Bahamas. The great Billy Preston, or the fifth Beatle as he is affectionately known, was performing a solo organ piece. Billy was very sick and was towards the end of his life, but he performed as if his health was perfect. He ended his piece by standing up and doing an amazing glissando just with his feet on the organ pedals. The entire place erupted in applause and cheers. It was an extraordinary moment.

Another memorable moment was during a performance with Whitney Houston. This was during her “hey day” and we were on a very long tour. I don’t remember the city we were in, but I do remember the song. We used to play a song called “In Return." We played this song just about every night. However, on this particular evening Nip, (as all of her close friends call her) decided to put something extra on her delivery. She didn’t tell us she was going to do, she just did it. At the end of the song at least half the band was crying including me. It was the first time it had ever happened to me and hasn’t happened since. Whitney was the only artist ever to do that to me while I was playing with them on stage. What an amazing gift she had in those days. We’ll probably never see a gift like that again anytime soon in this lifetime.

Valmai:  Michael you are an arranger and composer and you have also scored quite a few films. What inspired you to take this direction in music as opposed to popular songwriting?

Michael:  I’ve always loved film and film music. When I was a kid, our parents would take us to the movies often. I was always more fixed on the music than the actual images. I loved the other dimension music adds to the scenes. Music makes a scene more loving, scary, suspenseful, joyous, etc…I did not know I had the talent to score film until I went to college. While at Howard University, I was asked to provide music to a score for a documentary on Chief Justice Turgood Marshall. After seeing and hearing the music I composed married to the images on the screen, I was hooked. I’ve been scoring film ever since that moment.

Valmai:  What do you think are the necessary qualities needed to make a good arranger?

Michael:  You definitely need necessary qualities like command of music theory, orchestration, instrument ranges, imaginative musical phrasing, colors, textures and the like. But I think the most important quality might be un-teachable. That quality is taste. You have to know what to put in and what to leave out. I recently performed with icon Sergio Mendes. He paid me a great compliment after the show. He told me that anyone could learn technique, theory and all the rest, but he said you couldn’t teach taste. I’m always humbled when artists tell me that. I’m not sure where it comes from, but I’m glad to know what that means.

Valmai:  You first met Michael Jackson in 1993, and worked with him professionally for the first time in 2001. What were both experiences like for you?

Michael:  I met MJ in Mexico, at his concert in 1993. I was working with Madonna at the time and we all went to see the show. He was having a difficult time breathing in that Mexico City altitude. I was having a hard time and I wasn’t even on stage performing. We went back stage and I was able to say hello and all of that. He’s always been one of the nicest artists you ever wanted to meet. He was just a really sweet human being.

I first worked with him on stage in 2001 at his 30th Anniversary concert at Madison Square Garden in New York City. He wasn’t what I was told he would be. He was easy to talk to, engaging and not as shy as I had heard. His brothers were around so maybe he was in his comfort zone. I found him to be extremely professional and very detailed oriented. He knew what he wanted and how to get it. His talent speaks for itself.

Valmai:  Did you keep in contact between 2001 and 2009?

Michael:  Not every single year, but I did see him a few times when he was recording. MJ always recorded a lot of music when he was working on a record and I was in the studio with him for a few of those recordings. A lot of stuff I played on never made the final record, but it was always great working in the studio with Michael.

Valmai:  How did you come to get signed on for This Is It?

Michael:  When I found out I was on the short list of music director hopefuls for MJ's tour, surprisingly I was somewhat reluctant. I had been the music director for so many big stars in my career and wanted to pursue other musical endeavors closer to home. However, when it's Michael Jackson calling you have to at least explore the possibilities.

I first met with the This Is It director Kenny Ortega. We had a great meeting and he invited me back down that evening to meet with MJ. I asked that there be keyboards in the room when MJ and I met. When they finally brought MJ in to see me, I was already playing around on the keyboard. He walked in smiling broadly with pep in his step. Instantly, he started dancing and swaying to me playing "Workin Day and Night". We hugged and began talking about what he was looking for, and I told him what I was looking for. I interrupted him several times to have him sing songs as I played them. To his credit he did and we had a great bond immediately. We did a concert for about half an hour; just him and me. As I was leaving, I asked him for the set list and he just laughed. They were looking at a few more guys after me. He said, “God bless you,” and I left the room. I wasn't even home good before I got the call to be his musical director. I had a private gratitude moment and went right to work learning songs!

Valmai:  Michael Jackson knew every element, instruments, notes and chords in his music. He knew when something wasn’t right and we see this in the film with his song “The Way You Make Me Feel.” Was this the only time you and he didn’t see eye to eye with a musical arrangement?

Michael:  Many people seem to think me and MJ didn’t agree in that moment. Not true. We we’re having a “creative joust” as we called it. MJ had a strong opinion and so did I. We laughed and hugged at the end of it and you can see the mutual respect and love in the film. I have never been one to just be a sycophant and bow down to everything the artists say. Why else would you hire a musical director? Just hire a person to execute what you want to have happen and go with that? MJ was brilliant in that he always wanted to grow and push boundaries. He would always tell me to push him so that’s what I did. I have no problem doing that with any artist I work with. That’s the way it was with MJ and me and that’s the way it is. We saw eye-to-eye and then pushed our vision even further. The results are always better with that approach. It was all done in love.

Valmai:  What is your most memorable moment working with Michael on This Is It?

Michael:  That question is always so hard to answer. I grew up idolizing Michael Jackson and the Jackson 5 as many of us did. And now here I was working closely with a childhood hero. Not only working but confiding in, hanging with and having the blessings of his trust and faith in me to deliver him to the next level of his professional life. What can be more memorable than that? Towards the end, MJ trusted me implicitly and told me as such while he was here. I’ve been eternally “validated”, if you will, by MJ, and that alone is memorable enough for me.

Valmai:  Other people who have known Michael, speak about energy or an aura that surrounded him- that when he walked into a room the air literally changed. Did you experience that?

Michael:  Yes, actually I did. Everything they say about that is true. MJ just had a certain swagger with him nobody else could duplicate. That aura was real. The air would change because he always made it a concerted effort to smell good. And he smelled amazing! I always knew when he was around even if I didn’t see him.

Valmai:  You were the last one from the company who saw Michael after that last rehearsal. Did he seem happy and ready to do this tour?

Michael:  You’ve done your homework. Yes, he was very happy. Kenny Ortega and I were with him for the better part of the day taking care of tour business stuff. Travis was out working with the dancers. We got to the stage late that evening, but put in a full rehearsal. MJ looked great and he said he felt good. The band said he had a glow about him that night. They were right. I hugged him; he told me he loved me, talked about the next day and we got in our cars and left Staples Center. I have a very positive mental image of the last time we spoke. I’m at peace with it.

Valmai:  Many people have said Michael would never have been able to complete 50 concerts. What is your opinion on this?

Michael:  Who are these many people and were they at the same rehearsals I attended? I’m always amazed at people who talk in full confidence with no advantage of firsthand knowledge, obviously basing their opinions on hearsay and rumor. Look, It’s difficult to say if MJ would have completed all 50 dates or not. He was never one to mark when he worked. He always went full out every time I’ve worked with him. A couple of his brothers did express surprise when they saw an early cut of This Is It. They couldn’t believe that was MJ going full out like that. They told me he always used to try and save it for the show. I guess MJ felt he had something to prove. In my opinion, he was well on his way to doing it too. There is no way to fake what he did in This Is It. That was MJ doing what he did best. He was working his way back up to being show ready and those last few nights he was on! And he knew it! I don’t see any reason why we would not have made it through those dates. He even talked about the possibility of extending the tour in another country. That said it all to me.

Valmai:  Looking back on all the love that has been expressed for your friend since he died, what do you imagine he would say about that?

Michael:  I don’t really have to imagine. I know he would be very humble about it. He would embrace it and wallow in it. Even from the hypocrites. MJ only wanted to be loved for the art he created. I know he was hurt by all of the tabloid attention and paparazzi stalking him, but he understood it. He just wanted to be judged fairly and to have the attention he garnered to be more balanced. He was a giving and loving person and wanted that in return. As his friend, I will never try to deify him. He was only a man and not a deity, albeit an extraordinary man.

Valmai:  If you could have time to spend with him today what would you say to him? What would be very important for him to know? 

Michael:  There is not a day that I don’t think about MJ. Not one day since he passed. We will be linked forever and I’m good with that. I don’t really like to live my life in hypothetical, but if he were here the most important thing he would need to know is that his children are doing well and look as though they are going to be extraordinary world citizens. He would be most happy about that. All other issues would be secondary to him. I’d also let him know his true friends have never abandoned him and would back it up with actions and deeds, not just words. Then, we’d probably laugh a lot and go get something to eat from a place we liked to have lunch. I’d enjoy that immensely.

Valmai:  Have you experienced his spirit with you as so many others have? 

Michael:  Yes, but not in the way you might think. I experienced it when he was here. There is a moment in This Is It when we’re working on “Earth Song”. MJ is explaining what he wants and then he tells me when to “start that piano.” At the very moment he gives a thumb up to me, I felt something. I remembered it as I drove home from rehearsal that night. I forgot about it until we started making the film. As soon as I saw it, I got the exact same feeling I did the first night it happened. Transferring of energy is real amongst creative beings, but that was something else.

Valmai:  What is the one thing that you will always consider to be your fondest moment with Michael?

Michael:  I have many fond moments with MJ. He was just that way. One of my favorite moments is when he and I were working on the set list in the beginning of rehearsals, even before we had a band and dancers. We talked about how the show should flow and how we were like roller coaster designers. That’s what he wanted his show to feel like- a roller coaster ride. The warm moment for me was when he showed me his personal hand written notes about the set; he pulled out his reading glasses. I looked at him and smiled and he said, “What”? I said nothing and we just kept working. It was great to see his humanity on display. He was always so complete in public; it was cool to see him a little vulnerable. It was also cool to know that our relationship was changing to something more than just a music director/star relationship. He felt very comfortable around me and I appreciated that. He knew I didn’t want anything from him other than to see him back on top. Those glasses affirmed it to me.

Valmai:  What do you think is Michael’s greatest legacy?

Michael:  That’s hard to say. His art means different things to different people. For me, his legacy is probably his simplicity. Never in my career and probably in the history of music, has an artist affected so many human beings simultaneously. I can’t tell you how many times I hear from fans telling me that their 2, 3, 4 or 5 year-old children have discovered Michael’s music. This is just extraordinary to me. What is it about his music that appeals to so many people? He used to say to me, “When you’re coming up with new arrangements for the songs, make sure they’re simple.” He would say, “They gotta be able to hum it. If they can’t hum it’s too complicated.” He wanted his music to be sung by 8 to 80 year-olds. He succeeded!

Valmai:  What do you think of the Michael Jackson Tribute Portrait? Is it something you think he would have liked and approved of?

Michael:  I think it’s a great thing, this Tribute Portrait! It’s brilliant in its construct and I can only imagine MJ would have loved it. I’m honored to be part of the dedication.

Valmai:  With the list of credits to your name Michael, you must be very much in demand. Can you share what you are working on at present? Any big things on the horizon?

Michael:  I’ve been extremely blessed thus far in my career. It is not an easy thing to make a living at something you love to do and I don’t take it for granted. I’m humbled everyday at my good fortune. Presently I’m the music director for Lopez Tonight, George Lopez’s late night talk show on TBS. We are having a great time and we’re slowly trying to change late night. I have a few new artists I’m developing and recording a record with my band on the TBS show, The Ese Vatos. I also have many philanthropic things going on. I’m just trying to stay healthy and rest as much as possible so I can do everything I want to do. I’m a workaholic!  But, what a blessing it is to do this for a living.
Embrace love.
M~

By Valmai Owens© 2011. All Rights Reserved.
No reproduction without permission from author.

This interview appears in the publication Dot to Dot: Keeping Michael’s Legacy Alive,

http://mjtpmagazine.presspublisher.us/
and its content is the property of the authors and the Michael Jackson Tribute Portrait. Articles and exclusive interviews are copyrighted; therefore there should be no republication without permission. You may email edito@michaeljacksontributeportrait.com with any requests for republication. If permission is given, credit must be given to the author, Dot to Dot: Keeping Michael's Legacy Alive and the Michael Jackson Tribute Portrait.

Interview with Larry Nimmer

Larry Nimmer is noted for his documentary, Michael Jackson: The Untold Story of Neverland, which he created for the defense team during Michael Jackson’s 2005 child molestation trial, but he has also earned a variety of awards, including several Emmy nominations, for 30 years of producing entertainment and informational programming.

Larry began his career as a TV News Producer for the CBS-TV affiliate in San Francisco, KPIX-TV. He has since produced music videos for broadcast on MTV, documentaries shown on PBS and a variety of other programs and promotional spots for broadcast and cable networks.

It was a great pleasure for me to speak to this seemingly shy and softly spoken man.


Transcribed by Valmai Owens

Valmai:  Larry, your career spans 30 years and you have won quite a few awards. You have also been nominated for a few Emmy’s. Can you tell me when it all began?

Larry:  When I was 10 years-old that same Christmas I was given a darkroom set by my father. So, I started photography then and later film-making. In high school and college I made films and so-forth.
I’ve had an interesting and varied career. I started off making home movies and then worked for a CBS TV station in magazine style news. From there I did music videos, documentaries, religious and how-to videos, short films and litigation videos. One of the specialties I got into was making training videos for attorneys for use at trial that tell stories for their clients. That’s how I ended up getting hired by Michael Jackson and his attorney for his trial in 2005.

Valmai:  Are you freelance?

Larry:  Yes, basically I’m freelance. I have my own company, Nimmer Pictures Inc, and my wife is my partner. She is a graphic designer. I have a nice studio in a converted garage next to my home in Carpinteria. So, it’s really just the two of us and I pull in other people as I need them. I write, shoot, edit and sometimes perform in videos I do.

Valmai:  Yes, from what I have seen you do a little bit of everything, but out of all those things, is there one that you enjoy doing more than the rest? Do you feel more comfortable behind the camera or in front of it?

Larry:  Well, I feel more comfortable behind the camera. One of my mission statements is, to help give people a platform to express themselves. So, I particularly enjoy projects where I help people or organizations to either express themselves or get their message out.

I have a karaoke TV show I sometimes do which does that, and I do something called Generation Exchange, where I help younger people interview older people or vice versa, to get their stories out. I do Man in the Street columns and videos where I ask the question of the week and people talk about different subject matter. I also do art videos and have been doing them since the seventies, and the last number of years I’ve been doing something called Dance for Peace. New Year’s Day I dance from my town to the next town and I document myself. That’s one time I do video-tape myself; I have a little video camera that I can shoot myself while dancing or walking, but normally I’m more comfortable putting other people on camera.

              

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j44Lnc2hQrM

Valmai:  I’ve actually seen those videos on You Tube, A Citizen Dances for Peace, and I was going to ask what the inspiration was behind them.

Larry:  Well, it started off with getting older and needing to do more exercise. I figured every year on New Year’s Day I should at least get a big exercise, although I go to the gym at other times.

One year I hiked the mountain behind me, another year I walked a long distance and I guess it was during one of the Iraqi wars that I thought I would turn it into a dance for peace. I wore a sign that said, Peace Starts with a Smile, and I walked from Carpinteria to Santa Barbara. I felt that peace was a good thing to exercise or to perform for.

So, I kind of made it into a peace thing, but it’s also kind of a personal exercise for me and also to express myself and dance. I’ve kind of gotten more into dancing the older I get and it’s a kind of self-expression and self-growth, even though I really don’t like people seeing me when I dance to Santa Barbara, but somehow I don’t mind video-taping myself and having people see me later. I’m kind of shy about it while I’m doing it though.

Valmai:  You are? I don’t know. The videos are very entertaining and actually quite funny in places, and I thought to myself while watching them, “maybe he should consider a career in acting or comedy.”

Larry:  Well, I sometimes feel I’m too serious and I look too conservative. I kind of look like an old businessman. That was one thing Michael Jackson did for me, to help encourage me to get more in touch with my child-like nature as he often talked about. So, even though I’m sometimes embarrassed by revealing my child-like nature, and sometimes I’m worried it may make me look less professional to some people, to others I think they understand the urge to act like, and have the child-like spirit and express it. So, I have been encouraging myself more and more to do that.

Valmai:  I think that’s a good thing. I think everybody needs to do that. As you get older and get involved more with your life and the things that happen along the way, that “child” seems to get pushed deeper and deeper inside of you and you forget how to have fun.

Larry:  Right! Exactly! I encourage others to do it and I’m glad you feel that way too.

Valmai:  Oh, I do.  Larry, about music. I came across another video of you where you perform an original song that you wrote in the seventies, called “Born Under A Lucky Star.” You performed this at a Carpinteria talent show. Are you a songwriter also or is it kind of a hobby for you?

              

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RyeckI6tns8

Larry:  It’s just been a hobby. In my teens, when I had a lot of emotions pent up in me, I learned to play the guitar. It was a good release to express myself. I’ve always written in journals and right behind me where I’m sitting now, I have my journals that I have written since I was 10. There’s something like 35 or 40 journals. It’s just been a good release. I wrote “Born Under A Lucky Star” when I was at Berkley College, and those were some crazy times.

So, I play a little guitar now and then and both my son’s, who are now 25 and 28, play guitar too. Recently, there was a talent show in my town so I played that song.

Valmai:  It was good; very good.

Larry:  Thank you! Is there a video of that online? I didn’t realize that.

Valmai:  Yes there is, most certainly. I did a search on your name and there it was. It also came up with your Citizen Dance’s for Peace videos. From there I went to your channel and found a few other interesting videos.

Larry:  Good, good.  On You Tube I have a few channels. One is called Larry Nimmer, another is called Nimmer Pictures and another is called American Good Humor. The American Good Humor is; whenever I go a trip I always like to have some sort of artistic project.

I was going to Europe, I think five or six years ago, and I wanted a project to do. I wanted to do something that would give Europeans a good picture of Americans.  So, I played the part of the Good Humor Man. He was somebody in the Fifties and Sixties in the United States who went around selling ice cream and he wore a white suit. The Good Humor Man was an ice cream company.

So, I dressed up as The Good Humor Man, even though Europeans wouldn’t necessarily know who he was, and did something called, Experiments in Good Humor. I experimented in different ways of giving good humor to people by performing for them or doing little acts of charity or kindness, complimenting people and giving out little slips of free wishes. So, I did some of the documentation of that on my You Tube channel American Good Humor.

Valmai:  Well, I will have to check that out. Larry, when you are making a documentary, how do you choose the subject matter for it?

Larry:  Well, different ways. Sometimes, a client comes to me and they have something they want a documentary about and I will certainly do that. I make my living this way, and it’s sometimes harder to freelance so I’m always out marketing and trying to bring in projects. Sometimes projects that I’m interested in, I’ll look for grants for or other folks to fund them and I’ve got a number of grants for projects. Some of them have been environmentally related; to do with marshes and streams, lakes and water quality.

One funny grant I got was from the State of California. I knew the State was giving out money to help people learn about not dumping their motor oil on the ground or the ocean because it affects marine life. At the time, I was interested in the low-rider culture; the Latino culture of fixing up and cruising in their cars and so forth. So, I put in for a grant from the State of California, which I got, to do a series of videos on the low-rider culture and different low-rider clubs. I documented each of these clubs and suddenly, in each short documentary, I showed them recycling their motor oil. So, I got the message out that you shouldn’t dump your motor oil on the ground, and in the meantime I gave a platform to these different low-rider clubs to show that they’re good people and have a worthwhile hobby. Actually, a lot of them are doing charitable work. So, that’s just an example of how I get projects.

Some projects I do for free for different organizations. If it doesn’t take too much of my time I’ll video them and put them on the community access channel or put it on You Tube, Vimeo or somewhere online. Some of that I have done for the Michael Jackson groups. When Michael died, I did various videos and posted online and during the Conrad Murray hearings I posted some also.

Valmai:  Before you were hired to do the film on Neverland for Michael Jackson’s defense team, did you have a personal opinion about Michael, the trial and the allegations against him or were you fairly neutral?

Larry:  That’s a good question. I was pretty neutral. I hadn’t followed Michael’s career very closely though I had followed it like most people, and I always did enjoy following it.

As I say in my documentary, often I felt where there’s smoke there’s fire, meaning, I saw in the press that after the ’93 settlement, again there was an accuser and apparently at the trial it seemed like there were other people coming out of the woodwork accusing Michael. So, I didn’t really know one way or another, but I thought maybe he’s a molester although I felt I didn’t have the expertise; I didn’t know. That’s one of the reasons I was happy to hired and be involved with the trial so I could get the inside information, and I happily learned that he is not a molester and never was. He was taken advantage of because of his kindness to people and also taken advantage of by the media. But, I never really knew one way or another and I was happy to learn that he was an innocent guy.

Valmai:  And did you come to that opinion while you were filming and seeing Neverland for yourself or while sitting in on the trial?

Larry:  Well, I came to that opinion after looking at documents during the trial, after talking to his attorneys, after talking to others and seeing the evidence. That’s when I came to that opinion and I became fully immersed in all the facts to do with the trial and past allegations. That’s when I came to the conclusion that he was innocent.

Valmai:  So, what was it like filming Neverland? What was it like being there? You had access to some of the private living areas didn’t you?

Larry:  Right! Well, it was certainly like being a kid in a candy store for me. When I got the call to do the job I was just so happy.

I’ve always enjoyed being around celebrities, particularly celebrities I admire like Michael Jackson, and I’ve always been fascinated with Neverland. I’d heard about it like most people and seen it on television. I remember thinking in the past that if I could ever go there that would be great. In fact, I did go there one time before I was hired. I was just in the area of Neverland, and my wife and I drove by and then drove up to the gate. I buzzed it and said, hi, can we come in? And the guard said, well who are here to see and I said, Michael. Then he wanted to know if we had an appointment. I said no, of course, so he just said well I’m sorry. I understood that. But, I’d always wanted to go and so when I had the opportunity, it was just fabulous.

When I went, I initially met with Bob Sanger who was one of Michael’s attorneys, and then I met with Tom Mesereau. Bob and Tom gave me a tour around the area and in addition, introduced me to the ranch manager and other staff. They told the staff that it was basically up to me where I wanted to go.

When I was given the tour, the attorneys and the ranch manager told me that this is what people would normally see at Neverland, and suggested that this is what I document, but it was kind of up to me as well. And what the defense team wanted to show was what Neverland was really like to a typical visitor; to a visitor that may not know Michael, as well as a visitor that gets to go into the private residence and so forth. So, basically I had free reign to go more or less wherever I wanted to go. Over a period of a month, I went on a number of occasions. Sometimes Michael was on the property, but I never actually saw him. I saw him during the trial at the courthouse. At Neverland, he would be in one area and I would be in another and I was also encouraged not to disturb him while I was there.

One of the buildings they wanted me to videotape was the guesthouse where the Arvizo’s stayed, because the family claimed they had been held hostage at Neverland; it was an awful experience, they weren’t allowed to leave, they weren’t allowed to know the time and so forth. So, they wanted me to show that the guesthouse was like living in the lap of luxury. Elizabeth Taylor, Marlon Brando and others had also stayed there, but I couldn’t go in because it turned out that Michael was living in it. He didn’t want to go back into his bedroom at Neverland after it was defiled by the sheriff’s going through it.

It was just a great place. Sometimes people ask me what was it like and I tell them that is it kind of a cross between a Beverly Hills mansion, antique museum and Disneyland. It was very well maintained and Michael didn’t change too much of the structures from when he bought it. It was developed by a man named William Bone, who was a golf course entrepreneur. Bone had built the main house, lakes and the guest cottage I believe. Michael redecorated it and added some other features to it like the amusement park, zoo, theater and his dance studio, but it wasn’t that different from the original property.

By the way, I am really happy to hear that Michael’s kids are interested in possibly someday returning it to Neverland as a tourist destination. If that could be done that would be great.

Valmai:  I think it would be wonderful to have it reopened!

Larry:  I understand how the neighbors don’t want it because they feel it would be too much traffic and the stress on the local infrastructure, water, sewerage and so forth. But, in its heyday a lot of people did visit it and I certainly think select groups could continue to. I think there is room for more people to visit it. I’m hoping someday that something will work out.

Valmai:  I had the opportunity last June, to go to Neverland. Not inside the gates of course; none of us were allowed inside, but one thing that struck me was just how beautiful and peaceful it was. I didn’t feel the negativity that some people were sensing. I actually felt a very spiritual connection with the land and I also felt there had been a lot of happiness there. To me that kind of outweighed the bad stuff that had occurred at Neverland.

Larry:  I think that’s a good point. There certainly were some unhappy times there, but there was a lot of happiness as well and also inspiration for Michael for his songwriting, dancing and developing his child-like nature. And I think just the message of what Neverland was about; the wonderful example to others. Neverland is about creating an oasis of wonderment and childlike beauty.

Michael said he wanted to give break to the inner city, sick and disadvantaged kids and give them a place to go to that was fun to them. So, just the nature of why Michael built it the way he did, I think is a wonderful example to others to do charitable work. And hopefully others will be able to enjoy Neverland again in the future.

Valmai:  It’s true that you met Michael very briefly during the trial. You were sitting in the waiting room waiting to testify. What was your impression of him?

Larry:  Yes, I was sitting in the waiting room and there was a little window where I could see people coming and going in the hallway. I saw, what I thought, was a boy scout. I went up to the window and sure enough it was Michael in one of his jackets with military style buttons on the side. So, I went out into the hallway and he came back in a moment. I just said hi, and he said hi, how are you. He gave me a really lovely smile, but it also seemed like kind of a sad smile for what he was going through at the time. I can’t imagine how awful it was to face his accusers every day after he had helped this family so much. 

I testified on the stand for two days because I didn’t finish first day. Each day as I sat down, Michael kind of gave me a Buddhist bow; putting his hands together in prayer and bowing with a sweet smile to me. I didn’t talk to him a lot except for hi and thank you, but I could see the type of man he was and he must have had a lot of inner strength to be able to face all that negativity.

He was taller than I thought and he walked like a dancer, like kind of light on his feet. I’ve mentioned a few times in interviews that I noticed his nose. It looked like he had had plastic surgery and I don’t know if it’s rude to mention that or not, but I felt kind of sorry for Michael. I think he had more plastic surgery than perhaps he meant to have or maybe it was done more extreme than he meant it to be. And I know his father always made fun of his nose as he was growing up and maybe his siblings to. He was self-conscious about that and one of the video outtakes I had of him he says he thinks he looks ‘stinky.’ I felt sorry for him having plastic surgery that people make fun of. If anything, I think people should feel sorry for him and be understanding of it. But anyway, it was a pleasure to be in the same space with Michael, and I was really happy that I was able to help him in the way I did. I think the video of Neverland that I did, did help him.

              

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUAwwnwI85Y

I had a few interesting assignments for the tour. One was to show his book collection in the house because the prosecution tried to make out that Michael had an art book with some nudes in it of boys. Then, they also showed some statues on the property where there’s some nudity and that in Michael’s briefcase there was a girlie magazine. To me that was all very innocuous; it wasn’t a big deal at all. For one thing, the girlie magazine showed he was a regular heterosexual man; it wasn’t child porn or anything. In terms of the books, Michael had something like 20,000 with 10,000 books on the property. To go through all those books and only find one art book that had some nudity in it, shows that Michael wasn’t focused on that.

What I was able to show in his book collection was the range of books he had. Michael said himself that he was a voracious reader and loved studying different subject matter. So, the types of books Michael had were books on show business, magic, religion, Christianity; books on child-raising to teach himself on how to raise children and he also had a lot of the classics. He appreciated the authors from the past. So, it was nice to see that aspect of Michael.

Valmai:  Yes, it is well-known that he was extremely well read, but obviously the prosecution was going to pick on just that one book. That was their focus because of the allegations and that single book was enough. That’s what they were looking for; they weren’t interested in the 19,999 other books that didn’t contain anything that could be construed as suspect.

Larry:  Exactly! They were really unfair to Michael.

Valmai:  They were! Very, very unfair and so were the media. But, accusing Michael because he had one art book that showed some nudity would be like accusing anyone who has an appreciation for the work of masters such as Michaelangelo and Bernini.

Larry:  Exactly, exactly! That was a low blow, but luckily the jurors saw through it and found him innocent.
I was a little nervous after my documentary came out that the sheriffs might come after me, because in a way my documentary didn’t paint them and in particular the District Attorney, Thomas Sneddon, in a good light. But, they have acted professionally since then and haven’t bothered me.

Valmai:  That’s good to know. Now, you filmed outside the courthouse during Murray’s preliminary hearing and I’ve seen a couple of the videos you have done. What was the inspiration behind them?

Larry:  Well, partly fun. I love media circuses being in the media myself. It’s always a fun spirit and also fascinating to watch how other media work and who shows up. I wanted to be around the fans, hang out and hear stories. I also wanted to assist some of the others that I know. I just basically wanted to help anybody I could there.

When the trial starts, I would like to put together a series of reports and I’m looking for a media outlet or a Michael Jackson organization that might help fund me. I’m actually putting together a short video now which I’m going to send to some folk to see if anyone would like me to do a daily or weekly report on the trial.
So, going there was a little bit of fun and to support Michael and his legacy; to support his family, the fans, other people in the field and possibly to make some money too. I need to make a living.

Valmai:  Well, you do have to keep that in mind.

Larry:  Yes, and I’m really glad how tolerant the fans have been of that. I know when some of the Michael Jackson organizations try to do something and make money out of it, other fans will come down on them. I can kind of understand that, but on the other hand, you have to pay for your expenses and if you are not working you have to try and come up with some way to live. So, I’m glad people didn’t put me down for making some money and actually I haven’t made that much. But, I understand Michael believed in charitable work and I support that and others trying to do that as well.

Valmai:  What is your impression of Michael’s fans? Do you think they deserve the labels they have been given by the media and non-fans?

Larry:  Well, I’d like you to tell me what the labels are, but before you do, I’d like to say that I’m fascinated by the fans. I think it’s wonderful how they use Michael as an example of how to live and what messages to spread. In a way, he is like a religious figure that people revere and I understand that. There have been others also, President’s of the US, other entertainers that people really care for and use as an example.

One thing I find interesting and sad in a way, is how some fan groups are kind of fighting with other fan groups. I’ve been around some of that and I was kind of surprised by it. I guess it goes along with the territory when people feel so very strongly about what they are doing and what they’re representing. They disagree with other groups and get into disputes and fights, and I’ve seen some nasty stuff go on. But, what do you say on how the fans have been represented?

Valmai:  Well, I have read reports by certain media and also in discussion threads online, where they have labeled fans as crazy, mean, blinded by their devotion to Michael, and unable to recognize the facts etc.

Larry:  Well, that’s interesting and I see a little bit of that, but I think it’s true of any fan of any subject matter; for the Democrats, for the Republicans, for the Tea Party, for Obama. People who feel very strongly about something become somewhat blinded about the facts and just look at their side. So, I think that goes on with the Michael Jackson fans, but I think it’s true in any segment of society and in any culture.

Valmai:  With having these labels and with the fighting within the fan community, it’s often difficult to present a better picture of the fans toward the media and public. As representatives of Michael, it’s important to have a positive, intelligent and mature public image.

Larry:  Yes, it is kind of ironic that much of the fan community is trying to get out his message of peace and understanding and tolerance, when some people aren’t tolerant of others in the fan community. But, I think it’s for the reasons I just said. I think if something could be done to unite the fan community more that would be wonderful. I try to do that some and in fact when I went to the preliminary hearing there were some fan groups from opposing camps. I tried to be friends with both of them; to be a bridge. So, I try in my own small way, but I don’t know what else can be done.

It strikes me that maybe one reason for it is; some of the in-fighting is from people who are non-professional communicators. They don’t do it for a living; it’s their hobby and something they feel strongly about. They don’t run big businesses and if they had they would be savvier about it; if you do something there’s going to be fallout from it and will lead to more consequences. So, it’s another reason how I understand why that happens. By the way, I think the Michael Jackson Tribute Portrait is very cool. I’ve seen a lot of positive stuff come out of that and it’s important what you guys are doing.

Valmai:  Well, thank you. I was going to ask you what you thought about it, but you beat me to it.

Larry:  I met Jerry Biederman at the Beverly Hilton, at the Jackson family party, and of course the artist David Ilan and some of the other staff. Jerry and David seem very professional and there are some very positive things coming out of the Michael Jackson Tribute Portrait projects.

Valmai:  That’s wonderful to hear. We are very proud of the Tribute. Larry, have you considered making a documentary on the phenomenal connection between Michael and his fans and vice versa, that even now two years after his death, is still strong and active?

Larry:  Well, yes, I’ve thought of it some and I would like to.

The Untold Story of Neverland was relatively easy to make because all the footage was just sitting here in my office. I shot additional footage; an interview with Tom Meserau and some dramatic re-creations, but it wasn’t that big of a deal, in a way, to put together. I spent the time doing that without being paid and made some of money back by selling it on Amazon, but if I was to tackle a new documentary it would be very time consuming and I wouldn’t be assured of being recouped for my costs. I’d also possibly be at some legal risk.
As it is, the Jackson Estate gave me a hard time when my documentary first came out. They have since backed off, but I don’t think they realized that my documentary was positive to Michael and would help his legacy. They did send me a cease and desist letter and I had to have my brother’s attorney talk with them and so forth.

I am a little nervous that if I did something again in the future whether I would get on somebody’s bad side and be at legal and financial risk. But, if I was to do one, and I have been gathering footage by going to events and doing interviews, I would like to do it either on the fan community and how the fans benefit from Michael’s legacy and what aspects of Michael’s life is shown through the fans, or another subject that would be worthwhile and people have contacted me about, is Michael’s philanthropy. Another subject that interests me is Michael’s interest in the child-like nature and how he channeled that.

So, I may one day do another documentary and we’ll see what happens.

Valmai:  This is my last question Larry. Can you share what you are working on at present?

Larry:  Well, what am I working on…I’m working on doing a series of Man in the Street videos that would be seen nationally asking the question of the week, and I’m looking for an outlet. I actually have one fast food company I am talking with that possibly wants to use my Man in the Street video questions on their Facebook page and on their in store monitors. So, that will be a fun project.

I have a Man in the Street print column in my local paper and its questions about what makes you happy, what makes you sad, what books and movies do you like, what’s hard about being a parent, what’s easy.  Some of these questions are kind of an example to others to learn about people psychology and to know you are not alone with your problems.

So, that is one project, but another that that I’ve been doing for hobby purposes is my Dance for Peace, and I recently did a couple of other dance videos. I’m doing other projects for attorneys; settlement videos that basically talk about their clients stories that can be used at settlement conferences. I did some generation exchange projects where I have young people interview older people and vice versa, and we post them on the internet. That becomes a value to those families and it gives an opportunity for seniors to mentor kids and kids, in a way, to mentor seniors.

I have a couple of environmental projects that I will be doing. I’m going to do a recycling video and for some non-profit organizations I’m going to document some projects going on in Santa Barbara County. So, that’s a little bit of what I’m doing right now.

Valmai:  Larry, thank you very much for doing this interview with me. I've really enjoyed talking to you.

Larry: Thanks for calling. It was a good interview; you did a great job! 

By Valmai Owens© 2011. All Rights Reserved.
No reproduction without permission from author.

This interview appears in the publication Dot to Dot: Keeping Michael’s Legacy Alive,

http://mjtpmagazine.presspublisher.us/
and its content is the property of the authors and the Michael Jackson Tribute Portrait. Articles and exclusive interviews are copyrighted; therefore there should be no republication without permission. You may email edito@michaeljacksontributeportrait.com with any requests for republication. If permission is given, credit must be given to the author, Dot to Dot: Keeping Michael's Legacy Alive and the Michael Jackson Tribute Portrait.