TRANSCRIPCION DE UNA PARTE DE LA ENTREVISTA
Airdate: Jan 1, 2004
MJJF Talk Radio Interview with Geraldine Hughes - Part 1
RON: Okay, Geraldine.
GERALDINE: Yes.
RON: What we’re going do is a little bit different this time. Trish and I are calling this a coffee cup or a coffee table type interview. In other words, we want it to be conversational. We don’t want it to be like a standard Q & A, you know, we ask you a question and you respond, then we ask you another question, like a typical interview. We want it to be just like we’re sitting down at a table discussing all of this, asking you questions, making our comments, and so on, even though we’re in three totally different places across the country, you know, with a modern wonder of technology we’re able to do this. So I’m just going to go and then we’re going to do this. Are you guys ready?
GERALDINE: I’m ready.
TRISH: Yes, I’m ready.
RON: Okay, with us today is Geraldine Hughes. Geraldine’s upcoming book, “Redemption: The Truth Behind the Michael Jackson Child Molestation Allegations” details her inside knowledge of the allegations that were made against Michael Jackson ten years ago. Welcome to our program, Geraldine.
GERALDINE: Thank you very much for having me.
RON: Happy New Year to you.
GERALDINE: Thank you, and Happy New Year to you two as well.
RON: Geraldine, both of us have had an opportunity to read your book, Redemption. Can you begin by telling us, first of all, who you are and how and why you came to write this book?
GERALDINE: I am the secretary, I was the sole secretary that worked for Barry Rothman, who was the attorney that represented Evan Chandler, the father of the little boy that accused Michael Jackson of child molestation in the 1993 case.
RON: Okay.
GERALDINE: And you want to know how I came to write the book?
RON: Yeah, how did it come about? I mean, one of the things that we’ve been asked by people to ask you is that ten years ago this happened and the book is just coming out now. What inspired you to write the book? Why did you decide to write it? When did you decide to write it?
GERALDINE: My main reason for wanting to write the book was because I initially came forward on the very onset of the allegation that they were charging Michael Jackson with child molestation. I watched in tears like the world with the allegation, when it broke. And my first thought was, “Oh, my God, no, they didn’t do this to him!” So I’ve known from the very beginning that Michael Jackson was innocent of these allegations all along. I initially, on the onset as well, went and talked to the defense investigation team and gave them information as to why I felt that, you know, that the crime was being committed against Michael. But because the case settled and the attorneys, the first set of attorneys wound up quitting or resigning from the case, all the information that I provided them and because it never went to court, it is a wealth of information that has yet to come to the public’s attention, and missing links is information that points towards Michael Jackson’s innocence.
RON: Can you also describe how you, you know, the process by which you wrote the book? I understand that during the time you were the secretary to Mr. Rothman you actually made notations in your diary and so on and used that as a basis to write the book. Can you just describe that in brief detail to us?
GERALDINE: I, you know, from being on the inside of the Chandlers camp, when I started believing that something was really not right that was going on around me, I , for some reason, you know, and I’ve come to know exactly clearly why I did it now, but I just started jotting information in my calendar book. They call it a diary but, you know, it’s a calendar book and, you know, I just started jotting information down, but when I saw that it concluded to him being falsely accused of the child molestation allegations and the case settled, I was walking around for years not really knowing, you know, what avenue, what do you do at this point? How do I, you know, I know something that the world does not know, but how do you get this information out? I will say that the idea to write the book did not come to me until 1997. I actually started writing the book, or started the journey of writing the book, in 1997. And I completed writing the book in the year 2000. So, okay, now we have three years, right?
RON: Yes, it was three years. I guess you had stated in 1997 was when you went to the conference where you kind of got the initial idea to write the book. Trish, are you still there?
TRISH: Yes, I’m still here.
RON: Okay, and then when you got the idea to write the book, you started going back through the notations and, you know, went back into doing the research, you know, the public information. One of the things that I found interesting is when we were talking yesterday, Geraldine, you said 75% of the information that’s in your book is public knowledge.
GERALDINE: It’s public knowledge and, you know, the part that’s so interesting is that, you know, to me the most damaging information that I’ve, really, I’m just throwing it back out there, and that is the conversation that Evan Chandler had with David Schwartz, which was the stepfather of the little boy. He didn’t know he was being recorded, but Schwartz was tape recording, so he was freely talking. He didn’t know he was being recorded, where he just literally said blow by blow what his motive was, what his intention was, and if he didn’t get what he wanted what he was going to do, why he hired Rothman, which was the attorney I worked for, and he did everything that he said he was going to do. But Pellicano, the investigator on the defense, Michael Jackson’s investigator, he got ahold of that tape. He gave that tape to the network. They played this tape all over the networks, and they let everybody hear Chandler with his own mouth say, you know, and to anybody else that’s like premeditated, because he didn’t just say it. When you just say it and you don’t act it’s just an allegation or you’re just alleging something, but when you say it and then do it, it becomes a fact that is exactly what, you know, he did just what he said he was going to do. And if, like, that whole thing just got swept under the rug, and I’m like, you know, why weren’t we listening? We’re trying to make Michael Jackson out a pedophile. We’re trying to make him a child molester. We had this man say out of his own mouth, “I’m going to destroy him if I don’t get what I want.”
RON: It’s interesting that you mention that, Geraldine, because I actually have a couple of quotes that I wrote down from the transcript. Now, as an aside, before I read them, this would not have been admissible in court because at the time Evan Chandler denied knowing he was being recorded, is that correct?
GERALDINE: Right. That is correct.
RON: Okay, these are a couple of the excerpts from Geraldine’s book, the transcript that Mr. Schwartz and Mr. Chandler had a conversation, I assume this was in early August of 1993?
GERALDINE: I believe so. Let me check to get the exact date of that. I believe it was, yes, it was early August.
RON: In the conversation, Mr. Chandler alleges, “seduced by this guy’s power and money there’s no way I can lose. I’ve checked that inside and out. There are other people involved. I paid them to do it. This guy is going to destroy everybody in sight in any devious, nasty, cruel way he can do it”. At that point, allegedly referring to Mr. Rothman. Correct?
GERALDINE: Right.
RON: “I’ve given him full authority to do that”. And then one other thing that I found interesting is when Schwartz asked, what about, you know, what is in the best interest of the child? Do you remember what Mr. Chandler’s response to that was?
GERALDINE: He said it wasn’t important to him, that that was irrelevant or not important to him.
RON: Right, and that is probably atypical for somebody who supposedly, their child has just been abused by somebody.
GERALDINE: Right.
RON: Trish, why don’t you go ahead and ask Geraldine some of the things that are on your mind?
TRISH: Well, I want to talk about the cast of characters involved in the 1993 case, but before that, Happy New Year, Geraldine.
GERALDINE: Thank you. Happy New Year to you as well.
TRISH: Okay, so let’s talk about Barry Rothman, your former employer. Can you share with our listeners a little bit about the character and personality traits of the two main characters, Mr. Rothman and Dr. Chandler?
GERALDINE: Mr. Rothman, I do really, I spent a lot of time really explaining Rothman’s character because in order to understand how someone could have done this, you gotta know the person, you gotta know the person. So I spent a lot of time in the book really explaining Rothman’s character, and he was an attorney. I had been in the legal field for a number of years when I came to work with him, and I had never ran into any, I can say I never ran into an attorney like him. And I can honestly say I’ve never run into a human being like him. It was the most incredible experience that I have ever encountered. It was very, very - it was the type of character that could have done, you know, could have done - he was the attorney of choice that Chandler referred to when he said - I’ll use Chandler’s own words, “I found someone who is devious, who is” - can we do it like that?
RON: Why don’t we use the direct quote from your book? An encounter with Mr. Rothman was “like meeting a real life demon straight out of the pits of hell”.
GERALDINE: Yeah. And that was an understatement. But that’s about as clear as I can put it. That it was really, it was just an encounter that I’ll never forget. I’ve never had that type of encounter with anyone, and I hope I never encounter anyone like that again. But it was just totally incredible. I just could not believe that, you know, what I experienced as far as him as a person, and I was even more shocked that I was able to actually, you know, endure it up until that point. I didn’t have that much tolerance for certain characters, but I just thought that that was just amazing to me. I’d never met anyone like that.
RON: Can you tell us a little bit about the fact that Chandler may have hired Rothman because he had, the year prior to that, been engaged in another similar child abuse case where there were false allegations made? Can you tell us a little bit more about that?
GERALDINE: You know, I was - for lack of better words - I was trying to explain to the reader of the book why he hired Rothman and why Rothman, his choice in selecting Rothman was important. It had nothing to do with litigation because Rothman was not a litigation attorney. Rothman was an entertainment attorney. When you’re an entertainment attorney you’re not doing so much with the courts, you’re dealing with contracts, agreements, letters. And so an entertainment attorney could have very little litigation experience. So it didn’t have anything to do with that. He was not a family law attorney at the time. When he hired Rothman they were engaged in a custody battle at the time. Rothman was not a family law attorney. The only thing that made sense as to why he hired him during a custody battle was because Rothman had just represented - well, it was a client that he had where the lady wanted custody of her child and so they accused the father with child molestation. This was a case just prior to him representing Chandler, where they accused the father of child molestation, which gave the woman who was Rothman’s client full custody of her child and barring, you know, and limiting, restricting the father’s involvement with the child. So that was the only thing that really, you know, to me this is the only thing that makes sense because at the time there was a custody battle that was going on. But the part that just was so, you know, that was a little bit appalling was that the same thing that just had happened with a prior client was the same thing that happened in this case.
RON: Interesting. Trish? Go ahead, Trish.
TRISH: That’s amazing. You know, in your book, you don’t talk a lot about Larry Feldman, the attorney that was brought in to file the civil suit against Michael Jackson. Do you know if he was privy to the extortion attempts from Dr. Chandler and Mr. Rothman, which you have detailed in your book? What was his working relationship and the frequency of contact between himself, Rothman, and Chandler?
GERALDINE: During the time that I was working with Rothman, I did not personally see where Rothman had a lot of involvement with Feldman. Feldman, he was basically the attorney for the child in the civil case. So therefore most of his involvement had to do with, you know, basically representing the child in the civil suit. Once he did start representing the young boy, instantly he filed that civil suit, so there wasn’t that much involvement. I don’t know a lot about Feldman. The only information that I have about Feldman came from the document from the court. I mean, you can tell when you read an attorney’s work, how they’re pleading cases, and what points. I mean, that tells you a lot about an attorney. That’s my only knowledge of Feldman, but I can say my best answer to your question is that I believe with all my heart and soul that he was not privy to the extortion end of it. I believe that he was moving forward believing what was being given to him. I really don’t think that he’s a party or have anything to do with the extortion part of it. I think that he just was representing that young boy based on the information that was given to him from the father and the little boy. And I think that he was just in the best interest of his client representing him, you know, believing full well that he had been molested, or like he would have represented any other client. So that’s why I don’t say too much about Feldman other than, you know, what I’ve learned from him through his pleadings that he was filing at the time. I believe he was not privy to any of what was going on as far as the extortion, but he was representing him based on what he thought was the truth.
TRISH: In your book, you talk about how Dr. Chandler was a nervous wreck, and the child was always at ease trying to calm his father down, and, you know, that’s quite odd to me. Do you think that was odd as well?
GERALDINE: I thought it was very odd because, I thought it was odd because usually it’s the parent, you know, that’s usually the role that the parent takes with their child as, you know, we’re the ones that keep them. But I did witness behavior between the two that was just totally the opposite. I mean, Chandler was a nervous wreck, but I was kind of, you know, I was a little taken by the fact that it was the son that was constantly checking up on him, and when he would have outbursts, the son would go and calm him down. The little boy appeared to me to be perfectly normal, perfectly fine, and I even really, you know, saw something quite charming and kind of cute about him. Also, I can understand why someone would be drawn to him because he was a sweet kid, a nurturing kind of kid.
TRISH: So the roles were reversed. He was more of the father and Dr. Chandler was more of the child. This is really interesting.
GERALDINE: Yes, it was a complete role reversal going on with those two.
TRISH: Now you also talk about a meeting that you walked into between Mr. Rothman and Jordan Chandler. Can you describe that for us?
GERALDINE: I had, forgive me, this is New Year’s.
RON: You were out too late last night, weren’t you, Geraldine?
GERALDINE: You know, it’s just that I have some calls. People are trying to get ahold of me now to say “Happy New Year”. I walked in to Rothman’s office without knocking. We were always under the threat of death about walking into his office without knocking. And I was on my way home one evening and, you know, just thinking I’m gonna let him know I’m gone and walk out the door, and so I forgot to knock. I just opened up the door, and I noticed that - that was my first time seeing the little boy, the Chandler boy. He was in the back of Rothman’s office, but we did not see that little boy come in the office. For some reason, he got him into the office without anyone noticing that he had came in, and then he had him behind closed doors. But what struck me really interesting was that the father was not there. It was just Rothman and the little boy. At first, I thought that was kind of strange, but the thing that made me feel that there was really something weird going on was the look on the little boy’s face when I turned around and saw him in Rothman’s office. For some reason, he put like a puzzled look, he put the most funniest look on his face. And when I - Rothman snapped at me, of course, for coming and barging in, and I told him I was just letting him know I’m on my way out. And when I turned around and shut the door, that put a little question mark in me. I said, something just in me said something was really weird about that particular scene right there. You know, something wasn’t right about that because he just had the look that was on his face just looked like I wasn’t supposed to have seen that meeting right there. So that’s why I call it a secret meeting, and I elaborate, but the information that I do state in the book was that it is my opinion, it’s not a fact, but I kind of tie that in because I thought it was important to this case.
RON: Geraldine, one thing that we know about the current criminal case is the importance of the timeline, you know, when certain events happened, you know, when things took place, when things were stated, and I took very good notes as I was reading your book when things started to happen. And on August 4th is the date that you give as when the negotiations between Michael Jackson, Anthony Pellicano, etc., and Rothman and Chandler took place. I found it interesting that between August 4th and August 17th, during that time of the negotiations, those three weeks where the back and forth demands were going, you know, between Rothman and Pellicano, essentially, the child never went to the psychologist. And can you talk a little bit about that? I found it odd, reading the book, that if you’re a father and your son has been abused one of the very first things that you’re going to do is report it to a third party. You’re not going to try to extort money from an individual because of that. You’re certainly not going to spend three weeks if the child is going through trauma. Can you just tell us a little bit about your thoughts on, you know, the timing there?
GERALDINE: The thing that I thought was really key that was like you said, during that time we all know that first he queried this doctor. Rothman first queried the doctor, gave him a hypothetical question about what would happen if, and so the doctor actually wrote him a two page letter telling him, well if this was a real case, you know, this is what, you know, he gave him his advice. It would have to be reported and so instead of doing what that doctor told him to do, you’re right, there was three weeks after that. Instead of taking that doctor’s advice, he just merely took that letter that the doctor gave him and was using that letter as a bargaining tool to go to Michael and say, either you give me this money or, see this letter? I’m going to expose you. All he had was the doctor giving a response to a hypothetical question, but he used it as a bargaining tool, and it was his leverage that he first went to Michael with about giving him the money that he was requesting, which was 20 million dollars. But he didn’t just say, give me 20 million dollars. He was very clever. He said, what I want is four movie deals and they need to be 5 million dollars each. That’s the way he asked for it. So if he would have said give me 20 million, of course we would have said, oh that’s extortion. But still, when we really look at the definition of the word extortion, it is still extortion, even though he said give me four movie deals at 5 million because otherwise I’m going to expose you, because that’s the essence of what extortion is, using some undue influence to try to get someone to do something and if they don’t do it then, you know, there is a consequence that’s going to happen. So, you know, I kind of thought that was really interesting as to, you know, why he didn’t do what the doctor said to do. Instead, he used that. That was his leverage in going to Michael and asking for the 20 million in “terms of a movie deal”.
RON: Kind of makes you go “hmmmmm”.
GERALDINE: Oh, absolutely.
RON: It’s interesting that it was a hypothetical letter. It’s interesting to know that the letter was not based on any kind of meeting with anybody in the Chandler family. It was based, you know, Rothman obviously had his plan in mind, and if we’re going to believe everything as you’re laying it out, they had “the plan” that Chandler referenced several times. And the plan apparently was to use this letter as the tool, the bargaining chip, to say, look, all we need to do is to bring this kid to the psychiatrist because he’s going to report it to the cops and your career is over. I mean, it was essentially that simple.
GERALDINE: Right. And they did it just the way, you know, he made a point that he was moving according to a plan. And he also said, “I’m being advised”. You know, meaning that this was coming from someone else. “I’m being advised. I’m moving according to a plan”. And he said, one of the other comments was, “and I cannot lose”.
RON: It sounds like, in this case, he was right.
GERALDINE: Oh, he was right.
RON: One thing that I found interesting, Geraldine, when we talked a couple of days ago, you mentioned that you actually typed the letter that Mr. Rothman wrote to Dr. Chandler in terms of the procedure for a parent to report child abuse charges without any risk of liability. Can you tell us a little bit about that?
GERALDINE: I explain that in the chapter titled “Third Party Disclosure”, and that does tell in detail that it was Rothman that actually advised Chandler about how to report child abuse by using a third party without liability to the parent and I did type that letter. I did not copy the letter, you know, that is a breach of whatever, but what I did was, I did note that in my calendar book because there were some codes that he had attached to the letter and just, you know, I’m not even thinking at that time that he’s getting ready to get charged with child molestation or they’re getting ready to accuse him. But there something that was so, my curiosity just really, you know, made me wonder, I mean, I was so curious that I decided to note it in my calendar book, and I also noted the codes and I put the codes in the book as well.
RON: Another interesting element of the timeline that I thought was really key in the book is the whole child custody battle between Evan Chandler and his ex-wife, June Schwartz otherwise known as June Chandler. In late July, and I don’t have the exact date in front of me but it was like the third or fourth week in July, Rothman, on behalf of Chandler, negotiated with Bert Fields, who was Michael Jackson’s attorney at that point, to get the custody of the boy for one week. And that custody was held by Evan Chandler for five weeks. And, coincidentally, and I’m sure it was pure coincidence, Geraldine, on August 17th, the day Evan Chandler had to appear in court via an ex parte motion on behalf of June Chandler’s attorneys to get custody back of Jordan Chandler, was the same day, you know, that he was going to have to be doing this, it was the same day that he took Jordan to the psychiatrist where the infamous allegations of child abuse happened. And obviously, you know, us being a biased party, to us it looks a little bit suspicious, you know, that the day that you have to turn over your son after holding him four weeks longer than you were supposed to have him, you’re now basically accusing the mother in this case of being an unfit mother because the abuse that allegedly happened occurred while he was under her care. So can you just comment a little bit about, you know, how suspicious or awkward that seems to be?
GERALDINE: I guess that to me that’s one of those points that goes to the heart of this whole case because, you know, to the public it just looked to them like, you know, Chandler just took the boy to the psychiatrist and the psychiatrist questioned him and came up with a few details that he felt he needed to report, that was child abuse and he needed to report it. And behind the scenes it went nothing like that. The day that he took the young boy to the psychiatrist, like you said, that was the day that he had to go to court on a custody issue, where June had filed an ex parte. That meant that when you file an ex parte document that means that you have to go to court the next day. So you only have one day’s notice and explain, you know, why you’re doing this or, you know, and you’re asking the court for an order, and so they didn’t have a lot of time to think that one through. That was the curve ball on June’s part, and remember, they’re moving according to a plan, right? And so I’m at the office just, I’m on pins and needles, I’m like, just dying to find out the outcome because I knew what that was all about. I’m like, oh, God, I need to find out, you know, I can’t wait to find out what happened. Well, what happened was, the court ordered him to return the boy back to the mom. And so, you know, when I heard that that’s what happened, I said, oh, okay. You know, I’m thinking this thing is now over with because now the boy is back with the mom and all that Chandler was doing would come to an end. But that was also when I found out that he took the boy, instead of obeying the court order and returning his son back to the mom, he, instead of doing that, that was the day he took the boy to the psychiatrist that was already queried that if I do this and if this happens then, you know, we’re going to do this. That’s when he did it on that same day. So he never did return the boy. He went on and sent the boy to the psychiatrist, you know, which was the doctor that made the report to the Department of Children’s Services for child molestation, you know, the allegation of child molestation. And, you know, from the inside I’m like, wait a minute, you know, something is really wrong with that because he knew three weeks prior to that. He had already gotten that query that, you know, if this is this and if A is A then B will happen. But for him to have waited three weeks and not to have - oh, and I’ll tell you another thing, Ron, this is another little added point. And the added point that we talked about was that……….
----------------------------------------------------
Cuando pongan más, enseguida lo pondré.
Please, para los fans, que no sepan inglés, solicito traducción. Gracias :muac:
