La Toya Jackson: Truthful but fragile and mentally broken - Charles Thomson

Learn the truth about Michael Jackson's unhealthy interest in young boys.

Title
Go to content

La Toya Jackson: Truthful but fragile and mentally broken

This article was originally posted on Desiree speaks...so listen. The blog is no longer available online. Full credit goes to the original author.

This article will be archived on this site so people can read and freely make up their own minds without interference from Jackson's misinformation troll factory.
A while ago, I thought it was a good idea to write a post on La Toya Jackson. As we all know, for the past two decades, Michael Jackson's sister has been all over the place with regard to her brother and family, saying Michael was guilty and her family was abusive, and then saying he was innocent, that her family was simply 'tough' for the children's own good, and that all of her critiques were orchestrated by her late husband, Jack Gordon.

La Toya is a hard individual to adequately pin down. I find her incredibly truthful and honest but I also believe she is a fragile and mentally broken woman, the inevitable result of a life of victimization. This, of course, makes it difficult for one to decipher whether her 'tales' are true or false, false in the sense she is simply 'parroting' the stock Jackson tripe.

I know La Toya Jackson told the truth about her family, and there was never any muscling done by Jack Gordon to tell 'tall tales'; if any muscling was done, it was to get her to 'spill the beans'!

Her anecdotes about abuse were verified by Michael Jackson himself, who, in spite of his knack for deception, not only consistently stuck to the tales of beatings and emotional cruelty dealt out by his father (although he did not mention the sexual abuse) but also helpfully demonstrated the result of such treatment in his own life: the sexually inappropriate relationships with young boys and the inability to maintain successful relationships with other adults.

A recent interview with Janet Jackson on CNN's Piers Morgan Tonight, Janet Jackson implicated both parents--Joe and Katherine Jackson--as 'disciplinarians', just as La Toya Jackson stated in her book and on the various talk shows she went on:
MORGAN: Yes. I mean, would you say, when you look back on your relationship with your father, is he predominantly a good man, do you think? How would you position him?  

JACKSON: I think my father means well. I think he means well and wants nothing but the best for his kids. I just think that the way he went about certain things wasn't the best way. But, you know, it got the job done. And that's because of maybe how he was raised, doing what he thought was best, not knowing any better. So you know --

MORGAN: You tell the story in the book on one occasion you cite when you're getting out of the bathtub and he whacks you. How old were you then?

JACKSON: I was very young. I remember being younger than 8, let me put it like that.

MORGAN: That's pretty bad.

JACKSON: Yes. And I can't remember what it was that I did. I can't remember if I truly deserved it. My father has never touched me aside from that time. He's never put --

MORGAN: But he did the boys quite a lot.

JACKSON: Yes.

MORGAN: He's got a physically disciplinarian --

JACKSON: Yes. When my -- when my brother Randy and I, when we came along, I think my parents got kind of tired having nine kids and raising these children. I think they became -- and everyone says you guys get -- you guys have it so easy, my other brothers and sisters would say, and my parents were a lot more lenient with us, and I thought they were very strict.

MORGAN: Does he -- does he ever tell you that he loves you?

JACKSON: Yes, he has.
Of course, one does not get the full effect of the interview if one missed her pregnant pauses when this subject was broached. Janet Jackson predictably sugar-coated her upbringing but this is not surprising behavior, by any means, from a Jackson child.

But, again, note that she implicated both Katherine and Joe Jackson in abusing the children, the same thing La Toya had claimed in the 1990s.

Additionally, she added she has no relationship with her father, similar to Michael Jackson:
MORGAN: How do you get along with him now? Honestly.

JACKSON: Well, you think I'm going to sit here and lie to you?

MORGAN: Maybe.

(LAUGHTER)

JACKSON: That's wrong. We don't speak that much.

MORGAN: When did you last talk to him?

JACKSON: Honestly it's not often. Not --

MORGAN: Weeks? Months?

JACKSON: It's been -- oh, no. It hasn't been months, not like that. A few weeks ago.

MORGAN: Do you feel sad about that? Do you feel sad you don't have a relationship with him that is better?

JACKSON: Not anymore. I used to. [...]
If we take note of statement analysis, Janet's answering his initial question with a question is a 'buying time' tactic, which allows the interviewee a few to think of a more adequate answer; usually this denotes that a sensitive or difficult topic has been broached. To Janet's credit, she continues on truthfully, indicating that she not only has very little contact with her father but that she also has no regrets about it.

Can one blame her? While particulate affection for his children may reside somewhere within Joe, it is masked nearly completely by a cold and clinical view of them as products, or, in Michael's case, embarrassment and maybe even utter contempt for that proverbial 'black sheep' of the Jackson clan.
Joe Jackson never cared about Michael. The cruelty is despicable.

All of this is important in understanding La Toya: she was never lying about her abusive parents, including Katherine. To whit, the Jackson children have expressed affection for 'Mother' but, as an astute observer, one has to wonder why Katherine simply told Joe Jackson, in the midst of his beating Michael, that he was going to kill the boy, not that he should stop and never do it again.

At the very least, the Jackson matriarch was an accomplice.

Let's not confuse this with 'discipline', the explanation-du-jour given by Jackson children to justify such maltreatment. The years of terrible abuse have marred indelibly most of the Jackson sons, demonstrated in their complicated and failed relationships with women.

But let's return to La Toya Jackson.

As previously stated, I disbelieve La Toya Jackson was telling fibs about her family in the 1990s simply because I find her to be an honest person; the caveat of this with regard to La Toya is that she is capable of honestly repeating the talking points by given by whoever is running the show.

This does not apply to Jack Gordon, by my estimation, simply because Jack Gordon could not have known most of the stuff she revealed.

Yes, regardless of the numerous things La Toya has said since escaping Jack Gordon's 'clutches', I am saying she has always been the sole originator of the alleged 'stories' about her life as a Jackson and about Michael.

Most essential to point out, however, is that La Toya Jackson has always wanted to defend her brother, even if what she stated next was diametrically opposed to that internal drive. She would say something to the extent of, "I don't believe my brother would do such a thing," but following it up with, "I just don't know," and "I couldn't say."

In December 1993, La Toya Jackson gave her infamous public statement broadcasted from Tel Aviv, Israel where she implicated Michael in the alleged molestations of boys.
La Toya later claimed on Larry King Live in March 2003 this was farcical and she had been forced to read from a cue card written by Jack Gordon:
KING: One other thing on Michael. You did once criticize him in December in a news conference in Tel Aviv. You said you won't be silently (sic) collaborator of his crimes against small, innocent children. What did you mean?

L. JACKSON: Management.

KING: You were instructed to say that?

L. JACKSON: Exactly.

KING: No, explain that to me.

L. JACKSON: Actually, during that particular time in Israel, I believe it was, yes -- we were going there and I had no idea why we were going to Israel. He told me I need to go on vacation, so he went to Israel and we got to the hotel, Larry, and at the hotel all of these cameras were everywhere and I, of course, was in the limo and no makeup on, nothing and I said, Gee, I didn't know that they were having an award show here at the hotel. And I thought it was Academy Awards or some thing because photographers were every where.

He never told me any thing. And we got there and they were screaming my name and he gave me the paper and said, Here. And I put the glasses on and he said, Read this to the public.

KING: And this was -- And you said, "I cannot and will not be silent collaborator of his crimes against small, innocent children. I think Michael needs help." This has not been -- "This has been going to since 1981. It's not just on children."

It also said, "Forget about the stupid star. Forget about the icon. If he were any other man sleeping with boys you wouldn't like him."

L. JACKSON: I didn't know if it would go that far, but...

KING: You were reading that.

L. JACKSON: Yes, off of a card from what he -- I had never seen it before in my life -- it's like -- and he says, You better read it.

KING: Wow.

L. JACKSON: Management, meaning that that control and that power, which is something that I have taken all of this time out to stray away from. I don't need that to be manipulated that (sic) in my life.

KING: How did you let yourself get that?

L. JACKSON: You know what, Larry? I think about that today and I say, Jeez. I think it comes from growing up in a religious family not really knowing the world, not really knowing how people are and how people are and how they will manipulate you and use you and force you. It was a very, very abusive situation.

KING: And he could manipulate -- even into criticizing and attacking your brother?

L. JACKSON: It was very abusive and it's things that should not be said, things that you keep to yourself, but it was done.

But I'm so happy now because I'm better because I'm in a much better position. I'm in a positive space. And I want to keep it that way. I don't like to dwell on that. It's the past.
I do not believe a word of it. Although I find the handy deception detection technique of statement analysis to be generally applicable to most people, La Toya is a hard woman to read. The only thing one must do is try to find corroboration to her statements.

And, again, La Toya mentioned things that would be unknown to her then-husband.

I believe La Toya's statement from Tel Aviv is one of the most powerful statements against Michael Jackson with regard to his molestation woes. She revealed what she knew, knowledge that could only come from her being a Jackson.

Later on, she gave an interesting interview to Katie Couric from the Today Show, once again tight-roping between defense of her brother and telling what she knows. Please take note that La Toya has always been upfront about what she knows and what she does not know.
It should be noted that Couric's hostility towards La Toya was rooted in the public's fealty to Michael Jackson and the Jackson family. All of this is, of course, is demonstrative of irreproachable celebrity credibility.

Remember, most of the American public believed Michael Jackson was a victim of 'extortion' in 1993.

By the next year, La Toya Jackson was giving more specifics. According to a transcript referred to in Diane Dimond's Be Careful Who You Love, La Toya Jackson appeared on a talk show manned by Geraldo Rivera in February 21, 1994 and spoke of the checks she'd seen as referenced to in her Tel Aviv statement. From pages 36-37:
"Why are you so cinvinced in your head that he is guilty?"

"Because of what I've seen, because of what I know, because of what my mother has done,"...  "Because of what she showed me.  Because of the things that she says to me about Michael, that I refused to believe at the time.  My mother actually was screaming for me one day, and I ran into the room.  I--frantically--I thought something was wrong, something had happened.  And she was showing me this check and I said, 'Yeah, so.  What about it?' And she says, 'Well, look at it.' And the check, of course, was one and a lot of zeros behind it.  And she says, 'Latoya, this is one million dollars!' I said, 'So?' And she goes, 'But look who it's written to.' And, of course, at that particular time it was...  Written to the last name of the little boy that he was with all that time.  But it was written to the father, and not to the little boy.  It was in the father's name.  And [Mother] called [Michael] a very bad name.  There was another check behind that, and I said, 'Mother, please, let's leave.' I said, 'We shouldn't be in here I don't want this.'"

"And you recognize the name?"

"Yes."

"All right.  Don't tell us the name, but describe  the person to whom it was written--the father."

"I don't know the father."

"Was he a show business person?"

"No.  The father, supposedly, is a garbage collector--or, was a garbage collector, I should say, at that particular time."
As noted by Dimond, this boy was Jimmy Safechuck.
These photos are beyond disturbing, especially when considered with the fact Michael Jackson was accused numerous times of sexually abusing his 'special friends', not to mention he owned books of featuring nude young boys; not atypical of couple in love, Michael Jackson shows a possessiveness for his young 'playmate'. The photo on the bottom was used in a newsletter by the NAMBLA organization.

To be fair, La Toya Jackson does not reveal exactly what the money was for; by her mother's reactions, of course, coupled with the fact former secretary, Jolie Levine, frequently saw Michael Jackson in bed with Jimmy Safechuck during the Bad Tour and, as a result, considered her boss to be a 'chicken hawk', we can reasonably conjecture that these checks seen by La Toya and her mother were the gifts and monies of legend given to the parents of Michael's 'special friends'.

I should mention that I happened to see an old recording my late grandmother made of La Toya Jackson on Geraldo Rivera's 1990s television talk show; she revealed many intriguing things. Interesting to note about the tape was that La Toya mentioned bleaching creams Miko Brando used to fetch for Michael; she stated she would frequently tell her brother that they could be carcinogenic and harmful. She also stated he was not injecting himself to make his skin white, which had been a rumor at the time.

This is in direct opposition to the lie peddled by Michael Jackson's defense attorneys in 2004, who tried to claim that the blood stains on Michael Jackson's underwear were from injections of a medication to deal with his 'vetiligo' (sic), as attorney Susan Yu wrote. Having told that lie, one can assume that the alleged 'contamination' of these blood stains by cocaine claimed in a later document--the idea that cocaine metabolites were not excreted in his blood but rather cocaine in its pure form was simply on the stain--was also a lie!

Michael Jackson was snorting cocaine. This is the most simple and most logical explanation for why he'd have cocaine on his belongings or in his blood.

In 1995, La Toya Jackson, coiffed in a blond wig, sat down for a bizarre interview with Inside Edition, still clinging to her accusations that her brother was a pedophile.
La Toya, as it bears repeating, has since altered her opinion on her brother, Michael. She now believes him to be innocent.

However, one should look at all of her statements. It was convenient for La Toya Jackson to feign having been a victim of brainwashing when she was suddenly alone and in need of allies; so simple was it for her to return to the Jackson nest and claim it had all been a terrible lie.

But how could she have possibly told stories about her family and about Michael Jackson that went on to be effectively corroborated by other accounts and events if all of it was made up? There is little doubt in my mind that La Toya Jackson was manipulated by Jack Gordon to make money off of Jackson family dirt; however, I do not believe, despite La Toya's mea culpas, that she was forced to tell untruths about her family and brother.

She simply was 'forced' to tell secrets. Recall that I mentioned Katherine Jackson got Howard Mann, a Jackson business partner, to destroy a 'salacious' piece of property found in the Michael Jackson storage haul obtained from Henry Vaccaro. Tabloid magazines had offered to pay seven-figures (millions) for this since-destroyed mystery item.

There are tons of Jackson secrets, apparently.

Michael Jackson's fans take her 'change' as evidence she had always been lying. And, for sure, my belief in that she told the truth about her family and her brother in the 1990s can be seen as the flipside of the same coin. However, again, given the corroborating evidence supporting La Toya Jackson, I believe it's not exactly the 'same thing'.

Additionally, sort of tangential to unimpeachable witnesses like Jolie Levine, according to a Prosecution brief with regard to character witnesses for Michael Jackson, former Neverland employees Norma Staikos and Miko Brando stated they would not allow their own children to be left alone with Michael Jackson. The statements would be used against Michael if the defense wanted to bring out individuals vouching for his 'good character'.

The accounts are interesting.

It is well known that Staikos fled the United States for Greece, her native country, before she was ever able to be questioned by law enforcement investigating the Jordie Chandler allegations. It was only following the 1994 settlement with the Chandlers that she returned to testify before the investigating grand jury; simply, given that the Chandlers were silenced by the multimillion dollar payout, she did not have to reveal anything about the young boys Michael Jackson entertained.

That she would not allow her own children with Michael Jackson is interestingly corroborated. According to Orietta Murdoch, Staikos suggested she keep her son away from Michael; from page 148 of Be Careful Who You Love:
In quiet conversation, there was talk among the office staff about all those extravagant gifts Jackson doled out to the boys, the ones [Norma] Staikos called his "little boyfriends." They'd talk about his sense of possessiveness toward them, too. At one point, Staikos even warned Murdoch to keep close watch on her own son--and never leave the boy alone with the star. Staikos never explained why, and Murdoch was too afraid to ask any questions.

Murdoch said she took Staikos's warning seriously and never brought her son to the office when she believed Jackson was going to be there.
Apparently, Staikos was giving out the advice by which she also abided. According to this woefully short article abstract, guards suing Michael Jackson alleged that Norma Staikos also functioned as a person who arranged for payouts to the parents of Michael's 'special friends'.

Similarly to Staikos, that Miko Brando also abided by the "keep your kids away from Jacko" guideline, given that he has always had positive things to say about Michael, makes one wonder how well known Michael's attraction to boys was to employees besides the Neverland Five, Bill Bray, and Bob Jones. I thought the following photo caption from Victor Gutierrez's book Michael Jackson Was My Lover curiously corroborated the statement given by Brando:
This all is just a few things to think about until I find some time to write.

And, yes, I did write this in one sitting, in spite of my writer's block. This piece was exponentially less difficult to write than the others. Besides, I am again trying to gather my materials for the books entries.

Be back soon.

~ Desiree, P.I.
© Facts Don't Lie. Pedophiles Do.
© Facts Don't Lie. Pedophiles Do.
Back to content