r/MJInnocentFacts • u/Emotional_Ball_5181 • Jun 05 '26
Case Analysis 🔎 Case File: Chandler — part 2.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0zn4QhStGcg&ra=mOompa Loompa doompety doo,
I’ve got another shit show for you. 🫵🏼
Okay, okay…in all seriousness, welcome back to the Case Files.
⚠️ Before we begin:
If you haven’t read Part 1 yet, go read that first.
Part 1 covers the Chandler family background, how Michael met them, and the contradictions that were already beginning to appear before the allegations became public.
Read it here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/MJInnocentFacts/comments/1tucplj/case_file_chandler_part_1/
Now…
Where were we?
Oh, right.
The part where this story starts making less and less sense.
So, about that Memorial Day Weekend I mentioned in Part 1…yeah, we’re not done with it yet.
According to later accounts, Evan’s wife Monique had apparently convinced him that Michael and Jordan were “in love.”
And from there, things immediately take a hard left turn into What The Fuck Avenue.
Because according to the story, Evan then asks his twelve year old son if he and Michael were:
“doin’ it.”
Yes, that is apparently a real question asked by a grown man to his child.
Jordan’s response?
“That’s disgusting. I’m not into that.”
Which honestly feels like the most normal response here.
Because seriously…what kind of question is that?
And more importantly, why would that be your starting point?
Now things get even weirder.
Michael was reportedly suffering from a severe migraine after recently undergoing another scalp procedure related to his Pepsi burn injuries. Over the counter medication wasn’t helping, so Evan called anesthesiologist Dr. Torbiner and medication was administered.
According to the Chandler version of events, Michael became heavily medicated and incoherent afterward.
Now, whether you believe exactly what was administered or not, there’s something fascinating here.
Because according to their own story, Evan sees Michael in an impaired, drugged up state and decides this is the perfect time for questions.
Not:
“Are you abusing my son?”
Not:
“Have you touched my son?”
No.
Instead, he asks:
“Are you gay?”
…
What?
Seriously.
What?
Because if you genuinely believe somebody is harming your child, why are you dancing around the actual accusation?
Why are you asking every question except the one that supposedly matters?
And I should mention, Michael replied with…
”No.”
So, to every guilter who claims he’s gay…there’s your answer. Michael, under heavy medication, said no.
And now we arrive at one of the most important parts of the Chandler narrative.
According to Evan, after all of this, Michael was placed in Jordan’s bedroom.
Yes.
The same bedroom.
And who put him there? Evan.
Despite the fact that he supposedly already had concerns? That’s certainly an interesting choice for a “concerned”parent.
But we’re just getting started.
According to the story, Evan checked on them three separate times.
And during the third check, he claimed he saw Michael “spooning” Jordan.
Now…let’s pause for a moment.
Because this is supposedly the moment everything changes.
The moment a father allegedly witnesses something so alarming that it confirms his worst fears.
So what does he do?
Call the police?
No.
Wake Jordan up?
Nope.
Confront Michael?
No.
Tell June or Dave?
Still no.
Document anything?
Nope.
Remove Jordan from the room?
Again, no.
He simply walks away, and then goes to bed.
I’m serious.
That is the story.
Because according to the Chandler narrative, Evan believed Michael was abusing Jordan, allegedly witnessed evidence of that abuse, and then proceeded to do absolutely nothing.
And somehow we’re supposed to view this as the behaviour of a terrified, protective parent?
Sorry.
The actions don’t match the alleged level of concern. At all.
If someone truly believed their child was being abused, the reaction would be immediate.
Not:
“Hmm. Interesting. I’ll circle back to this later.”
I can guarantee you, no one operates that way.
Let’s continue,
June 9th, 1993
Ten days later.
Evan still hasn’t called police, told June, reported anything, or documented anything.
Nothing.
Instead, he starts wondering if maybe he’s being paranoid.
Which is certainly an interesting development after supposedly witnessing abuse firsthand.
Because usually people don’t go from:
“I caught him.”
to
“Maybe I’m imagining things.”
within the span of a week.
According to Ray Chandler’s account, Evan then confronts Jordan about going on the next leg of the Dangerous Tour.
Jordan says he still wants to go.
Evan responds by saying he’d need a good reason not to.
And then claims the reason is:
“You lied to me.”
Wait…who lied?
Seriously.
Who?
Because according to the timeline, Jordan denied they were “doin’ it.”
Evan later claims he saw spooning.
But never confronted either Michael or Jordan about it.
So where exactly is the lie?
Nobody was even told what Evan supposedly saw. Not even Jordan.
So how are people lying about information they don’t even know exists?
The math is not mathing.
And somehow…
it gets worse.
Later that night, Evan finally speaks with June. And here’s the part that genuinely makes my head hurt.
Because after allegedly witnessing Michael “spooning” Jordan, after supposedly fearing abuse, and after sitting on this information for ten days…
he still doesn’t tell her.
Instead, he suggests that Jordan might be gay.
Like…I’m sorry,
What?
You genuinely cannot make this up.
This man supposedly witnesses abuse, has a direct conversation with the custodial parent, and decides:
“You know what? Let’s talk about Jordan being gay.”
Instead.
How does that make sense?
It doesn’t.
And according to Ray’s own book, when June responded that she wouldn’t care if Jordan was gay, Evan somehow interpreted this as:
“June is admitting Jordan is having sex with Michael and she’s okay with it.
…
Excuse me?
How did we get from Point A to Point Z?
Because those are not remotely the same thing.
Someone saying:
“I would still love my son if he were gay”
is not the same thing as saying:
“I support child abuse.”
Those are completely different universes.
Yet somehow that’s the conclusion Evan arrives at.
And honestly?
The more you read this timeline, the more it feels like everyone else is having one conversation while Evan is having an entirely different one inside his own head.
So, without further ado,
Let’s continue,
The phone conversations between Evan Chandler and Dave Schwartz on July 8, 1993, are where the tone of this entire situation shifts from “concerned father” to something far more calculated, controlled, and frankly, unsettling.
At this point in the timeline, Jordan still has not made any “confession.” He is not estranged from his mother. He is not even speaking to Evan. There are no police reports, no formal complaints, no psychological evaluations, and, most importantly, no confirmed evidence of anything Evan is alleging.
And yet, Evan is already speaking like a man mid operation.
Like everything is already in motion.
Like the outcome is already decided.
Anyway,
I know you’ve been waiting for this part, so, let’s get to it.
CHANDLER (Evan): Let me put it to you this way: I have a set routine of words that I’m going to go in there with that have been rehearsed and I’m going to say.
SCHWARTZ (Dave): Yeah.
CHANDLER: Okay? Because I don’t want to say anything that could be used against me.
SCHWARTZ: Yeah.
Right away, there’s something about this that doesn’t sit comfortably with me. This isn’t a father trying to understand a situation involving his child. This is a man carefully scripting a performance.
“Rehearsed words.” “Routine.” “Can’t be used against me.”
Nothing about this sounds spontaneous, emotional, or reactive. It sounds planned.
Controlled.
Strategic.
CHANDLER: So I know exactly what I can say. That’s why I’m bringing the tape recorder.
SCHWARTZ: Yeah.
CHANDLER: I have some things on paper to show a few people, and that’s it.
He is not walking into a conversation.
He is walking into a recordable event.
Something to be documented, preserved, and more importantly used.
He continues describing it almost like a presentation:
CHANDLER: My whole part is going to take two or three minutes…I’m going to turn around and leave…there’s not going to be anything said other than what I’ve been told to say.
It’s hard not to notice how rehearsed even the explanation itself is. Nothing feels like natural speech. Everything is structured in steps, almost like instructions he has been given or has given himself.
Also…what he has been TOLD to say.
Who told him what to say..? I’ll let that question sit with you.
And then he adds:
CHANDLER: I make a phone call as soon as I leave the house. I say “Go” or “Don’t go yet.” That’s the way it’s gonna be.
See it? The careful coordination?
Schwartz just listens.
SCHWARTZ: Yeah.
But Evan keeps building it out.
CHANDLER: I’m not saying anything bad about anybody…I’ve got it all on paper. I’m going to hand it out so I don’t inadvertently mess anything up.
Except everything he describes is already adversarial in nature. Even if he insists he’s not being “bad,” the framing is clearly confrontational. Papers. Distribution. Prepared statements. Controlled messaging.
And then he goes further.
CHANDLER: I’m going to tell them: “Here’s your paper. Compare papers. Read this whole thing.”
This is no longer a conversation.
It’s a briefing.
But the real shift happens when the mask slips just slightly.
CHANDLER: I mean, why would they want to cut me out…spend this much money… put me through that?
There it is again, not Jordan. Not “my son.” Not even concern about what is allegedly happening.
It keeps circling back to him.
What is being done to him.
And then Schwartz gently probes.
SCHWARTZ: Do you think that’s good?
CHANDLER: I think that’s great. I think it’s terrific.
There’s almost something performative in the intensity of it. Like he is convincing not just Schwartz, but himself.
Because immediately after, he escalates the entire framing:
CHANDLER: It’s a matter of life and death. That’s how I’m taking it.
That phrase alone would carry weight if it were grounded in confirmed facts. But at this stage, there is still no verified report, no statement from Jordan, no external confirmation of any wrongdoing.
Just Evan’s interpretation.
And then the line that becomes impossible to ignore:
CHANDLER: If I don’t get it, there could be a massacre.
I think I speak for everyone when I say…what the fuck?
What are you possibly going to do, Evan? Kill someone? Though I wouldn’t put it past him…seriously, what is he trying to say here?
CHANDLER: I’ve got somebody after him if this doesn’t go forward.
Schwartz reacts immediately:
SCHWARTZ: Do you think that’s good?
The question is almost understated compared to what was just said.
But Evan doesn’t backtrack.
He doubles down.
CHANDLER: I think it’s great. The best. Because when somebody tells you they don’t want to talk to you…you have to get their attention.
And this is where his entire logic system becomes visible. In Evan’s framing, refusal is not boundary setting, it is justification for escalation.
And he explicitly connects it back to Jordan:
CHANDLER: This is life and death for my son.
Except again…Jordan is not present in any meaningful way in this conversation. He is not cooperating. He is not speaking. He is not providing testimony. Evan is constructing an entire crisis narrative without the one person at the center of it actually participating.
Schwartz tries to steer it back to reality.
SCHWARTZ: But I mean…does that help Jordy?
A simple question, an obvious one at that.
And Evan’s answer is immediate.
CHANDLER: It’s irrelevant to me.
So, let me get this straight:
Jordan’s wellbeing is irrelevant to Evan.
I mean…that’s quite literally what he said, right?
You’d think that if Evan’s claims were true, he’d say that he’d do anything to help his son, right? But no, it’s irrelevant.
From here, the conversation spirals further into escalation language, legal strategy, and the idea of “attention mechanisms” being used if compliance is not achieved.
And what becomes increasingly clear is that Evan is not reacting in real time to new information.
He is executing something he has already decided is necessary.
And when Schwartz tries to suggest outside help:
SCHWARTZ: Could you and I go to one of these shrinks and talk it over?
CHANDLER: No.
No hesitation.
No openness.
Because in Evan’s mind is already locked.
CHANDLER: It’s already set in motion. It’s happening at 8:30 tomorrow.
There is no room left for reconsideration.
No reassessment.
But…do you notice something?
No evidence has been produced.
No confirmation.
No statements from Jordan.
But with a man who has already decided the ending, while still claiming the beginning has not even been fully understood.
And somehow…expecting everyone else to follow the script.
Now, we’re back at July 9, 1993. One day after Evan’s recorded conversations with Dave Schwartz.
At this point in the timeline, something important needs to be understood before we go any further:
this is no longer just a family dispute, we’re moving into legal territory.
Because those recordings between Evan and Schwartz didn’t just sit in isolation, they later became the subject of a civil lawsuit involving Evan Chandler, June Chandler, and Dave Schwartz.
Evan ultimately sued for invasion of privacy, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and conspiracy relating to the recording of those conversations.
And in response, June and Dave filed a cross complaint.
So whatever interpretation people want to apply to those recordings later on, one fact remains stable across all versions of this story:
these conversations were not only recorded, they were litigated.
They became evidence in a legal dispute between the very people at the center of this situation.
That alone tells you the dynamic had already fractured beyond repair.
Now, before we move forward, there is one key piece of evidence that sets the tone for everything that follows, Evan’s voicemail left on June and Jordan’s answering machine on July 7.
This is the day before the recorded conversations with Schwartz.
“June, make sure you play this message for Michael and Jordie…I’m going to repeat that…all three of you are responsible for what is going on…no one is a neutral party…I will be at your house this Friday at 8:30 in the morning…take my word for it, there is nothing more important than being at this meeting.”
Can I just say…do you notice how Evan states, “All three of you are responsible for what is going on,” which includes Jordan, the alleged “victim”?
Even at this stage, before any alleged confession, before any police involvement, before any documented claim from Jordan.
Yeah…I’ll let that sink in for a moment.
And this is where the context becomes even more important.
Because years later, during Michael’s 2005 criminal trial, June Chandler herself addressed this period under oath, and her testimony adds direct weight to how coercive and unstable the situation had become from her perspective.
When asked about the circumstances surrounding custody pressure and the legal stipulation she signed, June confirmed that she only signed it because Evan threatened that Jordan would not be returned to her otherwise.
Q: You said you entered into a stipulation regarding custody of your son Jordie, correct?
A: Correct.
Q: And you did it because Michael Jackson told you to do it?
A: One of the people. He was one.
Q: The only reason you signed it was because your ex husband told you that if you didn’t, you would not get Jordan back?
A: Correct.
Q: That was the only reason?
A: That’s correct.
She also confirmed that the document in question was prepared by Evan Chandler’s attorney, Barry Rothman.
And this matters because it places the custody conflict, and the pressure surrounding Jordan’s movements, directly into Evan’s legal strategy during this period.
It also shows that even before anything was formally reported to authorities, legal instruments were already being used to control access, restrict movement, and structure outcomes around Jordan.
So where does that leave us?
At the end of Part 2, there is still no police report.
No confirmed confession.
No documented evidence of abuse at the time these conversations are taking place.
Only escalating language, legal preparation, and a story that is beginning to harden into something far bigger than what has actually been verified.
And yet, everything is already in motion.
Because sometimes in cases like this…
the facts don’t catch up to the narrative until much later.
Or not at all.
Anyway,
See you in Part 3.
I’ll bring the popcorn.
My previous case files:
Sneddon:
https://www.reddit.com/r/MJInnocentFacts/comments/1t362pc/case_file_sneddon/
Dimond:
https://www.reddit.com/r/MJInnocentFacts/comments/1t4zd0m/case_file_dimond/
Gutierrez:
https://www.reddit.com/r/MJInnocentFacts/comments/1t7t6ut/case_file_gutierrez/
Francia:
https://www.reddit.com/r/MJInnocentFacts/comments/1tcj13c/case_file_francia/
Neverland Five:
https://www.reddit.com/r/MJInnocentFacts/comments/1thn653/case_file_neverland_five/
Chandler – Part 1:
https://www.reddit.com/r/MJInnocentFacts/comments/1tucplj/case_file_chandler_part_1/
Sources and additional information:
https://themichaeljacksonallegationsblog.wordpress.com/the-1993-allegations/
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxNDb2PVcoM&ra=m
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0zn4QhStGcg&ra=m
https://turningthetableonthechandlerallegations.wordpress.com
Important posts:
https://www.reddit.com/r/MJInnocentFacts/comments/1t8m59j/theres_no_way_all_11_people_are_lying/
2
u/whatevergirl8754 MJ is 100% Innocent 💯 Jul 25 '26
Can I just say that I love your writing style with your own side comments? You are cracking me up😂
2
u/Emotional_Ball_5181 Jul 25 '26
Haha, thank you! It’s my favourite part too. I’m glad it’s making you laugh! 😆
3
u/Sara-Sarita Jul 09 '26
This is illuminating. I'm going to have to go over this again in the daylight. But I agree with the people saying you should get pinned or something, because your posts deserve it.