Monthly Report Of Vacation And Sick Leave Please Check Appropriate Leave Type: Vacat: Fill & Download for Free

Buckle up. This is a really, really long answer.I’m in my 50’s, undiagnosed, but likely aspie.I’m guessing I’m at the higher end of high-functioning. No one in my life ever suggested I might be autistic … though almost everyone in my life would consider me “different.”I believe my high-functioning was aided by having a childhood surrounded by older siblings and having lived a rough-and-tumble 1960’s and 70’s small town neighborhood where I had to sink or swim among older children. I got my balls busted a lot but everyone was picked on so I figured it was normal.I also spent a lot of time on trips with my parents as “the invisible child” at the table with publishers of newspapers large and small, including major big city newspapers. This helped me understand that “powerful people” aren’t terrifying and I have a huge vocabulary from being raised in a family that ran a newspaper.Skip to adulthood.I matured late. I got a degree in Computer Science (with bad grades) and kinda coasted until I was in my 30’s while I was going through a divorce. I had a decent amount of income from earnings from our family newspaper but as the golden-age of newspapers actually making money ended in the 1990’s, I knew that supply was going to run out and I’d be on my own.Also, going through a divorce I made a commitment to never miss a child support or alimony payment … and that was going to be expensive to the tune of over $500k over 15+ years. It adds up really fast over time.Quick summary: Take classes, learn graphic arts, get a poor paying job with good experience, get fired after being shifted to cold-call sales (something I loathe). Freak out. Teach myself, with help from my astonishingly talented girlfriend, how to do web design and database programming. Get another job. Work happily in a quiet cube. Didn’t get promised pay raise from $13–$15/hour and tell bosses “I’m looking for other work.” Get a new job in a large organization doing web design and such.This is where the aspie-side killed me.I’ve always felt different and have been known to be horrifyingly naive at times.I’m also very bright. I learn some things a little more slowly than others but everyone thinks I’m a really quick study. (Irony of being aspie is all of the contradictions that Neurotypicals do not understand. “But you are so smart? Why don’t you understand this?” <sigh>Anyway, the real problems started when a superior got jealous of a friend of hers who was promoted over her head. Then the gaslighting, lying, manipulation, more lying, crazy-making and total bullshit started.My aspie superpower: Ability to grasp large systems including the people who work with those systems. BUT my superpowers only work if I get accurate data.My superior lied about everything. All the time.Sometimes telling three different lies in about 15 minutes: One to her staff. One to the higher ups at a meeting. And a third lie when she came back down and told us that she hadn’t told us what she told us 15 minutes ago!I hated this person. I couldn’t think straight around her. And … I called her out on her lies. Even though I didn’t know I was aspie, I now realize that I feel a need to stand up against injustice.And I truly believed I could win.Fuck.It can be very difficult for someone on the spectrum to survive in an environment where lies and half-truths and lies of omission are all you ever hear.Neurotypical culture is full of small lies.Neurotypical corporate culture can be downright toxic due to useless levels of infighting and backstabbing middle and upper management. Worse, this was in a political environment so there was essentially no “product” and no measures of success and accountability was limited to “I said it is true so it is true.”Double fuck.I got angry. I dropped f-bombs. I fought the system with logic. I faced the tiger figuring I’d be eaten (fired) or not eaten (win an argument) … and it never occurred to me there was a third option:I was chewed up and spit out and told “do not help.”’Another middle manager approached me later that week and said, “so, you’ve been lead on developing a plan to do this huge system conversion. Could we meet and …”Me: “I was told I can’t help.”Manager: “No. She must have been kidding.”Me: “I was told … I … can … not … help. On anything.”Manager: “That can’t be right, I’ll go talk to them.”Twenty minutes later, this manager comes in looking like she had been run through her belly with a spear. “She said … you can’t help.”That “do not help phase” lasted for several years. I had tasks but was largely pushed to the side. I stuck it out. I needed the work.Lessons:The workplace is frequently not rational.People lie. A lot.There is no dealing rationally with irrational people.Sometimes you just plain lose.The ugly influence of this superior went on for a decade. I eventually lost it completely because of the constant sabotage. One day I snapped.My superior said, “If you need help. If you need me to stop something so you can finish this project. Just ask.”Me in my head: “Right. Yeah. Whatever.”A day later I got several projects dumped on me all at the same time one afternoon and I had to do them all simultaneously.Me: “I can’t do this. Please tell X that we can’t do that this afternoon.”Superior: “X? No. If that’s what they want then that’s what they get.”Me: <slack jaw … rising anger. BOOOOM!>I was standing in front of her office, in front of the secretaries desk and within earshot of the whole department.“GAAAAGHAGAGAH!!!! You will never fucking help us under any fucking circumstances, ever!!!”Superior: “That’s not true.”Me: “GAHHAHGAAGH! BULLSHIT.”And I stormed off. I had been dropping f-bombs for a long time but this was getting fucking old.A while later I got shit on one last time and I lost my fucking shit. I don’t even remember exactly what the last straw was but I was broken. And loud.I apparently scared the shit out of someone 100 yards away in some other department who reported me as “High Potential of Going Postal.” Fuck.Superior sits me down with my shop representative.Superior: “I’m worried about you. You need counseling.”Realizing I was defeated I played the game. “Yes, I do. I need counseling.”Superior: “I’m putting you on mandatory employee assistance leave.”Me: “That is fine. I will do what I need to do.”I ended up in what was essentially anger management with an utterly incompetent young psychologist who kept flinching whenever I told her how toxic the work environment was. If you constantly flinch at a patient’s reality … the patient will lose confidence!I actually had to chew out the therapist. “All you do is talk! I need some freaking tools! Give me some tools to use so I can not explode today at work.”I got a few tools, survived and the superior eventually “retired” after she got wind she was going to be fed to the wolves. Bosses since then have been complex and confusing but not complete and total lying douchbag fuckwit asshole … <ahem>Since then I’ve prioritized my personal life and sanity over “doing everything perfectly.”What I learned, from the perspective of having recently discovered I’m ASD?You truly have to find a way to let the fuck go of your innate sense of fairness and caring in order to function in many work environments.It is okay to not care. “I will do what I am told. I will bring up concerns but I will then say that I will do whatever I am told to do.” Apathy (in limited quantities) can be your friend. “I don’t care. I do not need to fix this. I will let it go.”I’m not religious but the serenity prayer is good here.God, give me grace to accept with serenitythe things that cannot be changed,Courage to change the thingswhich should be changed,and the Wisdom to distinguishthe one from the other.Serenity Prayer - WikipediaLearn what you can and cannot change.Get everything in writing. Do not allow liars to lie without documentation. Send an email: “I’m just confirming that in the meeting you said I am to do X and Y but not Z. Please confirm.” If they walk down the hall for verbal confirmation, politely say, “I really need that in an email so I can be sure I’m doing what you want.” You may get pushback. Be persistent. Find someone else on the project to include as a “cc:” so at least that person will know you asked and that you stated that your superior had assigned this asinine, will-fail assignment. ;-)Accept that working sucks for neurotypicals, too. It isn’t because you are on the spectrum that work sometimes sucks. Everyone is fucked with by superiors, coworkers and clients at one time or another in their jobs. It is hard but you must find a way to not take it personally. “I am doing this for my paycheck. I am doing this for my sanity. I will get this stupid fucking ass-backward fuckwit job done and I will do what I need to do next.”Don’t correct everyone all the time. The number of ass-backward illogical thoughts that you have to deal with on a daily basis is astounding. It is not your place to have to fix stupidity, arrogance, etc. Just suck it up, go home and write awful things in your journal to get it out of your head. Learn how to listen politely and keep your opinions to yourself … unless those opinions are critical for the current situation. I had a hard time with this one. I hate when “things are wrong” or “there is a better way.” That does not always matter.Give yourself time to process. Learn to say, “That sounds pretty good. I need to look up a few things and I will give you a response (by a set time in the future.)” Managers need to know you will get back to them. This tactic is important in relationships, too. Unless there is really an immediate time deadline, if someone says to you, “You need to give me an answer right now” that is generally a form of emotional blackmail.Managers can also be bullies (even unintentionally) and you will need time to process what you heard and how it makes you feel and whether or not it is logical.Find a place for timeouts. You will need to be able to “excuse yourself” from situations. Neurotypicals are largely immune to polite half-truths so if you say “I need to go to the restroom” you don’t have to mean “I have to take a shit.” You may just need to go lock yourself in a stall for five minutes to get your shit back together. You are not lying … you do need to go to the restroom! Finding “true statements” that can be misinterpreted is a good aspie trick I’ve learned. (Don’t start smoking but smokers have a built in excuse to go outside.)Doodle if you need to! I’ve found I need something to keep my mind “tight” when I’m sitting in long meetings. I doodle. Not draw, just make lines, shapes, whatever. People can think you aren’t listening but if you doodle at every freaking meeting it will fade into the background. Having paper for notes is good in any case so pen and paper are normal at meetings. If someone complains say, “Actually, I listen much better if I have something to do with my hands.” People don’t need to hear “I’m aspie. I need to do this.” You are human and you need to do have coping skills.Thank people for good behavior. It will help your relations with coworkers. If you find a coworker you really like working with and they say “Oh, thank you so much for doing that so quickly” … you can say back (usually in email) “You are easy to work with! I like working with you. Always glad to help.”Leave a dish of candies or something on your desk. On occasion, bring a treat in for your coworkers. People love food! They will find you more trustworthy if you give them something. If you love and are obsessed pickled herring … don’t bring that in as a treat! Try to find something simple/neurotypically normal ;-)Keep lists. If you have trouble staying organized, keep a list of tasks. If you don’t finish everything on the list and it gets cluttered … copy it to a new sheet of paper. Physically cross off what you get done. That seems silly but psychologically it helps. I’ve even written something down just to cross it off!Empty your email inbox every day of everything except currently incomplete tasks. Damn, this was a hard one. My list is now my email inbox for most items. Create a set of folders for things that repeat at your job. Flag items with colors related to different task types. Whatever works … but at the end of the day try to file as many emails as possible. When you finish an item, file all associated emails. Keeping an empty inbox can help reduce stress. I was only able to do this after I found a routine at work, what types of projects I do, things like HR and Personal, etc.Have something at home in your personal life that can fully take your mind off work. I go home and play an online tank game, play guitar, study quantum physics, or play a game with my family. (Quantum physics is one of my special interests and I’ve been learning for 30 years so that’s why I say “study” since I’m actually reading textbooks and such!)Don’t answer the phone on the first ring. This was probably the only really good advice I got from my less-than-competent therapist. Phones are “ambush traps.” When the phone rings, take a breath. Breathe in and out. Calm your mind for a second, then pick up. Quickly picking up leaves you half-into whatever you were doing and if it is That Asshole who always tries to throw you off balance you will be slightly more prepared.Ask for a raise or promotion. This is true for anyone but if you have been a place for a while and have not had a wage increase you will not get a raise or promotion without asking. Keep it formal and polite. “Since this is my second anniversary, I wanted to check in to see how you feel about my performance. I am very happy to be working here and want to be able to give my best. I would also like to be considered for (a raise and/or promotion) based on the extra work I have voluntarily been taking on.” Etc. Don’t be disappointed if the answer is no, even a grumpy or excuse-filled no. This will help you understand where you stand with the company. It can help you decide whether or not you should stay or start looking for other employment.Find a mentor. Saying to someone “I really admire your work. I want to do well here. I was wondering if it was okay to stop in to ask for tips or suggestions.”Say names back to a person when you are introduced. Write them down as quickly as possible right away if during a meeting, possibly with notes “Red hair. Glasses. Tall. Likes tennis.” Anything to remember their name. If you forget, walk up to them when you see them again and be honest, “I am terrible with names, I’m Jane, I’ve forgotten your name already.” Most people respond with great grace, often saying “I’m terrible, too!” To cement their name in your memory … say their name out loud when you see them in passing. “Hi Todd. How are you doing?” People love to hear their own name and it will help you get in their good graces.Admit to faults and failures and fuck-ups quickly. Be “that guy” or “that gal” who is unafraid to address a problem. Blame is a corporate game. Accepting blame quickly throws people off balance. “Hey. I deleted the Bristol account. I take responsibility. What can I do to fix this situation?” This will be especially helpful if you suffer from Being Overly Honest.Fixing screwups is a place where you can be honest. Also, don’t get caught up in some asshole managers witch hunts if they are looking for someone to blame and hang out to dry.I have even said, to that horrible superior when she came fishing for people to throw under the bus, “You are looking for someone to blame. Blame me. I don’t care. I don’t know how this situation came about but that doesn’t matter. I just want to fix it.”Shoot straight with straight shooters. This is where aspies really shine! You will find in any substantial sized organization that there are people who “folks don’t like very much because they are hard-asses.”What I’ve discovered is that hard-asses don’t like liars. Hard-asses don’t like ass kissers. Hard-asses like people who get to the point and don’t fuck with them!I have found that hard-asses like me very much. My honesty and directness are an asset with these folks. Often these are people at the center or a fair amount of responsibility and project coordination and they just don’t have time to waste being sugary and sweet and not getting pissed off at long-winded suck ups.Learn how to dress appropriately. Put a mirror by the front door if necessary. I hate dress codes. I dislike wearing a tie every day. I wear a tie every day.If you don’t have a lot of money, Good Will and Salvation Army are great places to find business clothes, including suit jackets, cheap. My wife spent $5 each on two used suit jackets that I wore at work for years and people gave me complements!And then I realized that if I wear a tie but not a jacket, everyone thinks my jacket is on the back of a chair somewhere. I haven’t worn a jacket (except on professional outside visits and at conventions) in at least 5 years!Ask someone at work you trust if you look okay. Say, “If I ever have a booger, spinach in my teeth or my tie is tied on top of my collar (which I do all the time) please let me know.” Guys … ask a woman. A bit of stereotyping here, but I find they are generally more observant and generally like to help people look nice. (Women, I can’t give you advice on how to dress. I’m clueless there, sorry!)Eat well. Sleep well. Avoid hangovers. Take sick days (if you have them). Plan vacation days well in advance (if you have them). As someone on the spectrum it is even more important to avoid accumulated stress than for most people. This can help with avoiding meltdowns … or in my case Storms of Screaming F-Bombs.Wow. That was long.I guess there is a lot to being a person in the workplace that can be really hard to understand. As someone on the spectrum … you can face challenges and get better at things over time!I’ve been at my current job for … 14 years … yesterday? Wow. I am largely well respected. I have learned to manage my temper (in public). I still haven’t gotten that promotion but I did ask about a month ago. BTW … during the reign of Superior From Hell I stopped asking and gave up for my own sanity. Sometimes “letting go” of a desire is the only way to survive.As I said, I’m a high-functioning aspie, so my your mileage may vary on how useful my tips are. I am definitely “battle hardened” by my experiences … but still none of my coworkers thinks I am ASD. I am just a very quirky person that is very loyal, enormously cynical and sarcastic at times and generally known to have a bit of a dark sense of humor.But, I am also respected. You can be, too.Find a workplace that works for you. It doesn’t have to be glamorous. It just has to not drive you insane and still pay the bills.—Question as originally asked: How does an autistic spectrum disorder affect one’s adult life, specifically in the workplace?

This answer may contain sensitive images. Click on an image to unblur it.I’ll open with a warning: what follows isn’t short, isn’t simple, and isn’t likely to leave anyone feeling entirely satisfied.But it is important. Deeply so.Like many, my first exposure to this story was via Emily Doe’s victim impact statement — an eloquent essay that became a key plank in the scaffolding of the #MeToo movement, itself the most overdue reckoning of our time.Emily referred to her statement as a “tiny fire”. It was anything but. It raged, far and beautifully. Reading it brought back the tears I shed with those I love as they wrestled with their own aftermaths. If you’d asked me in the hours after, I would have signed any petition and joined any march. I was inspired, and angry.That’s the thing about righteous anger: it burns.But once my fire had time to reduce down to coals, I decided to learn more about the judge in question. I wanted to understand why he did it.What I found was unnerving.The Big PictureI’ve invested a lot of time into this case over the past two years. I’ve reviewed all but one of the public trial documents, most of them multiple times. I’ve waded through somewhere around 100 additional articles, transcripts, and recaps. I’ve checked, cross-checked, and re-checked. This is by far the most work I’ve put into a single piece of writing. I wanted to be clear, and sure.My conclusion?Righteous anger blinded us to some really important things.This shouldn’t be surprising. We’re hardwired for clean narratives. We love being presented with binary action options that let us make our stance towards larger issues known. We love to reduce the chaos of the world to simple propositions that let us clearly place ourselves on the right side of the things we hate.Trouble is, Judge Persky’s recall was always more complicated than a simple referendum on how we feel about sexual assault. A vote against him was never a vote for justice or a vote against rape culture. It was a vote for a story. And it so happens that there was far more to this particular story than most of us knew.For a distilled version of my thesis, I’m going to quote (of all things) a random Reddit user:My lawyer friend had this take on it: “Let’s be clear: Brock turner is a piece of sh*t. The justice system failed this woman. But when our jails and criminal courtrooms are still primarily filled with poor / black / brown / undocumented defendants, scaring judges out of showing leniency is not achieving justice. The Brock Turners of the world will not pay for Persky’s recall.”That last line really gets to the heart of it.The Brock Turners of the world will not pay for Persky’s recall.If true, this suggests a crucial question: if the recall won’t hurt Brock or those like him, who will it hurt?That’s what I want to explore in what follows.Just four quick caveats/clarifications before we get into the meat of it:Brock Turner did a terrible thing. I have no interest in exonerating him. What follows is less about him and more about modern journalism, our treatment of Judge Persky, and our ideas of justice more broadly.For the purposes of cutting length, I’ve moved everything not vital to this story into a supplemental post. You’ll find an index of the topics it covers at the end.Some who read this will likely have cast a ballot in favor of Persky’s recall. Please know I have zero desire to confront anyone for their vote. My aim is to deconstruct the popular narratives behind the campaign for going-forward value only.I’m neither a lawyer nor a trained journalist. While I’ve done fairly extensive research into sexual abuse and its prosecution in the course of past roles, I’m not a credentialed expert there either. As such, I’ve gone to lengths to link authoritative sources as I go.That all in mind, let’s dive in.The Story of What HappenedIf you boil down the majority reporting, you get a story something like this:A rich white kid was caught raping an unconscious woman behind a dumpster, then was let off with a slap on the wrist because his rich white judge was also once a Stanford athlete.Some of the better outlets were a bit more nuanced than that, but they were few.What We KnowAt 12:19am on January 18th, 2015, Emily Doe receives a call from her boyfriend in Philadelphia. She’d just left him a voicemail that he couldn’t make sense of. When she picks up, her speech is heavily slurred. The boyfriend is concerned. He tells Emily to find her sister.Unbeknownst to him, Emily’s sister had left two minutes earlier to take a friend somewhere safe for the night. So when Emily rings her at 12:29am, the sister is still preoccupied. She asks Emily to call her back.When Emily doesn’t, the sister both calls and texts her.She gets no response.At 1:01am, the police are dispatched. Two cyclists had found a young man, later identified as Brock Turner, thrusting atop an unconscious Emily. The cyclists tackle Brock and hold him until the campus police arrive five minutes later.The authorities find Emily out cold, her underwear in a ball next to her, her other clothes in various stages of undress. Brock has his pants on, but seems to be erect underneath.Emily doesn’t wake up for several more hours. Even after the IV drip, she’s at no less than a .22 BAC — blackout territory. When she does wake up at 4:15am, she doesn’t remember anything from after about when her sister left.The police do tests. Emily hasn’t been drugged. But the tests do confirm something else: Emily has been assaulted. No semen, but the abrasions are consistent with aggressive digital penetration. They also find Emily’s DNA on Brock’s right hand.What We Don’t KnowBetween 12:29 and 1:01, Emily Doe moved from the patio of Stanford’s Kappa Alpha house to where the cyclists found her — lying on a slope near a three-sided wooden enclosure often used to store bikes and the frat’s dumpster.No one except perhaps Brock Turner knows how Emily traveled those 116 feet, nor in what state. We do know that it was in the rough direction of his dorm, and that she had no bruises or defensive wounds consistent with a struggle. But as to what motivation drove her from the porch, we have only his word. He says he invited her to his room. She doesn’t remember anything.Some time after his arrest and initial statement, Brock expands his story (which now conflicts in places with his original testimony):They had been kissing and dancing on the porch.She agreed to leave with him.On their way to his dorm, she slipped on the pine needles on the slope.They laughed about it.He leaned in and kissed her.Rather than getting up, he proposed digitally pleasing her then and there.She consented, and rubbed his back as he proceeded.He thought she climaxed.He moved on to dry-humping.He hopped off at some point because he was feeling sick.It was only then that he noticed the cyclists.He doesn’t know when Emily lost consciousness, or her name.Apart from the question of when he got off her relative to the cyclists’ arrival (they both say he dismounted and fled after they announced their presence), Brock alone knows how much of this is true. He was drunk that night, but not so drunk that he’s likely to have forgotten much. His BAC was around .16 at the time of arrest. Drunk enough, but still aware. And culpable.Sadly, we have no help from other witnesses. We know that Brock kissed Emily’s sister earlier and that he was generally acting in a hounding sort of way. The sisters and their friends teased him with a nickname based on how he resembled someone else they knew. But no one saw them together after Emily’s sister left, nor did anyone hear or see any kind of struggle or altercation.At minimum, Brock was caught dry-humping someone no longer conscious. As for how long she’d been in that state or what prior consent she may have given for that or other acts (or in which state she gave it), we have only his testimony, uncompelling as it is.The Anatomy of White PrivilegeLet’s recall the popular framing:A rich white kid was caught raping an unconscious woman behind a dumpster, then was let off with a slap on the wrist because his rich white judge was also once a Stanford athlete.Well, about that.As it happens, the Turner family isn’t exactly rich. Brock was attending Stanford on a 60% swimming scholarship. His two older siblings weren’t so lucky. All told, the three kids accumulated some $150k in student debt between them. The family wasn’t poor enough for full aid, nor wealthy enough to afford the tuitions outright. Their household income would be significant in context of Dayton, Ohio, but rather modest in context of the average Stanford student or Bay Area resident. In all likelihood, Brock’s case will leave them in or near bankruptcy.[EDIT: Brock’s mom mentions $90k in student debt for his two siblings in her testimony. I can’t recall where I got the $150k figure from, but the delta might be from Brock’s remaining costs after his scholarship.]And if the narrative isn’t quite true with Brock, it’s far less true with Judge Persky. If we look into his record, we find that:He’s a decorated advocate for mental health, AIDS awareness, and civil rights, known for generous pro bono work. His non-profit work included time on the board of the Support Network for Battered Women in Santa Clara.Before becoming a judge, he served for six years as a well-respected prosecutor focused specifically on sexually violent predators.As a judge, he had a thoroughly corroborated and very public history of ruling equally across ethnic lines. He has no record of favoring whites or disfavoring anyone else. (Some claim otherwise. We’ll get to that.)He was one of many Stanford-educated judges serving on a Bay Area court (though he actually got his law degree elsewhere).Prior to the Turner case, he’d never had an official complaint launched against him.Almost everyone who’d ever worked with him (prosecutor or defender) had only positive things to say about his character and judgment. (We’ll get more into this later too.)The entire basis of Turner’s appeal is that Persky was prejudicial against him.In other words, Turner wasn’t an overly privileged kid (apart from his skin, which we have no reason to believe played a role in the courtroom), and Persky had no particular reason to favor him.This isn’t to say that white privilege in courtrooms isn’t a thing. Nearly every study I’ve ever consulted says it is. But Aaron Persky happened to be one of the judges well-known for fighting against that particular problem.[EDIT: The original suggested that Persky’s wife was African-American. I got that wrong. She’s Asian-American. Mea culpa.]To The Left, To The LeftIt’s worth noting that Aaron Persky is, by all accounts, almost stereotypical in his philosophical consistency. Like many Bay Area natives, he seems a dyed-in-the-wool progressive, possibly from the womb.Putting that into practical terms as it concerned his judgeship:He favored restorative over punitive justice (i.e., he worried more about improving the future than correcting the past).He had a fondness for tailored punishments (which data suggests are more likely to produce positive outcomes).He was against prison in general, especially for first-time offenders (unless there was reason to believe that their release would lead to re-offense or some other public harm).Media distortion aside, I think part of our problem with Turner’s sentence has a lot to do with the difficulty of this philosophy. Progressive values are tough. They ask us to accept hard truths about the limits of eye-for-an-eye rulings. They ask us to take a much longer view of things. They give us precious little catharsis.As a consensus of qualified parties later acknowledged (we’ll get to them), most progressive judges would have placed a broadly similar sentence on Turner as Persky did. If we have a problem with that, it’s really with progressivism itself, not with a man who had long been an exemplary and consistent steward of the values he was appointed to uphold.The Day of JudgmentThe jury found Brock Turner guilty of three crimes:unlawful sexual penetration of an intoxicated personunlawful sexual penetration of an unconscious personassault with intent to commit rape of an intoxicated or unconscious personAs he often did, Judge Persky opted to follow the Santa Clara County Probation Department’s recommendation to the letter, sentencing Turner to six months in county jail, three years of probation, a year of mandatory counselling, lifetime sex-offender status, and a handful of non-trivial financial penalties.That’s a lot. But the crux of this particular case is that we have a tendency to over-focus on just one of those punishments. Our diet of scripted crime dramas has tuned us to see prison sentences as the real meat. Everything else feels trivial and insufficient to answer the demands of anything we’d agree upon as full justice.Well, here’s the thing: prison time is not intended to be the real punishment.There’s been a growing consensus in the legal community (particularly in progressive circles) that two things are particularly punitive:The restrictions and stigma that come with a felony conviction.The restrictions and stigma that come with being a registered sex offender.Around a week before Turner’s sentencing, Judge Frederic Block of the Eastern District Court of New York dropped whatever the judicial equivalent of a hit record is. Over the course of 42 pages, he artfully outlined what progressive judges have been saying for decades: that the 50,000 or so various legal restrictions applied to felons across the US often produce something quite other than their intended civic effect.Sexual offenders have it even harder, particularly in states like Ohio (where Turner is from, and to where he returned). I get more into the other downsides of sex offender status in the appendix, but suffice it to say that they are many and meaningful. As just one: he’ll have to register in the same category as pedophiles.Being honest, I find it improbable that the accompanying downsides could fail to deter anyone capable of being deterred. Even before his sentence was compounded by the public attention, it’s exceedingly difficult to imagine a scenario in which a would-be rapist could look at the totality of Brock’s punishment and consider it a slap on the wrist worth risking.It’s for this reason that progressive judges tend to eschew prison time unless especially warranted. In their calculus, most facilities are under-funded and over-crowded anyway. And while long sentences might give the illusion of justice, the evidence (see appendix) says they aren’t actually any better at producing rehabilitation or deterrence. As such, adding another prisoner at taxpayer expense only makes sense when the taxpaying public is receiving some extra benefit in return.Put another way, progressives judges tend to use prison as a means of protecting the public, not punishing the perpetrator. It’s just not that useful at the latter.And so, given the cost and diminishing returns of imprisonment, the relatively low risk of re-offence, and the presence of what they felt was sufficient empathy and remorse, two seasoned Santa Clara County probation officials, both of them women, decided there was no compelling public benefit in Brock Turner spending more than six months behind bars.Judge Persky, in turn, found no cause to disagree. He handed down the recommended sentence with detailed commentary as to the mechanics of his thinking. (While the infamous phrases “severe impact on him” and “I take him at his word” do appear in there, the context is other than you may think.)Though Justice Be Thy PleaNow, if a longer sentence does little-to-nothing to improve deterrence, little-to-nothing to reduce recidivism, and eats up costly public resources better spent on increasing conviction rates (which very much do matter), we’re left with a very important question:Who exactly is benefited by Brock Turner being in prison?This returns us to rival definitions of justice. Is it the gut pleasure of evil being overwhelmed with swift retribution? Is it the cold math of reciprocity? Is it maximum possible deterrence? Is it the measured response of a society determined to salvage what they can as best they can? Or, as some wonder, is it the victim getting what they want?Emily’s impact statement was published on June 3rd, 2016, exactly a month after her interview with the probation officer. A good chunk of it is dedicated to revisiting their discussion and how the latter party interpreted it.While we can (and should) be sympathetic to the inadequate amount of time that the two spent together, what Emily said at the time seems pretty clear.Note that last half-line. Then note what Emily says in her letter (emphasis mine):I told the probation officer I do not want Brock to rot away in prison. I did not say he does not deserve to be behind bars.Unless we’re going to quibble about the difference between “need” and “deserve”, there’s a discrepancy there. Is it possible that the probation officer paraphrased incorrectly? If anyone made that claim, I didn’t come across it.[EDIT: I suppose you could read Emily’s comment as “I didn’t say that last half-line from the report in any form”, but that would be a curious way to phrase it. I guess we’ll see if she clarifies in her forthcoming book.]Based on what Emily says in her impact statement, it seems more probable that three other factors played into her shift:The meeting wasn’t long enough for full nuance. The probation officer wasn’t wrong in her transcript. She just got a rushed, incomplete picture.When Emily made her statement, she wasn’t privy to what Brock would say in his. As such, what she suggested was predicated on her assumption of a certain remorse on his end.It wasn’t until she read his statement and the defense’s sentencing memo that it became clear to her that neither she nor the process had reached Brock in the way she’d hoped.To give a quick taste of how Turner framed it:I am the sole proprietor of what happened on the night that these people’s lives were changed forever. […] I can never forgive myself for imposing trauma and pain on [her]. It debilitates me to think that my actions have caused her emotional and physical stress that is completely unwarranted and unfair. […] I wish I had the ability to go back in time and never pick up a drink that night, let alone interact with Emily. […] At this point in my life, I never want to have a drop of alcohol again. […] I know I can impact and change people’s attitudes towards the culture surrounded by binge drinking and sexual promiscuity. […] I made a mistake, I drank too much, and my decisions hurt someone.He’s basically saying “everything between us was consensual — I just made a mistake in not recognizing how drunk she was, mostly because I was really drunk myself”.Emily felt this fell short of full honesty and remorse. I’d tend to agree.The trouble is that to expect more was a very bad idea.Defense attorney Nicholas Wooldridge explains it neatly:[The statement that] Brock's victim read during the sentencing hearing underscored the detachment between what victims expect from the criminal justice and what the criminal justice system is designed to deliver. Her victim impact statement was an attack on the system—she wanted a trial where Brock admits his guilt—that's not what happens in an adversarial system. A trial is a contact sport with a binary outcome: guilty or not guilty. The victim expected something from the criminal justice system that it was never designed to provide outside of the movies, at least, so long as fundamental principles such as the presumption of innocence or due process are to have any meaning. The victim is very much entitled and has a right to expect some responsibility, accountability, remorse and perhaps understanding and support from her attacker (by not having put her through the trial process in the first place)—but the criminal justice system is a blunt force tool not designed to provide any of the things that she desires. And, even after conviction, many defendants choose to appeal, so to expect a confession at that point is a non-starter.We can add to that a few comments from Judge Persky at sentencing:And so you have Mr. Turner expressing remorse — which I think, subjectively, is genuine — and [Emily] not seeing that as a genuine expression of remorse because he never says, “I did this. I knew how drunk you were. I knew how out of it you were, and I did it anyway.” And that — I don’t think that bridge will, probably, ever be crossed.Mr. Armstrong [Brock’s attorney] offered an explanation for that disconnect, which is that Mr. Turner, in his state of intoxication, sees the events in a certain way. And if he were to, just for the benefit of a lighter sentence or to pacify the Court or the public, come in at a sentencing hearing or any other time and state otherwise, which I’m sure defendants do all the time, he really would be not honest. I mean, I take him at his word that, subjectively, that’s his version of events. […]Once a jury renders a verdict, everybody is bound by that verdict. Everybody must accept the verdict, including Mr. Turner. But I’m not convinced that his lack of complete acquiescence to the verdict should count against him with respect to an expression of remorse, because I do find that his remorse is genuine.Emily’s counsel should have prepared her for this. From the outside, it seems that Ms. Kianerci may have been more focused on preparing a memo of her own — one meant to match her client’s in tone and effect. But however their discussions went, Emily seems to have come out with expectations sure to disappoint her. Brock didn’t get all the way to Jesus, no. But that was never likely to happen. It just wasn’t a reasonable thing to hope for in context.That said, Brock did get somewhere. In the opinion of the probation department, he demonstrated that he understood that he’d hurt Emily and why and how he needed to change. For them, that was enough.It isn’t that we shouldn’t want more from him. We’d just be unwise to pin our hopes on it. The law is frustrating like that. It almost never gives us the justice we want in our bones.But neither does any alternative we’ve ever come up with.Enter the Den MotherIf you’ve heard of this case, it’s likely because of Emily’s letter.If you have strong feelings against Judge Persky particularly, it’s likely because of Professor Michele Dauber.For those keen to really get into her bio and likely motivations, I recommend this excellent Highline piece. It’s by far the best thing I’ve read about the case in general (though that bar is low enough to be fit for a round of championship-level limbo).But for those who already feel over-invested (you have my empathy), here’s the gist of what Professor Dauber is all about:She had two direct connections to this case: (i) to sexual assault at Stanford, (ii) to Emily personally.In the first case, Dauber was an internal crusader at Stanford. She’d pushed hard to modernize what she felt were backward and antagonistic sexual assault response policies. While this introduced friction with her colleagues, that wasn’t enough to deter her from a cause she believed too just and too needful to ignore. She seems very much the type to dig her heels in when on the side of perceived righteousness.In the second case, Emily was like a daughter to her. One of Dauber’s own daughters was roughly the same age, and the two had been “inseparable” in childhood. Emily had even joined them on at least one family vacation.(As an aside, Dauber has an impressive backstory. She rose from being a homeless teenager working on her GED to a tenured position at one of the most prestigious law schools in the world, all while raising five kids in the process!)In sum, we have a tenacious advocate for women being led to apply that tenacity in the aid of a young woman she loved dearly.On the surface, there’s a lot that’s good and wholesome in this. I’m glad Stanford has her. And I’m glad Emily had someone like that in her corner.The issue is that Professor Dauber didn’t stay in the corner. Despite the obvious concerns about being too close to the case, she decided she was going to enter the ring and go after Persky personally for failing to deliver the justice she felt Emily deserved.But while intimacy clouding judgment was always going to be a concern here, there was something else too. Something more concerning.In this particular war, Professor Dauber had a hard time telling the truth.A Tale of Two SidesAs Professor Dauber’s recall campaign gained steam, the legal community began sorting themselves in two camps.Except, not really.Though much of the reporting would give the impression of arrayed forces on both sides, the ratios here were, well, not very equal.I asked around, reviewed the recall campaign’s website, combed through newspaper archives, and Googled to the best of my ability. From what I could find, precious few legal professionals, active or retired, were inclined to take Dauber’s position. I managed to identify eight in total, at least six of whom either had conspicuous causes of potential bias or a noticeably deficient understanding of the case. Some had both.In no particular order:Stanford Professor Mark Lemley (who found that Persky didn’t commit misconduct, but somehow thought he should be recalled anyway).Brandeis Professor Anita Hill (who, though I think highly of her, has her own well-known history here).California Attorney General Kamala Harris (who was stumping at the time, and spoke of the case as if she hadn’t gone deep on the details).NY Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (same as Kamala).Retired U.S. District Judge Nancy Gertner (who may or may not have actually supported the recall — the article they quote from is paywalled, and the excerpt itself is negative but inconclusive; it’s also unclear from the excerpt how well she understood the details of the case).Georgetown Professor William G. Otis (who wrote a New York Times op-ed which opens with the phrase “it is not disputed” and then carries on to list facts very much still in dispute).Stanford Professor David Palumbo-Liu (whose op-ed in The Guardian made a particularly brittle argument that Persky was racially biased based on a single ill-reasoned point of comparison).Attorney Barbara Spector (who was the plaintiff’s lawyer in the De Anza case and still seems angry at Persky about it, despite his decisions being deemed uncontroversial by nearly everyone else). [EDIT: There’s more about the De Anza case in the appendix. Nearly every article written about it as it concerns Persky omits really important context.]All considered, not exactly a weighty lot.[EDIT: I’ve taken Judge Del Pozzo off the list. The recall campaign quotes his disagreement with the Turner sentence, but fails to mention what he says minutes later in the same podcast interview: “Should he be recalled? Absolutely not.” Del Pozzo also goes on to say of Dauber’s attempt to show a pattern of favoritism in Persky’s past cases: “she fell flat on her face”. So yeah. If there’s a pattern, it’s misrepresentation on her part. See audio from 49:30.]The campaign otherwise rested on quotes from Dauber’s husband, a few politicians, a flock of random celebrities — oh, and one more retired judge.Trouble is, that last judge was LaDoris Cordell, who happens to have been the most vocal voice of the pro-Persky counter-campaign.(Best as I can tell, Dauber had some intern/assistant pull every quote that looked like it could be rhetorically favorable, context and integrity be damned.)While they were happy to quote Cordell about a different trial, they left out this more relevant gem:We did everything we could possibly do to fight the most dishonest campaign I had ever encountered. It was dishonest about who Aaron Persky was on the bench, and dishonest about his record. People were basically ill-informed about him and also about how the court system — and particularly the criminal justice system — works.She went on elsewhere to call Dauber a “bully” and “a smart, relentless, troubled human being”. So, yeah, perhaps not a star witness for the prosecution.As for the anti-recall team, support letters were signed by at least 95 law professors (including 29 from Stanford), the California Judges Association, the Santa Clara Bar Association, and quite a long list of Bay Area public defenders. Supportive op-eds appeared all across the US (and beyond).More narrowly, I was particularly interested in what those connected to the Santa Clara justice system thought. In reading those takes (here, here, here, and here), you’ll notice a common theme. The only person with direct knowledge of Persky that supported the recall seem to be Spector, a woman with a long-standing grievance not shared by her peers. The rest were effusive in their praise and/or defense.But the real kicker is that the recall was also opposed by the last three elected District Attorneys of the Santa Clara County Court — including none other than Jeff Rosen, i.e. the DA that oversaw the prosecution of Brock Turner.[EDIT: Note this quote from Rosen to the New York Times: “Most of the judges in California would have done the same thing as Judge Persky.” Also, see the appendix for more context about Rosen and Persky. The recall campaign played dumb to a great deal of background info that was rather damning to their position.]All said, it seems that the recall effort wasn’t really supported by any legal professionals with significant knowledge of Persky or the case.Which raises the question; why did it pass?History on RepeatAs the media did a decent job of making clear, recalls are extraordinary measures. There’s a reason California hadn’t passed one since 1932.To quote the California Code of Judicial Ethics:An independent judge is one who is able to rule as he or she determines appropriate, without fear of jeopardy or punishment. So long as the judge makes rulings in good faith, and in an effort to follow the law as the judge understands it, the usual safeguard against error or overreaching lies in the adversary system and appellate review.Put simply, there are better means than recall to correct otherwise good judges when they err.Of course, the sticking point here is whether or not Persky ought to be viewed as good. Professor Dauber clearly felt otherwise, pointing to what she claimed was a history of gender and racial favoritism.Well, those concerns were investigated by three bodies:The California Commission on Judicial Performance (report here).The Associated Press (findings here).Local newspaper Palo Alto Online (rundown here).Taken together, they found exactly one case where Persky did something even vaguely objectionable. And that exception concerned a somewhat obscure quirk of an interstate compact that even California’s overseer of said compact suggested was unclear to many judges.(In the interest of fairness, the recall campaign did write up a response to the CJP report. I personally found it poorly-written, misleadingly-framed, and not terribly compelling. But your mileage may vary.)Now, in the absence of any real evidence, one might wonder on what basis someone might still push for a recall?The clearest answer I can give you comes in the form of a editorial from The Mercury News (a Bay Area paper that covered the trial):The decision comes down to this: Voters need to stand up and make a statement on behalf of women and men about the seriousness of sexual assault. Persky’s sentence failed to do so to an extent that he never will again be able to serve as a respected, effective judge. He should be recalled.Bizarrely, the editors went on to concede that the recall team had cherry-picked data and that the CJP had reviewed the relevant cases and found Persky innocent of any misconduct. And yet they supported the recall anyway because…?It may not be fair to Persky, who is a decent man and an able judge. […] But opportunities such as the Turner case to alter longstanding cultural problems are rare. It’s imperative that Santa Clara County lead where Persky failed when given the opportunity.I struggle deeply with that thinking. The idea of offering up innocent sacrifices in the name of progress is Bronze Age thinking. We have a long history of that approach ushering in grotesque unintended consequences. We also have mines of data telling us that increasing social pressure on judges inevitably leads to less overall justice.Even so, the editors hand-waved those concerns away, suggesting that any damage a recall might unleash had already been summoned anyway.Well, here’s the thing: all available evidence suggests that this take is wrong.Paying the PiperDo you know what happens when you make judges afraid of being perceived as soft on crime?To quote the Dean of Law at Berkeley:Efforts to recall judges for light sentences encourage judges to impose maximum penalties out of fear that anything else could cost them their positions. After all, no one has begun a recall when a judge imposed an outrageously high punishment, such as in the first case I argued in the Supreme Court where my client received a sentence of 50 years to life under California’s “three strikes law” for stealing $153 worth of videotapes.Judicial independence is crucial to upholding the rule of law, and history shows that it is lost when judges fear removal for their unpopular decisions. This is not a new realization.Not new indeed. As per a metastudy by the Brennan Center (NYU Law) in 2015, more public pressure on judges invariably leads to longer sentences and more death penalties. This is something we’ve understood for a while.And, as with so many things, this is worse for minorities. Every “tough on crime” push falls heaviest on their shoulders (which statistically has nothing to do with how often they commit crimes). This is cruelty for them.Perhaps most perverse of all, longer sentences can also result in fewer men being held accountable for sexual assault. From my own work with shelters and sexual-assault counsellors, female victims have a tendency to be reluctant to name and charge their assailants when the penalty is perceived as being too severe.So, the net outcome of Persky’s recall?Judge Persky, stripped of his judgeship, had to take the numbers off his house because his address was doxed online.Judges, terrified of being “Perskied”, will now rule more harshly and with less discretion.More bills like Assembly Bill 2888 will introduce new mandatory minimums (again leading to diminished judicial discretion).Fewer men like Brock Turner are going to be prosecuted.Who exactly is winning here?A Better WayMy heart breaks for victims of abuse. I know what it’s like to weep with them. I have an idea of what it takes for them to rebuild, and how difficult it can be for them to relearn how to feel safe and whole. We should have deep empathy.To quote Emily (emphasis my own):I stood [in the shower] examining my body beneath the stream of water and decided I didn’t want it anymore. I was terrified of it. I didn’t know what had been in it, if it had been contaminated, who had touched it. I wanted to take off my body like a jacket and leave it at the hospital with everything else.On that morning, all that I was told was that I had been found behind a dumpster, potentially penetrated by a stranger, and that I should get retested for HIV because results don’t always show up immediately. But for now, I should go home and get back to my normal life. Imagine stepping back into the world with only that information.Imagine that indeed.There’s a lot there to chew on, and a lot we need to fix. But doing so is going to take far more than casting a ballot. These aren’t problems we can abstract or outsource. If we want culture to change, we have to roll up our sleeves and do the messier, much harder work.As a short list of what that might entail:Demand better journalism. Most of the reporting on this case had negative value. Lazily rewriting a trending story for clickshare is how the press dies. Why was the Highline piece the only coverage that helped me really understand the case?Demand increased budgets. Emily said she had a “fifteen minute” conversation with the probation officer, most of which was spent reviewing legal procedures. That isn’t sufficient. If we want victims to feel like justice has been served, the most important factor is making sure they feel (and are) heard.Train and volunteer as crisis counselors. Most sexual assault victims get (at most) a half-dozen sessions with a qualified therapist. They need far more support than that. Every victim should have people they can turn to for help — for as long as it takes.Train and volunteer as youth mentors. Teaching consent is critical. Young men like Brock Turner need to be told by every adult in their various orbits when to stop and why. This message can never be repeated often enough by enough different people. Millions of teens are still unclear on the basics.Watch over our friends. Victim-blaming is a problem. But that doesn’t mean we don’t need more dialogue about responsible partying. Anyone with a BAC 3 to 4 times the legal limit needs to be cared for. Try as we might (and must), we can’t catch and cure all the predators out there. But we can limit the opportunities for them to act (while also reducing the risk of other non-predatorial safety concerns).Support and celebrate wins. The conviction rate for sexual abuse is well under 1%. When it touches those near us, we need to walk alongside them through what can be an enormously draining process. Many won’t pursue charges because they worry about their own ability to get to the other side intact. That’s far more bearable with cheerleaders and warm voices saying over and over again “we will win together”.What happened to Emily should be a spur to all of us — not towards reflexive action, but towards creating a world in which young women like her don’t have to wake up alone in a hospital room wondering what happened, if their body is still their own, and what we’re going to do on their behalf.Covered in the appendix:What else should people know about Judge Persky’s background?Didn’t Judge Persky favor student athletes in the De Anza case?What would a normal sentence be for Turner’s specific crimes?What actually deters would-be offenders from sexual crimes?What’s the basis of Turner’s appeal?What about that letter from Turner’s father?What other motivations may Professor Dauber have had?Does it matter that Professor Dauber was never a lawyer?What impact does being on a sexual offender list have on one’s life?How likely is it that Turner took a picture of the victim?How aware was Turner that what he was doing was criminal?Don’t Turner’s comments about drinking prove that he still doesn’t understand what he did wrong?What’s the real purpose of victim impact statements?EDIT: I published my first draft here on June 18th, 2018, then made some cosmetic edits in the days following. I’ve now returned a year later to give it another once-over. See the edit log for a full list of changes (most for clarity).

Michael Jackson and Lisa Marie Presley were never in fact legally married. The marriage was performed illegally in the Dominican Republic 20 days after her divorce from her first husband was finalised in May 1994. Michael paid off a bent judge (Hugo Alvarez) with his own money, to fake the "wedding" in a tacky hotel room that was miles outside of where it was even legal! The judge then FORGED the wedding license with a stamp that said "La Vega" even though it was written up in La Romana. The marriage "license" was a complete forgery . Most people pay a celebrant to get married - but Michael paid Hugo Alvarez bribe money to NOT get married! MJ did it on purpose, he never wanted to marry her, only for the public eye for his reputation due to the false allegations, plain and simple. In all reality MJ would have never ever married Lisa Marie if it weren't for the false allegations. The ‘’ marriage ‘’ was invalid , unconsummated and performed illegally. It was a pr stunt. This was just a PR stunt to bring himself in a better light from the false allegations. He was pressured by his manager Sandy Gallin to get married so as to quell gay rumours after the 1993 scandal.Michael Jackson never met Lisa Marie Presley in Las Vegas in 1975 where her father Elvis took her to see the Jackson 5 perform. That is what they both alleged for the media to justify the out of the blue marriage in May 1994. They actually met for the first time in November 1992. Lisa Marie Presley pestered Brett Livingstone to introduce her to Michael Jackson and he did. At that point she became literally obsessed with Michael and broke her conveniently facilitated by the Church of Scientology marriage with Danny Keough with whom she was married since 1988 and by whon she had two young children.MJ fought for years to marry Diana Ross , then fought for years trying to win her back from Arne Naess . In the meantime, his camp kept telling him the gay rumors about him were out of control and he needed a wife! MJ brushed it off because he WAS seeing Diana whenever she had time for him but resented having to be her side piece. When he was launching MJJ records, a friend of his, Brett Livingstone told him he had a perfect girl for his label. He said she was young and beautiful, and her NAME was a marketing dream!! When MJ asked who, he told him Lisa. MJ said to get her tape, but Lisa insisted on meeting him. So Brett arranged it at his house ( this is lie 1 when Lisa claimed MJ insisted on meeting her ). Lisa was married to Danny at the time, but of course she didn't let that stop her. Brett said she began calling him constantly trying to get back to MJ. Brett got her a picture and told her if was from MJ She went crazy with happiness, and began calling MJ nonstop offering friendship and a listening ear. This is the time of the 1st allegations, and he was horrified and vulnerable. This is also lie 2 where Lisa claimed he was calling her all the time but both Brett and MJ said it was her, and MJ even told that to Ebony Mag..in the Michael/Lisa issue..“the idea of marriage was better than marriage itself. When Michael was facing possible child molestation charges, his life turned upside down,” the source said. ”During that time, he talked to Lisa Marie nearly every day on the phone… Since Lisa Marie was always there for him it was logical he’d ask her to marry him. But Michael does things on the spur of the moment and he lives to regret it. The reason he wants out is that he wants his privacy,” the source added.-ReuterHe thought he could trust her. Then she began telling him if he were her husband they would never dare say the things they were saying. That he would finally have PROTECTION from the lying press. He took the bait. He asked her on the phone " If I were to ask you to marry me, what would you say? She quickly said yes. I don't think she realized he meant as a FAVOR, not as a REAL wife. She divorced danny and went to DR to marry MJ. A cheap tacky motel room, no flowers, no decorations, no planning or even rice! The man who married them was Hugo Alvarez, he was a justice of the peace who was ONLY authorized to marry ppl in le Vega ,( his hometown) MJ paid him to come nearly 5 yrs away, and marry them in Casa , yet sign the certificate LA. Vega! ( which auto _voids marriage of course). This is Hugo Alvarez's account. Alvarez,," He stared at the floor. He looked lost. He kept looking so sad, my assistant and I kept pulling him aside, asking if he was OK. When I pronounced them, he acted like he didnt want to kiss her. She had to grab his face, and kiss him. There was no laughter, no smiles, no happiness. I felt like I'd just performed a funeral!".Now, let’s return to the so-called homemade video of the “wedding” that was shown on the Diane Sawyer show. More than any other evidence, is the most convincing evidence of a deliberate hoax and fraud. That home video scene was shot in a hotel room at Casa de Campo, not the JP’s living room. This reporter went to that hotel and with the help of the manager ($50 bucks can get you a lot in that country) and found that exact room. Using a copy of that Diane Sawyer interview video, it was confirmed that we had the right room. Our cameraman recreated the home video showing every detail in the original. It was one of the rooms rented in the name of a bodyguard. It is totally different in every way from the JP’s living room. So, how come the people in the video are not in the JP’s living room, as the official wedding register says? Why is that “ceremony” more proof of a deliberate fraud? Because, the JP is licensed by the government of the province of which La Vega is the capital, to perform weddings and make a legal record of various activities (marriage, birth, criminal events, property transfers, etc.) only in his home town. He is not licensed for anything in any other province in that country. That is why, to support the hoax, the registration book and his newspaper interview both claim he performed the ceremony in his living room. The entry in the book of recorded marriages written by the Justice of the Peace says the ceremony was performed in his home in La Vega. Had that actually happened, he might have performed and recorded a genuinely legal wedding. But there is the video, provided by Jackson and Presley, shown on the Diane Sawyer show, that undeniably shows them creating a fake ceremony performed in a hotel room in Casa de Campo. Thus we know, that not only was there NOT a wedding in the JP’s home, but if he had officiated at a ceremony in Casa De Campo, it was not a real wedding – and there is no record of a real wedding by officiated in Casa de Campo because this JP had no authority to do that. His book is only for register events that take place in La Vega and we also know that the record in the La Vega book is fake because the two participants and their two witnesses could not have been there on that date and time. Now if Michael Jackson had loved Lisa Marie Presley would he have married her illegally? If he had wanted her Presley kids so badly as she alleged would he have had an illegal wedding which by default meant that if he had had any children with her they would have by default been illegitimate ? If Lisa Marie Presley had loved Michael Jackson would she have gone on a hoilday with her ex husband Danny Keough with whom she was seen kissing and holding hands while still ‘’ married ‘’ to Michael Jackson?He also was chewing gum during the fake marriage ceremony. Who chews gum at a wedding! MJ was dressed so down like he was visiting Disneyland rather than being at a wedding ceremony on his wedding day !!! MJ did all this on purpose because he wasn't really marrying Lisa Marie legally in the first place, and he wanted the wedding to be sloppy and unreal as possible.marriage certificateas you can see the name is Michael Joseph Jackson and we know Michael uses The middle name Joe which is the Real middle name in LEGAL DOCUMENTIf Michael Jackson was in love with Lisa Marie Presley would he dedicate his HIStory album to Diana Ross, while just married and allegedly enamoured with Lisa Marie?Love note on the history album for Diana While married to Lisa!!![Tatum and I] developed into a real close relationship. I fell in love with her (and she with me) and we were very close for a long time. Eventually the relationship transcended into a good friendship. We still talk now and then, and I guess you’d have to sayshe was my first love – after Diana. When I heard Diana Ross was getting married, I was happy for her because I knew it would make her very joyous. Still, it was hard for me, because I had to walk around pretending to be overwhelmed that Diana was getting married to this man I’d never met. I wanted her to be happy, but I have to admit that I was a bit hurt and a little jealous because I’ve always loved Diana and always will. Moonwalk 1988Lisa really stalked him, but he was so busy fawning and following, and begging for Diana . He dogged her, and tried to get an annulment, and told his Attorney he better get him out of the marriage!But it was true. Before Michael had arrived in New York on this most recent trip, he’d married Lisa Marie. Even my parents hadn’t known about it. I suspect Michael didn’t tell them, because when they asked him the inevitable question—why?—he wouldn’t be able to answer it. He didn’t know how. That was just the way Michael was. He kept the various parts of his life separate from one another, and his reasons for doing so were his own. Now that we knew, we would have gladly accepted Michael’s marriage without any explanation at all, but he told us that he had made the decision for business reasons. At the time, he was doing business with Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal, who was known as “the Arabian Warren Buffett.” They were business partners in a newly formed company called Kingdom Entertainment. According to Michael, the prince and his colleagues liked to do business with family men, and so he wanted Michael, as his partner, to be married. Especially after the allegations in 1993. The prince was investing a lot of money in Kingdom Entertainment, and he believed that by marrying, Michael would restore his tarnished image. So Michael had married Lisa Marie Presley. Or so Michael’s story went. My father, who had an adult’s perspective on the whole affair, saw a simpler scenario. He believed that Michael wanted to be a father and hoped that he would have children with Lisa Marie. It was an unconventional courtship, to be sure, but Michael led an unconventional life. In the end, the union had lasted about a year and a half. When they split up at the end of 1995, Michael claimed that one of the main reasons was that Lisa was jealous of us (she called us the “Jersey family”) and the relationship he had with us. He preferred spending time with us to spending it with her. "From my perspective, Lisa Marie disappeared as abruptly as she had arrived. Apparently she and Michael stayed close, but I rarely saw her anymore." Frank Cascio My friend MichaelA few months after he married her was when Michael wanted out, according to his friend Niles Rogers. Maybe that could explain him leaving for weeks and weeks at a time without telling her where he was. He had already checked out of the marriage and was ready to move on. It was said by many that he hated confrontation so that was his way of trying to make her file for divorce. He was giving her reasons to leave him.VMAS 1995 MJ did not call his ‘wife’’ for 6 weeks and she was absolutelly not aware where he was and suddenly he demands her to go to some show for a little publicity. And Michael did not even call her himself. His PR team called her. Lisa went on VACATION WITH HER EX HUSBAND AND FATHER OF HER CHILDREN TO HAWAII. Yeah they were very much in love!!!!Source: Le Freak: An Upside Down Story of Family, Disco, and Destiny, by Nile Rodgers, December 1994‘’ We chatted for a while, and to my great surprise and relief, I didn’t have a pressing urge to drink or drug in the studio lounge.. I actually felt comfortable. From that point on, Michael carried most of the conversation. . He continued reminiscing about the early days on the road. I could tell he missed the music, as well as the love and camaraderie, not specifically mine, or his brothers’ or his crews’ or his family’s—it was more general: He missed the adulation his crews’ or his family’s—it was more general: He missed the adulation that he had always elicited up to that point in his life. . Unsurprisingly, I sensed that he was happiest when the world really loved him and everything he did, before his personal proclivities sparked constant tabloid fodder. The tone of the conversation changed. His mood shifted and something happened that I would have never thought possible in a million years: He opened up to me about his dark feelings. Until that point our rap was all upbeat—typical musician laughing and joking around. He said gossip in the news upset him and ultimately saddened him. I was very fragile and so was he, and we connected over our mutual state of mind. It was as if we were on the bus in the early seventies, only this time the secrets we shared were Far less innocent. I’d made it clear I wanted to play guitar and go home. But I was also so grateful for the Fact that Michael Jackson felt comfortable enough with me to share such intimate revelations. He confided that he was having marital problems and would probably be getting divorced. This was a full year before the slightest mention of his split with Lisa Marie Presley hit the press. Why share this with me? I thought to myself as Michael continued to unload. Maybe because I outwardly seemed very happy and well adjusted,, and he could sense that I was trustworthy.If Michael Jackson had loved Lisa Marie Presley and wanted her Presley kids so badly would he have married her illegally in the Dominican Republic and would he arrange to have kids with Debbie Rowe while still married to Lisa Marie Presley? Does that sound like something a man would do to a woman whom he considered his true love? The love of his life? Absolutely not. NO MAN would EVER do that to a woman he was truly in love with.LMP asks about Debbie and Michael, Liz Smith, Newsday, 28 January, 1999 Lisa Marie then wanted me to tell her my sources for various items about her ex-husband Michael Jackson and his current wife, Debbie Rowe! I declined, of course. And she declined to say much else either – merely that she is busy in the recording studio making an album. “Things are going well; my kids are good!"In the months that followed, (the divorce) I know that she (Lisa) reached out to Janet, Rebbie and Mother for their advice on how to best get through to Michael, to see if there was any way back.’’ Jermaine JacksonRebbie Jackson, OK! May, 1998:“I have never met Debbie, so I don’t know what she’s like,” she explains. But one ‘outsider’ Rebbie is happy to befriend Michael’s first wife, Lisa Marie Presley. She says: “Her six year old son Benjamin is so in love with my two daughters – he flirts with them all the time when Lisa’s visiting my home!”Lisa Marie hanging out with Janet at her album "Velvet Rope" release party, 1997"Never thought LMP really loved Michael. She was in love with his precensce, because it brought her a "high" that she felt when she was with her dad Elvis. So it makes sense because people (especially women) are drawn to people who are like their fathers. she told oprah she felt so intoxicated with him. ‘’ Frank Cascio“I have never felt so high in my life. I have never felt so high in my life as that. I am not lying when I say that. He had something so intoxicating about him and when he was on, when he was ready to share with you or give it to you, and be himself and allow you to come in. I don’’t know if I’ve ever been that intoxicated by anything…It was like a drug. He was like a drug for me. I felt like I just always wanted to be around him, always wanted to be part of – I felt so high. I’ve never felt like that around another human being, except for one, which was my father.” - LMPLisa Marie is a very evil little girl. She was horrible to Michael, myself, and anyone who was around Michael. She was even jealous of her own children when they adored Michael, she was the one trying to manipulate Michael and his world. I never saw Michael so miserable as I did when he was married to Lisa, she was a lovely person before they married. she pursued him with a vengeance even when she was still married. she did not smoke or drink, as soon as they got married, she drank, smoked, wanted to fire everyone around Michael, and demanded he become a Scientologist. he bent over backwards to please her... he never could, she was just too miserable,” Karen FayeThey were NOT on and off for four years after the divorce. In 1997 she was seen with David Arquette and rumors began circulating that they were dating. But it was only brief. In 1998 she began dating a guy by the name of Luke Watson. Then she dumped him for a guy named John Oszajca. And later became engaged to him in 2000. They soon split when she met Nicolas Cage whom she actually married (for a few months) in 2002. Why would Lisa be dating other men during this time period and even getting engaged to one of them if her and Michael were trying to work things out? Does that sound like something someone would do if they were serious trying to work things out with MICHAEL JACKSON?TRUTH is Lisa became sick after the divorce which is the main reason Michael let her follow him around. There was reports in the tabloids about Lisa being sick, then suddenly after that she was seen with Michael again. Coincidence? She said the sickness lasted for two years after her divorce from him. And it just so happens that 1997 and 1998 were the years where Michael let her hang around him the most.Lisa Marie is hospitalized, May 30, 1997Lisa Marie Presley, daughter of Elvis and Priscilla Presley and the former Mrs. Michael Jackson, has been hospitalized since Sunday in Florida, says USA Today. The twenty-nine-year-old mother of two has been diagnosed with a bronchial infection and stomach and liver infections. Her spokesman, Paul Bloch, said Presley’s condition is improving. “The prognosis for recovery is excellent, and she hopes to leave the hospital this week.” Presley, a practicing Scientologist, had a fever for nine days before she was admitted to the hospital.A few months later after the newspaper reports of an illness with Lisa Marie, Michael invited her to one of his concerts. And she began to be seen with him more often. Months later she starts to befriend his sister Janet. This was another one of her desperate attempts to get closer to Michael again. She also befriended Rebbie and to this day both of their older children are still friends with each other and she is still friends with Rebbie.He even took the mask off when he kissed his fans but he didn’t take it off to kiss her!!!Roger Friedman, Tuesday, January 18, 2005I know you’re wondering what had she had to say about former husband Michael Jackson, so I’ll tell you: Nothing. ‘’I’ve been away from him for almost 10 years. I’m not following the case at all,”Claire Magazine, 2008"My biggest mistake? Let's see," she begins quietly. "How can I word this? Um. Well. Leaving my first marriage, for the person that I left it for — that was probably the biggest mistake of my life. I was really naive at the time. I was in la-la land."Rolling Stones, 2004"Did I ever worry? Of course I f*cking worried. Yeah. I did. But I could only come up with what he told me. The only two people that were in the room was him and that kid, so how the hell was I going to know? I could only go off what he told me."LMP, The Mirror, July 10, 2003“I’m sure there was happiness, at some point, in the beginning, with all of them.The first, the most. In fact, I’m still friends with Danny. He’s holding the fort right now, looking after my daughter in the States. And I’m still in contact with Nicolas. We talk on the phone all the time. We’re friends – we’ve managed to work that one out. I can’t say that about everyone I’ve been with. And she adds: “If I were to bump into Michael in the hotel lobby, I’d just say “Hi’… and then walk.We have no contact at all.” Lisa Marie sighs.“I will just say that at one point I did say: ‘This is like I’m on the Titanic and it’s sinking.’ And I wanted to help, because I could see certain things happening. But I said: ‘I’m either going to jump now, or I’m going to go down with you. So I’m going to get out.’ He said: ‘Am I sinking?’ I said: ‘Yeah.’ And then I walked. And he is sinking. I didn’t know how long it would take, I didn’t know when. I just knew there was going to be a karma situation. You can’t possibly conduct yourself a certain way and get away with it. I knew the karma police were coming. Do I feel guilt that I left him? On the contrary.”Spinner – August 16th, 2007How do you feel when you see some of your dad’s songs commercialized — like the current ‘Viva Viagra’ commercial?I find that revolting. Some songs we have no control over. I know we didn’t license that one.Being that your ex-husband Michael Jackson owns the rights to a lot of the Elvis Presley catalog, do you ever have the inclination to call him up and ask him to stop the commercialization of these songs?I don’t know if he owns that one [laughs]. But have I thought about it? Yeah. I get mad all the time. If I see something wacked out, I’ll definitely yell and say, ‘What the hell is that?’ or ‘Get rid of this!’Oprah: “So to this day you believe none of those charges are true?”Lisa Marie: “No. I cannot say. The only people who are ever going to be able to say are him (Michael) and whoever were in the room at the time of whatever allegedly took place. I was never in the room. I can tell you that I never saw anything like that.”MSM chat- Apr 4, 2003Do you hate him? LMP: No, the opposite of love is not hate, it's indifferent. I'm indifferent...LMP, Primetime – April 3rd, 2003Diane Sawyer: Though nothing Lisa Marie Presley would ever do to her mum would equal this... DS..MICHAEL JACKSON?LMP OH, GOD!!!...I Was hoping you'd forget...Marilyn Manson - Manson And Presley Laugh At Jackson, April 2003"I felt kind of bad when she came over. So I did a little puppet show with it (Jackson with no nose) and made her laugh. "I said to her, 'Look, you can't get more punk rock than getting married to and/or f***ing a baby dangler. He's a baby dangler! At this point he's saying, 'F*** it, my nose has gone, I'm gonna dangle a baby.'"“It’s one of those things like, I don’t like to say I have regrets but I definitely regret that time period,” she said in a telephone conference call with about a dozen journalists. Lisa Marie PresleyBotox ugly mother , talentless bitch daughter , fat ass Oprah Winfrey trashing Michael Jackson in 2005 in their attempt to promote Lisa’s second utterly failed album which sold 15000 albumsLisa Marie Presley did not love Michael Jackson:1.Lisa's unkind comments she made about Michael before he died and after he died prove it.2.Lisa lies. Mainly the 4 year affair after the divorce fairytale.3. Women that had Michael heart’s before and after his relationship with Lisa4. Lisa called Michael’s son a retaliatory act in her 2010 Oprah Winfrey interview. Michael Jackson did not love LMP at all to retaliate against her in this way. And that interview was self serving , there was absolutely no reason for her to take a jab at innocent Prince in order to glorify herself in Michael’s life in her own conceited head and it was also inconsiderate of her to do.5. Michael Invincible album was mostly about her, another of her delusional liesNONE of the songs on the Invincible album is about LMP.Teddy Riley and Michael had a history: they had collaborated on the Dangerous album. And Rodney Jerkins had worked for Teddy Riley as a kid, so the two producers had their own shared past. Michael managed to spark a healthy competition between them. Sometimes he would have both Rodney and Teddy work on a song at the same time. He would wait for each producer’s take on it, then pick which he liked better. Teddy brought some great songs to the table: “Heaven Can Wait,” “Don’t Walk Away,” “Whatever Happens” (a duet with Carlos Santana), and a song called “Shout,” which didn’t make the album, but was a great song to start a concert.Rodney must have been nonplussed, to say the least, when Michael sent him back to the drawing board. The songs he had presented to Michael were the kind he was famous for producing. But working for Michael Jackson, he knew that he’d have to develop something new. Michael expected it. He drove his producers crazy, but he knew how to get the most out of everyone he worked with. So Rodney went back to work. Ultimately, he produced “Unbreakable,” “Invincible,” “Heartbreaker,” and “Rock My World” for the album. Michael unreleased track "Blue Gangsta" wasnt written about Lisa either. "While many fans are very interested in appropriations for each album of Michael Jackson, some go further in their approach. Thus, four members of the forum MJFrance managed to get in touch with Elliott Straits best known under the name of Dr. Freeze, is the producer of " Break Of Dawn "(Invincible)," A Place With No Name "or" Blue Gangsta ".Lisa Marie is a joke. She said she was on a 4 on and off year relationship with a man she dissed non stop for years and even after he died, who unlike her, he never once badmouthed her, while during that time she publicly dated 4 other men. Lisa just said that to make herself sound more important. She was dating other men , she got engaged to John Osjaza and then married to Nic Cage so when exactly was these 4 more years after the divorce? Lisa loved Michael's aura and she was more like a groupie then a wife. Her words were she was intoxicated by him. Lisa was/is still obsessed with MJ but this was Not the case with MJ, so enough with the laughable fairtales! He was like a drug for her (Oprah 2010). That is NOT love. Read her songs "idiot", "disciple", "Indifferent". ALL about Michael.Michael Jackson’s love life did not begin and end with Lisa Marie Presley as she likes people to think. She was not the love of his life. She meant nothing to him. It was obvious Lisa hated Michael because she said many disgusting things about him in the press. That whole ‘’I was crying all day on June 25th is a lie’’ .. That is something she made up after MJ passed. Whatever she said it was not truthful. Does she seriously expect folks to believe that on the day MJ died, she started crying all day and had no idea what was happening to her? Then suddenly she got the call from John Travolta?? She is full of shit. She is lying through her teeth, she didn't shed a tear on June 25.In fact, they were never intimate. Hence, she was not even subpoenaed to testify in his defence in 2005. Why wasn’t she even on the Defence Witness List ? After Michael died she pretended to be a grieving window to serve her own purposes."Do they find any child porn? No. Do they find anything on the computer about little boys? No. Were there any pictures of little boys in the house? No. He was a real man, and I think people see he loved women, he lost his virginity at 19." -David Gest.From Frank Cascio Book "My Friend Michael"Around this time, Michael had another friend – I’ll call her Emily – who visited the ranch regularly. She was a nice, cute girl, slender, with brown hair, in her early to midthirties. Emily didn’t want or need anything from Michael. They just liked spending time together – talking, walking around, hanging out in his bedroom. It was a romantic relationship, but as far as I know, he didn’t tell anyone about Emily but me. Michael kept her a secret – she didn’t stay in his room because he didn’t want her to be seen coming out in the morning – and even I didn’t see real evidence of the romance. That’s how I knew he was telling the truth. He wouldn’t have been so secretive if he hadn’t had something to hide. That was the longest relationship I saw Michael have: Emily was at the ranch frequently over the course of about a year. “It was downplayed. And I’ll tell you, Michael was private about that part of his life. Michael was attracted to women. He had a very particular type and it’s funny because people wouldn’t think it, but it’s a simpleton. He was dating this girl who he really cared about and you know and she cared about him and it was great to see, but it was also kept very private because Michael did not want to, you know, expose this girl and have the media from the outside ruin a relationship that he really was enjoying and you know, he likes slender, tall, simpletons, sweet, humble, soft-spoken girls. And I’m really happy that Michael actually found that in his life later on.”Brooke Shields:"We're closer now than we ever were. We love each other...We both did and still do" have "crushes" on each other. When Oprah asked if he's "more like a brother than a boyfriend," she replies "It's hard to say..." Michael's relationship with Brooke was more deeper than his relatiohdsip with LMP. Michael Jackson had so many posters of Brooke Shields on his wall that his sisters Janet and Latoya hated her guts. Janet Jackson's nickname for Brooke was giraffe butt. Michael was spinning around his room in happiness after he first met her at Oscars 1981. Brooke had a serious depression after the birth of her daughter so Michael was worried about her , that was one of reasons why he called her and sent her flowers. He called Brooke Shields ‘’one of the loves of my life’’ in his private home movies in 2003. He had a picture of Brooke Shields in Neverland , not Lisa Marie. That is what Brooke said:’’ He never actually formally proposed to me, though. He would sort of say, “Why don’t we adopt a child together? The way your heart works is what I want in my life,” and I said to him, “You’re always going to have my heart, we don’t need to adopt a baby, and I think it’s wonderful that you want to have children, adopt a child.” I wanted to fall in love and get married and have my own babies, and I said, “I don’t think that you need to necessarily do that.” This was just before he married Lisa Marie in the Nineties, I guess. He had discussed it with me, and I said, “I don’t think that’s the best thing to do for me.” I was just out of college, and wanting to fall in love and have a fairy tale, I was holding on to that. He just felt so bad that there were so many little children in Romania in these orphanages, and he wanted to try to give them homes, and I really wanted to be able to do that with him, but it would have divided my life too much.Michael Jackson asked Brooke Shields to marry him before he asked Lisa Marie Presley but Brooke refused.‘’Now Brooke Shields, she was one of the loves of my life. We dated a lot. Her pictures were all over my walls and mirrors. I was at the Academy Awards with Diana Ross and she just came up to me and said, “Hi, I’m Brooke Shields. Are you going to the after party?” I said, “Yeah,” and I just melted. I was about 23 … during Off The Wall. I thought, “Does, she know[that photographs of her are] all over my room?”And we went on the dance floor. And man we exchanged numbers and I was up all night, spinning around in my room, just so happy. She was classy. We had one encounter when she got real intimate and I chickened out. And I shouldn’t have.’’ Michael Jackson .“I would say, ‘You have me for the rest of your life, you don’t need to marry me, I’m going to go on and do my own life and have my own marriage and my own kids, and you’ll always have me. I think it made him relax. He didn’t want to lose things that meant something to him.” Brooke ShieldsMichael Jackson also dated a former Miss Universe, Tatum O’Neal and Stephanie Mills.Tatum O neal on Howard Stern she made out with Michael Jackson who was however in love with Diana Ross ‘’ and that was real’’ . Obviously , if he was in love with Diana Ross and made out with Tatum he was not gay and he had sexual interest in women long before he ever met Lisa Marie Presley.Frank Dileo. "I know some of the stars Michael had been with. I'll take that to my grave"Diana... most important woman in MJ's life!!Michael Jackson looking at Diana Ross in 1996 . He was still typically married to Lisa Marie then.Love letters Michael Jackson wrote to a woman. Obviously he had interest in women . But not in Lisa Marie Presley.