Jordan Chandler’s Description of Discolouration, Did It Match?

Jordan Chandler's Description of Discolouration, Did It Match?

There appears to be a lot of confusion, as well as deliberate fan misinformation concerning Jordan Chandler’s description of discolouration on Michael Jackson’s genitalia. You’ve probably read many pro-Jacko articles claiming that Jordan’s description was a complete mismatch or that any match only existed in the head of Thomas Sneddon and other “crooked” law-enforcement officers.

Let’s Start from the Beginning


On September 1, 1993, Jordan verbally described discolouration on Jackson’s lower torso, buttocks and genitals, including a particular blemish on his penis to Lauren Weis, who was deputy of the sex crimes division of the Los Angeles County District attorneys office.

Jordan was asked to draw a picture of Michael Jackson’s “erect” penis and document any distinctive marks he recalled.

It’s important to note that Jordan drew a two-dimensional drawing of Jackson’s erect penis, i.e. a picture which detailed the underside of Jackson’s penis. Many fans have a hard time comprehending what the actual definition of erect is.

On December 13, 1993, a warrant was obtained authorising the police to take photographs of Michael Jackson’s private parts.

The resulting photographs and description have been retained by the sheriff department under tight security, and despite what many fansites say, they never been shared with any third-party source.

For example, some stans claim that Jordan’s description appeared in Victor Gutierrez book: “Michael Jackson Was My Lover”. Even so-called award-winning “journalist”, Charles Thompson has claimed this on his Twitter account, complete with a cropped picture.

Charles Thompson

Was There a Match?


In reality, I shouldn’t have to tell you whether it did or didn’t. Tom Sneddon’s declaration stating that it did and equally Thomas Mesereau opposing the use of the description and photos in the 2005 trial, should be more than enough to convince any non-conspiracy theorist.

But anyway, let’s look at the evidence.

Declaration of Thomas W. Sneddon. Jr.


The prosecution led by Thomas Sneddon, initially had no intention of showing the jury Jordan’s description and the photographs of Michael Jackson’s genitalia, without Jordan’s corporation. But with the case slipping away from them, they decided to submit it as a late entry to rebuff claims from the defence that Michael Jackson was of a shy and modest nature.

Thomas Sneddon stated:

3. In the course of LAPD’s investigation of the allegations, Jordan Chandler was interviewed by Los Angeles Deputy District Attorney Lauren Weis on September 1, 1993, during which interview Detective Ferrufmo and a court reporter were present. Jordan was asked to relate information concerning his reported relationship with Michael Jackson. In the course of the interview Jordan Chandler made detailed statements concerning the physical appearance of Michael Jackson, in particular the coloration of and marks on the skin of his lower torso, buttocks and genitals, including a particular blemish on his penis. Jordan was asked to draw a picture of Mr. Jackson’s erect penis and to locate on that drawing any distinctive marks be recalled. Jordan did so. The drawing was signed and dated by Jordan Chandler and was attached as Exhibit 1 to Detective Ferrufino’s report in LAPD Case No. 930822245.
4. On December 13, 1993, as part of the of the Santa Barbara Sheriff’s investigation into young Chandler’s allegations a search warrant was obtained authorizing the search of Michael Jackson’s person and for the taking of photographs of his genitals. That warrant was executed at Neverland Ranch in Santa Barbara on December 20, 1993. The resulting photographs have been retained by the Sheri’s Department, under tight security.
5. I have reviewed the statements made by Jordan Chandler in his interview on December 1, 1993, I have examined the drawing made by Jordan Chandler at Detective Fernffino’s request and the photographs taken of Defendant’s genitalia. The photographs reveal a mark on the right side of Defendant’s penis at about the same relative location as the dark blemish located by Jordan Chandler on his drawing of Defendant’s erect penis. I believe the discoloration Chandler identified in his drawing was not something he could or would have guessed about, or could have seen accidentally. I believe Chandler’s graphic representation of the discolored area on Defendant’s penis is substantially corroborated by the photographs taken by Santa Barbara Sheriff’s detectives at a later time.

Executed May 25, 2005, at Santa Maria, California.

Full document: sbscpublicaccess.org

Despite the perfect opportunity to highlight any discrepancies, or a complete mismatch, Jackson’s defence team, did the complete opposite and fought tooth and nail to keep the descriptions and photographs out of the courtroom.

Jackson’s defence:

"The District Attorney is trying to do everything he can to keep the jurors from walking into the deliberation room with the facts of this case and the Arvizo family's credibility on their minds. The motion is devoid of legal merit, and, in fact, if granted, would result in a reversible violation of Mr. Jackson's confrontation rights. Even if there were some factual or legal basis to admit this evidence, it is improper rebuttal and would have to be excluded under Evidence Code Section 352."
"For the reasons stated below, the Court should not only deny the prosecution's motion but take whatever action it deems to be appropriate."

Full document: sbscpublicaccess.org

During correspondence between the attorneys and the discussion with Judge Melville, Thomas Mesereau had to be corrected by both Ron Zonen and the judge when he claimed Jordan’s description was hearsay.

Read the document here.

Ron Zonen, Tom Sneddon’s Right-hand Man


Tom Sneddon’s right-hand man, Ron Zonen had complete confidence in Jordan’s description and the photographs in 2005, as documented between the correspondence between the judge and Jackson’s defence team. That confidence has never wavered, and in a documentary titled: “The Real Michael Jackson” by Jacques Peretti, which was released in March 2020 on the BBC, Ron again reiterates that Jordan’s description was accurate, so accurate that he believed it was “remarkable cooperative evidence”.

Watch the segment below.

Former Deputy District Attorney, Lauren Weis


As mentioned at the start of this article, Lauren Weis was the deputy of sex crimes division of the Los Angeles County District Attorneys office from 1979 to 2002 and then went on to be a Superior Court judge in Los Angeles. Under her supervision, Jordan made the description of Jackson’s genitalia, which was later compared to the photographs.

In a podcast, she went on to say:

"Correct. Not just the genitalia, but a particular mark on the underside of his penis, which the victim described… and we had information that that Michael had always maintained that he was never seen naked in front of any of these children."

Listen to the audio below.

LAPD Investigator, Bill Dworin


Bill Dworin was one of the lead investigators from the LAPD, and has investigated thousands sex crime cases.

In a documentary titled “Michael Jackson and the Boy He Paid Off” he went on to say the following:

"He [Jordy Chandler] described Jackson's genitalia - it was unique because of the discolouration. And then we obtained a search warrant to photograph Jackson to cooperate, what the child had said. When photographing Jackson's genitalia, it did cooperate. In other words, the boy saw Jackson naked. Does that mean Jackson molested the child? No, but it adds to the credibility of the child."

In a 2003 interview given to nbcnews.com, Bill Dworin again confirms to Josh Mankiewicz that Jordan Chandler’s description did match with the photographs of Jackson’s genitalia.

Here’s a direct quote:

"Dworin says one critical piece of corroborating evidence was found not in Michael Jackson’s home, but on Michael Jackson’s body: an intimate description that the young boy gave police."

"Dworin: We had served a search warrant to photograph Michael Jackson. Those photographs corroborated the description that the boy gave us regarding Michael Jackson’s genitals."

”Mankiewicz: The boy was able to describe discolorations of Jackson’s skin?"

”Dworin: Yes."

”Mankiewicz: On his genitals, accurately."

”Dworin: Very much so.”

Source: www.nbcnews.com

Dr. Richard Strict


Dr. Richard Strick was a doctor who was present on behalf of the local authorities during the photographing of Michael Jackson’s genitalia. He said the “genitalia was very oddly coloured with dark skin and light skin.” He was later told that the boy [Jordan] description absolutely matched with the photographs that were taken. I don’t think he was told by guy down the street, by the way. 

While Dr. Richard Strick never saw Jordan’s description, he’s an interesting source, as somebody outside of the so-called “crooked” law enforcement club. Dr. Strick with his own eyes did witness discolouration on Michael Jackson’s genitalia and lower torso, something that Jordan did describe.

In a 1995 Diana Sawyer interview, Michael Jackson is asked about the description, that was made by Jordan Chandler and the photographs that were taken by the local authorities. Rather than give a direct answer, he starts blathering on about how there was no connection and there was nothing that could match him up with these charges. He is asked directly if there were any markings on his genitals and his reply was there was no markings. He then tries to claim that he wouldn’t be sat here and giving this interview if there was.

Here’s the transcript:

DS: How about the police photographs though? How was there enough information from this boy about those kinds of things?
MJ: The police photographs?
DS: The police photographs.
MJ: That they took of me?
DS: Yeah.
MJ: There was nothing that matched me to those charges. There was nothing.
LISA MARIE PRESLEY : There was nothing they could connect to him.
MJ: That’s why I’m sitting here talking to you today. There was not one iota of information that they found, that could connect me…
DS: So when we heard the charges…
MJ: There was nothing…
DS: …markings of some kind?
MJ: No markings.
DS: No markings?
MJ: No.

Watch the segment below.

Dr. Strick’s statement, at the very least, does confirm that Jackson was so brazen in 1995 that he didn’t just openly lie on national television, but attempted to manipulate millions of viewers into believing Jordan was a liar and the police were leaking false information concerning the description.

The Truthers Myths


There is, of course, many myths from Jackson truthers that Jordan’s description did not match. The most popular is that Jordan described Jackson as being circumcised, when the autopsy revealed he wasn’t. This is something that appears to originate from Victor Gutierrez’s book, and a decade plus old article from the Smoking Gun website. The truth is, nobody other than the police know whether Jackson being circumcised or uncircumcised was part of the description. There is certainly no indication within Tom Sneddon’s declaration, or via interviews given by law-enforcement that it was.

Jackson stans have even resorted to posting misinformation on Wikipedia concerning this claim.

This is a direct quote:

"In March 1994, Jackson's mother Katherine was called to testify in front of the LA County Grand Jury. Investigators asked whether her son had altered the appearance of his genitalia. Jordan claimed that Jackson was circumcised. However, Jackson's autopsy report showed that he had not been circumcised and his foreskin appeared intact, with no signs of surgical restoration."

The autopsy report concerning Jackson’s genitalia doesn’t mention anything about “surgical restoration”. In fact, it was so vague, it only states that his penis “appears” uncircumcised.

Autopsy report

That could (or couldn’t) be admission that Jackson had a tight or unusual foreskin, or that his penis had literally shrivelled up into nothing, which is no real shock on a lifeless corpse.

Autopsy source.

We could also argue that Jordan was asked to draw Jackson’s “erect” penis, i.e. the underside which would have only been visible if Jackson was in an aroused state. I don’t need to tell you what happens to a uncircumcised penis when aroused.

Either way, it’s pure speculation concerning this claim and whether Jordan got it wrong.

But He Would Have Been Arrested on the Spot, Right?


Another myth from truthers is that Jackson would have been arrested on the spot if JC’s description had matched with the photographs. But where is the evidence to support this? Where in the police manual does it say a matching description of a person’s private parts accused of sexual assault is an instant arrestable offence, no ifs or buts?

Jackson’s multimillion dollar legal team, fronted by Johnnie Cochran, would have known all the ins and outs concerning the law, yet somehow they didn’t capitalise on the police’s failure to arrest Jackson after the photographs were taken, but instead advised him to settle for a reported 20+ million dollars ASAP.

Strange, right?

Of course, the reality is that the strip search was conducted to further add credibility to Jordan’s allegation that Jackson had been performing multiple sexual acts on him over a lengthy period of time. The description and photographs became evidence in an ongoing and complex case, not as a means to arrest and charge Jackson there and then.

To my knowledge, nobody in the Western world, has been arrested base solely on a accurate description of their genitalia. After all, changing rooms would be a no-go area. Jordan’s description would have been used if the case had gone to trial, where a jury would evaluate all the evidence in its entirety.

Jordan Just Made a Lucky Guess


Jackson’s skin colour, as well as his physical appearance started changing through the 80s. Jackson suffered from vitiligo, though it’s unknown whether this was caused by skin bleaching or a natural occurrence or a combination of both.

There are several photos of Jackson through the 80s and 90s, where his skin is slightly blotchy, plus it’s no secret that he also had a Jacuzzi in his private quarters, and as testified by Wade Robson and his sister, Jackson would bathe seminaked.

Q. Do you recall what Mr. Jackson was wearing in the Jacuzzi?
A. From my recollection, he was wearing shorts. You know, like swimming shorts. And that was it.

It’s almost certain Jordan, just like any close acquaintance, was fully aware of Jackson’s uneven skin tone, though the odds of him making a stab in the dark guess concerning his genitalia are slim.

Remember, we are led to believe Jordan Chandler’s father, Evan was trying to extort Jackson. Would an “extortionist” really be so reckless, and damage their chances of a big “payday” by making a guess, even an educated one? Probably not.

If we go back to Tom Sneddon’s declaration, it states that Jordan described multiple areas of discolouration on his lower torso and buttocks, but it was only the location of the singular dark mark on the underside of his penis that he was asked to draw, as it was so unique, and only visible if Jackson was naked and most likely aroused.

Deputy District Attorney, Lauren Weis states that they had information that Michael Jackson had never accidentally exposed his naked body to children, let alone the underside of his penis.

The irony with this claim is that Michael Jackson himself claimed there were no markings on his genitalia, as well as many fans. So, do fans say that Michael Jackson lied about the marks and Jordan’s description of discoloration was right, but it didn’t quite match up, or do they try and spin some other conspiracy? Tough choice.

Only One of the Marks Matched


I’ve only included this truther theory for its entertainment merit, rather than its factual accuracy.

Twitter user @AnnieIsNotFkOk, played a “game” with their friend, @RaspberryR3d. This game involved drawing up to 10 marks on a “mushroom”. After they both made their independent drawings, they compared them to one another, where unsurprisingly, there was a strong, if not near identical match, which proves “how Sneddon got away with it”.


Annie Is Not Ok

@AnnieIsNotFkOk believes that Jordan drew multiple marks on the shaft of Jackson’s penis, and through the process of elimination, Tom Sneddon was able to match one of them up, and state that it was in the same “relative location” in his declaration. Yes, really.

As mentioned above, Jordan described discolouration on his “lower torso, buttocks and genitals, including a particular blemish on his penis”, but it was only the dark blemish he described on his penis that he was asked to draw. Jordan did not draw up to 10 marks on the underside of his penis, where 1 out of 10 was in the same relative location.

The fact that two grown adults actually believe this is a plausible theory, highlights the insanity within the Michael Jackson fan community, and how everything is moulded into a conspiracy.

I recommend that you read the full thread, where other fans also agree with @AnnieIsNotFkOk “process of elimination” theory.

Conclusion


Was it a match or a mismatch? Those who worked on the case and viewed the photos and description with their own eyes, say it clearly did. Even the language that Jackson’s defence team used in 2005 strongly demonstrates that they believed it was, at the very least, something they needed to keep out of the courtroom.

The description and photos were of even greater concern to Jackson’s 1993/94 legal team. Carl Douglas, who worked alongside Johnnie Cochran, described it, very bluntly, as the 300 pound gorilla in the mediation room and that they had to “silence” the accuser at a seminar alongside Larry Feldman and Thomas Mesereau in Los Angeles on September 15th, 2010.

Watch the Carl Douglas segment below.

It appears the photographs of Jackson’s genitalia was the final straw, and within weeks, a multimillion dollar settlement had been agreed with Jordan and his parents. That in itself speaks volume.