I have been thinking as to what to the pro and cons of hoaxing your death for certain situations would be, in the hope that it can lead us to the simplest explanation. After all, that is usually the most accurate. Lets start with the theory that Michael was in danger, because this seems to have people talking at the moment.

PROS for the "in danger" theory.


I believe that if Michael was in danger then people would be more understanding as to why he had to hoax his death. I mean it would take a pretty heartless person to not understand why someone had to do this in order to stay alive. Michael also has the advantage of the movies portraying this as well. There have been several movies which focus on someone hoaxing their death in order to escape someone who was trying to hurt them. I don't know if you have all seen "Sleeping with the enemy" staring Julia Roberts. It highlights domestic violence and how a woman had to hoax her death at sea in order to escape this. Lets have a look at "canoe man". That was a case of greed. He hoaxed his death in order to cash in his life insurance policy but he was stupid enough to come home when he decided he was home sick. Something as big as fraud is never taken lightly and you can expect people to turn on you. However, if you have NO other choice and your life is in danger, people can pretty much forgive anything that you need to do.

Michael is a Father first and foremost an has said this on several occasions. He is a father first and an entertainer second. It is my belief that if his life was in danger for any reason he would hoax his death in order to protect his children. I am sure if Michael was aware someone was out to hurt him and tried to move around there would be the chance they would catch up with him when he was with his children and they would be brought into the equation. However, if Michael hoaxed his death and had to stay out of the spotlight until the "bad guys" were brought down and in the meantime his children were with their Gran, I am sure they would be perfectly safe. Michael wouldn't leave his children in anything but the best hands.

CONS for the "in danger" theory.

Michael been in danger is a horrible thought and we don't want to think this, however we need to investigate it in order to get the full picture.

There will always be those who will never understand what it is like to be in this situation and won't have much understanding for Michael or the situation. These are the people who will continue to label him as "wacko" and will always continue to do so.

This runs the risk that Michael will never return. Where does the danger end? Who is to say that if the people are trying to hurt Michael are brought down and spend the rest of their lives in jail and they can't organise someone they are connected with to fulfil their plans? Michael is a person and not public property. He has to make sure he is safe and well and if staying away for good so he can continue to live his life with his family then that's great. We aren't selfish people and I am sure we would all rather see his happen then Michael come back to any harm.

PROS for the "movie" theory.

People would be talking about it for years and years to come. It would be one of those magical moments where you could say to your grandchildren, "I was there to witness that. I was part of history". Those very rarely happen. We have already been privileged enough to witness the wonder that was Michael in the musical world and how he pushed boundaries and pioneered things for today's artists. If he did this for a movie, he would truly establish himself as the greatest wonder the world has ever seen. Michael isn't known for been a wallflower and doesn't shy away from things. Who else could bring out a song called "Black and White" when he had suffered so much questioning from the press about his changing appearance? Michael has the balls to pull this off. He truly would be known as the artist that wasn't afraid to do anything. That is something that most artists today strive for and very rarely achieve. That's why the shelf life of a pop star today is so short lived. They don't have the guts to step away from the mainstream and take a gamble on making a name for themselves by different.

It would generate so much money. I don't mean to add this to make Michael sound like a money grabber because that's not what I am getting at. People are curious by nature and want the inside scoop on everything. Even those who wouldn't want to admit it, would want to know how this was pulled off and I am sure if it was ever to make it to cinemas, the gross amount would be off the scale. "This Is It" is set to make more than "Titanic" did and that was in it's billions. Michael's estate is set to make 90% of that. It's an insane amount of money. You would indeed never have to work again and you would have established your name in one movie. Quite ingenius really!

CONS for the "movie" theory.

I'm sure you don't need me to tell you this but the media backlash would be uncontrolable. We have seen what happened whenever Michael tried to do something as simple as grow a beard. The media scrutanised him and went out of their way to make him look stupid. Can you image what would happen if it came out this was all for a movie? I don't even want to think about it because it wouldn't be pretty but you know it would be bad.

Michael would risk losing a lot of fans and credability. As it stands at the moment, Michael is back on top and is basically considered a God. I know for the believers that think he is still alive, nothing would make us happier than Michael coming back to us. However, not everyone is that forgiving. We have to remember that people have grieved an awful lot since June 25th, even people who weren't massive Michael fans to begin with. They have spent a lot of money on Michael records, merchandise, DVD's, clothes etc etc. I wouldn't imagine it would sit too well with them if they found out this had all been done for a movie. People have been reported as commiting suicide because of this. I would imagine that was true. I remember back in the UK when a big boy band called "Take That" split up ten years ago a girl commited suicide. I believe that the people who commited suicide had underlying health problems and Michael cannot be blamed for his, however in their anger people lash out and look for someone to blame.

Michael would run the risk of his family been targeted because of this. People would want to know, and probably would find out, if the family were involved and why they went along with it for a movie. Their motives and actions since June 25th have already been questioned numerous times and for some siblings there has been a reignation of fame. Jermaine has been on LKL numerous times and is now going to judge a new talent show in the UK and La Toya is rumoured to be lauching her own range of milkshakes. This would all be taken away from them and as much as I am sure Michale disliked his family leaching off him and milking his name, he would never want them to come to any harm because of his actions. Then there are his children. The whole world and his uncle knows who they are now. I am sure there would be some sick people out there who would threaten to endanger them. Would Michael risk all this for movie? Not on your life!

PROS for the "showing the press up" theory.

The press have hounded Michael for years and made his life a living hell. I strongly believe they have a lot to do with fans turning on Michael after the 1993 and 2003 child molestation allegations. This would be the ultimate revenge. Todays stars know better than to question what they write because they have the power to make or break you. However, Michael showed that people don't scare him that easily. I am sure you have all seen the 2001 footage where he makes a stand against Sony and Tommy Matolla! He would show he wasn't a man to be crossed or messed with and if you do screw him over, sooner or later, you will get what is coming to you.

CONS for the "showing the press up" theory.

The press would NEVER let this up. They influence us so much in everyday life. We don't even realise it. They are truly one of the biggest opressers out there. They have the power to influence people every single day and if they print that someone is evil more often then not we believe them. Look at the recent case of the "balloon boy". It has been announced that the Mother of the child admitted that it was a hoax. The press latched onto this straight away and there has been talk of the children been taken away from their parents. They make it look like anyone who trys to pull something like this off is an unfit parent (I believe in the case of "balloon boy" this is the case) but Michael would most likely face the same thing. His sanity would be questioned and people who didn't believe he was "wacko" (sorry hate that word but I needed it for emphasis!) would surely believe so now. I mean if you weren't a believer, or even if you are, would you think it was right for someone to put so many people through all this for personal revenge? I am sure the answer to that from many would be no.

PROS for the "DEA" theory

Michael may most likely be seen as a hero. Drugs and celebrity deaths are a massive problem right now, none more so than the last few years. There was Anna Nicole Smith. Heather Ledger and DJ AM to name a few. Celebrities and drugs seem to go hand in hand and it is something the DEA are trying to crack down on at the moment. Someone had a great quote in a thread today that I wanted to share with you: "I don’t think Michael became a victim of the drugs, he became a solution". If this theory is to hold any weight it would take someone of Michael's magnitude and someone with his connections to try and combat this problem.

CONS for the "DEA" theory.

Michael may be seen as hard core drug abuser whose habit forced him to hoax his death in order to escape the consqueneces of taking drugs. It's easy for people to overlook the reasons why people become addicted to drugs. More often than not it's dismissed that people may have become hooked due to medical problems or after suffering a horrific injury. Drugs have a stigma attached to them and if you are a drug abuser you run the risk of people always looking down on you and thinking you are dirt.

A tarnished image. Michael's image has taken so much of a battering. He had to contend with people saying he bleached his skin, he and La Toya were the same person, he was always been questioned when it came to plastic surgery and last but not least his image was shattered when people thought he was a child abuser. Most of the world fell back in love with Michael on June 25th and for the masses they have forgotten all of the above. The press has been kinder to him then they have in years. If this was anything to do with drusg, I can see the headlines now. It wouldn't be pretty.


PROS for the "not coming back" theory.

The pros for Michael would obviosuly been able to live what he would consider a normal life with his children. We have all heard countless times how Michael stated he couldn't even go to the store or a park without been mobbed by people. He never had any peace. Can you imagine how difficult it would be to step out of your front door and have 100 cameras flashing in your face? Or how about waking up and finding that the tabloids had printed more rubbish about you. It's the darker side of fame and Michael had to contend with this for half of his life. I don't understand how he did it because I, along with many people, would have cracked a long time ago.

Michael would be able to retire from the public eye and concentrate on projects that he wanted to work on, without having distractions and people either suing him or accusing him of hatefull vicious crimes. Michael gave his all to his fans for 45 years. That is an amazingly long time when you are only 51. Even though it can be argued that Michael loved his job and lived to entertain, he deserves to be happy and have a rest.

CONS for the "not coming back" theory.

From a purely selfish fan point of view for us the main con would be Michael not coming back to us.

It's highly likely that Michael would never be able to go out of his home again without wearing a heavy disguise. Unless he had drastic plastic surgery most people would recognise him in an instant. He reached parts of the world where people don't even have a tv and I think in a recent poll it was stated that Michael, Ronald McDonald and Jesus have the most recognised faces in the world. This will only have increased since June 25th. It would be a lot of hard work to have to put on a prosetic face everytime you wanted to go out. Also, now the children's identies have been revealed everyone who is pictured with them is been questioned. I am sure if Michael was to go out with his children this would be questioned and people would begin to investigate who he was. It would only be amatter of time before it came out that it was indeed Michael.

Michael would never again be able to perform in the public eye or release anything new under his name. If a new song was to be released people would be asking where it came from. Lets take the recent release of "This Is It" as an example. As soon as it came out it was scruntanised. We all wanted to know when it was recorded and why it had a "tinny" effect to it. When it came out that Paul Anka had co-written the song it caused a massive stir. Michael would have to contend with this all the time. If we look at it from the point of view that Michael has retired from music and wants to direct film under a new name that would also pose some problems IMO. It's not easy to get your foot in the door and in Hollywood their are countless rejections. Someone with a name like Michael Jackson would have no problem getting his foot in the door, but would Joe Bloggs? Would the ideas sell because of his name? Everything attached to Michael is an instant hit. It's highly unlikely that a movie by anyone else would have the same success.

Michael is being sued left and right at the moment. I mean people are quiet literally crawling out of the woodwork to try and leach off of his estate. For the time been Michael's lawyers and executors will be doing the best they can to keep things at bay. However, who is a judge going to go in favour off? A person who is able to defend their actions or a person who is dead and cannot give their reasonings? This would cut into Katherine and the childrens inhertiance big time, something I am sure Michael would not want. I would also like to add here that Michael runs the risk of been sued by everyone because of the hoax, and not just if he doesn't return.

Conclusion.

Ok so what have we learnt from this? I hope something or I have wasted time typing all this out LOL. Ok seriously, the above is just based on my thoughts but I would like to think I am a logical person and can look at things from all perspectives. I think the cons for the "movie theory", "showing the media up theory" and the "DEA theory" outway the cons so for me they don't hold any weight as to why Michael would hoax his death.

So, by the process of elimation that leaves the theories that Michael was in danger or is not coming back. Now it doesn't take a genius to say that we won't know what the answer to this will be until Michael, assuming he does, comes back and tells us. However, these two theories are the only ones that hold any weight to me. As I said in another thread this wasn't a decision that was made on a wim or something that was taken in vain. The consequences for something as big as this are massive, whether your chose to make a comeback or not. If you make a comeback you risk losing everything, if you stay "dead" you lose the chance to live your life to it's fulliest and you will always be looking over your shoulder.

I guess we have a bumpy ride in store and I am sure more evidence will come to light in the coming months to point us in the direction of one of these theories, and I pray with all my heart we will one day find out the truth.[b]