Book Review– Be Careful Who You Love: Inside the Michael Jackson Case by D. Dimond


mjbookI’ve always been fascinated by Michael Jackson & his life as most of the world has. Admittedly, I’ve always been a fan. I was looking for a book that would present as many FACTS as possible about his life & the allegations made against him. Normally, all we hear through the media is speculation, exaggeration, sensationalism, rumor, opinion, hearsay, lies & gossip that sends ratings through the roof & gets people paid. When I first read a description of this book & read about Diane Dimond I thought “this might be more credible and unbiased than usual”. Boy was I wrong. This book reads in large part like a tabloid…particularly in the beginning & toward the end. But to be fair, I wonder if a book could be written about him and not sound like a tabloid?

This book is full of shady characters that the author (& the court apparently) uses as “witnesses” or “proof”. Boy has the meaning of those words been bent & morphed to the point that many of us don’t even recognize when it’s happening anymore. In somecases she does present both sides even if it still seems biased and, in a lot of cases, is all hearsay that can’t really be corroborated with much, if any, legitimacy. In my opinion, those things shouldn’t even be included in the book if it is intended to have a shred of a credible feel to it. Otherwise, you get the tabloidesque undertones that in all honesty made me want to just stop reading it after about page 20 or so. But again I wonder could a book be written without hearsay? There probably wouldn’t be much to say if not for hearsay.

The one point that does not seem like speculation, gossip, hearsay, opinion or exaggeration is chapter 9. This is where the author presents a conversation she had with a profiler that works on sex crimes. One thing bothered me about this chapter…well, a lot of things bothered me about this chapter but at the top of the list was the fact that it was supposed to be anonymous…meaning that the profiler was not supposed to be commenting on Michael Jackson but he obviously knew who Dimond was referring to. That doesn’t make what he supposedly said untrue but I just felt like it was thrown out there and then the chapter was over. This definitely wasn’t the only instance where I felt like I needed more information or that details were missing.

She does present some testimony from the trial in 2005 and I have to side with the jurors in this case….the prosecution (according to this book anyway) wasn’t particularly convincing no matter how hard the author tries to make it so with her commentary. The book jumps all over the place. There are bits & pieces scattered here and there so that it is a little hard to keep track of everything. Details from one instance will be presented in the beginning of the book but the big picture & the author’s comments or opinions will be at the end or in the middle somewhere. It would be very easy to forget the details that were presented if you are not taking notes (Although I read this book in the span of about 24 hours so it wasn’t that hard for me).

One of the biggest problems that I have with this book…maybe the only real problem that all of the others stem from…is that while she somewhat tries to pretend like she is being an unbiased reporter, it is written with an obvious undertone and theme throughout…one of her obvious belief that Michael Jackson is guilty on all accounts from 1993 on. Not to mention his guilt of just being a weird, undeserving human being that brought everything on himself no matter how many un-credible, money hungry people he had around him. There are many justifications presented by the author for the witnesses’ (I use this term loosely) accounts relayed through whatever means to her (the author). When presented with a chance to ponder what Michael Jackson/Jackson Team’s circumstances or justifications might be this is clearly left out a large majority of the time.

Were there parts that startled me? Yes. Were there parts that made me rethink my thoughts & opinions previously? Yes. Did it change my thoughts & opinions in the end? No. It did however give me a great respect & possibly pity for the 2005 jury. I have a clearer picture of how hard it must’ve been to sift through all of the information given & come out feeling like you accomplished something. For me, it also proves, crime or no crime, that money really is the root of all evil. I think based on this book a circumstancial case could be made for either side but in the end there was just way too much reasonable doubt and no real proof on either side.

In the end, I walked away from this book feeling like I had just wasted too much of my life reading tabloid trash. I didn’t feel like I had any more concrete answers than I had before I read it. Even though some of the details were shocking, it wasn’t anything that I didn’t expect. Really the only thing shocking to me is that Michael Jackson didn’t run out of money way before he did….guilty or not.

Don’t waste your money on this book. If you must read it get it from a library.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: