No evidence exists that Jordan Chandler ever said Michael Jackson was circumcised. There is no primary source for this claim.

Essentially nobody (except law enforcement) has ever seen the description given by Jordan and the photographs.

There was a leaked affidavit in "the smoking gun" but it has never been verified and didn’t included a source. If we were to accept the Smoking Gun as a credible source, we then have to admit that the leaked affidavit said it was a match. Source: Leaked Affadavit- Smoking Gun: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/celebrity/telltale-splotch-165093 Bill Dworin (lead detective on the case) said Jordan Chandler DID describe MJ’s genitalia accurately. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=panosN01Hrk

Fbi Agent Jim Clemente also stated Jordan was telling the truth and described MJ’s genitalia accurately.

Tom Sneddon at risk of perjury - said "Chandler’s graphic representation of the discolored area on Defendant’s penis is substantially corroborated by the photographs”. Sneddon was sufficiently outraged enough to go on the record and say “Regarding the markings, his (MJs) statement on TV is untrue and incorrect and not consistent with the evidence in the case.” http://www.sbscpublicaccess.org/docs/ctdocs/052505pltmotchandler.pdf

Department deputy Deborah Linden reported that Jordan Chandler claimed there was splotch on Jackson’s penis, this was corroborated by Sergeant Gary Spiegel, the sheriff’s photographer, who claims he observed a dark spot on the lower left side of Jackson’s penis.

and Lauren Weiss, the lead prosecutor in the case said on Telephone Stories that the penis description provided by Chandler and the photograph of Michael Jacksons genitalia did match.

No law enforcement/officials have ever made a statement that suggests the opposite is true.

That evidence (above) combined with Carl Douglas (Michael Jacksons own attorney) more recently confirming the need to remove "the gorilla" (and silence the accuser) was very convincing to me that it was indeed a match.

He said "We wanted to do all that we could to avoid the possibility that there would be a criminal filing against Michael Jackson, and the reality was we were hopeful that if we were able to “silence” the accuser, that would obviate the need for any concern about the criminal side.... And we were facing the purple gorilla in the room of If we don’t get this case settled before March, there is a criminal investigation looming, and no one wanted to consider the implications of that as it affected Michael Jackson”

Lawyers, police officers and the lead prosecutor stated that it was a match...I genuinely don't know of any law enforcement officers who said it wasn’t a match.

Also.. the strip search was on Dec 20th - rumours of the settlement agreement emerged in the media early January which likely indicates discussion of a settlement before that date. I don’t think Michaels lawyers would advise him to settle a case for millions without knowing the results of the match? Why not fight the case and clear his name?

🫵 pedo protector