Latest on MJJC

FT article: Michael Jackson estate says accuser is trying to extract $213mn

kelley said:
remember thats the article writers framing of whats going on. And if thats from the article by Stacy Brown, it's no wonder it's bent that way. He's a known MJ guilter.
Click to expand...
It's not. That quote is from the FT article.
 
Well well well looky here! Is it our favourite Jersey boys and fam - coming to get their payout! Damn poor Michael the man really couldn’t trust anyone had he any premonition - I would have had him hide in a bunker all his adult life!

For sanity I would say clock out of this one - if it gets to you because I will. It is upto the estate to take this to court like the other two scum bags - no doubt Dan reed is foaming at the mouth. This is what will happen now the Michael Jackson estate is becoming lucrative with the musicals , air play , vega show with a biopic on the way…. Gravy train commence!
 
TeaMJ said:
Well well well looky here! Is it our favourite Jersey boys and fam - coming to get their payout! Damn poor Michael the man really couldn’t trust anyone had he any premonition - I would have had him hide in a bunker all his adult life!

For sanity I would say clock out of this one - if it gets to you because I will. It is upto the estate to take this to court like the other two scum bags - no doubt Dan reed is foaming at the mouth. This is what will happen now the Michael Jackson estate is becoming lucrative with the musicals , air play , vega show with a biopic on the way…. Gravy train commence!
Click to expand...
All this and a grieving family
 
TeaMJ said:
Well well well looky here! Is it our favourite Jersey boys and fam - coming to get their payout! Damn poor Michael the man really couldn’t trust anyone had he any premonition - I would have had him hide in a bunker all his adult life!

For sanity I would say clock out of this one - if it gets to you because I will. It is upto the estate to take this to court like the other two scum bags - no doubt Dan reed is foaming at the mouth. This is what will happen now the Michael Jackson estate is becoming lucrative with the musicals , air play , vega show with a biopic on the way…. Gravy train commence!
Click to expand...
Michael should have turned Neverland into a public attraction like Disneyland rather than actually living there. I'm convinced allowing any of these families into his life was a horrible idea. He moved into Neverland around 1987 when Bad came out, it only took a couple of years before people started to extort him as he employed hundreds if not thousands of people who brought all of their family members over to his place.
 
IhateTheMedia said:
Michael should have turned Neverland into a public attraction like Disneyland rather than actually living there. I'm convinced allowing any of these families into his life was a horrible idea. He moved into Neverland around 1987 when Bad came out, it only took a couple of years before people started to extort him as he employed hundreds if not thousands of people who brought all of their family members over to his place.
Click to expand...
I know one man’s dream generosity and philanthropy taken for weakness and it’s been a nightmare ever since. No one can hurt him now - that’s the only consolation.
 
IhateTheMedia said:
They are idiots. Why did they think paying 20 million was a good idea?
Click to expand...
trying to give them the benefit of the doubt here

maybe it was setup by the estate to get hard core evidence and put them in jail?

It must be said though, that they didn't just give them 20 million for nothing, they actually bought the rights to the cascios siblings life story.

Stop calling it a payoff or settlement. It was a legitimate business deal.

At least we know the cascios can never sell a book or a movie now.
 
kelley said:
trying to give them the benefit of the doubt here

maybe it was setup by the estate to get hard core evidence and put them in jail?

It must be said though, that they didn't just give them 20 million for nothing, they actually bought the rights to the cascios siblings life story.

Stop calling it a payoff or settlement. It was a legitimate business deal.

At least we know the cascios can never sell a book or a movie now.
Click to expand...
So the family can now never go public legally for any false claims?
 
1nn5 said:
Lies or not, they accepted money given by the Estate.

If the Estate wanted really to defend the minimal honor of MJ, they would not give them money to keep them away from the scene.
Click to expand...
Thats exaxtly my words i was going to write here. If i want to defend Michael Jackson, then i dont pay money. Branca, the asshole evil fucking bastard just care about money he get from a fucking movie. I dont care about a movie, i care about MJs legacy. I would never pay them. Now we and they cant escape from this mess anymore. You can explain this paying money from the 90s one time. But not a second time. This will stay forever, we have do deal with this kind of claims forever. There will no peace for us, forever. Thanks Branca u fucking asshole!
 
Last edited:
kelley said:
trying to give them the benefit of the doubt here

maybe it was setup by the estate to get hard core evidence and put them in jail? [...]
Click to expand...
From the FT article. Assuming it's legit and the quotes are accurate, of course:

" Jackson’s estate is asking an arbitrator to award damages, order the accuser to abide by the terms of the 2020 deal and issue an injunction barring him from releasing details he previously agreed to keep secret.

“The agreement contained a clause that stated neither party can disclose its existence to any third party,” said John Branca, a longtime Jackson aide who co-manages the estate."
 
Now The Jacksons have to bury Tito and deal with this stuff on top of it. It's sad to think about but I wonder if the family knew this news was coming.

And I had this through before, but now it wouldn't be surprising if the Estate was blackmailed into having the Cascios tracks on the 2010 album, what do you think? Maybe Damien uncovered something about this and that is why his podcast never came out?!

Do we know if/when the Cascios stopped talking to the Jacksons? (and was it because of the tracks?)
 
zinniabooklover said:
From the FT article. Assuming it's legit and the quotes are accurate, of course:

" Jackson’s estate is asking an arbitrator to award damages, order the accuser to abide by the terms of the 2020 deal and issue an injunction barring him from releasing details he previously agreed to keep secret.

“The agreement contained a clause that stated neither party can disclose its existence to any third party,” said John Branca, a longtime Jackson aide who co-manages the estate."
Click to expand...
Okay so this is good, it means that lying cheat family can't go public with any claims or they'll be royally screwed in court
 
Let them show themselves up for the actual thieves they are… it only goes to evidence the extortion attempts that Michael Jackson when alive and now dead continues to face, it’s barbaric, there’ll be bumps on the road like this for MJs legacy we have to ride the waves.
 
IhateTheMedia said:
True, to the average person the media can easily spin this as "Jackson estate uses money to surpress abuse victims"
Click to expand...
But my point is that they don't need to spin anything, the wording of the above genuinely reads like suppression. I can't fathom how that part of the article can come off in any way positive. MJ was always accused of paying off Chandlers to avoid a criminal trial - The Estate are openly saying they paid off the new accusers and are upset they are going back on the deal, like THAT'S supposed to be the takeaway here?

I hope the Estate haven't shot themselves in the foot here. I don't think this will be major news, but still. Who knows, maybe super transparency will work out for them in the long run. But settling anything in 2019/2020 to me is absolutely insane and playing with matches in a field doused in petrol.
 
Unless, what the article/Estate is REALLY trying to say is that they can't go to media but can still go to authorities - which I'm assuming they haven't done. You can't gag a crime. Hopefully that is the angle they were trying to come from?
 
innuendo141 said:
But my point is that they don't need to spin anything, the wording of the above genuinely reads like suppression. I can't fathom how that part of the article can come off in any way positive. MJ was always accused of paying off Chandlers to avoid a criminal trial - The Estate are openly saying they paid off the new accusers and are upset they are going back on the deal, like THAT'S supposed to be the takeaway here?
Click to expand...
This is what is freaking me out. Not suggesting I have a legal brain which could handle this better than MJE. I'm not saying that. But it's hard to get my head around, ngl.

AlwaysThere said:
It’s hit the trades.
Click to expand...
Sadly, it was already in the Daily Mail (UK tabloid) 4 - 5 hours ago. :(
 
innuendo141 said:
Unless, what the article/Estate is REALLY trying to say is that they can't go to media but can still go to authorities - which I'm assuming they haven't done. You can't gag a crime. Hopefully that is the angle they were trying to come from?
Click to expand...
Well, if what they claim really happened, why didn't they go to the authorities then? They wait until 15 years after the man is dead? Nah. It's bullshit....again.
 
luis98 said:
Well, if what they claim really happened, why didn't they go to the authorities then? They wait until 15 years after the man is dead? Nah. It's bullshit....again.
Click to expand...
The point is, they allegedly per the document Can never report their claims to any third party, i would assume this means the mainstream press or tabloids, or any other source.

​

​

 
IhateTheMedia said:
The point is, they allegedly per the document Can never report their claims to any third party, i would assume this means the mainstream press or tabloids, or any other source.
Click to expand...
This is why I'm so confused. MJE would have taken legal advice before going public with this but ... the agreement? That's why I want to know if those quotes from John Branca are legit. My brain is mashed potato atm. :(
 
innuendo141 said:
Unless, what the article/Estate is REALLY trying to say is that they can't go to media but can still go to authorities - which I'm assuming they haven't done. You can't gag a crime. Hopefully that is the angle they were trying to come from?
Click to expand...
The confidentiality clause means this as it pertains to the alleged abuse
It means that neither party involved in the agreement can disclose the existence of the agreement itself to any third party, including the media, the press, or the authorities. This type of clause is designed to keep the entire agreement and its terms private. However, there are often exceptions to such clauses, especially when it comes to legal obligations. For instance, if you are legally required to disclose the agreement to authorities (e.g., in response to a court order or during a legal investigation)
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top