Latest on MJJC

Michael Jackson Settles case Against Prince Abdulla

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Prince of Bahrain vs MJ Trial Thread: (UPDATE: Michael to testify next week)

Lacey said:
I don't know. We'll see how it plays out. I do think how it was terminated does matter though. Michael leaving without letting him know he had no intention of coming back, then that letter from Raymone, then not taking his calls. Well, either way the prince wouldn't be happy about the business relationship being over, but I bet he'd much rather it have looked publicly like a mutual agreement to disband rather than having it look like he was kicked to the curb. I bet to a lot of people (not MJ fans) it looks like MJ used him and when he didn't need him anymore moved on, making him look rather foolish for being so generous to MJ. I don't think it was that way and it didn't have to be made to look that way either. Bet the prince would rather have saved public face all around and IMO, he thinks the only way he can do that now is this suit. So again, in my opinion, if the termination had been handled better, MJ would still be out of the agreement and there would be no civil suit.
Click to expand...

Well as I remembered it being reported, the way it looked was Michael had been kicked out, not left, because the Prince was tired of paying for his stay there. No one was talking about how Michael used the Prince and moved on, but rather how he was kicked out, even though that was obviously false.
 
Re: Prince of Bahrain vs MJ Trial Thread: (UPDATE: Michael to testify next week)

wannabestartinsomthin21 said:
Well as I remembered it being reported, the way it looked was Michael had been kicked out, not left, because the Prince was tired of paying for his stay there. No one was talking about how Michael used the Prince and moved on, but rather how he was kicked out, even though that was obviously false.
Click to expand...

I don't remember it that way - unless you count Friedman, which I really don't. Could be wrong. But in any case, that's kinda the way it's looking now and it didn't have to. Anyhow, I do think if MJ had really good advisers, it could have been handled much better and more privately and been all over and done with. I just think it has more to do with the prince trying to save face more than anything else. If he just wanted fame with MJ's name all he has to do is write a book called "Living with MJ in the Palace". Guaranteed bestseller and prolly movie of the week. All MJ could do is sue and the prince's pockets are deep enough to handle that. So far the prince hasn't said anything personally derogatory at all about MJ. Hoping that lasts.
 
Re: Prince of Bahrain vs MJ Trial Thread: (UPDATE: Michael to testify next week) [threads MERGED]

sooo.. testimony reveals that even unto this day...Michael is an emotionally vulnerable person. do you know anyone else who would go thru such a long successful career in the most shark infested business in the world and still maintain an emotionally vulnerable heart? no. other people would find that it would be easier to be callous after being burned repeatedly, and they would be nasty, after having such a prolonged career like this..if theirs lasted this long...

but i knew when MJ waved at me when i was homeless, that he was the type that could never say a callous type no to anyone...and therefore,the sharks would circle him and his success, the most. and continuously try to destroy him. there is just no way that MJ is the wrong party in this case. he is not doing the suing. he should be. but he isn't. this is one time when a gut feeling is evidence enough that the prince decided that no meant yes, and yes meant contract. where he made two plus two equal five. and the prince knew in his heart that MJ wasn't really ready to work with him. but the prince surpassed his own gut feelings regarding truth and went to take advantage of the phenomenal vulnerability of MJ. not to mention that the prince dropping Jermaine sticks out like a sore thumb. the prince will be blown out of the water. i'd stake my life on it.

and MJ being phenomenally nice will work in his favor. the laws of the universe always dictate that with the boomerang factor. u put it out..in the end, u get it back. in the end, justice will be kind to MJ, because MJ is too kind to callous people. and..in the end...callousness comes back to those who are callous, like the prince.
 
Last edited:
Re: Prince of Bahrain vs MJ Trial Thread: (UPDATE: Michael to testify next week)

Lacey said:
I don't remember it that way - unless you count Friedman, which I really don't. Could be wrong. But in any case, that's kinda the way it's looking now and it didn't have to. Anyhow, I do think if MJ had really good advisers, it could have been handled much better and more privately and been all over and done with. I just think it has more to do with the prince trying to save face more than anything else. If he just wanted fame with MJ's name all he has to do is write a book called "Living with MJ in the Palace". Guaranteed bestseller and prolly movie of the week. All MJ could do is sue and the prince's pockets are deep enough to handle that. So far the prince hasn't said anything personally derogatory at all about MJ. Hoping that lasts.
Click to expand...


no..he just said something legally derogatory about MJ. it's called a lawsuit.
 
Re: Prince of Bahrain vs MJ Trial Thread: (UPDATE: Michael to testify next week) [threads MERGED]

UK Report

Ok I think I just saw a pig fly!!!

Its unbelievable but Uk's GMTV had a reporter called Wendy Leigh talking about this and it was completely positive!! She'd clearly looked into the case herself and spoke her honest interpretation..

She said that the idea that the Prince would give MJ just 7 milion for all these projects was ludicrous! She said MJ was such a famous person that surely he would command much more than that.

Then she gave a history of the case and said that it looked like 'unrequited love' lol which is what we were all saying. She said this was payback time for the Prince because he was annoyed that MJ withdrew from him after offering him a haven. She said the Prince must have been very generous, as he also gave Jermaine loads of cash and a rolls royce (and she said Jermaine is nowhere near as famous as Michael). But it was only with Michael that the Prince wanted something in return.

She also stated that she thinks the finacial situation is largely exxagerated and we dont need to be worried about him lol. She said that he still owns half the ATV catalogue and the Neverland deal was not what it seemed. She claimed he had simply formed a joint company, Colony and Neverland was signed over to the company instead of it being under his name.

Overall, she was sympathetic and seemed sure that Michael would make a good impression. And she actually called him Michael all the time, not even Jackson. She actually humanised him. Who is this woman? she was speaking from Miami.
 
Re: Prince of Bahrain vs MJ Trial Thread: (UPDATE: Michael to testify next week) [threads MERGED]

HEY; THEY SPRED THIS CASE ALL OFER THE TV TEXT; ONE TEXT SAYS " The prince sues jackson about 7 THOUSAND million dollars!" look how rich they think he is...
 
Re: Prince of Bahrain vs MJ Trial Thread: (UPDATE: Michael to testify next week) [threads MERGED]

Well that is unusual, lol. But refreshing.

In a nut shell, what this case is: The Prince helped Michael with the hope and the intent of developing a business relationship with Michael and profiting both financially and personally from that relationship, not because he actually cared about making Michael better. When his bribes and methodes of seduction ultimately fell through, he got mad and wanted all of the money he spent trying to make money back.
 
Re: Prince of Bahrain vs MJ Trial Thread: (UPDATE: Michael to testify next week) [threads MERGED]

Stranger said:
UK Report

Ok I think I just saw a pig fly!!!

Its unbelievable but Uk's GMTV had a reporter called Wendy Leigh talking about this and it was completely positive!! She'd clearly looked into the case herself and spoke her honest interpretation..

She said that the idea that the Prince would give MJ just 7 milion for all these projects was ludicrous! She said MJ was such a famous person that surely he would command much more than that.

Then she gave a history of the case and said that it looked like 'unrequited love' lol which is what we were all saying. She said this was payback time for the Prince because he was annoyed that MJ withdrew from him after offering him a haven. She said the Prince must have been very generous, as he also gave Jermaine loads of cash and a rolls royce (and she said Jermaine is nowhere near as famous as Michael). But it was only with Michael that the Prince wanted something in return.

She also stated that she thinks the finacial situation is largely exxagerated and we dont need to be worried about him lol. She said that he still owns half the ATV catalogue and the Neverland deal was not what it seemed. She claimed he had simply formed a joint company, Colony and Neverland was signed over to the company instead of it being under his name.

Overall, she was sympathetic and seemed sure that Michael would make a good impression. And she actually called him Michael all the time, not even Jackson. She actually humanised him. Who is this woman? she was speaking from Miami.
Click to expand...

i'll just savor it! lol...thanks for posting this!!! there are many winged pigs baby
 
Re: Prince of Bahrain vs MJ Trial Thread: (UPDATE: Michael to testify next week) [threads MERGED]

My advice to MJ would be: Beware of a wolf in sheep's clothing!:bugeyed
If I am not mistaken someone posted an article where it stated the Prince called MJ during his 2005 trial and then GAVE him $1M along with a few other things and then told him to come chill in Bahrain after the trial to ease his mind and relax. Well my issue is why in the world would he call Michael at the lowest point in his life, befriend him, then once he gets MJ into his house WHAM, BAM ,THANK YOU MA'AM hit him up with a proposal/contract to record an album...??? Man talk about low down.. That part really got to me, because that means the Prince wasn't looking to be a REAL friend to Michael, he was looking for Michael to put him on the map (musically).
Oh well that's my :2cents: about it, I just hope everything works out and they both go their separate ways without this getting really ugly.
 
Re: Prince of Bahrain vs MJ Trial Thread: (UPDATE: Michael to testify next week) [threads MERGED]

Pigs are certainly flying, thanks for posting that Stranger, it certainly is refreshing to see a journalist doing some research.


#1MJstan said:
My advice to MJ would be: Beware of a wolf in sheep's clothing!:bugeyed
If I am not mistaken someone posted an article where it stated the Prince called MJ during his 2005 trial and then GAVE him $1M along with a few other things and then told him to come chill in Bahrain after the trial to ease his mind and relax. Well my issue is why in the world would he call Michael at the lowest point in his life, befriend him, then once he gets MJ into his house WHAM, BAM ,THANK YOU MA'AM hit him up with a proposal/contract to record an album...??? Man talk about low down.. That part really got to me, because that means the Prince wasn't looking to be a REAL friend to Michael, he was looking for Michael to put him on the map (musically).
Oh well that's my :2cents: about it, I just hope everything works out and they both go their separate ways without this getting really ugly.
Click to expand...

This how I see it too
I hope and pray that this goes well for Michael
 
Re: Prince of Bahrain vs MJ Trial Thread: (UPDATE: Michael to testify next week) [threads MERGED]

wannabestartinsomthin21 said:
Well that is unusual, lol. But refreshing.

In a nut shell, what this case is: The Prince helped Michael with the hope and the intent of developing a business relationship with Michael and profiting both financially and personally from that relationship, not because he actually cared about making Michael better. When his bribes and methodes of seduction ultimately fell through, he got mad and wanted all of the money he spent trying to make money back.
Click to expand...
I'm sure its not as clear cut as that, Nicole..
 
Re: Prince of Bahrain vs MJ Trial Thread: (UPDATE: Michael to testify next week) [threads MERGED]

If they can come up with a win-win this can end quickly.
 
Re: Prince of Bahrain vs MJ Trial Thread: (UPDATE: Michael to testify next week) [threads MERGED]

wannabestartinsomthin21 said:
In a nut shell, I'm sure it is.
Click to expand...

I'm sure there's people in the Prince's inner circle saying the exact opposite of what you're saying.(Just because the love the Prince and know him well)
 
Re: Prince of Bahrain vs MJ Trial Thread: (UPDATE: Michael to testify next week)

vncwilliam said:
i think it's in MJ's nature to show gratitude if the party that treated him is genuine. remember he was hospitalized when he could not perform for HBO? well he was so grateful to the people that genuinely cared for him in the hospital that he gave them more than one expensive car as a gift..rather..gifts. still..having said that..people should not go around saying they are generous and do things out of the goodness of their heart if they actually EXPECT something in return. obviously, the prince was expecting something. so..however this turns out..the prince is not genuine like those hospital staff were genuine. i would also think that MJ would determine how he would pay back, like he did with the hospital staff...not the prince.
Click to expand...

Of course. I never expect anything in return when I do something for someone. And I know that is MJ's nature. I have no comment on this since I have no idea what is going on....
 
Re: Prince of Bahrain vs MJ Trial Thread: (UPDATE: Michael to testify next week) [threads MERGED]

I know you're trying to be the objective fan who looks at the issue from all sides, but the truth is, you're playing devils advocate here and in turn aren't actually looking at the circumstances surrounding how this all came about. In an effort to be objective, you're coming across as subjective as anyone else here. You think I and others here defending Michael are doing so based on feeling he doesn't legally owe the Prince money, but you're very wrong. It's based on how and when he went about ropping Michael in to this deal in the first place. It's a moral issue, not a legal issue. How many times does that need to be said? I feel zero sympathy for the Prince because of the way he went about this. Whether Michael backed out of a contractual agreement or not, which so far there's been no evidence of him doing so, is irrelivent to me. The Prince deserved what he got because of the way he went about this whole thing. It was wrong.
 
Re: Prince of Bahrain vs MJ Trial Thread: (UPDATE: Michael to testify next week) [threads MERGED]

wannabestartinsomthin21 said:
I know you're trying to be the objective fan who looks at the issue from all sides, but the truth is, you're playing devils advocate here and in turn aren't actually looking at the circumstances surrounding how this all came about. In an effort to be objective, you're coming across as subjective as anyone else here. You think I and others here defending Michael are doing so based on feeling he doesn't legally owe the Prince money, but you're very wrong. It's based on how and when he went about ropping Michael in to this deal in the first place. It's a moral issue, not a legal issue. How many times does that need to be said? I feel zero sympathy for the Prince because of the way he went about this. Whether Michael backed out of a contractual agreement or not, which so far there's been no evidence of him doing so, is irrelivent to me. The Prince deserved what he got because of the way he went about this whole thing. It was wrong.
Click to expand...
You really believe I am coming across as subjective? Even though I am attributing blame to each party?
 
Re: Prince of Bahrain vs MJ Trial Thread: (UPDATE: Michael to testify next week) [threads MERGED]

You only think you are. So far, there's greater evidence in Michael's favor then in the Prince's, yet you continue to favor the Prince's complaint over Michael's.
 
Re: Prince of Bahrain vs MJ Trial Thread: (UPDATE: Michael to testify next week) [threads MERGED]

Stranger said:
UK Report

Ok I think I just saw a pig fly!!!

Its unbelievable but Uk's GMTV had a reporter called Wendy Leigh talking about this and it was completely positive!! She'd clearly looked into the case herself and spoke her honest interpretation..

She said that the idea that the Prince would give MJ just 7 milion for all these projects was ludicrous! She said MJ was such a famous person that surely he would command much more than that.

Then she gave a history of the case and said that it looked like 'unrequited love' lol which is what we were all saying. She said this was payback time for the Prince because he was annoyed that MJ withdrew from him after offering him a haven. She said the Prince must have been very generous, as he also gave Jermaine loads of cash and a rolls royce (and she said Jermaine is nowhere near as famous as Michael). But it was only with Michael that the Prince wanted something in return.

She also stated that she thinks the finacial situation is largely exxagerated and we dont need to be worried about him lol. She said that he still owns half the ATV catalogue and the Neverland deal was not what it seemed. She claimed he had simply formed a joint company, Colony and Neverland was signed over to the company instead of it being under his name.

Overall, she was sympathetic and seemed sure that Michael would make a good impression. And she actually called him Michael all the time, not even Jackson. She actually humanised him. Who is this woman? she was speaking from Miami.
Click to expand...

well at least she is not a sheep like the rest fo the media is.
 
Re: Prince of Bahrain vs MJ Trial Thread: (UPDATE: Michael to testify next week) [threads MERGED]

wannabestartinsomthin21 said:
You only think you are. So far, there's greater evidence in Michael's favor then in the Prince's, yet you continue to favor the Prince's complaint over Michael's.
Click to expand...

I prefer to look at sourrounding circumstances (not leaving out anything) before I start pointing fingerz. And how can you say that I am favouring the Prince even though I specificly stated that both of them might have been wrong? Cmon now, dont be like that. Anyway your whole argument is based on the fact that MJ was not in his sound mind when The Prince approached him. Whether MJ was not of a sound mind is not improbable but its really a factual question that needs to be established with evidence. What if MJ was really in his sound mind and knew what he was doing despite the trial. Its a possibility that you chose to ignore. In actual fact we can only assume that MJ was not in his sound mind, we cant state it as a fact like you and others are doing.
 
Re: Prince of Bahrain vs MJ Trial Thread: (UPDATE: Michael to testify next week) [threads MERGED]

BONGANI said:
I prefer to look at sourrounding circumstances (not leaving out anything) before I start pointing fingerz. And how can you say that I am favouring the Prince even though I specificly stated that both of them might have been wrong? Cmon now, dont be like that. Anyway your whole argument is based on the fact that MJ was not in his sound mind when The Prince approached him. Whether MJ was not of a sound mind is not improbable but its really a factual question that needs to be established with evidence. What if MJ was really in his sound mind and knew what he was doing despite the trial. Its a possibility that you chose to ignore. In actual fact we can only assume that MJ was not in his sound mind, we cant state it as a fact like you and others are doing.
Click to expand...

are you arguing for the sake of being one who disagrees? there is a spirit much like you that appears in every thread during a Michael crisis, in the form of one who disagrees with people who clearly support MJ but says they don't, right before MJ gets a victory. i've seen it before, in more than two MJ crisis situations..lol
 
Re: Prince of Bahrain vs MJ Trial Thread: (UPDATE: Michael to testify next week) [threads MERGED]

vncwilliam said:
are you arguing for the sake of being one who disagrees? there is a spirit much like you that appears in every thread during a Michael crisis, in the form of one who disagrees with people who clearly support MJ but says they don't, right before MJ gets a victory. i've seen it before, in more than two MJ crisis situations..lol
Click to expand...

You didn't even dispute my post on its merits. You merely brang up an argumentative side issue (to deflect mine,probably). Therefore I will not entertain you, plus I'v seen your posts as of late, you pretty much think Michael is God. Its no use talking to you.. waste of time and money.
 
Re: Prince of Bahrain vs MJ Trial Thread: (UPDATE: Michael to testify next week) [threads MERGED]

BONGANI said:
You really believe I am coming across as subjective? Even though I am attributing blame to each party?
Click to expand...

not talking about this case specifically, but just because one attributes blame to both sides does not mean you're objective or anything. e.g. Holocaust deniers, there is no "attributing blame to both sides" type objectivity here.

Just making a logical point, not arguing about this case, since i don't really understand it.
 
Re: Prince of Bahrain vs MJ Trial Thread: (UPDATE: Michael to testify next week) [threads MERGED]

BONGANI said:
You didn't even dispute my post on its merits. You merely brang up an argumentative side issue (to deflect mine,probably). Therefore I will not entertain you, plus I'v seen your posts as of late, you pretty much think Michael is God. Its no use talking to you.. waste of time and money.
Click to expand...

no..i don't think Michael is God. people keep saying that. what is the definition of God? i dont even know what you believe as far as that is concerned. religion has nothing to do with this. it's just that there is a seeming hatred for the common fan who simply likes to defend MJ..and the first thing the naysayer draws is the MJ is god card. it's so easy and so lame. and it makes it hard on MJ fans..as if life isn't hard enough for MJ himself.

i'm just one who is defending Michael because there is much to defend.
and u have already entertained me.

it's frustrating to see someone say they are neutral when they clearly are looking for problems with Michael where there are none. you keep looking for flaws as if you have seen the ins and outs of the whole case that nobody hasn't even seen, including you. the basic laws of generosity and deceit are clearly mapped out here, and you are turning a blind eye to them just to frustrate people who choose to defend MJ.
 
Re: Prince of Bahrain vs MJ Trial Thread: (UPDATE: Michael to testify next week) [threads MERGED]

MJandRFfan said:
not talking about this case specifically, but just because one attributes blame to both sides does not mean you're objective or anything. e.g. Holocaust deniers, there is no "attributing blame to both sides" type objectivity here.

Just making a logical point, not arguing about this case, since i don't really understand it.
Click to expand...
Has the word "objectiv" taken a new meaning? Or did you misunderstand the context in which I was using it? Anyway without getting to technical my whole point is that I'm not the type of fan to automaticly assume Michael is the wronged one everytime there is a dispute of this nature. Nor am I the type of fan to point at Michael, I'd rather take consider all the sorrounding circumstances and consider ever possibility before pointing fingerz.
 
Re: Prince of Bahrain vs MJ Trial Thread: (UPDATE: Michael to testify next week) [threads MERGED]

Some fans think that being against Michael is "Being Objective". Just because we're fans doesn't mean we can't pick Michael's side without being "Blind". I Heard both sides, and i don't believe Prince​
 
Re: Prince of Bahrain vs MJ Trial Thread: (UPDATE: Michael to testify next week) [threads MERGED]

The topic of this thread is the trial in London. There will be trial updates soon. Criticizing one-another is not a respectful nor productive use of anyone's time and emotion. For the sake of everyone's peace-of-mind, please take arguments to PM so that others do not have to read them.

Thank you,

Victoria
 
Last edited:
Re: Prince of Bahrain vs MJ Trial Thread: (UPDATE: Michael to testify next week) [threads MERGED]

I'm still waiting for vncwilliam's reply to Bongani. I believe you've made some good points Bongani and you're attempting to see it from a neutral perspective, kudos to you.

Of coarse i'm on MJ's side and judging by most media reports that usually state MJ's in the wrong, they're actually mostly FOR Michael in this case, so I dont think much will come from it.
 
Re: Prince of Bahrain vs MJ Trial Thread: (UPDATE: Michael to testify next week) [threads MERGED]

WilliamJean said:
I'm still waiting for vncwilliam's reply to Bongani. I believe you've made some good points Bongani and you're attempting to see it from a neutral perspective, kudos to you.

Of coarse i'm on MJ's side and judging by most media reports that usually state MJ's in the wrong, they're actually mostly FOR Michael in this case, so I dont think much will come from it.
Click to expand...

and what shall that reply be other than what i wrote?

the idea that he is neutral isn't shared by everybody...so that eliminates the logic of your point on his behalf.

having said that, and though i don't expect everybody to agree with me, and i really don't care...

one thing you and i can agree on...even the media is running out of steam against MJ on this one...so....the feeling of confidence on MJ's behalf is all i need. i don't need applause from all sides...as far as agreeing with me is concerned. just MJ's victory will suffice.

whether i satisfy all other posters or not, with my responses, is not what i need for satisfaction
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top