Re: Breaking News: Michael Jackson Sues Julien's Auction
unless it's directed at michael, i don't see a point, webbie. after all, julien's didn't go in and steal his stuff, he allowed this to happen. so the person at fault, in this one, is michael j. jackson sr. not julien's auction house.
i just hop ehe gets the items back he wants. he cannot discern what an auction house will say what is and waht isn't a collector item. he's not a regular joe, he's mj so of course pics and art of his kids and his kids' furniture IS sellable and he shoul dknow that. especially b/c he's so private about his children, where there's mystery, there's a market
I don't agree with those trying to fault MJ and saying it was his fault, because it wasn't.
There are misconceptions being paraded here, and i'm not one to say blind support for Michael, but i also don't believe in the opposite, failure to be objective about what is going on.
We all know judges are human beings, they have bias and can be influenced by the media. This judge disregarded California law which Jacksons team relied on and ruled otherwise just because he has a beef against Michael.
It was no accident that Juliens brought up Nation Of Islam infront of this judge and that's why MJ's team is seeking another fair judge because lawyers know judges can be biased and Julien's lawyers exploited this very well. It had no basis in this case to bring up NOI other than to influence the judge, since if Juliens had been threatened, they should have gone to the police straight away as it's criminal to threaten someone with harm.
The judge bias can be seen from 1993, if you read Geraldine's book, in the way the judge was ruling against MJ contrary to law.
To make it clear, those who say Tahome had power of attorney and could sign contracts on personal issues concerning MJ, well, that then means Tahome could sign a contract with AEG for Michael to tour without Michael signing it and that contract would be valid and binding.
Tahome would have exceeded his authority. He may have a right to negotiate on behalf of MJ concerning a tour, give MJ merchandise samples to autograph for illustration purposes, but ultimately, without MJ signature on a contract to tour, it's invalid, even though Tahome were to sign it.
When it comes to MJ's personal property, the same law applies. Tahome may negotaite an auction, but ultimately MJ has to sign off because it's his personal property.
Tahome has admitted he exceeded his authority and had no authorisation to sign off.
So what's the issue, with the judge? It's pure malice and bias. But some want to blame it on MJ when the system tries to rail against him.
If it's MJ's fault, then why does Julien's bring in NOI to inflame the judge's views when they never reported the same threats to police?
It's because Juliens are trying to trip and sell things they shouldn't sell which MJ should have picked out before finally signing off to an auction, then they have the audacity to mock MJ that he can bid on his own things if he wants them back.
At what point did Julien present Michael with a document to sign off items for auction, because what Tahome signed was at the beginning before Juliens moved in to pack up items and Juliens have admitted Michael had to sort out what he wanted to keep before auction. That's to say, before any auction could take place, he had to chose then sign off.
But they saw they could sell some valuables Michael might take out for a lot of money.
That's what Bashir did. Michael was to review the documentary before it aired and give his approval. Bashir used deceit to bypass the agreements and when Michael sought help of the courts, the judges failed him despite agreements in place.
Now Michael is to review items before sale, Juliens want to sell before Michael reviews and signs off, but the courts are failing him.
When it's all to clear that not only has MJ not signed off to sell his property, but there were oral agreements that supplemented what Tahome signed (exceeding his authority) which resulted in Juiens returning some items MJ wanted to keep till a point when they ceased to uphold the oral agreements so as to rely only on the written document Tahome signed so as to make more money by denying MJ the recovery of more valuable items.
And lo and behold, it's all MJ's fault.
At times blame should be apportioned where it belongs, that includes at the foot of the justice system and those who seek, for their own greed, to manipulate it by inflaming judges so as not to be fair in their rulings.
