Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG

[jamba]

I have never seen anyone claiming to "know" on this board. All I have seen are people citing Shafer on the possible reasons of june 19th.
Does Shafer disagree with the coroner then ?
If I use your logic, how come the coroner doesn't explain june 19th ?
Michael's problems were caused by drugs, that's why. Bouee

Well-I have seen people claiming to 'know'--whether it's a gut feeling or based on their interpretation of what we have learned from various sources. I think Petra was saying there is an enormous amount of speculation and an even greater number of theories, some being held with great conviction. I personally think that the precise physical reasons for why MJ was cold, or cold/hot, why he even had insomnia in the first place, why he was trembling, shivering, rambling, scared, on the 19th is not known and may never be known. This is how life is. We are complex organisms both mentally and physically--we are talking about a very complex situation, with lots and lots of factors, lots of people involved, lots of opinions, and a very complex person at the center--MJ, so there are many, many variables and I doubt we can do anything but what we are doing, which is endlessly speculating and arguing/debating about our speculations. B/c of this I find some people on the forum a breath of fresh air when they can cut through all the variables to find a clear and rational position based on verifiable and reliable information. But it ain't easy.

So you can make statements, Bouee, that do not make sense to me, and I probably make statements that do not make sense to you b/c we are coming at this from a different perspective, state of mind, approach, etc. So "Michael's problems were caused by drugs" seems reductive to me. How did the drugs get into MJ? How did they affect him? All we know is he gave what witnesses agree were 2 good rehearsals on the 23 and 24--and then died the 25th from propofol saturation mixed with lorazepam and other drugs. It was the combination of drugs and the amount added to CM's incompetence and irresposibility.

I really fault this judge for allowing this trial and not dismissing the final charge of negligent hiring. I personally think she will go down in history along with Ito of being a terrible judge. I posted her credentials earlier--which was mainly her work dealing with the finances of drug cartels! She is 1000 miles away from the kind of judge we saw in Pastor (and yes, I am aware it was a criminal trial) but Pastor showed great integrity, discipline, focus, and courtesy. This judge is already being made fun of in the UK for allowing the tstimoy about Lionel Richie's ex-wife's seance contact with MJ's ghost!! She has let the door open for a true circus. There is already an alternate juror who wants to be excused b/c he can see the trial is going on so long since Panish won't finish his case til July 9 and then AEG will start.

I am trying to ignore this trial, which I see as having no other purpose than to destroy MJ's reputation and legacy as much as possible so that KJ can get more $$. She doesn't need it and neither do PPB. The rest of the family seems to be doing better since the media is giving them more attention since MJ is no longer here. Publishing those photos is just more of the shaming of MJ. They are also ruining the good feelings people had about MJ since he died and the impact of TII to show people he could indeed sing and dance and put 2 words together in spite of all the detractors and naysayers. I think the trial is turning the general public off to MJ (they are tired of hearing about all the controversies) and the Jackson family.

Right now, the person I see that needs the most help is Paris.

 

[Tygger]

Berman's testimony did not help the defense.

I have only heard about the greatness of the rehearsals on the 23rd and 24th from AEG employees/independent contractors. Was one of these rehearsals seen by a grammy executive as well? This executive would not know about any happenings before the rehearsal they witnessed. Is there any information regarding the rehearsal on the 23rd? From testimony, the 24th rehearsal included Thriller and Earth Song only.

The last rehearsal: “He was his old self. He was interacting with us, giving us suggestions, making changes. In the beginning, he let everyone else run things. Then, he was like, ‘This is my show. We’re going to do it how I want to do it.’ I loved it. That’s something I always wanted to see. I thought he was being taken advantage of in the beginning because he was older. ... And you could tell he had something to say, but he wouldn’t say it. But that last day, he took over.
“He knew what he wanted. The dancers were like, ‘Good, he’s speaking up.’ The dancers had Michael’s back.”

This is not directed at you Gerryevans; I am just quoting the article you posted (thank you for posting it).

This is another AEG employee and from testimony, it is now known they were to keep remarks about Michael and TII positive. It is confusing that this it the first time this dancer worked with Michael and yet refers to Michael's "old self." What is his comparison memory if he never worked with or met Michael before?

To me, Murray is MJ's hire and employee. He recruited him, arranged a way to pay him through AEG, just like he arranged to pay off his Bahrain suit. It was MJ's suit. AEG paid it off. It didn't suddenly become AEG's lawsuit because they paid it or interacted with Bahrain reps to do so, which makes sense they would have had to have some interaction with Bahrain reps directly to finalize the payoff.

I am not aware of Michael arranging this. AEG granted Michael an advance which Michael would reimburse (through the estate). If AEG wanted Michael to perform, they needed to insert themselves into the Bahrain settlement through the advancement.

On the other hand AEG was involved in the contract, they were advancing the money, and there's Gongaware's email that said "we want to remind Murray AEG is paying his salary"..

AEG did not advance monies for the doctor's salary; it was a pre-production cost and treated as such, mistake or not. If it was an advancement, there would be no need for the civil trial.

MJ's personal physician is just another league entirely IMO. I just don't think any other employee or independent contractor is comparable. It's a situation unique unto itself. This person literally has a life or death position. There are actual legal considerations in a patient and doctor relationship that does not exist with others.

All the more reason to do a background check on the doctor which AEG admitted to not doing. As long as Michael appeared for rehearsal (and footage of Michael was collected for the 'making of film' which later became TII), AEG was fine with the doctor.

 

[bouee]

I have never seen anyone claiming to "know" on this board. All I have seen are people citing Shafer on the possible reasons of june 19th.
Does Shafer disagree with the coroner then ?
If I use your logic, how come the coroner doesn't explain june 19th ?
Michael's problems were caused by drugs, that's why. Bouee

Well-I have seen people claiming to 'know'--whether it's a gut feeling or based on their interpretation of what we have learned from various sources.

Please tell me who ? I have not seen anyone claiming to "know", I have seen various opinions, but no one claiming to "know".
And for once, all the opinions I have seen so far about this were based on professional opinions (Shafer & Lee).

Edit : Saying these persons "claim to know" when they just offered an opinion, or sometimes just a possibility, based on facts, is somewhat disrespectful & exagerating what has been said IMO.

I really fault this judge for allowing this trial and not dismissing the final charge of negligent hiring. I personally think she will go down in history along with Ito of being a terrible judge. I posted her credentials earlier--which was mainly her work dealing with the finances of drug cartels! She is 1000 miles away from the kind of judge we saw in Pastor (and yes, I am aware it was a criminal trial) but Pastor showed great integrity, discipline, focus, and courtesy. This judge is already being made fun of in the UK for allowing the tstimoy about Lionel Richie's ex-wife's seance contact with MJ's ghost!! She has let the door open for a true circus. There is already an alternate juror who wants to be excused b/c he can see the trial is going on so long since Panish won't finish his case til July 9 and then AEG will start.

I am trying to ignore this trial, which I see as having no other purpose than to destroy MJ's reputation and legacy as much as possible so that KJ can get more $$. She doesn't need it and neither do PPB. The rest of the family seems to be doing better since the media is giving them more attention since MJ is no longer here. Publishing those photos is just more of the shaming of MJ. They are also ruining the good feelings people had about MJ since he died and the impact of TII to show people he could indeed sing and dance and put 2 words together in spite of all the detractors and naysayers. I think the trial is turning the general public off to MJ (they are tired of hearing about all the controversies) and the Jackson family.

Do you have a law degree ???
do you read the juror's mind ?
How can you see people on this board "claiming to know" what was wrong with Michael, and now you fault the judge when you say you don't follow the trial ?
If you did, you would know that AEG issued a contract to Murray instaed of a cash advance to Michael, and that's what started this, regardless of who you think hired Murray.
So blame the Jacksons for bringing this up if you want, everyone can inderstand that, blame AEG for their mistakes if you want, but why the judge ?
Why instead of blaming the judge , don't you try to be a little objective and try to understand what she does ?
And she is not the one who brought up Brenda Ritchie.

 

[Big Apple2]

This is the most I got from the expert today: He made a lot of money from this case, since Katherine paid him and AEG had to pay him for his deposition. I did not even know you could get money for a deposition. I thought once a side needed you as a witness and you gave them a deposition, the other side could sit in and question you for free. Well I learn something new in this case, finally.

The next thing I learned was: Berman responded, "I believe that it's highly inappropriate. It is highly unusual."
Berman retired from the music industry in 2001 to become an expert witness for music industry-related lawsuits. He said he had never heard of a situation in which a tour promoter hired a doctor on behalf of an artist.

Thanks for your recap Petrarose.

Let me tell you about my experience with these expert witnesses. On the last case I sat on, we LARGELY disregarded anything they had to say. Although we did discuss the expert witness testimony, we basically just ignored most of it. Not all of it, but MOST of it.

There were a few reasons why that happened. Firstly being the amount of money these expert witness were pulling in, in order to make one or the other side's case look feasible. Two of them had given up their medical practices, so that they could travel the country giving expert testimony. Both testifying that it was highly rewarding financially for them to do so. Nothing illegal about that, but it did rub some of us the wrong way.

Then there was an expert witness who had just testified in a similar case as to the one I was sitting on, but this time he was testifying for the defense, and his testimony was totally opposite as to the testimony he gave when he was testifying for the plaintiff. Bottomline, same cases, but different testimony by this expert.

The very first question these expert witness were asked was: "How much are you being paid for your testimony?" Very FIRST question each time an expert took the stand.

All of that BACKGROUND came into play, and all we could do is stare in amazement, especially those on the jury panel who had been out of work for a period of time.

So there you have it, MY personal expert witness experience.

 

[ivy]

Berman's testimony did not help the defense.

this made me chuckle , of course an expert hired and paid and put on the stand by Jacksons wont help AEG.

remember dr.white? expert witness for murray who made up drinking propofol theory which was not even possible?

 

[Big Apple2]

So let me get this straight, Mr. Berman (who testified yesterday) is some sort of ex-record label executive, and he has never been in the business of actually promoting a concert - is that the story?

 

[AliCat]

Thanks for your recap Petrarose.

Let me tell you about my experience with these expert witnesses. On the last case I sat on, we LARGELY disregarded anything they had to say. Although we did discuss the expert witness testimony, we basically just ignored most of it. Not all of it, but MOST of it.

There were a few reasons why that happened. Firstly being the amount of money these expert witness were pulling in, in order to make one or the other side's case look feasible. Two of them had given up their medical practices, so that they could travel the country giving expert testimony. Both testifying that it was highly rewarding financially for them to do so. Nothing illegal about that, but it did rub some of us the wrong way.

Then there was an expert witness who had just testified in a similar case as to the one I was sitting on, but this time he was testifying for the defense, and his testimony was totally opposite as to the testimony he gave when he was testifying for the plaintiff. Bottomline, same cases, but different testimony by this expert.

The very first question these expert witness were asked was: "How much are you being paid for your testimony?" Very FIRST question each time an expert took the stand.

All of that BACKGROUND came into play, and all we could do is stare in amazement, especially those on the jury panel who had been out of work for a period of time.

So there you have it, MY personal expert witness experience.

This practice of being an 'expert' has been going on a long time. I first heard about it back in the early 1980's, for the sole purpose of a jury trial, to sway them, as they aren't the 'expert' on the subject at hand!

 

[serendipity]

So this expert made a cool 25 grand for 60 hours. Plus 5 grand for his depo. Damn. Is the Estate paying all these experts?

 

[Big Apple2]

This practice of being an 'expert' has been going on a long time. I first heard about it back in the early 1980's, for the sole purpose of a jury trial, to sway them, as they aren't the 'expert' on the subject at hand!

In my opinion, back in the 1980's is wasn't big business, like it is now. These so-called experts today are not only out there for the MASSIVE money they are able to earn, they are trying to make a name for themselves, by "any" means necessary, i.e. Dr. White TRYING to make up stuff right there on the witness stand (LOL).

As Mr. Berman is not a concert promoter, I don't believe he is an "expert" on the subject at hand either. Son is out there collecting a huge paycheck, FROM BOTH SIDES, regardless to that fact. Nice work if you can get it, I guess.

 

[Soundmind]

So this expert made a cool 25 grand for 60 hours. Plus 5 grand for his depo. Damn. Is the Estate paying all these experts?

yes -_-

 

[bouee]

just finished reading PG's testimony of 29th may from another website. Here are few notes for those who are interested (It's Panish asking questions)

-Contract AEG-Murray doesn't list Michael as a party- It is between AEG, Murray, and Murray's company, Michael was supposed to sign it, but was not a party to the contract.

-Budget : PG says he didn't necessarily agree with Tim wolley but thought that it would be sorted out later. The budget could have been for Murray's housing in London , not his salary (personnal note : ha! ha! ha!)

-"Engaging Murray or Michael". In his deposition PG is talking about an early meeting with Murray. He can't remember if Michael's health was discussed, he says that the meeting was "about Murray and engaging him". The depsotion was later changed , the change is not clear, the judge asks for a clarification , Putnam explains that "him" was changed to "Michael Jackson". (personnal note : so the sentence should be " about Murray and engaging Michael Jackson"). Then PG explains that engage means focus, ie coming to rehearsals, and that it was Kenny's request.

-Another part of his deposition is about a meeting with Murray (I'm not sure if it's the same meeting or another one). At the meeting, there were KO, RP , PG, Murray & certainly Michael. In the depo PG says health was discussed, couldn't remember if sleep issues were discussed. During his testimony, he was sure sleep issues were not discussed.

-He says that the 1st meeting with Murray was called by Ortega.

- Emails, re , june 14th /15th :
Panish says AEG live was trying to use AEG's ressources for a nutritionnist and a physical therapist, when ther was a full time 150 000/month doctor that could have acted as a nutritionnist. (e mails show that PG was looking for one, and the emails mention a Dr Luigi Gratton , who was both a PT and a nutritionnist). PG doesn't remember any of this.

- ortega's "let's turn this guy around" on june 15th : suggests that PG was aware of health problems- Panish has the same remark about Hougdahl's email " deteriorating for 8 weeks" of 19th june : the mail was sent to RP and PG ,and none of them ask more info from Hougdahl. PG was at a wedding, RP answers "my biggest fear is time".

-Hougdahl and PG were in the same office : did not usually communicate by e mail.

-Carla's e mail 'Pg having nightmares", chatting Carla up : it was about change of show dates, MJ didn't show up at a meeting about the change of dates. Apparently (it's not very clear) the mail was in a chain about the date of the 1st show. Personnal notes the e mail is dated 5th may, Michael had a visit at Klein's that day (it was a 3 days in a row one : 4th-5th-6th may).

- Panish insinuates that there's a link between what happend june 15th and june 19th. (personnal note : so does Ortega's e mail : 'now that we brought the doctor in the fold, played the now or never card, threatened to pull the plug... the artist may not be able to rise to the occasion")

-getting him there is not the issue, it's much deeper = insinuation by Panish that Murray had already been orderd to get Michael to rehearsals ("getting him there is not the issue").

-as Ortega was at every rehearsals, he was the most knowledgable person, including about Michael's health. Since he was paid by AEG, he had a duty to "oversee" everything, including Michael's health. (personnal note oversee is not the best word, the idea was that Ortega was AEG's eyes and ears at rehearsals). PG agrees with this.

David Loeffler is the food person that Phillips "hired"(he is a freind of Phillips). Loeffler was on his way to the house on june 25th, was possibly in Michael's dressing room. (from panish questions)

 

[Tygger]

Ivy, glad to be of service. laughs

It may be preferred to dismiss this paid, expert witness but, how will one dismiss every expert who has testified for the plaintiffs especially when they agree with most (if not all) of AEG’s witness who have testified to the same premise? It is not customary for a third party to hire a doctor and have that doctor beholden to them. It is a conflict of interest, it is not ethical, and in this case, it proved to be fatal.

I understand there are those who prefer the Jacksons lose this case. However, the plaintiffs are the beneficiaries, Michael’s mother and children, not the Jackson family as a whole. Even if the whole family were plaintiffs, it does not change or somehow correct AEG's actions. I am unsure how it is possible to dismiss weeks of testimonies that clearly hurt the defendants’ case and expose their unsavory actions.

The defendants’ experts will not be able to say it is appropriate for a third party to hire a doctor as they will look as ridiculous as Dr. White in the criminal trial. The majority of their testimony will most likely be about Michael’s past actions and how he caused his own death.

Soundmind, is there proof the estate paid for the experts' (there have been more than Berman) testimonies?

 

[troubleman84]

^ I was about to ask that... :blink: What does MJ's estate have to do with this case?

 

[ivy]

Ivy, glad to be of service. laughs

It may be preferred to dismiss this paid, expert witness but, how will one dismiss every expert who has testified for the plaintiffs especially when they agree with most (if not all) of AEG’s witness who have testified to the same premise?

my comment about experts go for all experts and to me what it seems like you don't realize that obviously all the experts put on the stand by jacksons will agree with jacksons and all the experts put on the stand by aeg will agree with aeg. It's kinda no brainier. so to me it didn't make sense to say "yay jacksons experts said exactly what jacksons are saying". yeah he got 30 K to say it. to the jury some experts will seem to have more expertise and some will be more beliveable and credible.

^ I was about to ask that... :blink: What does MJ's estate have to do with this case?

who do you think paying katherine's legal fees?

 

[elapentela]

Berman's testimony did not help the defense.

I have only heard about the greatness of the rehearsals on the 23rd and 24th from AEG employees/independent contractors. Was one of these rehearsals seen by a grammy executive as well? This executive would not know about any happenings before the rehearsal they witnessed. Is there any information regarding the rehearsal on the 23rd? From testimony, the 24th rehearsal included Thriller and Earth Song only.



This is not directed at you Gerryevans; I am just quoting the ar
ticle you posted (thank you for posting it).

This is another AEG employee and from testimony, it is now known they were to keep remarks about Michael and TII positive. It is confusing that this it the first time this dancer worked with Michael and yet refers to Michael's "old self." What is his comparison memory if he never worked with or met Michael before?




I am not aware of Michael arranging this. AEG granted Michael an advance which Michael would reimburse (through the estate). If AEG wanted Michael to perform, they needed to insert themselves into the Bahrain settlement through the advancement.



AEG did not advance monies for the doctor's salary; it was a pre-production cost and treated as such, mistake or not. If it was an advancement, there would be no need for the civil trial.



All the more reason to do a background check on the doctor which AEG admitted to not doing. As long as Michael appeared for rehearsal (and footage of Michael was collected for the 'making of film' which later became TII), AEG was fine with the doctor.

I don't know where you are coming from but in US AEG executives as non medical people had no authority at all over long time personal doctor of Michael Jackson. As a matter of fact all public surveys in USA shows the doctors as the most trusted group among all professionals. AEG officially had no right to do any other background check than criminal one. So those arguments have very little value even when promoted by a judge.

 

[Big Apple2]

I don't know where you are coming from but in US AEG executives as non medical people had no authority at all over long time personal doctor of Michael Jackson.

Thanks for repeating that, because I'm STILL trying to figure out how a NON-medical person is able to supervise a LICENSED Medical Doctor. Case in point, I'm in the legal field, there is no way I can supervise a school teacher.

I remember when Mother first filed this case, one of her claims was that AEG "picked" the doctor for Michael. Which sort of got lost in translation when it was revealed that Michael already had a prior relationship with Murray before AEG came on the scene.

On another note, I wonder if Mother noticed all of those oxygen tanks around Michael's crib? I also wonder if she ever went into Michael's bedroom, probably not, but I still wonder. You guys know how Mother's can be. LOL! We like to take note of such things, i.e. A Tour Of The New Home.

 

[Big Apple2]

It may be preferred to dismiss this paid, expert witness but, how will one dismiss every expert who has testified for the plaintiffs especially when they agree with most (if not all) of AEG’s witness who have testified to the same premise? It is not customary for a third party to hire a doctor and have that doctor beholden to them. It is a conflict of interest, it is not ethical, and in this case, it proved to be fatal.

Like ivy said, ALL expert testimony is in line with the side they are testifying for and they get paid PLENTY to do that. That's the name of the EXPERT GAME.

In my opinion, the ONLY person Murray was "beholding" to, was (and is) himself. If he were truly beholden to AEG, as you claim, then in my opinion, he would not have gotten all up in Mr. Ortega's face. Folks that are usually "beholden" don't want to rock the boat and usually toe the beholden line.

He was nasty and he was mean, but he most likely knew that Michael would back him up, for fear that their secret could be exposed. In my opinion, of course.

 

[LastTear]

Have I read that right? Kai Chase's testimony is her video deposition?

Okay I have seen this now.

0 Comments | Print
Chef describes Jackson children's lives to jury
By ANTHONY McCARTNEY
AP Entertainment Writer
Published: Tuesday, Jun. 18, 2013 - 12:24 pm
LOS ANGELES -- A chef who worked for Michael Jackson has described to jurors the lives of the superstar's children, including what she says was Paris Jackson's last birthday party.


Kai Chase says the singer hired a private circus for his daughter's 11th birthday party in 2009 in the backyard of his rented mansion.


Chase says the performance was a Cirque du Soleil style performance with men on stilts and a woman performing in a giant balloon. The celebrity chef continues to work for the singer's children and his mother.


She says Paris Jackson, now 15 years old, has not had a birthday party since then.


Chase is testifying in Katherine Jackson's lawsuit against AEG Live LLC over her son's death.


AEG Live denies any wrongdoing.


• Read more articles by ANTHONY McCARTNEY




Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/06/18/5506281/chef-describes-jackson-childrens.html#storylink=cpy

 

[Big Apple2]

Dr. Finklestein's deposition is going to be played? Well at least portions thereof.

How in the heck do you get to exam and/or cross-exam a video tape!

What's the 411 on Dr. Finklestein, what role does he play in all of this. I'm familar with the name, just can't remember the connection.

 

[LastTear]

He was treated Michael on the Dangerous tour. I agree with you on video depositions.

 

[Big Apple2]

She says Paris Jackson, now 15 years old, has not had a birthday party since then.

Oh wow, that's interesting.

I wonder if that was by choice, of if her guardian didn't think it was necessary.

I don't know, I was just thinking in light of everything that happened, the family would have decided to continue the traditions that Michael had in place. In any event, very interesting.

ETA: I'm glad to hear that Ms. Chase still has an association with the children. She did appear to have their best interest at heart, when I heard her speak about the children during a television interview. I think Michael would definitely approve.

 

[LastTear]

^^^^ I respect Katherine's religion but I find that statement really sad.

 

[LastTear]

He has posted the complete piece now, seems it was Paris's choice.

LOS ANGELES (AP) — A chef who worked for Michael Jackson has described the home lives of the children during the final months of the singer's life, including what she said was his daughter's last birthday party.


Kai Chase told jurors hearing a lawsuit filed by Jackson's mother against concert promoter AEG Live LLC that Jackson was a hands-on father who often played with his children. Katherine Jackson's lawsuit lists the singer's three children, Prince, Paris and Blanket, as plaintiffs and claims the concert promoter failed to properly investigate the doctor convicted of giving the singer a fatal dose of anesthetic in June 2009.


AEG denies it hired the doctor or pushed the entertainer to rehearse for his final series of comeback concerts titled "This Is It."


On the stand, Chase said Jackson made sure the children kept a healthy diet and got plenty of sleep for school sessions.


She described an April birthday party for Jackson's only daughter, Paris, in which she said the singer hired a private circus for his children. The Cirque du Soleil-style show featured men on stilts and a woman performing in a giant balloon, Chase said.


Paris Jackson, who was turning 11, adored her father and Chase helped decorate a room filled with posters and photos of the "Thriller" singer. The singer's music was played throughout the party.


Chase, who continues to work for Jackson's mother and his children, said that was the final birthday party that Paris Jackson has had.


"Paris hasn't had any birthdays since," Chase said. "She hasn't wanted to celebrate since."


Michael Jackson was fiercely protective of his children's privacy while alive, often shielding their faces in public with masks.


Chase, who testified during Conrad Murray's involuntary manslaughter trial, described for civil jurors the routines inside Jackson's rented mansion in the months before his death.


She said Jackson wouldn't allow his children to eat sweets and made sure they went to bed early so they would be alert for tutors who instructed them. Chase described Jackson as a prankster who ate meals with his children, exchanging jokes and stories.


Paris Jackson would often write notes for her dad on a chalkboard sitting in the kitchen that Chase used to list a menu of the day's meals. One message from Jackson's daughter shown to jurors read, "I love daddy" and "Smile it's free."


Chase described the close bond Jackson and his children shared, telling jurors the youngsters would run to their father when he came into a room. "They would take off like lightning," she said, hugging their father's ankles and legs.


If jurors determine AEG Live is liable for Jackson's death, they will have to determine any damages awarded to his mother and his children.

http://bigstory.ap.org/content/anthony-mccartney

 

[serendipity]

That's definitely sad about Paris.

Is it just me or does it sound like the plaintiffs don't want Dr. Finklestain to testify live in court? I may be be wrong but that's how they made it sound in the article. If so, I wonder why?

 

[ivy]

^^
AEG can always call him to stand as their witness if they want

 

[Vici]

A chef who worked for Michael Jackson has described to jurors the lives of the superstar's children, including what she says was Paris Jackson's last birthday party.

She says Paris Jackson, now 15 years old, has not had a birthday party since then.

Oh wow, that's interesting.

I wonder if that was by choice, of if her guardian didn't think it was necessary.

I don't know, I was just thinking in light of everything that happened, the family would have decided to continue the traditions that Michael had in place. In any event, very interesting.

According to a poster on another board Paris did have birthdays. Ive copied this post from LSA

"Paris did celebrate birthdays after MJ passed. For her 12th birthday in 2010 she went to the Rollerway Skating Rink in Glendale.

She also had a party in 2011 when she turned 13.

I remember Toya tweeting about "coming home from her niece roller skate themed birthday party".

This was her birthday cake. Chef Chase Kai was not working for the Jacksons at that time."

 

[marebear]

I am little confused. She does celebrate her birthday. This year she spent it with Debbie. You don't have to have a party every year. At her last birthday with Michael she had pictures of him on the wall then? She was so close with Michael that it has been hard on her. I am so glad people are hearing what a good dad Michael was.

 

[crillon]

Thanks for repeating that, because I'm STILL trying to figure out how a NON-medical person is able to supervise a LICENSED Medical Doctor. Case in point, I'm in the legal field, there is no way I can supervise a school teacher.

I remember when Mother first filed this case, one of her claims was that AEG "picked" the doctor for Michael. Which sort of got lost in translation when it was revealed that Michael already had a prior relationship with Murray before AEG came on the scene.

On another note, I wonder if Mother noticed all of those oxygen tanks around Michael's crib? I also wonder if she ever went into Michael's bedroom, probably not, but I still wonder. You guys know how Mother's can be. LOL! We like to take note of such things, i.e. A Tour Of The New Home.

Same here--it seems completely illogical to me. But, the law can be complicated and I wonder if the jurors have or will receive instructions on what "hiring" means according to CA law. Would be helpful if they had a definition and knew what evidence to look for.

 

[Ashtanga]

The celebrity chef continues to work for the singer's children and his mother.


Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/06/18/5506281/chef-describes-jackson-childrens.html#storylink=cpy

Is this true? :scratch:

 

[Tygger]

my comment about experts go for all experts and to me what it seems like you don't realize that obviously all the experts put on the stand by jacksons will agree with jacksons and all the experts put on the stand by aeg will agree with aeg. It's kinda no brainier. so to me it didn't make sense to say "yay jacksons experts said exactly what jacksons are saying". yeah he got 30 K to say it. to the jury some experts will seem to have more expertise and some will be more beliveable and credible.

who do you think paying katherine's legal fees?

Ivy, yes, I understand very well what an expert does and why they are paid for their expertise in trials. Again, these experts have AGREED with most (if not all) of AEG’s witnesses who have testified thus far in that it is NOT customary that a promoter/producer hire a doctor as a third party. When the defendants' witness agree with the plaintiffs' experts, it is not a good sign for the defense.

This legal team receives payments on a successful verdict and if successful, there is a chance the defendants will be responsible for those legal fees. Even if the estate paid for any and all legal fees, it was Michael’s wish his mother and children be provided for.

I don't know where you are coming from but in US AEG executives as non medical people had no authority at all over long time personal doctor of Michael Jackson. As a matter of fact all public surveys in USA shows the doctors as the most trusted group among all professionals. AEG officially had no right to do any other background check than criminal one. So those arguments have very little value even when promoted by a judge.

Elapentela, Big Apple2, Crillon, in a working environment, a supervisor gives a task to be performed by another. Depending on the task, the supervisor may instruct how the task needs to be performed. Telling an employee/independent contractor what to do is not the same as telling them how to do an activity but, it is still supervision.

Wherever one resides, it is not ethical for a third party to supervise a doctor. When AEG made the doctor responsible for Michael’s rehearsal schedule, when Michael did not show up for rehearsal and it became the doctor’s responsibility to get Michael there, when they requested the doctor’s help directly for medical documents for insurance, AEG was supervising the doctor. Berman’s testimony showed the doctor’s employment negotiations did NOT include Michael. Can AEG tell the doctor HOW to do his job, no. Can AEG tell the doctor WHAT his job entails, of course they can and those details have been and are currently being testified to.

On another note, I wonder if Mother noticed all of those oxygen tanks around Michael's crib? I also wonder if she ever went into Michael's bedroom, probably not, but I still wonder. You guys know how Mother's can be. LOL! We like to take note of such things, i.e. A Tour Of The New Home.

I thought about this as well. This may be one of the reasons family was not allowed in the home. They most likely would not restrict themselves to the first floor. Those who did see the tanks did not vocalize their concerns it seems as per testimonies from Michael’s employees in the criminal trial.

The doctor was beholden to whoever he felt would pay him. He did not accept Michael’s money as he was promised $150K/month. He followed AEG’s instructions as they allegedly made him their independent contractor. There would be no reason for the doctor to take on the tasks he did from AEG if he was not working for them.