Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG

[jamba]

Re: Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG (daily threads merged)

double post--whoops

 

[ivy]

Re: Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG (daily threads merged)

In their motions to exclude Gongaware already said that it was Michael who told him to fire Grace and even gave him a prepared letter.

 

[christy]

Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 2 and 3 - April 30 - May 1, 2013 - Discussion

One of the highlights of testimony today was the contradiction of Katherine in relation to health issues of Michael. The fact that she thinking that the medicine was for back pain and never have known Murray until the day of his son's death, denounces that the relationship was not as close, despite declarations full of love that Michael always did when talking about his mother and despite the note written by him which was shown to the jury on the first day.

However, despite questionable behavior of Jacksons, which suggests failure, they are not the defendants in the case. Let's see how this evolves.

Good point re the contradiction between the note and the reality that she didn't know CM or why/if MJ was taking prescription drugs. I think when she gets on the stand it will be more of the same--I think she will not have much to share/offer except feelings (motherly feelings)--meaning grief, anguish, confusion. Personally, I question how much he confided in her esp. in the last years. I think whatever she knows comes from the press, same with the sibs.

This contradiction's Not good for KJ. What's going for her now is to
play on the emotions of jurors; the grieving mum card.
If she's not close to her son Michael, the greed factor inches
up a few notches.
It does speaks volume of her motivation for this suit
rather than seeking compensation for emotional loss
& reasonable economic loss

 

[scorpion]

Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 4 - May 2 2013 - Discussion

^^Katherine's side is lying at times, AEG is lying at times, & the only person who knows is dead, so they will not stop lying.

I wish that dead person appears in that courtroom at last and kicks everyone's ass.

 

[AliCat]

Re: Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG (daily threads merged)

Cherilyn Lee, the Nurse who attended to Michael and who also warned Michael about the danger of Propofol, did not work for AEG Live and the individual who called Cherilyn Lee on behalf of Michael about his symptoms of being hot on one side and cold on the other, neither party said a word to anyone out of concern for Michael. If either party had contacted AEG Live, perhaps a different outcome would have happened on June 25, 2009.

Randy Phillips stated that he had no idea about the night time Michael Jackson. This is how secretive Michael was in not letting AEG Live know about using Propofol. The individual who called Cherilyn Lee, both knew Michael was having problems and Michael apparently did not go to the Emergency Room at the request of Cherilyn Lee.

Conrad Murray called Kenny Ortega an amateur doctor as well as a psychiatrist and yet Kenny Ortega was concerned and why he emailed his direct Supervisor and an Intervention, I mean a meeting was held at Michael's house and still not a word about Propofol usage.

 

[Kingofpop4ever3000]

Re: Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG (daily threads merged)

what bugs the hell out of me about this lawsuit is that The Jackson's INSIST there were SO MANY interventions. What about the letter they all signed in 2007 that said that there was NEVER any interventions and that Michael had NO problem whats so ever. Where they lying THEN....what changed from 2007 to 2009?....Again I ask...were they lying THEN OR are they lying NOW??...while I do not particularly have a "side" in this trial I HOPE that AEG brings up that letter...because it's ridiculous. It seems as they are MISSING the whole point of this case...and that is SUPPOSE to be..WHO hired Murray...NOT how much of a drug addict was Michael Jackson. Jeez...that whole point there can be solved in 2 seconds ...all they have to do is introduce the autopsy report into evidence....it really does speak for itself. The ONLY side I am on here....IS Michael's....and that's it!!

I agree. I hope they get to the point of this case soon.

 

[Tygger]

Amoremotus, Bonnie Blue, I feel if the doctor admitted why he did not perform CPR correctly, it would force him to admit his timeline was false. I do not believe he will ever admit this.

Soulmum, I agree the doctor could have received more charges but, at the very least, a higher charge. From Detective Martinez’ testimony, the doctor may have been culpable in another patient’s death and was suspended for lack of record keeping; both would have figured interestingly in the criminal trial.

Jamba, Detective Martinez discussed interventions today and they were discussed in the defense’s opening statements as well. I do not know if concertventions will be mentioned during the trial.

 

[Bubs]

Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 4 - May 2 2013 - Discussion

What was Michael supposed to do about the pain in his back? Stay in bed all day? Not take pain pills for his back just to make them happy? Screw that. If my back hurts I take something. Why if he took something he was an addict?

I agree, Michael was the only one in the world that should have suffer from pain and not take any painkillers.

I don't think family knew much about Michael or his illnesess. Katherine was supposed to be closest to him, and you would think Michael talked to her about his Vitiligo, Lupus (I'm not medical person, but I read that with viltiligo it is painful) and his pain (according to his autopsy report, he had some arthiristis, which is painfull), his inability to sleep, but we have heard nothing to indicate that they knew,incliding Katherine. If Katherine didn't know, I'm sure cubs knew even less.
They have not said a word about his Lupus and barery mention Vitiligo , and Katherine didn't know how MJ got rid of spots (as per her interview with oprah).
If they knew Michael's illnesses and how they effected on him, I doubt there wouldn't have been be any intervention talks.

 

[bouee]

Re: Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG (daily threads merged)

Dileo's vm re we want to know what he's 'doing' says to me that he suspected drugs, so he wanted a blood test. Also he said 'we'--so he had spoken with AEG people and they did suspect drugs, but of course maybe not propofol at that point. I think MJ used propofol in the past when actually performing, not for rehearsals. Dileo (rip) could tell us a lot if he were still here and a witness.

Didn't Kenny Ortega cc his e mail to Frank DiLeo ?

It sounds like every one was suspecting Klein, or even Michael, and not Murray. That sounds weird to me. Would you ask Murray to do a blood test if you suspected him ? But then again, in that situation, they had no one else to ask.

 

[LastTear]

Re: Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG (daily threads merged)

what bugs the hell out of me about this lawsuit is that The Jackson's INSIST there were SO MANY interventions. What about the letter they all signed in 2007 that said that there was NEVER any interventions and that Michael had NO problem whats so ever. Where they lying THEN....what changed from 2007 to 2009?....Again I ask...were they lying THEN OR are they lying NOW??...while I do not particularly have a "side" in this trial I HOPE that AEG brings up that letter...because it's ridiculous. It seems as they are MISSING the whole point of this case...and that is SUPPOSE to be..WHO hired Murray...NOT how much of a drug addict was Michael Jackson. Jeez...that whole point there can be solved in 2 seconds ...all they have to do is introduce the autopsy report into evidence....it really does speak for itself. The ONLY side I am on here....IS Michael's....and that's it!!

I have said it before but I'm going to repeat myself:

I think what bugs me the most re the Jacksons insisting MJ was an addict and that they knew about it at the time, and had tried interventions, is that they had the ideal opportunity during the family dinner, 14th May I think, to 'intervene.' So it tells me that either they didn't feel they needed to intervene or that they chose, for whatever reason, to ignore Michael's addiction. It really bugs me so I hope this is brought up.

Randy Jackson says nobody told them, well, they were with him so why would they need someone to tell them. It's so easy to point the fingers at others but sometimes you have to look within.

Let me be clear, I don't blame Michael's death on the Jackson's, but neither do I blame it on AEG, the only person I blame is conrad murray.

 

[amoremotus]

Re: Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG (daily threads merged)

Based on what I am reading I do not think they are overly focused on addiction yet? The Jacksons had to address addiction because AEG will, but in a worse way. The Jacksons explained that he had these problems because of his injuries and I am sure people can relate with that! Now they brought up the interventions just because AEG will argue that if the family did not know about it how could they. Which is utter BS in my opinion. AEG had people working with Michael almost on a daily basis and even a functional family doesn't necessarily meet very often.

And for the background checks, where I live you also need people's consent for looking into the financial background. But it is a normal business practice to get this consent before you do business with anybody. To me that is no excuse why they shouldn't check him out and I am also sure they have their ways to get information either way.

But people still argue that the severe financial situation and the 5 millions he asked for to care for Michael, were no warning signs not to hire him. However, once they knew that Michael had problems (and apparently suspected that he was taking something) would't that been the time to realize that Murray is involved? To ask themselves why does Michael need a personal doctor, why did Michael insist on Murray and why did Murray ask for that much money? It would not make sense, if you suspect that he is taking something, not to suspect the doctor Michael so badly requested... I believe that AEG knew exactly what was going on (maybe not which drugs were administered, but that Murray would supply him with what he needed) and I am very curious how the Jacksons are trying to prove it. They said in their opening statement

Panish: evidence will show MJ requested a doctor... plus opiates. Paul Gongaware talked to Dr. Murray and closes the deal.

. If they have evidence to support this, AEG to me is as guilty as Murray and nothing else as drug enablers.

 

[bouee]

Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 4 - May 2 2013 - Discussion

Then, either Muarry had enough money from his salary to pay his debt & he did not, or his salary could not keep up with his debts. Shouldn't Panish show which it is, because if they make a claim that he needed this money due to debt, there is no guarantee he would use this new money to pay off his debt, if his regular salary was sufficient & the debt was still not being paid. If that is the case, then his actions would not have been motivated by his need to get money for his debt. So debt or no debt Muarry would act the same way & AEG would have no way of knowing.

I think there are "levels" in "bending the rules" : you can do something inappropriate (give propofol), or careless and negligent (the way it was given- without proper equipment, leaving the room ) . I think money and ego are the main reasons. Money is easy to understand, ego for being around a famous person, and being certain he could give propofol the way he did, thinking it would be fine.

 

[elusive moonwalker]

Re: Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG (daily threads merged)

The jacksons are the ones who started the whole addiction b.s. as soon as he died oxman was stood there. not mention all those randy
articles back in the day. they were no coincedence. the jacksons filed this suit and claimed aeg should have known. aeg are defending themself. so to say its aeg who started this adfiction talk is ilogical.

imo katherine says whatever randy and co tell her. she says mj was fine when she last saw him and had only heard about supposed issues and interventions from others ie steven and maureen. she thought mj may have had a p.k addiction in june 09.evidrnce from the trial doesnt support that. and seems to be clueless about her sons legitimate illnesses. unfortunatly to me aeg will prob only show those contridictions for the purpose of showing they werent actually that close not to show the family were lieing over d.a and interventions

 

[amoremotus]

I have said it before but I'm going to repeat myself:

I think what bugs me the most re the Jacksons insisting MJ was an addict and that they knew about it at the time, and had tried interventions, is that they had the ideal opportunity during the family dinner, 14th May I think, to 'intervene.' So it tells me that either they didn't feel they needed to intervene or that they chose, for whatever reason, to ignore Michael's addiction. It really bugs me so I hope this is brought up.

Randy Jackson says nobody told them, well, they were with him so why would they need someone to tell them. It's so easy to point the fingers at others but sometimes you have to look within.

Let me be clear, I don't blame Michael's death on the Jackson's, but neither do I blame it on AEG, the only person I blame is conrad murray.

As difficult as it is to accept, Michael had a dependency. He even admitted it himself. And I am certain, that while he had it under control most of the time it is very difficult when you are under stress. The problem with the pain medication is, he needed it for his injuries. It is really the doctor's responsibility to control the amount that is prescribed and make sure you do not become dependent and if you do, you get the help. Sadly, Michael was surrounded by enablers, drug dealers that call themselves doctors!

I do not know what sources you are reading, but to me it always sounds like they are talking about his dependency issues in general (not a particular point in time) and also genereally about interventions that took place.

“Mrs. Jackson was asked if she or any other family members ever attempted to do an intervention with Michael as it relates to painkillers or any other drugs. She stated that there had been one attempted intervention at Neverland on behalf of Janet, however Michael didn’t want to participate. (LA Times)

So if the Jacksons establish that AEG hired Murray for the purpose of supplying him with drugs at Michael's request, you do not think they are to blame for what happened in the end?

 

[elusive moonwalker]

Re: Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG (daily threads merged)

Panish: evidence will show MJ requested a doctor...**plus opiates*. Paul Gongaware talked to Dr. Murray and closes the deal.. If they have evidence to support this, AEG to me is as guilty as Murray and nothing else as drug enablers.*

--------
so was mj never allowed to use p.k even though he had lupus arthritus a chronic lung condition. dr treachy talked about how mj would rather be in pain then take p.k so aslong as issues were looked after in a
controlled way why couldnt mj
take.p.k if he really needed it. as there were no p.k in mjs house it shows he wasnt taking any on a general basis. so to say every dr that gave him whatever amount of p.k was enabling is imo a ridiculous statement to make as it implies drs were not giving them for legitimate purposes and were not giving the right amounts.its generalising to the extreame

the argument that mj asked aeg for p.k isnt logical as one murray was already working for mj. mj didnt need to ask aeg for anything and mj had ppl like metzger klien. lots of ppl speak.b.s in opening statements that they never prove. i doubt this case will be any different

 

[bouee]

Re: Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG (daily threads merged)

Based on what I am reading I do not think they are overly focused on addiction yet? The Jacksons had to address addiction because AEG will, but in a worse way. The Jacksons explained that he had these problems because of his injuries and I am sure people can relate with that! Now they brought up the interventions just because AEG will argue that if the family did not know about it how could they. Which is utter BS in my opinion. AEG had people working with Michael almost on a daily basis and even a functional family doesn't necessarily meet very often.

And for the background checks, where I live you also need people's consent for looking into the financial background. But it is a normal business practice to get this consent before you do business with anybody. To me that is no excuse why they shouldn't check him out and I am also sure they have their ways to get information either way.

But people still argue that the severe financial situation and the 5 millions he asked for to care for Michael, were no warning signs not to hire him. However, once they knew that Michael had problems (and apparently suspected that he was taking something) would't that been the time to realize that Murray is involved? To ask themselves why does Michael need a personal doctor, why did Michael insist on Murray and why did Murray ask for that much money? It would not make sense, if you suspect that he is taking something, not to suspect the doctor Michael so badly requested... I believe that AEG knew exactly what was going on (maybe not which drugs were administered, but that Murray would supply him with what he needed) and I am very curious how the Jacksons are trying to prove it. They said in their opening statement . If they have evidence to support this, AEG to me is as guilty as Murray and nothing else as drug enablers.

yes, it makes sense.

BUT, that's very tricky, would they suspect it would enventually kill Michael ? People usually OD when they're on their own. If you have a doctor there, you can think he's doing weird things, but keeping them within a certain safe limit, because he is a doctor.

 

[elusive moonwalker]

Re: Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG (daily threads merged)

theres no evidence mj had any dependency issues on p.k or anything else at the time of his killing. we know he had issues in 93 and the early 00's but mj did not die of a p.k overdose. p.k are not relevent to this case just like they werent relevent in murrays trial even though murray tried to use it as a defence. Supposed interventions at neverland are irrelevent as that was in the early 00's as aeg said and we could say the same what does a p.k addiction from 93 have to do with the use of diprivan to sleep 15 years later. of course we know the jacksons are trying to push the agenda that mj was a continuas addict from the last 20-30 years but the facts from the crim trial show mj was not taking anything other than what murray gave him that night and bottled benzos that had been prescribed for sleep had been under used and certainly not abused.

As difficult as it is to accept, Michael had a dependency. He even admitted it himself. And I am certain, that while he had it under control most of the time it is very difficult when you are under stress. The problem with the pain medication is, he needed it for his injuries. It is really the doctor's responsibility to control the amount that is prescribed and make sure you do not become dependent and if you do, you get the help. Sadly, Michael was surrounded by enablers, drug dealers that call themselves doctors!

I do not know what sources you are reading, but to me it always sounds like they are talking about his dependency issues in general (not a particular point in time) and also genereally about interventions that took place.



So if the Jacksons establish that AEG hired Murray for the purpose of supplying him with drugs at Michael's request, you do not think they are to blame for what happened in the end?

 

[bouee]

Re: Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG (daily threads merged)

On every thread it seems like we have to do a post about addiction/dependancy, and so on.

Mj had problems with medication, AT TIMES.

In 2009, we have no idea what was going on, but it looks like he was not addicted to anything in 2009.
There was no pain killer in his house, he was getting demerol on a very irrgular basis from Klein , but that was too irregular to really cause a problem.
Panish says he was looking for a doctor and opiates. Well that's wrong, it shows they don't have a doctor to help them, they don't know what propofol is, do they even know what opiates are ?
The pills that were found at his home, were benzos (insomnia, anxiety), there were no opiates at all. The only opiate in the story was the demerol Klein was giving. Propofol is not an opiate.

Michael could not sleep. That was the problem. According to Dr Metzger' testimony it was always the case when he was touring, and it had been going on for decades. We don't know why for sure he had this insomnia. But that was the problem he was trying to fix with propofol.

What they mean I think is that Michael had problems in the past, and so AEG should have suspected the doctor because of that.

 

[elusive moonwalker]

Re: Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG (daily threads merged)

Is the n.l janet intervention the one jermaine talked about and said he saw mj and he was fibe and that was it.

one of the many things that pisses me off about these interventions is for eg u have the fanily turning up based on soneone ekse telling them something. the family went to the ranch mj said im fine what u on about and that was it. that then gets turned into we went to save mj and he lied and refused an intervention . well how about u went based on second hand information and when u went to see him there were no isuues and shock horror he was fine. and frankly if mj had problems the last ppl he would want helping were his family. it would be in the press and u would have randy doing like he did in 05

 

[amoremotus]

Re: Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG (daily threads merged)

On every thread it seems like we have to do a post about addiction/dependancy, and so on.

Mj had problems with medication, AT TIMES.

In 2009, we have no idea what was going on, but it looks like he was not addicted to anything in 2009.
There was no pain killer in his house, he was getting demerol on a very irrgular basis from Klein , but that was too irregular to really cause a problem.
Panish says he was looking for a doctor and opiates. Well that's wrong, it shows they don't have a doctor to help them, they don't know what propofol is, do they even know what opiates are ?
The pills that were found at his home, were benzos (insomnia, anxiety), there were no opiates at all. The only opiate in the story was the demerol Klein was giving. Propofol is not an opiate.

Michael could not sleep. That was the problem. According to Dr Metzger' testimony it was always the case when he was touring, and it had been going on for decades. We don't know why for sure he had this insomnia. But that was the problem he was trying to fix with propofol.

What they mean I think is that Michael had problems in the past, and so AEG should have suspected the doctor because of that.

That is what I was trying to say. That they DO not say Michael had addiction problems right now but AT TIMES. And people cannot really deny that. And this means that there is always a tendency to relapse, especially when under a lot of stress. I am not sure whether it even matters to which drug Michael was addicted to and what killed him? Wouldn't it be enough to establish that AEG knew Michael had dependency issues in the past and thus providing him with a personal doctor that does 'need this gig' is a risky business. I am not sure why Panish said that about opiates though, you are right. I guess we will see in the further course of this trial.

But the point I was trying to make, i do not think that the Jackson are are overly obsessing on dependency in this trial and trying to negatively paint Michael as an addict. But from the restricted information we have it is difficult to tell.

 

[elusive moonwalker]

Re: Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG (daily threads merged)

agree. mj had issues at times not for the last 30 years and the evidence shows not 09.but as aeg argue how were we supposed to know mj was using diprivan based on a p.k addiction from 93.theres no connection at all. mj was not abusing p.k and certainly didnt die from it so even if they did suspect something they would have been along way off interms of what was really going on. and as joked about before do all those real drugged up rockers who go on tour do they have drs with them

On every thread it seems like we have to do a post about addiction/dependancy, and so on.

Mj had problems with medication, AT TIMES.

In 2009, we have no idea what was going on, but it looks like he was not addicted to anything in 2009.
There was no pain killer in his house, he was getting demerol on a very irrgular basis from Klein , but that was too irregular to really cause a problem.
Panish says he was looking for a doctor and opiates. Well that's wrong, it shows they don't have a doctor to help them, they don't know what propofol is, do they even know what opiates are ?
The pills that were found at his home, were benzos (insomnia, anxiety), there were no opiates at all. The only opiate in the story was the demerol Klein was giving. Propofol is not an opiate.

Michael could not sleep. That was the problem. According to Dr Metzger' testimony it was always the case when he was touring, and it had been going on for decades. We don't know why for sure he had this insomnia. But that was the problem he was trying to fix with propofol.

What they mean I think is that Michael had problems in the past, and so AEG should have suspected the doctor because of that.

 

[elusive moonwalker]

Re: Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG (daily threads merged)

The jacksons entire cases revolves around mj being a drug addict and aeg should have known. aeg defence is if the family didnt even know what was hap with all these refused interventions why should we have known mj was using diprivan when his own mother says she didnt know about it. the jacksons are like murray. going on about demoral etc when that has nothing to do with what happened to mj and is irrelevent to this case.

that is why so many fans do not support this case or the family because mj is being made out to be nothing more than a raving d.a by his family inorder that they can live in wealth for the rest of their lives

 

[bouee]

Re: Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG (daily threads merged)

That is what I was trying to say. That they DO not say Michael had addiction problems right now but AT TIMES. And people cannot really deny that. And this means that there is always a tendency to relapse, especially when under a lot of stress. I am not sure whether it even matters to which drug Michael was addicted to and what killed him? Wouldn't it be enough to establish that AEG knew Michael had dependency issues in the past and thus providing him with a personal doctor that does 'need this gig' is a risky business. I am not sure why Panish said that about opiates though, you are right. I guess we will see in the further course of this trial.

But the point I was trying to make, i do not think that the Jackson are are overly obsessing on dependency in this trial and trying to negatively paint Michael as an addict. But from the restricted information we have it is difficult to tell.

- I think it is very important that it is propofol : it's not an OD, it's the way it was given that killed : it's negligence on Murray's part. How can a non medical person evalutate that ?

-I understand the questions about AEG (should they have done this or that) from a human point of view, but I have no answer right know, I just want to know what they knew, and hear their arguments.
It's very difficult, because yes you are supposed to protect a person in danger, but that person was a sane adult , who was free to choose what he wanted for his health.

-They can talk about addiction if they want, but at least do it correctly ! Stating that in 2009 MJ was looking for a Dr AND opiates is ridiculous, and will turn against Panish.

-Another thing I don't understand, is why they spent so much time on Murray's debts and not on his lies. That's a very important part of the problem. Michael was secretive, but Murray was even more secretive....Michael's decisions were based upon his lies, and so were AEG's.

 

[amoremotus]

Re: Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG (daily threads merged)

theres no evidence mj had any dependency issues on p.k or anything else at the time of his killing. we know he had issues in 93 and the early 00's but mj did not die of a p.k overdose. p.k are not relevent to this case just like they werent relevent in murrays trial even though murray tried to use it as a defence. Supposed interventions at neverland are irrelevent as that was in the early 00's as aeg said and we could say the same what does a p.k addiction from 93 have to do with the use of diprivan to sleep 15 years later. of course we know the jacksons are trying to push the agenda that mj was a continuas addict from the last 20-30 years but the facts from the crim trial show mj was not taking anything other than what murray gave him that night and bottled benzos that had been prescribed for sleep had been under used and certainly not abused.

Sorry, I probably was not very clear in my post. I am not saying that he had a dependency on painkillers at the time of his death, but that does not mean that he did not have an "addiction". That is often an ongoing problem, especially when you really need the medication for continuing problems. So Michael had issues with prescription drugs at different points in his life, why is it such a big deal that they talk about that in court? It is a part of his life and I do not think it is anything anyone should be ashamed of. Especially with pain medication dependency can really happen to anyone that needs to take them. And I disagree that this dependency issues are not relevant to this case, because it is something everyone knew and should have been considered in the decision to hire and keeping on Murray.

And as far as i understood everything, the Jacksons did not even bring up interventions? It was the defence that ask about that yesterday, right?

 

[amoremotus]

Re: Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG (daily threads merged)

the jacksons are like murray. going on about demoral etc when that has nothing to do with what happened to mj and is irrelevent to this case.

The Jacksons are like Murray? Seriously? I think we are reading or interpreting different reportings about the case because again, I do not see them overly obsessing about his dependency yet. But I will read it again, just to be sure!

 

[elusive moonwalker]

Re: Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG (daily threads merged)

Panish using demoral slides in opening going on about mj asking about opiates.saying murray was hired to feed an addict. he continuingly says/implies mj was an addict when he was killed in order to help the families case that aeg were responsible for what happened.

mj died cause he was an insomniac who was given diprivan by a negligent dr. Not because he was addicted to p.k or anything else.p.k did not contribute to his death it wasnt like mj had been dr less for the last ten years then suddenly murray comes on the scene and it made ppl suspicious.it also wasnt like mj had had ongoing addiction issues either. as was said its a far reaching thing to think a p.k addiction in 93 had anything to do with diprivan in 09. why should mj requesting his own dr that he had had several years of realtionship with rather than have some random dr that he didnt know or trust arise suspicion. we saw that when mj was in ireland he hired treachy to look after his skin/ilnesses so we know if mj was going anywhere for a long period of time he needed a dr because of his ongoing illnesses. do other artists that go on tour not have their own drs? does that make them all d.a's? the jacksons whole case resolves around mj was a d.a in 09 aeg should have known. (or interms of their real allegation which was aeg hired murray and made him give diprivan!)

 

[amoremotus]

Re: Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG (daily threads merged)

- I think it is very important that it is propofol : it's not an OD, it's the way it was given that killed : it's negligence on Murray's part. How can a non medical person evalutate that ?

-I understand the questions about AEG (should they have done this or that) from a human point of view, but I have no answer right know, I just want to know what they knew, and hear their arguments.

You are right, we should really wait and see and stop speculating. But like you said, from a human point of view to understand the issue. It just seems like people are so caught up in their hate of the Jacksons to forget that AEG may really have some responsibility in all of this.

It's very difficult, because yes you are supposed to protect a person in danger, but that person was a sane adult , who was free to choose what he wanted for his health.

Of course he was free to choose, but AEG was also free to decline a doctor they did not approve of IF they are hiring and paying him. They could also have said we are paying only the usual salary for a private doctor or request a nurse to attend to Michael as well. Because in the end, IF you hire someone you are responsible and thus have to make sure that everything is ok.

-They can talk about addiction if they want, but at least do it correctly ! Stating that in 2009 MJ was looking for a Dr AND opiates is ridiculous, and will turn against Panish.

You are right, but who knows what they meant by this. We will find out, I guess.

-Another thing I don't understand, is why they spent so much time on Murray's debts and not on his lies. That's a very important part of the problem. Michael was secretive, but Murray was even more secretive....Michael's decisions were based upon his lies, and so were AEG's.

If Murray was that secretive and going to length to hide everything from others, that would show that AEG could not have known better, right? So I do no get why AEG is not going there?

 

[Bubs]

Martinez testified that on the day of the singer’s death, he went to Jackson’s home, which boasted a movie theater, workout room, dance area and a wine cellar.

A search warrant and affidavit said that no adults besides Jackson were known to live at the location and that the staff was only allowed to be present on the ground floor. Martinez testified that the chef was allowed to leave food outside a door upstairs.

Martinez said that when he arrived, Jackson’s children and his brother Randy were at the home. He also saw three cars, including Murray’s BMW.

I'm not clear whether he says Randy and kids were in the house 25th or 26th?
No wonder LaToya couldn't find any money from the house if Randy got there first. Didn't Paris or Prince say in their deposition that Randy took case from the house?

As for Michael being drud addict, what kind of drug addict goes months and months without any drugs?
If you are depended on painkiller or other drugs, then it is contant use unless help is seeked for it. It is not something you choose to be depended or you choose not to be depended. You are depended on them all the time, there won't be breaks here and there and then go back using them like nothing happened.

 

[elusive moonwalker]

Re: Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG (daily threads merged)

Wonder what anderson will testify to as the toxicology doesnt go with pannish claims. guess he will skip that bit

 

[elusive moonwalker]

Re: Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG (daily threads merged)

As for Michael being drud addict, what kind of drug addict goes months and months without any drugs?
If you are depended on painkiller or other drugs, then it is contant use unless help is seeked for it. It is not something you choose to be depended or you choose not to be depended. You are depended on them all the time, there won't be breaks here and there and then go back using them like nothing happened.
------------------------+

michael was special bubs lol. the only demoral addict who only saw klien a handful times in a month was given normal levels and had no demoral in his house of system yet was addicted to it and according to some died from it. never let the truth get in the way of rewriting history and a good lynching