Latest on MJJC

Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG

Status
Not open for further replies.
Soundmind said:
So? he was called a freak before and AEG are only repeating what others said before about him ? that's considered an excuse ? that justifies calling someone you are about to make hundred of millions of a freak ? you dont call someone you admire or respect a freak , period , Nor you justify that by claiming he was called freak by others
Click to expand...

They shouldn't have said it and when I read about that testimony, my first thought was that this was a throwback to so many tabloid headlines over the years. As fans, we knew & loved the real Michael, but to the casual observer, or the casual concert promoter who was not his friend, people formed an opinion about Michael from what they read. I truly think this is where that "freak" characterization came from--the influence of the tabloids.

And, what the "freak" comment has to do with this trial beyond stirring the emotional pot is beyond me.
 
Soundmind said:
So? he was called a freak before and AEG are only repeating what others said before about him ? that's considered an excuse ? that justifies calling someone you are about to make hundred of millions of a freak ? you dont call someone you admire or respect a freak , period , Nor you justify that by claiming he was called freak by others
Click to expand...

I thought the person who called him a freak had actually nothing to do with the TII tour and have never met MJ. He won't be testifying nor is he a part of this lawsuit. The Jacksons only brought this comment up hoping the jury will pin it on the people that are being sued.
 
Tygger;3874409 said:
As for restitution, I hope you received you answer from Ivy’s post. I can almost feel Ivy’s joy when she believes she is correcting my posts! laughs
Click to expand...

let me be honest. I don't feel "joy" when I believe I correct anyone's posts. I feel proud when I can back up every single one of my legal opinion posts with actual laws and /or example cases. You should try it too sometime. It's easy to come up with claims from thin air, the hard task is to back them up with sources.
 
Tygger
Last Tear the transcripts for all witnesses are on other sites.
Click to expand...

I know of one other site, but I wouldn't go there if it was the last place on earth to view them, I prefer mine unbiased and true.

Last Tear, if you read or have read the transcripts of Phillips/Gongaware, you will see the memory lapses that happened when questioned by the defense lawyers were not quite as extensive as the memory lapses that happened when questioned by the plaintiffs’ lawyers. No need for me to fabricate that.
Click to expand...

I didn't suggest that you fabricated it, just that you were mistaken as the direct came from the Plantiffs.

Now, the doctor has lost his license due to conviction. His license allowed him to practice the skill which made him successful as Phillips characterized him. Again, I would not be surprised to find out Katherine did NOT know his license was revoked. How does anyone suggest this doctor create income directly to support these children that he did not support before killing Michael and eventually pay restitution to Michael’s mother, father, and three children?
Click to expand...

Michaels father would not have received restitution.
 
Last edited:
jaydom7;3874286 said:
I really wish MJ had someone who cared and medical profession that could've helped him
Click to expand...

Actually, he did. Right after Michael’s death when all of the news media were still referring to a possible heart attack as the cause of death, Nurse Cherilyn Lee came forward. She said she had treated Michael’s children for colds, etc. and was working with Michael on nutrition and natural herbs, etc.

Then one day Michael called her and when she got to his house he asked her to give him Propofol to help him sleep. She said she wasn’t even sure what he was talking about because she was only familiar with the brand name “Diprivan” so she went home and looked it up. Then she went back and told him “Michael, this will kill you.” He said “no, it’s safe, I just have to have someone watch me while I sleep”. She told him that she would not do it. She cared and she tried to help.

Then he approached Murray.

The next time she heard from him she was on the East coast when he called and said he was cold on one side of his body and hot on the other. She told him to go to the emergency room immediately! He did not. She cared and she tried to help. There are laws that prevent her from doing more than that.
 
(it's a bit late now but I'm not so fast as you all. Sorry for that)


I have problems
a) with your interpretation of that word "freak" und about the indignation of parts of this board
b) I may ask you what it is the difference between "his nose was like a toothpick" and "freak"

to a): Honesty, for me is "freak" not unambigous negative.

And also wikipedia writes it so:
"In current usage, the word "freak" is commonly used to refer to a person with something strikingly unusual about their appearance or behaviour. This usage dates from the so-called freak scene of the 1960s and 1970s."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freak

Well, in that sense it is not bad for me to say 'MJ was a Freak' even it is (for me!) more an appreciation for MJ's nonconformismus and independence from the public meaning and common practice.

I guess nobody of us know in what sense "freak" was wrote in that email. Nobody! Panish an Mrs. Jackson also, but Panih is doing very indignant an Mrs. Jackson is crying.
Maybe they are right, but maybe they are not right, because their interpretation of the word is one-sided.

btw, I mean too that word "freak" in that email was not neccessary, it was only silly and maybe the old men wanted to be sloppy and do as young people..... who knows...


Now to b): I tought at the Ophra-Winfrey-Interview with Mrs. Jackson.
There is Mrs. J. saying that Michael's nose at times looks like a toothpicker.

" She admitted that she tried to keep him away from drugs like Propofol, just as she tried to get him to stop undergoing plastic surgery.
"I thought it was too small," she said of Jackson's post-surgery nose, adding that it looked "like a toothpick at one time." "I had told him, 'That's enough, why do you keep going?'"
http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment...h-winfrey-normal-dad/story?id=12087134&page=1

or this: http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment...h-winfrey-normal-dad/story?id=12087134&page=1


Really I ask myself "what ist more insult for Michael: when outsiders calling him a freak or when his own mother says in a openly Interview "his nose was like a toothpicker".
 
Tygger said:
Again, I would not be surprised to find out Katherine did NOT know his license was revoked.
Click to expand...

Why wouldn't she know? I would think any mother would like to know something imprtant as this regarding her son's killer. But then again, seeing as how she is clueless about alot of stuff, including this lawsut which she claims she filed on her own, I guess I wouldn't be surprised either.
 
Tygger;3874409 said:
I see there are no source links or examples for preventing indirect profit! No worries, I will remain patient and see what is discovered.
Click to expand...


I'm happy to report to you that I have found an example in no other than our favorite O.J. Simpson which proves my earlier comment of "determined case by case basis"


Although “Son of Sam” laws may not prevent an individual from writing or telling his or her story, there are other ways a criminal may be prevented from profiting from criminal conduct. In 2007 O. J. Simpson authored If I Did It, a hypothetical account of the murders of which he had been acquitted. In 1995 Simpson had been found not guilty of the murder of his ex-wife Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ronald Goldman, which had occurred outside Brown Simpson’s home. In the civil trial, Simpson was found liable of wrongful death and ordered to pay $33.5 million to the families of Brown Simpson and Goldman.

Regarding the publication of his book, Simpson’s daughter, Arnelle Simpson, claimed she came up with the concept and was thus entitled to any monies from its sales. (example of indirect profit)The Goldman family, however, believed that the publisher, Lorraine Brooke Associates (derived from the middle names of O. J. Simpson’s two youngest children), was being used to shield monies paid to Simpson. Simpson himself was quoted as saying, “This was an opportunity for my kids to get their financial legacy. My kids understand. I made it clear that it’s blood money, but it’s no different than any of the other writers who did books on this case.”

In July 2007 a Florida U.S. Bankruptcy Court awarded the book rights to the Goldmans, allowing the family to auction the rights to help satisfy the civil judgment against Simpson. Judge A. Jay Cristol ruled that Lorraine Brooke Associates was accomplished to perpetuate a fraud. Arnelle Simpson’s attorney argued that the claim by the Goldmans could only be held against O. J. Simpson, not against the publisher, because any claims against the publisher would punish Arnelle Simpson as well.

so as you can see even if an indirect way of profiting is established, you can get the profits through a fraud claim.

You are welcome ! Now what about sources or example cases for every legal aspect that you claimed? Can you do it? Don't worry if you can't. I'm not holding my breath.
 
ivy said:
let me be honest. I don't feel "joy" when I believe I correct anyone's posts. I feel proud when I can back up every single one of my legal opinion posts with actual laws and /or example cases. You should try it too sometime. It's easy to come up with claims from thin air, the hard task is to back them up with sources.
Click to expand...

I see you stopped reading the rest of the post. No worries and no, I do not fabricate law. Feel free to look it up. Just because you cannot find it or you have and will not admit it, does not mean it does not exist.

LastTear said:
Michaels father would not have received restitution.
Click to expand...

Go back a few posts. There would be no need for Walgreen to consult Joe and/or his lawyer if he would not.
 
<header class="header">



  •
  • 2
  • 0

    Google
  • Stumble
  • 1
  • 0
  • 1
    Commen
</header>
Conrad Murray Voicemail to Jackson Family: Let Me Be or I TAKE YOU DOWN!
July 24, 2013

Dr. Conrad Murray really, really does not want to testify in the Michael Jackson wrongful death case. That's just the impression we're getting lately.

In a voicemail to a friend, he threatens to drop a nuclear bomb on the entire case (so to speak) if he's forced to testify, and he says he's not bluffing:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=-eyncoK0mMQ

[video=youtube;-eyncoK0mMQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=-eyncoK0mMQ[/video]

It's the second time Murray has threatened AEG and the Jacksons with potentially destructive testimony, suggesting he has only BAD things to offer.

Curiously, this threat appears directed at both sides, so it's unclear exactly what secrets he's harboring ... but in any case, this is one scary dude!

The incarcerated Conrad Murray says in his latest voicemail warning:

"Please stop. If you don&#8217;t, let this serve as my final warning to both sides. Don&#8217;t incite me to testify. Consider this as an imminent nuclear warning."

"Enough is enough."

He then hints at the nature of his "nuclear" secret, which pertains to the true nature of Michael's relationship with his family. Again, it's not clear how.

Murray was subpoenaed n Katherine's $40 billion wrongful death lawsuit against AEG, but pleaded the fifth because he doesn't want to incriminate himself.

He has appealed his involuntary manslaughter conviction, which landed him in jail for four years for his role in the 2009 death of the King of Pop.



http://www.thehollywoodgossip.com/20...-or-i-take-yo/

<header class="header">

</header>
 
Last edited:
Tygger said:
Just because you cannot find it or you have and will not admit it, does not mean it does not exist.
Click to expand...

check my post just above yours, I posted the example of stopping indirect profits you asked for.

And I'm curious why do I need to find what you claimed? Why can't you post it yourself? I am able to post sources for everything I claim, it's a respect that I show for everyone reading my "legal information" posts. That's also because they don't need to take my word for it but they can read the sources and make their own conclusions. Why can't you do it too?
 
Tygger said:
I see you stopped reading the rest of the post. No worries and no, I do not fabricate law. Feel free to look it up. Just because you cannot find it or you have and will not admit it, does not mean it does not exist.



Go back a few posts. There would be no need for Walgreen to consult Joe and/or his lawyer if he would not.
Click to expand...

I honestly don't mean to sound rude, I really don't, but you seem to be enjoying playing some kind of game here, if you know of a law then you can post a link or excerpt of what you are reading. You seem to be enjoying sending other people off to search for what you say exists.

Re Joe, perhaps you are right, and maybe that's why Katherine didn't want it!
 
@soundmind Im seeing what you were referring to earlier re figures

@ABC7Courts: Panish showed an email from Gongaware about MJ first draft of worldwide tour projection. It lists "net to Mikey $132 million."

@ABC7Courts: Email cont'd: Maybe gross is a better number to throw around, if we need to use numbers with Mikey listening.

@ABC7Courts: Panish: Isn't Paul Gongaware suggesting to lie to Michael Jackson?
Meglen: No he is not

Salesmen techniques I see, but honestly, Michael had been in this business all his life, surely he had advisers and financial people to check these things over.
 
LunaJo made &#8203;&#8203;a video with a compilation of interviews of Randy Phillip talking about Michael, Conrad Murray and TII.


[youtube]W6aXrIVVOxs[/youtube]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6aXrIVVOxs



How many lies... :puke: :perrin:








crillon;3874444 said:
Conrad Murray Voicemail to Jackson Family: Let Me Be or I TAKE YOU DOWN!
July 24, 2013

Dr. Conrad Murray really, really does not want to testify in the Michael Jackson wrongful death case. That's just the impression we're getting lately.

In a voicemail to a friend, he threatens to drop a nuclear bomb on the entire case (so to speak) if he's forced to testify, and he says he's not bluffing:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=-eyncoK0mMQ

[video=youtube;-eyncoK0mMQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=-eyncoK0mMQ[/video]

It's the second time Murray has threatened AEG and the Jacksons with potentially destructive testimony, suggesting he has only BAD things to offer.

Curiously, this threat appears directed at both sides, so it's unclear exactly what secrets he's harboring ... but in any case, this is one scary dude!

The incarcerated Conrad Murray says in his latest voicemail warning:

"Please stop. If you don&#8217;t, let this serve as my final warning to both sides. Don&#8217;t incite me to testify. Consider this as an imminent nuclear warning."

"Enough is enough."

He then hints at the nature of his "nuclear" secret, which pertains to the true nature of Michael's relationship with his family. Again, it's not clear how.

Murray was subpoenaed n Katherine's $40 billion wrongful death lawsuit against AEG, but pleaded the fifth because he doesn't want to incriminate himself.

He has appealed his involuntary manslaughter conviction, which landed him in jail for four years for his role in the 2009 death of the King of Pop.



http://www.thehollywoodgossip.com/20...-or-i-take-yo/
<header class="header">
  • 0
  • 0
</header>
Click to expand...

:fear:
 
Last edited:
IMO, she doesn't want to have to cope with any problems at all. She wants a carefree life with no worries and she also wants all her cubs around her, so she accepts them "home" no matter what and takes care of them with MJs money. I don't think Katherine wanted to be around MJ very much.
 
respect77 said:
I think Michael's sleep problems since childhood had a lot to do with the showbiz lifestyle/family problems. Katherine maybe knew this deep down and maybe that's why she did not take Michael to the doctor about it. She was afraid the doctor would say the showbiz lifestyle needs to stop or that the whole family needs to go into therapy. Michael was the breadwinner - that aspect of him was always more important to them than his health.
Click to expand...

You've hit the nail on the head and given the backdrop of all we know about the family history, it fits. Michael was always "sacrificed" for the others, and as you point out--he was the breadwinner and the one whose needs were ignored. "The show must go on!" was likely drilled into his head daily and all the stress to perform, make a living, carry the Jackson 5 as the lead singer and more, all added up to a neglected little boy who couldn't sleep, didn't have a childhood and didn't have parents who cared for him in the traditional sense. Heartbreaking.
 
absolutely heartbreaking.. and the fact that Katherine at 83 is now sacrificing her now dead son for the benefit of her family is sickening
 
why wasn't the fact that Katherine and Joe met with Randy Phillips in May brought up? it shows that Katherine could've easily asked Randy about her son's welfare and health before these shows started? where was her concern about MJ??
 
Spectator banned from Jackson trial over photo
Jackson-AEG Suit



By ANTHONY McCARTNEY, AP Entertainment Writer

LOS ANGELES &#8212; A spectator attending the civil trial over Michael Jackson's death was banned by a judge from watching the proceedings after he snapped a photo in a courthouse hallway that included jurors hearing the case.

Bailiffs confiscated William Wagener's cellphone and ordered him to return on Thursday to find out whether the ban will remain in place or other disciplinary actions will be taken.

Wagener said he inadvertently snapped the photo on his smartphone while riding an escalator. He cooperated with bailiffs to retrieve the photo and said he did not send it to anyone.

The photo is the latest incident that has raised concerns about the security around jurors hearing the negligence case filed by Jackson's mother against AEG Live LLC. Two alternate jurors were approached by a woman last month who told them not to award any money to the Jackson family.

In recent days, tiny windows on the courtroom door were blocked after jurors reported seeing someone press a camera to the window and snap a photo during the proceedings. Videotaping and photography in the courthouse are banned without a court order, and a judge blocked a request by news outlets to broadcast the trial.

Bailiffs or a court clerk give daily reminders of the courtroom's rules, which include a ban on any transmissions from inside the trial or loud outbursts during the testimony.

Wagener, 67, said he posts updates on the trial on Facebook and YouTube and has sold rights to videos he made during Jackson's 2005 criminal trial. He said if he's banned from the trial, it will hurt his ability to cover the case. He said being in the courtroom is the only way to hear the inflection of lawyers and witnesses and get a full sense of the proceedings.

Superior Court Judge Yvette Palazuelos said she would consult with another judge about how to handle Wagener and the photo of jurors.
 
One of the things that I hope comes out of this lawsuit is that the other singers in bed with AEG realise just how much of a commodity they are. I hope they are not foolish enough to think that it is only MJ that has been manipulated and lied to by this corporation.

As a performer, watching this trial would lead me to ask 'Am I going to be paid what they said I could make? What do they call me behind my back (after praising me to my face?)' And I would have to ask my management to take a serious look at my arrangement with AEG. But hey, that's just me!
 
^^^^I think there's much worse promoters out there. AEG has a very good reputation in the industry, especially because of Phillip Anschutz. Anschutz is based out of Denver, Colorado and he is well-liked and considered very ethical in his business dealings, generous to charities, etc. I don't think any company is perfect & you hire the best people expecting they'll do the right thing.
 
Of course Dr. Farshchian just had to say "there was a monkey on his back" he says it slang for demerol use but did he really have to say that grr
 
What is wrong with Wagner? First he got into trouble with Pastor in the Muarry trial and now he claims his phone went off accidentally. There have been many spectators breaking the rules in that courtroom, because they see how lax the judge is in handling the case. Even the attorneys are out of control and have to be restrained. People quickly find out who is weak in authority, and then try to see how far they can go in breaking the rules. Then, she always has to ask or speak to some other judge about the bad behaviors. She should just have these people make an appearance and deal with them, and stop saying she is going to talk to judge X & Z about this. I know there are different types of judges who have different roles, but surely she could handle some of this by herself and show people she means business. When you have fans telling Karen "you go girl" and nothing is said to them. You have a problem.

Crillon I think also that many companies have people like Meglen, Freke, and Teel. The thing is the owner hires these people, and they come with their nasty egos and behaviors. They even talk about the owner behind his back, so it seems this is a boy's club where the top executives have the same personalities. How that came about, I don't know. Maybe they act alike to fit in with each other, or they are just inherently nasty people.

Muarry is singing the same old song over and over. I think he has nothing new to say that we do not know already. If he spills anything, he will have less to put in his book. He keeps giving these threats because he really is afraid of testifying and thinks if the defense and plaintiffs believe he will mess up their cases, they will leave him alone. He was also afraid to testify in his case and told the judge he made a decision not to do so. Yet he blamed his attorney for not putting him on the stand. Expect a book filled with made up stuff coming from a psychotic mind.

It is a pity we have a case with two groups and both--plaintiffs and defendants and their attorneys--are despicable.
 
Just looked at Dr. F testimony. What I find odd is that he claimed he did not know how Michael became addicted to the drug. I am getting the impression that the doc did not ask Michael the regular questions that doctors ask their patients. Then he claimed that he was not following the media and news back then, so he went on the internet and found out that Michael had an ongoing problem. My thing is you have the man in front of you. Why not do a social history and find out what you need to know. Why not ask him when did he first take it and for what? When was the next treatment and what happened, etc.

He talks about the leg being sprained and Michael had to rehearse on it at Madison. Maybe that is why he looked so out of it. He was in pain and no doubt had taken something for that. Maybe that was the time Karen gave him a bagel and made him wake up.
 
Tygger;3874409 said:
All of those indirect payments to Alvarez who is hopefully using it for her child with the doctor does not satisfy the support of the other children the doctor has. Therefore, restitution would NOT help the Jacksons and the doctor's children are NOT going to get child support before restitution.
Click to expand...

If Katherine had agreed to restitution and Judge Pastor had issued a Restitution Order/Fine which would not expire and would not be dischargeable in bankruptcy, any money Murray makes on the inevitable book deals, paid interviews, etc. would be attached by court order. That may not help the Jacksons fill the family coffers with a serious amount of money, but it handcuffs Murray for the rest of his life and that's something.

Tygger;3874409 said:
Unfortunately, the article does not include information about the doctor’s appeal lawyer being a guest of the defense team at the civil trial on a number of trial dates. It also does not mention lawyers on the defense team who may be assisting with the doctor’s appeal. Interesting indeed.
Click to expand...

I've noticed you are big on sourcing, so I'm curious how you know that Murray's appeal lawyer was a guest of the defense team or which lawyers are helping with Murray's appeal?
 
Just read about what happened in court today and two things. I hate the fact that Michael's medical records are put on display and Mrs Jackson is not only a liar but a bad one
 
crillon said:
I've noticed you are big on sourcing, so I'm curious how you know that Murray's appeal lawyer was a guest of the defense team or which lawyers are helping with Murray's appeal?
Click to expand...

one certain fan on twitter is making those claims. That cannot be sourced or posted here per rules.

Let me point out that appeal court only shows Valerie Wass as Murray's lawyers. AEG lawyers helping is nothing more than an unsubstantiated rumor / speculation. As for the "guest", court has reserved seats for Jacksons, AEG, Media and only 1 seat for general public. It looks like AEG is allowing Wass to use their reserved seats, it doesn't mean they invite her and I don't think anyone expect Jacksons to offer a seat to Murray's lawyer.

It's also quite unrealistic to expect the media - non tabloid media in court - to report any speculative stuff. they reported at least twice Wass attending the trial and what she said, they won't be reporting any conspiracy created by fans.
 
ivy said:
one certain fan on twitter is making those claims. That cannot be sourced or posted here per rules.

Let me point out that appeal court only shows Valerie Wass as Murray's lawyers. AEG lawyers helping is nothing more than an unsubstantiated rumor / speculation. As for the "guest", court has reserved seats for Jacksons, AEG, Media and only 1 seat for general public. It looks like AEG is allowing Wass to use their reserved seats, it doesn't mean they invite her and I don't think anyone expect Jacksons to offer a seat to Murray's lawyer.

It's also quite unrealistic to expect the media - non tabloid media in court - to report any speculative stuff. they reported at least twice Wass attending the trial and what she said, they won't be reporting any conspiracy created by fans.
Click to expand...

I wonder then if Wass is doing her due diligence attending the trial just in case her client changes his mind and decides to testify. Or, maybe even using the opportunity to get any useful testimony for the appeal. Possible?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top