Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG

[crillon]

MJ did not deserve to be slandered for the sole purpose of making Randy Jackson a billionaire

That's how I see it, too. And, I would add Rebbie in there as well.

 

[Justthefacts]

You are right, I forgot MJ had 2 bedrooms and KJ could have been only the other one, non medical bedroom.
But if my kid had past addiction, I definately would be nosing around. Not to satify my curiosity, but check what is going on.



Klein.


If that cream worked for MJ, Klein could have used that cream when he gave botox and other cosmetic stuff.
I think he purposely used demerol, because he wanted MJ to be dependant on him and come back, secondly there is a big price difference between that cream and shots.

It would have been hard for Michael to get dependent on demerol because he was not getting it on a regular basis he would go days without getting it. But I do agree with the fact that he gave Michael demerol because he could charge him more for it. The one thing you notice about his claim is the price for stuff. I think this was something Klein had done to Michael for years give him demerol when he did not have too enough where he could charge more but not to much where it could be dangerous. @Ivy did the estate ever pay his CC claim?

 

[crillon]

I would think it is either the estate or Sony that has been investigated by IRS, as only those 2 have ownership to it, and only they have the reason to put value of it to their tax form of whatever you use your side of the pond.

If this is true--that there's an IRS investigation--I would bet money on it that it was initiated by some disgruntled family member just trying to cause trouble for the Estate and/or Sony. How else would Panish know about it?

Panish took aim at a defense attorney: "Your honor, Ms. Strong keeps looking over at me making faces, making noises, trying to disrupt me."

Panish threatened to take matters in his own hands.

The judge: "I didn't hear anything."

It goes on with plaintiffs' attorney Kevin Boyle saying: "It's like a little squeakfest of grunt and laughing, and the jury will see them."

The judge instructs Strong: "Don't look in his direction. No grunt or groaning or anything."
------------------------------

Last week Panish was making faces at Putnam, and when being told to stop it he asked if he could make faces at Bina.
Now he accuses Strong making faces at him.
I seriously wonder the mental age of these lawyers?

This whole scene of lawyers behaving badly/childish just underscores what happens in a long, drawn-out trial that's much ado about nothing. What happens in that courtroom is under the control of the judge--her lack of discipline and setting boundaries may be a big part of the problem.

 

[Bubs]

Michael was asset rich and cash poor. I do believe his catalog was worth more than his debts. But the thing is , the value of the asset doesn't mean much if he's not willing to sell it and he wasn't.

For example if we go with what Panish says and the value of the catalog is double the debt $800 Million versus $400 Million - which is good, which again shows Michael was asset rich. However imagine paying back the $400 Million debt, he would have needed to sell half of his share (25%) to cover it. And as Panish said to be able to spend for 30 years he would have been required to see the other half of his share.

Yes he had more assets than this debt but those weren't liquid assets as Panish makes them sound like. In a asset rich, cash poor situation, it's possible for him to have billion dollar asset but only limited cash at hand. And the only way to increase his cash - with no working - would be by selling parts of his assets. It's apparent that he did not want to do it and therefore he went back to touring. The only way to pay his debt and spend for years without selling his assets would be through working.



Bubs, there's an estate tax here. A tax has to be paid on the value of the assets before the probate ends. When a person dies the ownership transfers from the person to their beneficiaries, so the government taxes that. The tweets aren't clear but it might mean that Estate showed a certain value on the Estate tax forms for the catalog and IRS disagreed with that valuation.

two important things, valuation of an asset on a tax form versus the actual market value are two different things - meaning the tax value of an asset could be lower than it's real value. For example for tax purposes houses are shown at 70% of their value. Meaning for example a house that is worth and would sell for $200,000 would be shown valued as $140,000 for tax purposes.

secondly a higher valuation on a tax form would mean Estate has to pay higher taxes which would mean lower money for the beneficiaries.

Thanks Ivy.
Thats what I meant when I said that KJ (Randy & Co) propably thinks when she (Randy &Co) hears catalogue is valued 1 billion, it must mean even MJ is in debt 400 million, he still have 600 million in liquid asset, (or would have been if any of them had been assigned as executor). I suppose family sees MJ holding on to the catalogue as waste of time, and tried various ways to release MJ from his "burden".


Do you know how Panish found out that or is it something that you find freely someplace over there?

 

[Justthefacts]

Randy was trying really hard in 05

 

[jaydom7]

Randy was trying really hard in 05

he sure was.. Randy and his chronies wanted MJ to sell the catalog for dirt cheap

 

[ivy]

It would have been hard for Michael to get dependent on demerol because he was not getting it on a regular basis he would go days without getting it.

just a note : that's what is written on the medical records.

@Ivy did the estate ever pay his CC claim?

I don't think so but I'm not sure.

How else would Panish know about it?

Do you know how Panish found out that or is it something that you find freely someplace over there?

Two of Katherine's Estate laywers Sanders and Ribera is also listed as her lawyers in this case. She is getting notices about Estate matters in Estate probate case so that is probably how her lawyers know about it.

 

[Soundmind]

that's not sponsorship either. If they were sponsoring thriller 25, they would have added info about it. for example Coca Cola sponsors American Idol and you see Coca Cola cups on the table in front of judges. As I said they licensed thriller song for their own commercial however that commercial brought Thriller back to the minds of the people and it might have helped to the Thriller sales.

If it's not an endorsement or a sponsorship by definition, I won't say it is. Sobe used Thriller in their own advertising with no tie back to Thriller 25 and with no appearance by Michael. They paid Michael money for licensing his song.




Michael was asset rich and cash poor. I do believe his catalog was worth more than his debts. But the thing is , the value of the asset doesn't mean much if he's not willing to sell it and he wasn't.

For example if we go with what Panish says and the value of the catalog is double the debt $800 Million versus $400 Million - which is good, which again shows Michael was asset rich. However imagine paying back the $400 Million debt, he would have needed to sell half of his share (25%) to cover it. And as Panish said to be able to spend for 30 years he would have been required to see the other half of his share.

Yes he had more assets than this debt but those weren't liquid assets as Panish makes them sound like. In a asset rich, cash poor situation, it's possible for him to have billion dollar asset but only limited cash at hand. And the only way to increase his cash - with no working - would be by selling parts of his assets. It's apparent that he did not want to do it and therefore he went back to touring. The only way to pay his debt and spend for years without selling his assets would be through working.



Bubs, there's an estate tax here. A tax has to be paid on the value of the assets before the probate ends. When a person dies the ownership transfers from the person to their beneficiaries, so the government taxes that. The tweets aren't clear but it might mean that Estate showed a certain value on the Estate tax forms for the catalog and IRS disagreed with that valuation.

two important things, valuation of an asset on a tax form versus the actual market value are two different things - meaning the tax value of an asset could be lower than it's real value. For example for tax purposes houses are shown at 70% of their value. Meaning for example a house that is worth and would sell for $200,000 would be shown valued as $140,000 for tax purposes.

secondly a higher valuation on a tax form would mean Estate has to pay higher taxes which would mean lower money for the beneficiaries.

We know that .However, Biggs denied any knowledge about any asset that was worth 200 , 300 or 400 millions , period . He did not use the argument you use , he did not tell the jury he was asset rich but cash poor . He refused to acknowledge MJ had assets that worth hundred of millions . If the jury got to hear he had asset worth a billion they would not think much of 400 million in debt . But the impression they are getting he was a broke man who needed to tour desperately to pay his debts not a man who was willing to tour instead of selling his assets . He was not forced , it was done by choice .

 

[ivy]

But the impression they are getting he was a broke man who needed to tour desperately to pay his debts not a man who was willing to tour instead of selling his assets . He was not forced , it was done by choice .

I understand that but that's not the issue here.

Look to this mathematically. Michael had a very valuable catalog - his estate still has the catalog. so it is still there, there's no loss no damages there. It's actually the reason why Jackson's expert Erk did not include catalogs or royalties and so on in his calculations.

That means you operate on the assumption that the assets will not be sold to cover the debts. The debts will be paid by the incoming earnings - exactly the reason why Michael went back to work.

So the damages in this lawsuit should be : Michael's earnings minus the expenses & payment of loans. If you go with Jacksons lawyers that should mean $1.5 billion minus $150 Million expenses minus $400 Million loans = let's say around $1 billion

Suddenly you get the assumption that he would be willing to use his assets for his debts and spending? Interesting to say the least.

and to "he wasn't forced, it was done by choice " part, do you think that fits with the Jacksons arguments? They argued AEG controlled and pressured Michael, in their dismissed claims they accused AEG of financially controlling Michael - which they still claim in their case as well. So when convenient Michael is this weak guy at a corner who did not have choice but to perform. He's portrayed like he cannot sell his double the debt, 30 year worth of spending catalog. But when it comes to discussing damages, miraculously Michael is no longer in debt and AEG should not say that he needed to tour because he needed money. I thought it was why AEG able to pressure / control Michael in the first place.. Flip flop positioning by both sides...

 

[jaydom7]

In all actuality, what is you guys' opinion of Katherine's lawyers? are they doing a good job in this case?

 

[Soundmind]

like we really care . Both sides are doing great job at destroying MJ's reputation

 

[ivy]

In all actuality, what is you guys' opinion of Katherine's lawyers?

you are asking for personal opinions which would differ among people. I'm sure some will think that they are the best while others disagree.

are they doing a good job in this case?

there's an easy determination for that. In a lawsuit the burden of proof is on the plaintiffs which in this instance is the jacksons. Go back to a week or so ago before AEG started calling their witnesses . Only consider the part when Jacksons presented their chief case. If at that moment you can say "Jacksons will definitely win this thing" they did a good job, if you can't then they didn't.

The moment the plaintiff finishes presenting their main case and before the defense starts, it should be top moment for the plaintiff. The defense later starts to attack plaintiffs arguments in the hopes to hurt it and then comes the rebuttal in which the plaintiff tries to recover from the damages.

so at that peak point - when the plaintiffs finish their case in chief - you should be thinking "they would definitely win" if they did a good job.

 

[passy001]

Tygger, honestly, are you finding anything that resembles the "truth" in this trial, especially about TII? To me, it's all "smoke and mirrors" from each side while they throw Michael Jackson under the bus. When this is all over and the smoke finally clears and the stench from the court room disappears, we will see the full extent of all the damage to Michael's legacy and to his children, compliments of Katherine Jackson. I doubt that any of us will think it was worth the price.

Maybe that is the real plan. if the jacksons can't get their hands on MJ estate, they may as well ruin it for everyone including his children. They have this attitude of self-entitlement that has been driving their irrational conduct since day one.

 

[MIST]

I don't know much about medical stuff, but couldn't Klein use that Emla crem to numb the skin so he didn't need to use any drugs? I know from Dr Treacy that MJ had very sensitive area around the nose, thus perhaps there was a need for something stonger for that area, but if he was getting something other place than around the nose, could he not use that cream for it?
That time when Emla cream was used,was it Klein's partner who was taking care of MJ that time, and used Emla for numbing?

You have to put on EMLA one hour before the treatment to get the skin numbed and it must be a fairly thick layer otherwise it won´t work.
I use it sometimes on arms and hands when I take bloodtests on children.

 

[HIStory]

Michael Baden is a media hog who will say anything for money. If Michael had lung disease how did the experts hired to look over his autopsy miss it?

They didn't miss it. It's in Michael's autopsy.

It wasn't life threatening but he did have a chronic lung disease (inflammation) and that's what Baden says too.

From the autopsy:

 

[crillon]

Maybe that is the real plan. if the jacksons can't get their hands on MJ estate, they may as well ruin it for everyone including his children. They have this attitude of self-entitlement that has been driving their irrational conduct since day one.

I agree--I can see that being one of the motivations. Because when you look at what they're doing, it's like a scorched earth attack on Michael, with no respect or concern for what this would do to him or his children all for a big payout. Who would be willing to do that to the memory of a beloved family member?

Whatever the outcome of the case, the family must realize they can be spoilers impacting the Estate's ability to generate revenue for Michael's legitimate heirs. Katherine is one of them, of course, but she apparently was willing to be a puppet for her cubs and compromise Michael's kids and legacy in the process. Selfish, greedy and reckless. imo

 

[Justthefacts]

They didn't miss it. It's in Michael's autopsy.

It wasn't life threatening but he did have a chronic lung disease (inflammation) and that's what Baden says too.

From the autopsy:

Thank you. I think I was looking at Lloyd's words rather then his. But he is still a media hog

 

[serendipity]

Putnam: You heard about MJ having money problems? Mrs. Jackson: I heard for years Michael Jackson was broken and he wasn't
Putnam: Did you ever ask MJ about having money problems? Mrs. Jackson: No, because I didn't believe it. Because he wasn't. (ABC7)

Maybe in her mind, if MJ was in debt 400 million and ATV catalogue was worth of billion, that means MJ had 600 million to spend to his family.

Right, she never believed it or bothered asking him and just kept coming with requests and even told Janet to stop giving her money after MJ came back to the US. Why should Janet give her own money when Katherine can just start taking MJ's again? She didn't ask because she didn't want to hear the truth maybe, which would mean MJ giving her less and not being able to come with different requests to him. So that's why she didn't ask and didn't believe - she just kept taking and taking and taking.

Tygger, honestly, are you finding anything that resembles the "truth" in this trial, especially about TII? To me, it's all "smoke and mirrors" from each side while they throw Michael Jackson under the bus. When this is all over and the smoke finally clears and the stench from the court room disappears, we will see the full extent of all the damage to Michael's legacy and to his children, compliments of Katherine Jackson. I doubt that any of us will think it was worth the price.

There is no truth seeking here. That became perfectly clear with the two settlements offers and no restitution from Murray. But this has been obvious from day one anyway. This trial is disgusting on so many levels and Katherine should be ashamed of herself agreeing to this for no other reason than money. It's always been about money with them and this time it's no different. Money money money. And MJ will end up being the loser, just like with most matters involving his family.

Whatever the outcome of the case, the family must realize they can be spoilers impacting the Estate's ability to generate revenue for Michael's legitimate heirs. Katherine is one of them, of course, but she apparently was willing to be a puppet for her cubs and compromise Michael's kids and legacy in the process. Selfish, greedy and reckless. imo

I'm not sure that Katherine is a heir. I thought she was just a temporary beneficiary. She won't inherit anything. Only his kids will.

 

[crillon]

I'm not sure that Katherine is a heir. I thought she was just a temporary beneficiary. She won't inherit anything. Only his kids will.

I'm confused then. According to Michael's Will, 1/3 went to Katherine, 1/3 to the kids and 1/3 to charities. When Katherine dies, her portion goes to the kids, but she is currently one of his "heirs" since she inherited money. Right? At least that's how I'm using the term.

 

[ivy]

I'm confused then. According to Michael's Will, 1/3 went to Katherine, 1/3 to the kids and 1/3 to charities. When Katherine dies, her portion goes to the kids, but she is currently one of his "heirs" since she inherited money. Right? At least that's how I'm using the term.

she's a beneficiary, not a heir.

40% is put aside to pay her expenses on a as needed basis. when she dies any money put aside but not used and the 40% goes back to MJ's kids.

 

[marebear]

Michael still makes sure his mother is taken care of in death and it seems that is still not good enough.

 

[StellaJackson]

The guy being paid $700,000 by AEG to provide his expertise, while at the same time consulting for the estate, seems like a clear conflict of interest to me. Either way, AEG seem to be focusing on reducing the amount of damages.

 

[ivy]

The guy being paid $700,000 by AEG to provide his expertise, while at the same time consulting for the estate, seems like a clear conflict of interest to me. Either way, AEG seem to be focusing on reducing the amount of damages.

well clear isn't that direct IMO.

Estate is not a party to this lawsuit so win or lose, the money awarded , not awarded has nothing to do with MJ Estate. Hence there's no direct conflict. Plus what Briggs did for MJ Estate - as it seems valuation of the catalog versus what he is doing for AEG - what would MJ earned if he lived seems to be different things. also I'm not sure about the "same time" comment. It seems to me Briggs valued catalog for tax purposes and then some time later got hired by AEG and notified Estate lawyers before accepting AEG's hiring.

However this expert is hired to reduce the damages amount that would be given to Katherine and MJ's kids who happen to be the beneficiaries of MJ Estate, so there's an indirect relation there. Obviously it can be used - by Anti Estate people - to argue that Estate did not consider the best for Katherine and the kids - assuming the best is more damages .

What's more interesting is if Jacksons knew this and thought this was a problem why didn't they try to exclude his testimony in full before trial. But it is more likely that they did not see it a problem or they preferred to mention IRS did not agree with his valuation of MJ's catalog hence question the credibility of his other calculations presented in this case.

 

[ilmjj]

Michael still makes sure his mother is taken care of in death and it seems that is still not good enough.

It was never enough it appears. They want more money and what's left of Michael's reputation and dignity. I bet Michael wouldn't be shocked that his family is doing this. Just incredibly sad.

 

[Vici]

Im finally done reading the last 60 pages of this thread. Been away so I havnt had time to catch up. Thanks to everyone for their inputs in this thread.

Funny that Briggs say that MJ did not have any assets worth of 200 million dollars or more. Thats BS!! I mean isnt it rumoured the catalogue generates nearly 80 million/year in proceeds only?! Im curious to know what estimation he told the Estate about the worth of the catalogue.

Neverland is estimated to be worth 90 millions and his MiJac is also up there.

That witness was too predictable.

 

[Vici]

Right, she never believed it or bothered asking him and just kept coming with requests and even told Janet to stop giving her money after MJ came back to the US. Why should Janet give her own money when Katherine can just start taking MJ's again?

I believe Katherine actually said she told Janet not to give her any more money after MJ passed since she was gonna get money from the Estate.

 

[serendipity]

I believe Katherine actually said she told Janet not to give her any more money after MJ passed since she was gonna get money from the Estate.

I think she also says in her deposition, if I remember correctly, that when MJ left after the trial he left for her $500K and Janet also gave her $10K, so I thought this was the time she was talking about. Or maybe this was just a one time gift from Janet. Her testimony is confusing anyway.

I still remember her complaining in the media how the Estate wasn't giving her enough money. Why not go to her daughter instead?

 

[8701girl]

I'm confused then. According to Michael's Will, 1/3 went to Katherine, 1/3 to the kids and 1/3 to charities. When Katherine dies, her portion goes to the kids, but she is currently one of his "heirs" since she inherited money. Right? At least that's how I'm using the term.

The children are the heirs

 

[8701girl]

Snippet from news section
Meantime, attorneys are still clashing. Transcripts obtained by Eyewitness News record complaints made to the judge outside the presence of the jury.

Panish took aim at a defense attorney: "Your honor, Ms. Strong keeps looking over at me making faces, making noises, trying to disrupt me."

Panish threatened to take matters in his own hands.

The judge: "I didn't hear anything."

It goes on with plaintiffs' attorney Kevin Boyle saying: "It's like a little squeakfest of grunt and laughing, and the jury will see them."

The judge instructs Strong: "Don't look in his direction. No grunt or groaning or anything."
------------------------------

Last week Panish was making faces at Putnam, and when being told to stop it he asked if he could make faces at Bina.
Now he accuses Strong making faces at him.
I seriously wonder the mental age of these lawyers?

:doh: These two are acting like immature high school kids ! pathetic

 

[crillon]

It was never enough it appears. They want more money and what's left of Michael's reputation and dignity. I bet Michael wouldn't be shocked that his family is doing this. Just incredibly sad.

Well, in a way, Michael knew his family's antics from personal experience so maybe he wouldn't be surprised. But, I think he would have been deeply hurt & shocked to hear his mother was part of it and that she prioritized the trial over his children with Paris being a casualty. Nothing was more precious to him--as we all know--than his children, and I think he would have been hurt to his core, if he knew. imo