Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG

[twinklEE]

Never mind the lawsuit it was just wrong of them to say anything about Michael’s so called problems. Conrat Murray had made it known that he would not be blamed for killing your brother and you do the same thing he did blame your brother. At times I still think Michael was found on the doorstep or adopted because he was never treated like he belonged in that family. Yet, these are the same people that go out of there way to hide what a messed up bunch they are

Michael was too good for them, it was on Michael's tiny baby shoulders these leeches escaped poverty, no matter how much they hate to acknowledge this very fact. And it's on his dead body's expense that they are trying to earn money again, by throwing him under the bus and stripping him of every ounce of dignity he had. SMGDH @ this ****ery going on and on, hopefully they will get their due eventually, including Katherine.

 

[twinklEE]

YEP! and Janet was listening to rock head Randy all the time so you know he put some stuff in her head knowing good and well she didn't care about MJ or his health. She would go years without seeing him which she admitted to to Oprah in 1997-98

She said the same thing back in 2007/2008 again on Oprah and on Tyra as well.

 

[jaydom7]

She said the same thing back in 2007/2008 again on Oprah and on Tyra as well.

wow didn't know she said it that recent.. so if she hadn't see him in years how was she planning interventions?

 

[jaydom7]

Michael was too good for them, it was on Michael's tiny baby shoulders the Jackson's escaped poverty, no matter how much they hate to acknowledge this very fact. And it's on his dead body's expense that they are trying to earn money again, by throwing him under the bus and stripping him of every ounce of dignity he had. SMGDH @ this ****ery going on and on, hopefully they will get their due eventually, including Katherine.

Exactly! Katherine got her every want and need from her 5 year old son and he took care of her for 45 years of his life yet she didn't take care of him and cater to his wants and needs. If it wasn't for MJ, that entire family would still be poor in Gary Indiana and they have yet to show any appreciation to him whatsoever.

 

[Bubs]

Michael was too good for them, it was on Michael's tiny baby shoulders the Jackson's escaped poverty, no matter how much they hate to acknowledge this very fact. And it's on his dead body's expense that they are trying to earn money again, by throwing him under the bus and stripping him of every ounce of dignity he had. SMGDH @ this ****ery going on and on, hopefully they will get their due eventually, including Katherine.

Something what KJ said:
Putnam asked her about her decision to sue AEG Live in September 2010. She said she didn't discuss with her children or her grandchildren before filing the lawsuit. "This was your decision alone," Putnam asked. She said it was. (AP)
"I wanted to find out, I think I owe it to my son to find out what really happened to him," Mrs. Jackson said. "I heard stories and I heard from my grandson he was being pressured, that he was asking for his father, that Joe would know what to do." Mrs. Jackson: My son was sick and Kenny Ortega said nobody gave him a cup of tea. Nobody said call the doctor, let's see what's wrong w/ him. Mrs. Jackson: It hurts to seat here in court and hear how sick my son was and no one was trying to help him.

2 settlement offers from HER lawyers to AEG doesn't go with the above testimony.
With certain amount of money, she would have put aside her need to find what happen to MJ. Had AEG taken the settlement, there would have not been questions what happen to her son.


So yes, I agree with you that hopefully someday all of them get what they deserve.

 

[jrsfan]

Something what KJ said:
Putnam asked her about her decision to sue AEG Live in September 2010. She said she didn't discuss with her children or her grandchildren before filing the lawsuit. "This was your decision alone," Putnam asked. She said it was. (AP)
"I wanted to find out, I think I owe it to my son to find out what really happened to him," Mrs. Jackson said. "I heard stories and I heard from my grandson he was being pressured, that he was asking for his father, that Joe would know what to do." Mrs. Jackson: My son was sick and Kenny Ortega said nobody gave him a cup of tea. Nobody said call the doctor, let's see what's wrong w/ him. Mrs. Jackson: It hurts to seat here in court and hear how sick my son was and no one was trying to help him.

2 settlement offers from HER lawyers to AEG doesn't go with the above testimony.
With certain amount of money, she would have put aside her need to find what happen to MJ. Had AEG taken the settlement, there would have not been questions what happen to her son.


So yes, I agree with you that hopefully someday all of them get what they deserve.

I disagree with the settlement offers not going with her testimony at all. She knows the depositions & the evidence, discovery that she would not have known had she not filed. Had AEG taken the settlement, she would still have answers that she would not have otherwise.

 

[ivy]

She knows the depositions & the evidence, discovery that she would not have known had she not filed. Had AEG taken the settlement, she would still have answers that she would not have otherwise.

you are correct in the sense that the trial resulted in discovery and brought information she did not have before however she doesn't know the depositions and such. During her testimony she said that the first time she heard many stuff was during testimony. Which is extremely weird to me. I wouldn't expect her or anyone to sit and read all depositions for example but I would have expected the lawyers to tell her the most important discovery & evidence.

 

[Big Apple2]

I wouldn't expect her or anyone to sit and read all depositions for example but I would have expected the lawyers to tell her the most important discovery & evidence.

I have a sneaky little feeling that Mother's attorneys DID take a "411 discovery & evidence" meeting, but it wasn't with Mother, it was with Randy Jackson.

I have always been of the opinion that this case was brought by Randy Jackson and Company. Mother, as usual, is just THE FACE of this lawsuit. (Just like she was for that bogus tribute concert and Gene Simmons is STILL talking smack about MJ. But I digress. Sorry about that.)

And as Jermaine so eloquently put it: "Mother will always take care of her cubs." My note: Even though most of those so-called cubs are already AARP Members.

 

[sfosteredi]

Never mind the lawsuit it was just wrong of them to say anything about Michael’s so called problems. Conrat Murray had made it known that he would not be blamed for killing your brother and you do the same thing he did blame your brother. At times I still think Michael was found on the doorstep or adopted because he was never treated like he belonged in that family. Yet, these are the same people that go out of there way to hide what a messed up bunch they are

Just to clarify, adopted people DO belong in their families.

 

[#MJforever57]

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

I totally agree with this






He would be shaking his head at all of this

I agree with you both.

 

[Tygger]

I disagree with the settlement offers not going with her testimony at all. She knows the depositions & the evidence, discovery that she would not have known had she not filed. Had AEG taken the settlement, she would still have answers that she would not have otherwise.

Agreed.

It is extremely rare that a plaintiff will review depositions, etc with the intensity of the lawyer they hired to such activities.

The majority of plaintiffs will find out at trial what a witness will testify to for the first time as Katherine did. Even if Katherine read every deposition, etc., she would still be surprised by testimonies where witnesses stated opposite testimony to their depositions.

 

[jaydom7]

If Katherine wanted to know what was going on with MJ and this tour, she should've asked him instead of trying to get Joe and Leonard Rowe in on it so they could get some cash. She saw MJ herself. She could've easily asked about his health and weight when she saw him. She was right there in LA, she could've showed up at rehearsal if she was concerned. She did nothing!

 

[Vici]

ABC7 Court News ?@ABC7Courts
LaPerruque said it was hot and humid that day in Orlando and he does not know when was the last time MJ ate or drank anything.
ABC7 Court News ?@ABC7Courts
Chang asked if there was a mention of low blood sugar in the report. Defendant's attorney objected based on hearsay and judge sustained it.

Magic.

Why was this objected and sustained when they have shown Michaels medical records before??

 

[serendipity]

If Katherine wanted to know what was going on with MJ and this tour, she should've asked him instead of trying to get Joe and Leonard Rowe in on it so they could get some cash. She saw MJ herself. She could've easily asked about his health and weight when she saw him. She was right there in LA, she could've showed up at rehearsal if she was concerned. She did nothing!

Agreed. She's doing this for money not because she wants to know what happened. She knows very well what happened, they ll know... JMO

 

[ivy]

Why was this objected and sustained when they have shown Michaels medical records before??

They don't have this medical record. So bodyguard Mike is repeating what he was told by the paramedics - hence it's hearsay. It would either require the FL paramedic back from 2001 / 2002 testify or they would need the paramedic report.

 

[Big Apple2]

If Katherine wanted to know what was going on with MJ and this tour, she should've asked him instead of trying to get Joe and Leonard Rowe in on it so they could get some cash. She saw MJ herself. She could've easily asked about his health and weight when she saw him. She was right there in LA, she could've showed up at rehearsal if she was concerned. She did nothing!

Yeah, it's funny how when Joe Jackson asked her to go check on Michael, she didn't go. Her excuse being that she didn't want to invade Michael's privacy.

BUT she had no problem invading Michael's privacy when she went and put herself in the middle of that meeting in Beverly Hills, also attended by her husband and his buddy Leonard Rowe.

Had she gone to check on Michael that day, she MIGHT have run into the Murderer Murray and she MIGHT have had the opportunity to ask the good doctor some questions.

Apparently if it involved money that little privacy issue didn't matter. Just my opinion.

 

[jamba]

ABC7 Court News ?@ABC7Courts
Briggs: If he didn't make any money there would be no profit for him to donate.
ABC7 Court News ?@ABC7Courts
Strong: If he didn't make money from those tours, would he donate money?
ABC7 Court News ?@ABC7Courts
Briggs said he relied on Gongaware's testimony that MJ's tours lost money or broke even, since the actual amount is normally confidential.

Self explanatory.

What is self-explanatory is that HE is different from the TOUR. He, in this case MJ or any other person on tour, can make a profit (receive a percentage of the $) and the TOUR can still break even or lose $ (after covering all costs out of the $ that they took in).

Take an example, employee X earns a salary and receives that salary, yet the compoany still does not show a profit. This actually happened in various Wall St firms where the CEO made millions (along with others) and yet the company went belly up.

 

[Annita]

Did a deposition with Grace happen?

 

[Petrarose]

I find Chang cross of LaPerruque very good.

-LaPerruque said 2001-2004 were very difficult years for Michael Jackson. They were also very busy years.


plus

Chang shows clips of Michael working well during the time he was supposed to be suffering from addiction. To me those 2 things help and don’t help both sides. Panish claimed that AEG ignored the red flag of a man with a known drug addiction, etc, etc. Now his side brings out that at a time when Michael was supposed to be an addict he was working hard and performing. Given this, AEG could have accepted that Michael would have continued to work just as hard in 09 and perform, regardless of any known drug use from the past.

Also those 2 things affect Briggs statements as well who goes the opposite extreme of plaintiffs expert and implies that Michael will not make money because he filtered Michael’s drug use into the equation. Yet Chang brings out that at a time when Michel was supposed to be taking drugs he was working hard and performing, i.e., making money.


-Chang: Would it be fair to say that throughout the years you worked for MJ you never saw him overdose?
LaPerruque: Yes

-La Perruque reiterated that he didn’t see any signs Jackson was struggling with prescription medications in ’07 or early ’08.

-The bodyguard said when he returned to work for Jackson in 2007-early ’08, the singer seemed to have a clear path of what he wanted to do.


These 3 things affect Panish statement about the red flag because right before 09 there was no indication that this “known drug addict” was engaged in behaviors that should alert AEG. Plus prior to that, the witness never saw Michael overdose. Therefore, if he worked with him before AEG, saw doctors come in, and never saw him in an overdosed state, how could AEG have known who had just began working with Michael and unlike the bodyguard had never gone into Michael's room?

Annita I think whenever they tried to find Grace she runs away. When she came back after Paris' issue, they tried to get her and she became sick. It seems she recovered and went missing again.

 

[jamba]

Briggs said Erk's projection is "significantly in excess of MJ's prior tours & significantly in excess of imaginary tours Panish calculated"

I had a good laugh at their choice of word, imaginary tours
I certainly agree with defence about MJ's future tours. If he didn't do that amount of tours when he was young and able to, there is no chance that he would have done tours that plaintiffs were "imagining".

Overall, good comeback from Briggs, specially when he mentions that what was planned in early proposition and before anyone signed agreement.
-------------------------------
Regarding shows in Japan and India, Gongaware was planning 4 shows in India. Briggs said Erk projected 60 shows in India.
Gongaware planned 8 shows in Japan plus 1 private for a total of 9 shows, versus Mr. Erk's projection of 50 shows in Japan, Briggs

A little bit of exaggeration or "imaginary" concerts from Erks side
-------------------------------
Briggs said he relied on Gongaware's testimony that MJ's tours lost money or broke even, since the actual amount is normally confidential.
Strong: If he didn't make money from those tours, would he donate money?
riggs: If he didn't make any money there would be no profit for him to donate.

Are they suggesting that MJ donating money to charity was publicity stunt and no money was donated at all?
Does anyone knows how this can be verified?
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Outside the presence of the jury, Putnam told Judge Yvette Palazuelos that Panish threatened Briggs during the break.
Putnam said Panish told Briggs "you're lucky we're in court." "I can't have my witness threatened, you honor," Putnam said.
Panish said the events were not quite like that. He told the judge Briggs ran him over, said "this witness ran me over".
Judge laughed and said "I'd be surprised if anyone can run you over, Mr. Panish." Panish said he didn't touch or hit him.
Judge: Mr. Panish, don't talk to any witness unless you're talking about this case.
Panish: I didn't threat him, he's not afraid, he'd know if I threatened him.
and
Panish addressed the judge: Your honor, I ask that Mr. Putnam stop making comments.
Judge: I already said I'm not going to babysit the two of you. Jury didn't laugh this time around.

Seriously! Now Panish is behaving like 10 year old shcool yard bully, and judge just laughs it off? Maybe she got a hint when jury didn't laugh at her joke.

------------------------------
Panish: Do you know he recorded 100 new songs between 2001 and 2008 for new release?
Briggs: I did not know that.

Now we have something to wait for, if we trust Panish' source (Randy)
I wonder if he knows whether those songs are ready for release or what is the state of them?

No, Judge, you are not a babysitter--you are (supposedly) a judge--so step up to the plate and use some SANCTIONS, FINES, something more than "I am not going to babysit the 2 of you"--that makes it sound like they are both at fault but that is not true--it is Panish who is at fault in this particular instance for his comment and then he goes on "if I threatened you, you'd know it." This reminds me of Pellicano's famous words to V Gutierrez: "Consider yourself dead."

I don't know whether to laugh or cry but this trial is more and more of a total disaster every day.

 

[jamba]

I find it "interesting" that AEG has chosen to try to damage Michael's character, but not offer proof that Michael was the one to "hire" Murray. By that, I mean any provable documentation that Michael was the employer, i.e. written material such as emails from Michael, or even his signature on a contract. Lacking that, they are going for character assassination. This was also the agenda, and the tactics, of Murray's trial. Didn't work, there. So, like Murray's trial, this is all over-the-place, but in the end, a jury must decide, and that has as much to do with emotion, as it does with the law. . . .

How do you offer proof you hired a doc? I call my doc, make an appt, pay him. etc. He has a record, I have a cancelled check, etc. But no contract. If MJ paid CM in cash and CM kept no records--hard to 'prove' any hiring--doesn't mean it didn't happen, tho'.

 

[Thrill]

^^
isnt this what the trial is about??? somehwere the hiring part got lost.

so far aeg have done nothing to prove that mj was the one that hired murray. they say 'no signature = no contract' but really... why was other ppl working and being PAID bu aeg without a signed contract??

 

[jamba]

I consider Panish more of a clown than Briggs. Briggs IMO nailed it when he spoke about 'imaginary tours'--Panish needs a clown suit and clown make-up IMO. Erk is another guy who needs to be in a clown suit IMO.

 

[ivy]

http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/06/showbiz/jackson-death-trial/?hpt=en_c2

 

[Soundmind]

Actually it showed that MJ at his lowest point, under immense pressure facing the allegations his physical and psychological state was nothing compared to the state he was in after AEG entered the picture . That the bodyguard was alarmed by observing much less serious symptoms than the ones MJ was showing during the rehearsals for This is it still AEG claims there were no red flags to be alarmed about .

where did they prove what they claimed about secrecy in denial addict when they have called witness after witness to testify although he had medical challanges he acknowledged he had a problem, all knew he had a problem , he fought hard not to take drugs ...etc How does that fit with the picture they portrayed in their opening statement ? This is exactly what Jacksons' lawyer said in his opening statement not what AEG claimed these people would testify to and prove .

regarding 2007 , it just refute AEG's claims that MJ was addicted to drugs for decades , abusing them in secret on continuous basis still no one knew how could they have known . What the witnesses so far have testified to is bolstered by the coroner's report . Anthony of AFP wrote on his twitter after the coroner done testifying how a jury could make sense of Jackson the long term addict described in the opening statements after they were told by the coroner he was in great health when he died . This is the only expert who did not get a dime from testifying . It goes with what the Jacksons said at certain point he suffered immense physical and emotional pain that resulted in dependency on prescription medication , not what AEG claimed of decadeS of continuous drug addiction in secrecy , the in denial manipulative drug seeking behavior , did they prove any of that?

 

[Thrill]

I consider Panish more of a clown than Briggs. Briggs IMO nailed it when he spoke about 'imaginary tours'--Panish needs a clown suit and clown make-up IMO. Erk is another guy who needs to be in a clown suit IMO.

so briggs also nailed it when he said he couldnt calculate how much money mj would've made cus thats speculative??????? So Briggs nailed it when it turned out he based his theory on a survey of 1800 ppl in the US?? so briggs nailed it when he UNDERVALUED sony/atv???? apparently he did an amazing job valuing the catalogue because thanks to him the IRS is investigating it now. LMAOOO. briggs was the biggest clown in this mess so far and his paid ass was sweating on the witness stand.

 

[Petrarose]

^^Well to satisfy all sides: AEG side did bad things & the plaintiffs side did bad things.

 

[Thrill]

^^^i know but its not about that. i see ppl filled with so much hate against the jackson family that they cant even call out aeg and their ridicolous strategy and statements, because oh boy there have been MANYYY wrongs by aeg in this trial-

 

[Soundmind]

I consider Panish more of a clown than Briggs. Briggs IMO nailed it when he spoke about 'imaginary tours'--Panish needs a clown suit and clown make-up IMO. Erk is another guy who needs to be in a clown suit IMO.

I believe Biggs is not only a clown but an exposed liar . The jury got to know how he lied on purpose regarding MJ's share in the catalouge , when he had the nerve to say under oath MJ was in $ 400 millions in debt but had no asset worth anything near $ 200 , 300 or 400 millions. actually after he was forced to admit to his lie there was A LONG PAUSE in the court room .

A liar when he testified that he built his estaimation on a Jacksons' expert who said due to Murray's presence in MJ's life , MJ had a one week life expectancy . He insisted on deleting Murray from the equation , when he was the very reason for the expert's openion

A paid liar who reviewed all the testimonies from the four doctors however did not believe he had to review the coroner's report while addressing MJ's life expectancy .

The jury already heard what AEG bosses said about the success MJ had , how much hopes they had for the concerts , a $ 700000 paid to lie expert who was impeached heavily would do nothing to change that .

 

[Soundmind]

Why was this objected and sustained when they have shown Michaels medical records before??

Forget that we got to know the paramedics told the bodyguard MJ suffered from low blood sugar which perfectly explains what happened