This would be one of the reasons for the applause and I very much agree with the jurors. However, I do believe Ortega gave great testimony. He did not favor either side purposefully. He told his truth and each side can take from it what they will. Could also be that the plaintiffs have finally ended their case.
Ivy, who said this? This is a wrongful death trial and AEG is being sued because the plaintiffs believe AEG is culpable in their loved one’s passing. You yourself have often said the criminal trial was based on the doctor being a substantial factor in Michael’s passing not the absolute factor in Michael’s passing which is true. The same is happening here with AEG.
The truth is AEG should NOT have sought a relationship with the doctor. Because of the relationship, they allowed themselves to be exposed to liability which is why they are in court now. When they took on the responsibility to allegedly hire the doctor, they also took on the responsibility of vetting the doctor to ensure he would do the job he was allegedly hire to do. It was not enough to accept him because Michael referred him. There are so many risks involved with Michael’s passing (or someone else) as the worst case scenario and that is exactly where they found themselves.
With Klein, AEG gave Michael the advance. This is why I continually repeat the difference between Klein and the doctor. No one in this thread has been able to explain why - if the doctor was to be paid with an advance – the doctor had a relationship with AEG and Michael where Klein obviously did NOT have a relationship with AEG and Michael.
I will say this in defense of those who do believe Michael would not have passed if the doctor was not allegedly hired: the doctor would not be in Michael’s life. This doctor happened to be in debt and he was not going to take Michael as a charity case client. If he decided to remain with Michael pending some payment plan he and Michael decided on that was independent of AEG drafting an employment contract, that would be between the doctor and Michael and AEG would not be in court today.
However, I seriously doubt this doctor would accept the lower number of monies Michael would provide because the doctor was in debt. I truly do not see this doctor remaining with Michael without the alleged employment contract which secured a much higher number of monies.
Maybe remove Michael from the situation, remove death, simplify the situation, place ourselves inside, and a wonderful doctor instead. Perfect? Absolutely NOT; there is still a problem.
If this was anyone of us, would anyone of us want our employer to hire our personal doctor and have our doctor dependent upon our employer? Choose an ailment or be perfectly healthy. What happens when the doctor does not meet the obligations as required by our employer and now our doctor that we have depended on and feel comfortable with for whatever reason is gone solely because our employer said so? Would that not leave us at a distinct disadvantage? How is that situation not dangerous for us?
