Latest on MJJC

Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG

Status
Not open for further replies.
@Bubs, I can't find the quote in the re-released moonwalk - I could have sworn that was there. I do agree that Debbie is possibly in a very awkward position. I don't envy her.
 
LastTear said:
@Bubs, I can't find the quote in the re-released moonwalk - I could have sworn that was there. I do agree that Debbie is possibly in a very awkward position. I don't envy her.
Click to expand...

It wasn't in the book, see: http://ohnotheydidnt.livejournal.com/39352864.html

--------------------
"ON HIS MUM: Publicly Jackson has always insisted that Katherine, 78, was "the closest person in his life, a great mother and provider."
"But on the secret tapes he said: "She disappointed me. She did an interview (about him). I don't like her to talk. It's none of those people's business."

MJ would be more than disappointed with this lawsuit. With this lawsuit, KJ put all aspect of his life to out there.


Debbie is nervous
Painted Desert Ranch ?@DJRJPDR 22h
@JBsShawtyMane we sweetie I am getting ready to go to count I won't be home for a few days so I am trying to get stuff done o keep crying
 
Last edited:
ivy said:
I think Tohme is the reason. First of all he would get 10% from every transaction. And the lawsuit with Tohme is challenging his contracts and his ability as a manager. If they can win against Tohme, they can seek to invalidate the Neverland deal and get it back at a lower amount.



I don't want this man to get anything. Smart move by the Estate i hope their can win against Tohme. This belong to Michael Jackson Estate that is where it should be. Despite what has happen at NeverLand this is still part of Michael legacy.








Soundmind - AEG claims law differentiates between how people met being a factor.

For example if a company sends a delivery guy to a customers house to deliver an order and the delivery guy beats the customer , you can see that the contact (being at the house) was generated by the employment (delivering the order). However if a person and the delivery guy ran each other at a parking lot of a store and delivery guy beat the guy, the contact did not happen due to employment.

In this instance AEG is arguing as Murray and Michael met in 2006 - long before the contract between AEG and Murray - Michael and Murray's contact and Murray's treatment of Michael wasn't generated by AEG employment. It was already present for 3 years.

the logic behind a negligent hiring claim is that the company is exposing the customers/other workers to a dangerous employee and risking harm. the counter argument is that if the exposure is not due to company, the company can't be found liable. If the company sends a delivery person with violence tendencies to your home, they are liable. however if you ran into this guy on your own, the employer is not responsible.




It is. everything is an interpretation. There can be opposite examples, or special conditions. we will have to see what Jacksons side argue and how the judge will decide.
Click to expand...



Like the way you explain it Ivy as you always do thank.

My question is why did AEG get invole with Murray in 2009 in the first place? Michael and Murray met in 2006 so Michael had his doctor alreadyr so AEG didn't have to do anything but to draw up the contract that said Artist Michael have control of Murray so if Michael was not please with Murray he would be able to fire him

Was it AEG job to also do a background check did AEG need to do this? What i am saying is AEG should have just left it alone Michael would have did his part because he is the Artist AEG like the expcerts said their cause a conflict of interest by getting invole with Murray. AEG wouldn't be in this postion there would be no trial.

In the bolds parts.

1 Why would AEG get invole in 2009 if this was already done by Michael and Murray?
2 Did AEG cause harm to Michael?



Could the reason also be that AEG was taking care of everythings and took care of this also for Michael?
 
Bubs said:
It wasn't in the book, see: http://ohnotheydidnt.livejournal.com/39352864.html

--------------------
"ON HIS MUM: Publicly Jackson has always insisted that Katherine, 78, was "the closest person in his life, a great mother and provider."
"But on the secret tapes he said: "She disappointed me. She did an interview (about him). I don't like her to talk. It's none of those people's business."

MJ would be more than disappointed with this lawsuit. With this lawsuit, KJ put all aspect of his life to out there.


Debbie is nervous
Painted Desert Ranch ?@DJRJPDR 22h
@JBsShawtyMane we sweetie I am getting ready to go to count I won't be home for a few days so I am trying to get stuff done o keep crying
Click to expand...

Thanks Bubs, I feel like I knew the Randy story a lot longer than '09 - oh well, not really important. I agree, Michael would be devastated about this lawsuit but more than that I feel he would feel extremely let down by members of his family since his death. Seriously, if Janet had been the one to pass - do you think Michael would have given any interviews?

No doubt this will be very difficult for Debbie, I'm not particularly a fan but I feel that she has never gotten over Michael, I believe she did love him in ways that he didn't return, but more so because of her new relationship with Paris, (I try hard not to be cynical about the timing) the last thing Debbie would want to do is to is to testify for the 'other side'.
 
Sick of it. ..........................................
Click to expand...

Bubs, nothing happens as he is not a plaintiff. Is the wish for harm necessary?
 
Annita said:
The Estate has a lawsuit against TohmeTohme. Part of the suit is also the Neverland-Deal. Nothing will happen with Neverland until the decision of the suit has happen.

http://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/t...hme-Tohme-countersues-Tohme-s-complaint-pg-14
Click to expand...

I want the Estate to win this. Neverland belong to Michael Estate.


Bubs said:
I would love to see the estate buying it back, but the way KJ is spending money, and if her lawyers bills are sent to the estate, its going to be years when the estate has money to purchase NL back.

Thanks @Annita, I forgot that Tohme lawsuit. In case the estate wins, NL deal is void.





I'm surprised he didn't call it party :angry:
The other day I needed that quote of what Randy said but couldn't find it anywhere. Do you have a link to it?

Yes, this trial is bs in my opinion, and I'm well and truly fed up reading the headlines.
MJ was drug addict, MJ's kids could wake up their over dosed dad, MJ refused family help and intervention, MJ was 500 million in debt...........................
Sick of it.
Click to expand...


If it was done in a church setting it would be call a Repast. That where ppls would bring foods for the family and it would be in a place cal a Life Center there the family soicals and meet with friends it would be like the last supper.



twinklEE said:
I'm scared of what Debbie is going to testify and how the media is going to sensationalize it.
Micchael's been dragged and dragged and dragged through the mud ever since he died, nobody is willing to give him a break. I don't even want to know what's going to happen when Murray is released from jail, which is this October, thanks to Katherine not going for restitution Murray is free as a bird.
He will be the first killer openly supported by the media and society they will help him make money out of the death he caused.
Click to expand...

I am worry too what Debbie is going to say too. Who will gain from her testmony AEG or The Jacksons. We just have to wait and see.
 
^^^^ LOL

************

Randy talked about interventions in NY, Neverland, Las Vegas. And there was another intervention in Taiwan.
Q: Did you go to Taiwan?
A: Yes, with Rebbie and some family members

MJ was doing shows in Taiwan. Randy said what spurred him to go to Taiwan was the fact that he needed help, he was far away, we said we need to go. Randy: I didn’t know anything but we had heard things. That’s why we were there. Randy said in Taiwan they visited him, gave him family love, wanted to make him feel comforted so he wouldn’t think about doing those things
Click to expand...

I can't be certain that Randy didn't go to Taiwan, but Margaret M only describes Jermaine, katherine and Joseph going.
 
Must have been some apology! lol

******

Btw, I know I keep confusing this court case with how a criminal trial would be managed - but is it unusual for the plantiffs to delay formally resting? Time is getting on and it seems like panish wants to see what AEG brings before he decides.
 
Last edited:
LastTear said:
Must have been some apology! lol

******

Btw, I know I keep confusing this court case with how a criminal trial would be managed - but is it unusual for the plantiffs to delay formally resting? Time is getting on and it seems like panish wants to see what AEG brings before he decides.
Click to expand...

I don't understand that either. I thought in both criminal & civil trials the prosecution (plaintiffs) puts on its case and then it's the defense's turn & then it goes to the jury. Seems to me it would put the defense at a disadvantage if the other side could keep this thing going based on what they hear the defense say. The trial might never end!!

Of course, it would help if Panish had one strategy and could stick to it. But, as we've seen, he changes it on the fly. A good judge would add some discipline to the courtroom--both procedural AND behavioral--so this sort of thing would not happen. (Maybe they're shooting for the Guiness Book of World Records for longest, lamest civil trial in history.)
 
Last edited:
crillon said:
I don't understand that either. I thought in both criminal & civil trials the prosecution (plaintiffs) puts on its case and then it's the defense's turn & then it goes to the jury. Seems to me it would put the defense at a disadvantage if the other side could keep this thing going based on what they hear the defense say. The trial might never end!!
Click to expand...

Ivy has told us previously that a civil trial is more informal, however, I do agree with you that this could put the defence at a disadvantage.
 
LastTear said:
Ivy has told us previously that a civil trial is more informal, however, I do agree with you that this could put the defence at a disadvantage.
Click to expand...

I agree with that too it does put the defence at a disadvantage. If if was reverse and AEG went first maybe the Jacksons defence would be differance.
 
From CNN

Doctors "would try to outbid" each other on who could give Michael Jackson "the better drug" for his pain, his former wife testified Wednesday.

"Michael had a very low pain tolerance and his fear of pain was incredible," Rowe testified. "And I think that doctors took advantage of him that way."
 
crillon said:
I don't understand that either. I thought in both criminal & civil trials the prosecution (plaintiffs) puts on its case and then it's the defense's turn & then it goes to the jury. Seems to me it would put the defense at a disadvantage if the other side could keep this thing going based on what they hear the defense say. The trial might never end!!

Of course, it would help if Panish had one strategy and could stick to it. But, as we've seen, he changes it on the fly. A good judge would add some discipline to the courtroom--both procedural AND behavioral--so this sort of thing would not happen. (Maybe they're shooting for the Guiness Book of World Records for longest, lamest civil trial in history.)
Click to expand...

Yeah, I don'tunderstand that either.

But I am perfectly sure in California there is a 'Code of Civil Procedere" too. And that means:
If a side (plaintiff or defendant) is handling against the rules, the judge MUST intervene and take action. If the judge do not so, there is a reason for the other side for a revision what means, it will be a new trial due to a (or several) flaw/flaws.

Therefore the judge pay attention for the rules.

(in my opinion)
 
I wonder when this f*ckery will be over, we've known enough already and it isn't even relevant for this lawsuit and I'm pissed Michael is been distorted once more and his whole private life invaded.
 
^^

as Walgren said Michael trusted his life to Murray

& most people feel like it. doctors spend years to become a doctor. Not many people would question a doctor.
 
Even if Michael was requesting certain medications, he trusted that doctors wouldn't oblige if it could do him harm. :-(

I am interested in hearing if Debbie tried to talk to Michael about it and how he reacted.
 
ivy said:
^^

as Walgren said Michael trusted his life to Murray

& most people feel like it. doctors spend years to become a doctor. Not many people would question a doctor.
Click to expand...

^ basically the sad irony of this platitude of a trial
 
Michael Jackson had debts of nearly 3.2 billion when he died.According to insurance investigator William R. Ackerman had Jackson's expensive habits and unsuccessful tours caused the economic pickle, writes Contactmusic.

William R. Ackerman was called as a witness in the ongoing trial in which AEG Live is against Michael Jackson's family, who claim that concert promoter contributed to the pop star's death by having pressured him to tour despite knowing about his failing health.

- Every year he spent 100-130 million more than he took in, said Ackerman.

Micheal Jackson died in June 2009 of an overdose of sleeping agent Propofol. His doctor Conrad Murray was sentenced in 2011 to four years in prison for writing out the lethal dose.
Click to expand...
From a tabloid/newspaoer in Sweden.
I don´t think it fits in a newsthread :angry::lies:
 
ivy said:
From CNN

Doctors "would try to outbid" each other on who could give Michael Jackson "the better drug" for his pain, his former wife testified Wednesday.

"Michael had a very low pain tolerance and his fear of pain was incredible," Rowe testified. "And I think that doctors took advantage of him that way."
Click to expand...

I understand Michel because I can't take little pain either much less pain from the type of surgeries he had; plus back pain is one of the worst things It seems Debbie is putting some blame on the doctors here, but AEG might say that Michael had some responsibility too.
 
It is sad that Michael trust Murray but Murray is no better then all of the doctors that AEG brought to the stand like Debbie said all of them was out doing each others to see who can give Michael the better drug to help with his pain.

IMO all of them went against the oath (Do No Harm)
 
Just read what we have about Debbie's testimony so far, and she is going to be good with the jury. She sounds like another Kenny--someone who cared. I like the way she calls out the doctors by name. It is time people realize there was a reason why Michel became addicted to painkillers, and it involves professionals who should have known better. One can only imagine the amount of overcharging that went on.
 
Petrarose said:
I understand Michel because I can't take little pain either much less pain from the type of surgeries he had; plus back pain is one of the worst things It seems Debbie is putting some blame on the doctors here, but AEG might say that Michael had some responsibility too.
Click to expand...


Yes you are right.AEG is going to come right back to part that Michael didn't tell the doctors what medcine he recived from the others doctors. AEG defence is Michael kept it a secert from the doctors
 
Petrarose said:
Just read what we have about Debbie's testimony so far, and she is going to be good with the jury. She sounds like another Kenny--someone who cared. I like the way she calls out the doctors by name. It is time people realize there was a reason why Michel became addicted to painkillers, and it involves professionals who should have known better. One can only imagine the amount of overcharging that went on.
Click to expand...


In the bold part. So sad
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top