Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG

[sophie]

Debbie testified Michael used propofol on two occasions during the dangerous tour - and yet he travelled with Dr Neil Ratner, an anaesthesiologist? Debbie doesn't mention him at all. So it's one of two things, either Debbie was actually hardly around and never met Ratner (btw babies can be made without sex) - Or Ratner wasn't on tour.

re ratner:

in 2000, there was an insurance-fraud case against a new york physician which involved ratner and ratner's alleged treatment of mj during history tour came up in court.

two articles from feb 2000:

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/item_gsxwogI8sdLfEVCmJfEc1J

February 9, 2000

DEVLIN BARRETT

A one-time dope-addict doctor was accused yesterday of pumping Michael Jackson full of drugs while on tour with the bizarre megastar.

The bombshell accusation came in Manhattan federal court, where Dr. Neil Ratner was testifying against another doctor in an insurance-fraud case.

Sources said Ratner told colleagues he once gave the Gloved One so much of a relaxant that Jackson collapsed during a world tour.

Ratner is a key prosecution witness at the federal trial of Dr. Niels Lauersen, a celebrity gynecologist dubbed the "Dyno Gyno," who's charged with defrauding health-insurance companies for fertility treatments.

Ratner said that in the past few years he worked as a "tour physician" for Jackson, but refused on the stand to answer questions about Jackson and drugs.

"Would you give Michael Jackson drugs?" asked Lauersen's lawyer, Ted Wells, referring to the singer's 1996-97 tour.

"I'm not going to discuss a patient's personal medical condition," answered Ratner.

Seconds later, in a heated sidebar conversation with Judge William Pawley, Wells accused Ratner of being Jackson's personal drug pusher.

Wells told the judge Ratner gave Jackson drugs while the King of Pop was touring in Europe.

"I think what he is doing is illegal," insisted Wells, who has spent days grilling Ratner on the witness stand, trying to paint him as a liar and a thief.

The judge ruled that Ratner did not have to talk about his treatment of Jackson.

Asked again about his work on the tour, Ratner answered: "I administered medical treatment occasionally."

Sources said Ratner once told people in Lauersen's office that Jackson collapsed after a show because Ratner had given him too much of a general anesthetic called propofol.

Propofol is often used to relieve anxiety or pain, but larger doses cause unconsciousness.

When told of the lurid drug accusations that surfaced at the trial, Jackson lawyer Brian Wolf said the Gloved One's medical history was confidential.

Ratner has said he was an out-of-control drug-using doctor in the late '80s before getting sober.

He has denied ever illegally prescribing drugs to anyone, including Jackson, in the '90s.

http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/news/crocked-doc-won-gave-drugs-jax-article-1.865855

FEBRUARY 9, 2000

BY GREG B. SMITH / NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

An upper East Side doctor who shot himself up with morphine while treating patients said yesterday that he was pop star Michael Jackson's tour doctor in 1997.

Dr. Neil Ratner, testifying yesterday in the insurance fraud trial of high-profile infertility expert Dr. Niels Lauersen, was evasive when asked if he had administered drugs to the Gloved One.

"Would you give Michael Jackson drugs?" Lauersen's demanded attorney, Theodore Wells.

"I'm not going to discuss a patient's personal medical condition," Ratner replied.

In a telephone interview from Los Angeles, Jackson's attorney, Brian Wolf, said the singer "denies that Dr. Ratner ever prescribed any inappropriate medications or treatments."

Wolf insisted that any medical treatment is confidential and said Ratner was correct not to disclose it.

Ratner, a 49-year-old ex-rock 'n' roll drummer and manager of Peter Frampton and Edgar Winter, has been on the stand for days, admitting he repeatedly took drugs while caring for patients during the 1980s.

In May 1989, he collapsed after shooting himself up with a paralytic agent during cosmetic surgery on the upper East Side.

Ratner, who still practices in Manhattan, pleaded guilty to insurance fraud and is cooperating with Manhattan U.S. Attorney Mary Jo White in the case against Lauersen in hopes of reducing his prison sentence.

Lauersen is accused of lying to insurers to make them pay for $2.2 million in infertility treatments the companies traditionally don't cover.

Ratner was Lauersen's chief anesthesiologist for the past decade.

Ratner, who graduated from a medical school in Mexico and cut his ponytail two weeks before trial, said he traveled with Jackson as paid tour doctor during the African leg of the singer's 1997 world tour.

When Wells pressed Ratner about giving drugs to Jackson, prosecutor Christine Chung asked to discuss the matter outside the presence of the jury.

At Manhattan Federal Judge William Pauley's bench, Wells insisted that Ratner had, in fact, given Jackson unnamed drugs.

"I want to explore the implication, and I think what he is doing is illegal," Wells added.

But prosecutor Chung argued that the mention of Jackson was distracting jurors from the case at hand.

Pauley warned Wells to avoid further references to the Gloved One.

During cross-examination, Ratner then repeatedly dodged Wells' questions about whether he administered drugs to anyone on the tour.

"In the course of performing your job as tour doctor, did you have occasion to administer narcotics to persons on the tour?" Wells asked.

Ratner: "No."

Wells: "Drugs?"

Ratner: "What is your definition of drugs?"

Wells fired back, "You're the anesthesiologist, you define it."

Pauley instructed the jury to ignore Wells' comment.

 

[Big Apple2]

re ratner:

in 2000, there was an insurance-fraud case against a new york physician which involved ratner and ratner's alleged treatment of mj during history tour came up in court.

two articles from feb 2000:

Thanks for posting those 2 articles sophie!

Dang, Dr. Ratner had more than a few issues on his plate.

I guess he can answer ALL Michael Jackson related medical questions now. Is that true?

 

[Justthefacts]

This whole thing with Ratner is perplexing

 

[Bonnie Blue]

I dont know if someone answered this but it seems as Thome was gonna get the 200,000 from AEG if he signed off the document with the production costs.

"Jorrie said Mr. Tohme did not sign the consent document in her presence. She gave him the document for review.
Panish: Were you aware Dr. Tohme was supposed to get paid $200,000 for signing this document?
Jorrie: I wasn't aware, sir".

I missed that, really? Is that true, the $200k? So when mj died the only prod costs approved by contract were $7.5m and they were now another $27.5m higher. So aeg get a guy who mj terminated as manager months previously to sign off on it after mj's death with a $200k 'deal' - sounds really iffy if true. I had been wondering why if aeg/mj took out a $17.5 m insurance for prod costs, thome/dileo just immediately agreed aeg get the full amount back, leaving the mj estate to deal with getting money from the insurance claim. They were meant to be representing mj's interests, not aegs.

 

[Aquarius]

Anyone thinking AEG could make Michael change his mind about a doctor, should remember when Ortega tried to make Michael sing out, use more emotion & redo the song in TII. Michael said about 3 NOs and he did not budge. He was not going to do it, because he wanted to save his voice, and the way he said No and made a gesture you really saw he could be firm and stubborn if he wanted to. This is no baby that people can sway to do things if he does not want to do it.

I don't remember. Which song was it?

I don't understand how some people think AEG could impose a doctor to Michael. I believe AEG tried to help Michael but unfortunately, they were suspecting the wrong doctor.

 

[Bonnie Blue]

I don't see a relationship between credit check and doctor competence or lack thereof. do you expect a reasonable person to do a credit check on a doctor he is suspecting? personally I would check the doctor's track record. find out more about the quality of his previous services and even speak to his previous patients if necessary. but credit check is so out of it. really. it's the last thing a reasonable person would ever do. why? because there is no value in doing so in the first place. unpaid debts do not tell me whether this doctor I'm starring at is fit for the job or not. it means NOTHING. ZERO.

I was under the impression the money situation wasn't connected to the doctor's competence or fitness, but to the potential conflict of interest. It was definitely an issue that Randy phillips thought important. Phillips testified he was told after the 19 june crisis by murray that mj's wellbeing depended on continuing with tii, that it would hasten his decline if it didn't go ahead. He told ortega this in his email and made sure to say that murray's views were unbiassed and ethical as he didn't need this gig, ie there was no conflict of interest for murray as it was not that important to him if tii went ahead or not. We know that is not true, phillips didn't have enough info to know if murray's financial situation was not an influence on his view adn we know murray put the continuance of the tour ahead of mj's health by continuing to administer his chemical cocktail as he wanted the tour job. At a v crucial time, phillips was believing that murray's financial security wd make his medical recommendation that mj was fit to carry on with tii, a correct one, he may or may not have genuinely believed it himself but he certainly used this belief to allay other's fears.

they had a pre-existing relationship prior to AEG. Murray being around was actually one of MJ conditions to do the TII concerts.

?No he wasn't. Murray was never mentioned in either the negotiations or contract with aeg. Murray was only mentioned to aeg in april/may, long after the time that mj was 'locked in' to doing tii.

 

[ivy]

The Jacksons are saying Murray was not paying his debts back to the point he was about to lose his home and offices and THAT was the red flag. Not his loans. They are saying Murray was desperate for money, if that makes it easier to undertsand.

currently 1.5 Million houses are facing foreclosure. Economic crisis really affected a lot of Americans. Michael's Neverland and Hayvenhurst was facing foreclosure. So does that make Michael desperate for money and will do anything for it as well?

ps: I checked the credit reports. I don't see anything about his office rents being not paid. He wasn't paying his home mortgage since February 2009 but it wasn't yet in foreclosure status. Soon it would have been but not as of June. He had student loans, child supports, some credit cards in addition of being not paid.

And I responded: preventing liability which is Business 101.

okay but it still doesn't explain why the other people wouldn't be subject to a background check. as you can see from the bridge incident of 1999 any type of accident is possible - they don't need to be a doctor - to hurt Michael. so if you said "let's submit all our independent contractors to prevent any liability", I would have said fine. but if you are saying only murray, you need to come for an explanation for it.

You did not answer my question so I will restate and rephrase. Ask yourself why the doctor had to tell Jorrie about his successful $1M/month offices?

Murray is a sociopath, he likes to gloat if you did not realize it by now. Ask yourself why Michael told his kids Murray was the best doctor.

You did not mention the example of governments running checks on doctors and oftentimes their family members if they are to take on heads of states as patients. Negligent hiring is prevented spectacularly in those instances.

Anyone in this thread who may use medical insurance can feel free to ask their “in-network” doctor if they went through a vetting process and what it entailed. If not, Google is your friend.

I can't mention what I don't know and as I see you are still unable to provide sources for your claims. I don't have to google anything or ask my doctors you said. You either have a source or you don't.

Oh, the plaintiffs’ lawyer site is sourced!

It has 2 credit reports and 1 debt summary there. have you read them before commenting on them? Only one credit report shows 3 social security numbers and I wasn't able to see the mention of unpaid rent on any of them. I prefer to read things, I'm not going to apologize for reading stuff.

We are now back to the beginning of the argument where I stated authorities will not look into multiple social security numbers unless a criminal act is done using those numbers. *sigh*

I got it. There can't be a legit reason for Murray to have 3 numbers but he hasn't done anything criminal to warrant an investigation. You don't see your conflicting statements.

The man killed Michael however, we should not be suspicious of him having three social security numbers because AEG did not discover it due to not performing any background check before the alleged, negligent hiring of the doctor.

Murray killed Michael so therefore we should be suspicious of him having three social security numbers is a hindsight opinion. Now we can be suspicious of everything. Now we know he's a liar. but that's not the discussion here.

Before Michael's death if you found out Murray had 3 social security numbers, would you be suspicious that he would someway harm Michael? Would 3 social security numbers show you he would be involved in malpractice? does it tell you he would give drug in an inappropriate way? remember we are talking before Michael's death.


I really don't get what is so hard to realize that I'm talking about "before Michael's death" and you need to remove anything and everything related or after Michael's death.

Before Michael's death you have a person who has been his doctor for 3 years. he has been asked by Michael. AEG tried to not hire him but Michael insisted. Michael determined his payment amount. This doctor is licensed in 4 states,did not have any malpractice, had a legit company, a simple google search has turned up 2 clinics owned by him. He told you he was successful earning $1 million gross a month.

- what would make you not trust his words?

- why would you run a common criminal background check on him?

- why would you run a credit check on him?

- why would you single him out from all the employees?

- how do you justify the above background checks if your don't do any background checks on independent contractors and did no do a single background check on TII staff ?

do you see that I'm not even talking about what they would discover and what they should conclude from it?

 

[bouee]

currently 1.5 Million houses are facing foreclosure. Economic crisis really affected a lot of Americans. Michael's Neverland and Hayvenhurst was facing foreclosure. So does that make Michael desperate for money and will do anything for it as well?

ps: I checked the credit reports. I don't see anything about his office rents being not paid. He wasn't paying his home mortgage since February 2009 but it wasn't yet in foreclosure status. Soon it would have been but not as of June. He had student loans, child supports, some credit cards in addition of being not paid.

Did Michael lie to get TII ? Did he ever stop supporting his kids, his nephews, his mother ?

This is from Orlando Martinez's testimony :

His investigation revealed that Murray hadn't paid his mortgage in more than six months, his home was being foreclosed on and he had several liens for unpaid child support and tax debts, Martinez said.(CNN)
As of January 2009, Dr. Murray had not been paying his mortgage and was behind $ 15,165.11. Late charges accruing at rate of $3,477.95 (ABC7)


Panish asked Martinez about 5 day notice to pay rent or quit -- Dr. Murray owed $7,058.38 in business rent, had evicted note and tax liens (ABC7)

One 2007 judgment against Murray in Missouri ordered him to pay $135,000. There were also eviction notices for his medical business and liens for being behind on child-support payments.(LATimes)

Before Michael's death you have a person who has been his doctor for 3 years. he has been asked by Michael. AEG tried to not hire him but Michael insisted. Michael determined his payment amount. This doctor is licensed in 4 states,did not have any malpractice, had a legit company, a simple google search has turned up 2 clinics owned by him. He told you he was successful earning $1 million gross a month.

- what would make you not trust his words?

Because he was willing to give up 85% of his (gross) income. There's a huge difference between 1 million a month and 150 000/month (and the original 5 million claim).
That's weird.

 

[ivy]

Because he was willing to give up 85% of his (gross) income. There's a huge difference between 1 million a month and 150 000/month (and the original 5 million claim).
That's weird.

correct comparison would be between net incomes. we can't really compare a net and gross amount without knowing the expenses. that would be like comparing apples to oranges. we don't know how much * allegedly* expenses he had and how much of that $1 Million gross was net income. You need to deduct rent for multiple offices, utilities, equipment costs, staff salaries (nurses, bloodwork techs, front office help, billing services), insurances he had to maintain and so on. so after all that the $1 Million gross could be equal or close to the $150,000 net + housing + travel + insurance (covered by AEG).

To me what is weird is Murray dropping from $5 Million to $1.5 Million. Someone can look to it and say "well he tried to get the best deal ever but when he realized it won't happen he accepted what he was being offered" or even a simple "well he did not want to miss the chance to be MJ's doctor".. As I said before during negotiations one party would offer a high end number, other side will offer a low end number and they would settle somewhere in between. So logically I would expect the final number to be less than $5 Million but $1.5 Million seems to be significantly less.


-------------------

as for eviction notices or pay rent or quit, I don't see those on the two credit reports. That information might come from other sources.

edited to add: How does an eviction get on my credit report?
It’s important to know that just receiving an eviction notice isn’t what puts it on your credit report. An unlawful detainer must be filed in court. The property manager has to obtain an eviction judgment from local small claims or civil court. Once the judge has ruled in favor of the property manager and the judgment is final, the three major credit bureaus will receive notices of the eviction and add it to the tenant’s credit report in the form of a public record.

I'll check to see if there are any judgments like that.

 

[Bubs]

I recognize the names of Adams and Ratner, but who the heck is Dr. Van Valin? I never heard that name before.

Also, it's interesting that the court has ordered Mother to hand over VARIOUS financial documents. She (and they) can't be too happy about that.

They had no problem putting Michael's PERSONAL business in the street, now more of their own personal business is about to hit the streets. Well you know what they say: WHAT GOES AROUND, COMES AROUND!

Okay, back to Dr. Van Valin. Can somebody fill me in on his back story. Thanks!

Van Valin was MJ's friend, neighbour,doctor and author of book "Conversations in Neverland with Michael Jackson"

 

[LastTear]

I think he said Michael asked him to give him propofol in 03 for a tour. What tour is my question?

He wrote the book 'Private Conversations with Michael Jackson' he does not discuss how he treated Michael medically.

ETA Bubs are we twins? Lol

 

[bouee]

correct comparison would be between net incomes. we can't really compare a net and gross amount without knowing the expenses. that would be like comparing apples to oranges. we don't know how much * allegedly* expenses he had and how much of that $1 Million gross was net income. You need to deduct rent for multiple offices, utilities, equipment costs, staff salaries (nurses, bloodwork techs, front office help, billing services), insurances he had to maintain and so on. so after all that the $1 Million gross could be equal or close to the $150,000 net + housing + travel + insurance (covered by AEG).

To me what is weird is Murray dropping from $5 Million to $1.5 Million. Someone can look to it and say "well he tried to get the best deal ever but when he realized it won't happen he accepted what he was being offered" or even a simple "well he did not want to miss the chance to be MJ's doctor".. As I said before during negotiations one party would offer a high end number, other side will offer a low end number and they would settle somewhere in between. So logically I would expect the final number to be less than $5 Million but $1.5 Million seems to be significantly less.


-------------------

as for eviction notices or pay rent or quit, I don't see those on the two credit reports. That information might come from other sources.

Martinez gave his sources :

Panish: did you check Dr. Murray's credit?
Martinez: yes, by serving grand jury subpoena on experian, equifax and transunion (ABC7)

“If anyone would have run the credit report, they would have got the same information?” Panish asked. “Yes,” Martinez said. (NYDailyNews)


As a police officer, Putnam asked Martinez if he had special privileges to do searches. Martinez said private investigators can do it too (ABC7)

yes the 5 million to 150 000 is weird too, but i'm not sure if Jorrie was given that info. That's AEG's messy organisation, that's why I put it in parenthesis.

Gross/vs net : some of the examples you gave (bloodwork) would be charged to the patient, wouldn't it ? Housing was for London only, when the contract started in LA and he was from Las Vegas. Then it would mean that those 4 clinics would net him less than 15% , and yet, in spite of that, he was behind on his mortagage, child support, and clinic(s) rent(s).

I would understand someone with no income or a low salary being behind, but someone who pretends to make a lot of money shouldn't.

AEG asked her to draft the contract to protect themselves - she's a lawyer and her job was to do the "special" contracts, she was not doing all of the contracts. And all she did is a Google search ... She didn't protect them that much.

 

[bouee]

I thought - can't remember the source- that Van Valin was somehow connected to Dr Saunders . That would have been around the year 2000 - 2002 and connected to demerol use ?

 

[ivy]

Martinez gave his sources

and those are posted on Panish's website. I don't see a missing rent being reported on those.

if you can find it can you show it to me

http://www.psblaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Exhibit-462-4712to462-4724.pdf

http://www.psblaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Exhibit-462-4726to462-4727.pdf

(transunion refused to provide it) - http://www.psblaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Exhibit-5-3938.pdf

Gross/vs net : some of the examples you gave (bloodwork) would be charged to the patient, wouldn't it ?

I meant the staff doing the bloodwork. I'm thinking about my doctors office. 2 people at the front of the office - like reception, answer phones, check in etc, 3 nurses , 1 specific nurse to draw blood / make injections, 1 person handling billing.

so I expect a doctor to pay

- office rent
- utilities - water, heat, electricity
- staff salaries - front office assistants, nurses, technicians, billing, housekeeping
- equipment costs - new equipment, maintenance and repair costs
- insurance costs - malpractice insurance

there's just no way to know what would be his alleged expenses and his net income

That's AEG's messy organisation, that's why I put it in parenthesis.

they are big organization with everyone is being given a duty and do their job independently. most of the organizations are like that. I get assigned tasks at work that I do independently 99% of the time. My supervisor only sees it when I'm done. In such big organizations it is almost impossible for one person to do or to oversee it all.

if budget is gongaware's job, jorrie - a lawyer and has nothing to do with accounting / finance, would not read it. jorrie is also an outside independent contractor. a contract probably needs to be read by Trell and he would give "okay sign it" to Phillips, I would not expect Phillips to read it.

 

[crillon]

okay but it still doesn't explain why the other people wouldn't be subject to a background check. as you can see from the bridge incident of 1999 any type of accident is possible - they don't need to be a doctor - to hurt Michael. so if you said "let's submit all our independent contractors to prevent any liability", I would have said fine. but if you are saying only murray, you need to come for an explanation for it.





Before Michael's death if you found out Murray had 3 social security numbers, would you be suspicious that he would someway harm Michael? Would 3 social security numbers show you he would be involved in malpractice? does it tell you he would give drug in an inappropriate way? remember we are talking before Michael's death.


I really don't get what is so hard to realize that I'm talking about "before Michael's death" and you need to remove anything and everything related or after Michael's death.

Before Michael's death you have a person who has been his doctor for 3 years. he has been asked by Michael. AEG tried to not hire him but Michael insisted. Michael determined his payment amount. This doctor is licensed in 4 states,did not have any malpractice, had a legit company, a simple google search has turned up 2 clinics owned by him. He told you he was successful earning $1 million gross a month.

- what would make you not trust his words?

- why would you run a common criminal background check on him?

- why would you run a credit check on him?

- why would you single him out from all the employees?

- how do you justify the above background checks if your don't do any background checks on independent contractors and did no do a single background check on TII staff ?

do you see that I'm not even talking about what they would discover and what they should conclude from it?

Exactly. And, this is what I don't get about arguments on the plaintiff's side--it's ALL HINDSIGHT. For AEG to single out Murray among all the independent contractors for a background check when he's been Michael's doctor for 3 years and Michael is the one determining his salary, vouching for him, etc. would be inappropriate & invasive. When has any corporation or 3rd party done a background check on an individual's personal doctor? I'd love to hear some examples of that, because it's such a weird and unusual practice. And, "usual and customary" is a legal standard that doesn't fit this whole credit & background check scenario, and something the jury will be able to relate to from their own experience.

And, as you point out, even if they had done one, it wouldn't pull up any red flags for Murray that would indicate he would harm Michael, so it's a moot point anyway.

 

[ivy]

Defense expert: Promoter didn't pressure Michael Jackson's doctor
By Alan Duke, CNN
updated 11:23 AM EDT, Mon August 19, 2013
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
Jackson lawyers contend AEG Live pressured Dr. Murray to get the singer to rehearsals
An AEG Live expert testifies Murray was independent of the concert promoter
A Jackson expert concluded Murray had a conflict of interest as Jackson's physician
Jackson's mother and children are suing the concert promoter in the pop icon's death

Los Angeles (CNN) -- The doctor convicted in Michael Jackson's death did not appeared to be pressured by AEG Live, an expert hired by the concert promoter testified Friday.
Dr. Gary Green returns to the witness stand Monday, the 72nd day of testimony in the Jackson wrongful death trial in Los Angeles.
Michael Jackson's mother and three children contend AEG Live is liable in the pop icon's death because it hired, retained or supervised Dr. Conrad Murray, who is serving a prison sentence for involuntary manslaughter.
The company argues that Jackson chose and controlled the doctor and that its executives had not way of knowing about the dangerous propofol infusions Murray was giving him in the privacy of Jackson's bedroom.
Jackson died from an overdose of the surgical anesthetic days before his comeback concert was to premiere, according to the Los Angeles County coroner.
Green, who reviewed the testimony and evidence presented in the previous 16 weeks of the trial, challenged the conclusions of Dr. Gordon Matheson, a medical ethics expert hired by Jackson lawyers.
"I disagree with Dr. Matheson completely," said Green, who serves as the team doctor for Pepperdine University athletics.
Matheson, the director of the sports medicine department at Stanford University, testified that AEG Live created a conflict of interest because the contract it negotiated with Murray to serve as Jackson's personal doctor for $150,000 a month "was likely to lead to poor medical decisions."
Matheson, who also is team doctor for Stanford's athletic department, compared it to a football coach telling a team doctor on the sidelines in the fourth quarter of a big game that a star quarterback has to go back in the game despite a suspected concussion.
Green challenged Matheson's comparison, saying the school chooses the team doctor, not the patient. Jackson chose Murray, he said.
Murray, who had closed his clinics to take the job and was $1 million in debt, would be inclined not to resist the AEG Live executives' pressure to get Jackson to rehearsals despite evidence of his failing health, Matheson testified.
Murray himself was conflicted because the negotiated contract was structured so that he answered to AEG, but it also could be canceled if the tour was canceled, he said. "I think that conflict played out as Michael Jackson's health began to deteriorate."
Green testified Friday that there was no conflict because it was in Murray's interest to keep Jackson healthy so his job could continue.
E-mails from the show director Kenny Ortega and production manager John "Bugzee" Hougdahl warned AEG executives of Jackson's deterioration during June 2009, including indications he was unable to do some of his trademark dances or remember lyrics to songs he had sung for decades.
His makeup artist and a choreographer testified about Jackson's paranoia, his talking to himself and hearing voices, and his severe weight loss.
Associate producer Alif Sankey testified that she "had a very strong feeling that Michael was dying" after a rehearsal 11 days before his death.
"I was screaming into the phone at that point," Sankey testified. "I said he needs to be put in the hospital now."
The defense expert discounted the significance of an e-mail written by AEG Live Co-CEO Paul Gongaware to Ortega that the Jackson lawyers argue is evidence the promoter pressured Murray in the days before Jackson's death.
Gongaware wrote: "We want to remind (Murray) that it is AEG, not MJ, who is paying his salary. We want to remind him what is expected of him."
Green testified Friday that since he saw no evidence the message was ever communicated to Murray, he believed "it was not influencing."
The AEG Live expert also cited evidence that Murray resisted any interference from the promoters, telling them at one point to "stay in their lane" and leave Jackson's health to him. He also kept Jackson from rehearsals at one point, contrary to what the promoter wanted, Green said.
AEG Live's next witness will be human resources consultant Rhoma Young, who it hired to provide expert testimony concerning the Jacksons' contention that the company negligently hired Murray.

 

[bouee]

and those are posted on Panish's website. I don't see a missing rent being reported on those.

if you can find it can you show it to me

http://www.psblaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Exhibit-462-4712to462-4724.pdf

http://www.psblaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Exhibit-462-4726to462-4727.pdf

(transunion refused to provide it) - http://www.psblaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Exhibit-5-3938.pdf



I meant the staff doing the bloodwork. I'm thinking about my doctors office. 2 people at the front of the office - like reception, answer phones, check in etc, 3 nurses , 1 specific nurse to draw blood / make injections, 1 person handling billing.

so I expect a doctor to pay

- office rent
- utilities - water, heat, electricity
- staff salaries - front office assistants, nurses, technicians, billing, housekeeping
- equipment costs - new equipment, maintenance and repair costs
- insurance costs - malpractice insurance

there's just no way to know what would be his alleged expenses and his net income



they are big organization with everyone is being given a duty and do their job independently. most of the organizations are like that. I get assigned tasks at work that I do independently 99% of the time. My supervisor only sees it when I'm done. In such big organizations it is almost impossible for one person to do or to oversee it all.

if budget is gongaware's job, jorrie - a lawyer and has nothing to do with accounting / finance, would not read it. jorrie is also an outside independent contractor. a contract probably needs to be read by Trell and he would give "okay sign it" to Phillips, I would not expect Phillips to read it.

About costs : equipment would be rented I guess (that would include maintenance), but that's a detail.

from panish's website :

LV clinic : pay or quit (dated july 17th 09)
http://www.psblaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Exhibit-462-7987LADA.pdf
that's the clinic address, as per this letter (about Michael) : http://www.psblaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Exhibit-535-22.pdf


Default Judgement against Acres Home (texas clinic) GCA (las vegas clinic) and murray : to pay about 130 000 dollars in 2007 (to Popular Leasing) , in Missouri.
http://www.psblaw.com/wp-content/up...der-Judgment-Popular-LeasingInc-v-GCAExhB.pdf

again something filed in Nevada in 08, again Popular Leasing against Murray, GCA and Acres Home
http://www.psblaw.com/wp-content/up...-457-Filing-App-Popular-Leasing-Inc-v-GCA.pdf (the Missouri judgment trasnferred to Nevada ? )

Edit :

default judgement against GCA from Citicorp in 08, Nevada, 210 000 dollars
http://www.psblaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Exhibit-459-Default-Judgment-Citicorp-v-GCAExhA.pdf

---
AEG's organisation : I know how they work, but ALL relevant info should have been given to Jorrie if she was supposed to make a contract, including initial negociations. I understand why Gongaware didn't do that, but that's AEG's problem, they had that info.

---
reading from some of the credit reports , they refer to debts as "instruments" , I couldn't help but and share.....

 

[ivy]

from panish's website :

LV clinic : pay or quit (dated july 2nd 09)
http://www.psblaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Exhibit-462-7987LADA.pdf
that's the clinic address, as per this letter (about Michael) : http://www.psblaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Exhibit-535-22.pdf

so it would not show up on a credit check before MJ's death. murray became delinquent on July 2nd 2009. Also I posted the rule before, it won't show on credit report until it is taken to court and a judgment is ordered on it.

so yes there was a pay or quit notice but it was after Michael's death and not on credit record. So it's not something AEG would be able to see it. so "Murray was not paying rent on his offices" is out.

Judgement against Acres Home (texas clinic) GCA (las vegas clinic) and murray : to pay about 130 000 dollars in 2007 (to Popular Leasing) , in Missouri.
http://www.psblaw.com/wp-content/up...der-Judgment-Popular-LeasingInc-v-GCAExhB.pdf

again something filed in Nevada in 08, again Popular Leasing against Murray, GCA and Acres Home
http://www.psblaw.com/wp-content/up...-457-Filing-App-Popular-Leasing-Inc-v-GCA.pdf (the Missouri judgment trasnferred to Nevada ? )

correct, it's the same thing. they are recording the Missouri judgment in Nevada as a foreign judgment so that they can collect it in Nevada.

interestingly it's not on Murray's credit record either.

default judgement against GCA from Citicorp in 08, Nevada, 210 000 dollars
http://www.psblaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Exhibit-459-Default-Judgment-Citicorp-v-GCAExhA.pdf

not on credit report either.

so I would assume these are business loans / debts and murray's name is included as an officer of the business but not on personal capacity. so that would mean they won't show up on his personal credit report but can be found if searched for legal cases Murray & his company involved in by doing a Lexis legal search . that explains Panish's question to Jorrie.

"Jorrie uses Lexis for legal research, she said. Panish asked if she checked how many judgments existed against Dr. Murray. She said not. Jorrie didn't check any pending lawsuits, litigation regarding child support or if Dr. Murray's properties were in foreclosure. Jorrie conceded she could've searched Dr. Murray in Lexis. "

so this requires not only a credit check but a Lexis legal research.

 

[LastTear]

@Tygger

Last Tear, where did the idea come from that the doctor needed a contract in place and specifically one with Michael AND AEG? The doctor could have been paid through an advance.

Do you remember when AEG wanted to hire a nutritionist at a point in time? Would it not have been easier to question Chase? AEG could not question Chase; her contract allowed her to be paid through an advance and that is why AEG had no relationship with her. AEG had a relationship with the doctor which was allowed through their alleged implied employment contract.

I don't know enough about this field of work to know why and how contacts are put in place, perhaps the fact the were going to a different country had something to do with it, idk.

As far as we know Michael was involved with any communication between AEG and Murray, he was present at that meeting, and could have prevented Murray from attending if he wanted to. So as far as Chase goes, they could have spoken to her, with Michael's permission, but she is a chef not a nutritionist.

 

[bouee]

so I would assume these are business loans / debts and murray's name is included as an officer of the business but not on personal capacity. so that would mean they won't show up on his personal credit report but can be found if searched for legal cases Murray & his company involved in by doing a Lexis legal search . that explains Panish's question to Jorrie.

"Jorrie uses Lexis for legal research, she said. Panish asked if she checked how many judgments existed against Dr. Murray. She said not. Jorrie didn't check any pending lawsuits, litigation regarding child support or if Dr. Murray's properties were in foreclosure. Jorrie conceded she could've searched Dr. Murray in Lexis. "

so this requires not only a credit check but a Lexis legal research.

She would not have come up with the LV eviction thing that's right, but she would have come up with 2 default judgement (meaning Murray didn't even show up at court, didn't try to defend himself ? ) for 340 000 dollars against GCA, the company she contracted with.

So those clinics were making 1 million a month and he was not able to pay his vendors.

There could be more on panish's website, i didn't look up every link, I was looking for things related to his clinics.

 

[ivy]

^^

yes she would come up with two default judgments but only if she did a Lexis legal search. A credit report would not show those. As far as I can see his credit report shows several delinquent student loans, a state tax lien, several small credit card debts and recent nonpayment of his mortgage. (student loans delinquent since 2006, credit cards since 2007, his mortgage was since 2009.)

Also his housing history is interesting, he had a mortgage / house worth of $444,888 in 2001, he sold it in 2003 and got another mortgage/house worth of $699,032, he sold it in 2005 and bought a $1,520,000 + $150,000 house / mortgage. He refinanced it in 2007 for $1,656,000. He missed payments on that house on 11 and 12 / 2008 and he made a payment in January 2009. he continued to miss the payments between february and june 2009 but made a payment in April 2009 - which wasn't enough to cover the outstanding balance. The value of the houses does suggest that he had a really good and perhaps increasing revenue sources over 2001 and 2007. In USA mortgage amount the bank will give you will depend on your income levels. his ease in getting these high number mortgages suggest the negative effect on his credit score did not start until 2007 / 2008. He seems to be in a downward spiral since 2007.

 

[bouee]

LV clinic : pay or quit (dated july 17th 09)
http://www.psblaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Exhibit-462-7987LADA.pdf

This one is interesting because Murray stopped paying the rent on may 26th 09, almost at the same time he was asking payment from AEG.

 

[bouee]

^^

yes she would come up with two default judgments but only if she did a Lexis legal search. A credit report would not show those. As far as I can see his credit report shows several delinquent student loans, a state tax lien, several small credit card debts and recent nonpayment of his mortgage

and child support

 

[LastTear]

LV clinic : pay or quit (dated july 17th 09)
http://www.psblaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Exhibit-462-7987LADA.pdf

This one is interesting because Murray stopped paying the rent on may 26th 09, almost at the same time he was asking payment from AEG.

Probably Murray's arrogant ass thinking he didn't have to give notice.... the rules never apply to him.

 

[ivy]

and child support

yes I saw a $1033 per month child support that was delinquent for a while but the last situation is impossible to tell from credit report. It was sold / transferred to another collection / debt agency and it wasn't updated since 2 / 2008. Even if he was regularly paying it in 2009 (I'm not saying he was), it would have stayed on his credit report for several years.

 

[serendipity]

Interesting that Ratner says in that article that he traveled with MJ on the African leg of the tour. If that's true and if I remember correctly Katherine and Joe were also in Africa with MJ (I believe Lisa Marie was also there).

Rater's testimony should be interesting.

 

[bouee]

^^


Also his housing history is interesting, he had a mortgage / house worth of $444,888 in 2001, he sold it in 2003 and got another mortgage/house worth of $699,032, he sold it in 2005 and bought a $1,520,000 + $150,000 house / mortgage. He refinanced it in 2007 for $1,656,000. He missed payments on that house on 11 and 12 / 2008 and he made a payment in January 2009. he continued to miss the payments between february and june 2009 but made a payment in April 2009 - which wasn't enough to cover the outstanding balance. The value of the houses does suggest that he had a really good and perhaps increasing revenue sources over 2001 and 2007. In USA mortgage amount the bank will give you will depend on your income levels. his ease in getting these high number mortgages suggest the effect on his credit score did not start until 2007 / 2008. He seems to be in a downward spiral since 2007.

you would need to know how much was mortgage and how much was the house value : real estate prices were going up until 08/09 : a house bought in 2001 would be worth more in 2003, so he could have sold it to buy another one, etc.. he didn't necessarily borrow more.

 

[jamba]

The plaintiff’s case officially rested when Ortega’s testimony was complete. It was a formality for Panish to address the jurors today. I do not know why he did not want to do that. It would be a great idea if MJJC could do a Q&A with both Panish and Putnam when the trial is complete.


Jamba, while I appreciate your assisting TwinklEE, the point is to NOT accuse a man of rape without any proof. It is a horrific, violent crime and extremely rude to accuse someone of such just for sport. There are people who accuse Michael of the very same although he was acquitted. I am surprised I even have to say such.



You are indeed correct! Can someone connect Michael’s behavior in 1984/85 to his behavior pre-TII tour in 2009? It will help in making sense of AEG’s defense.

I included the info from Maldonado's book to show that there was a police report and a police investigation into the alleged rape. You made the comment that someone (TwinkLEE) was accusing Jermaine of rape "for sport"--and I wanted to show there was in fact a lot more to it than that. Maldonado later says the charges were "thrown out on a technicality" but that she was convinced Hazel was telling the truth (64).

As far as connecting the 1984/5 behavior to the pre-tour TII behavior, you need to ask Randy Jackson about that--he is the one linking the 2 by saying that MJ never had any problems sleeping while on tour (his last experience touring with MJ being the 1984 Victory tour) and therefore,according to Randy, it is nonsense to claim he had insomnia in 09.

I think it's a cheap shot to compare Hazel's accusation of rape to those made by Michael's accusers and to get on a high horse about it. IMO Hazel Gordy has a lot more credibility than Chandlers and Arvizos.

 

[bouee]

Probably Murray's arrogant ass thinking he didn't have to give notice.... the rules never apply to him.

yes, maybe. Or AEG putting more pressure by not paying him until the contract was signed. that's interesting because that was one of the Jacksons' argument as to how AEG pressured Murray (by "promising" a salary)

 

[LastTear]

Interesting that Ratner says in that article that he traveled with MJ on the African leg of the tour. If that's true and if I remember correctly Katherine and Joe were also in Africa with MJ (I believe Lisa Marie was also there).

Rater's testimony should be interesting.

The South African portion was in the third leg of the tour, 5 shows none of them back to back.