Latest on MJJC

Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG

Status
Not open for further replies.
IRS goes after Michael Jackson estate for $702 million

Randee Dawn NBC News contributor


1 hour ago


The Internal Revenue Service says that the Michael Jackson estate owes $702 million in federal taxes, plus penalties, according to charges the agency brought in U.S. Tax Court, reports Reuters.

IRS representatives say the estate has undervalued the late pop star's assets by hundreds of millions of dollars, amounts they say were not disclosed in a court challenge the estate filed in July, as a response to a bill from the IRS.

Essentially, the estate is saying Jackson's legacy is worth considerably less than the tax agency believes it is.

Jackson died on June 25, 2009, which is the date of the estate's tax return, and left his estate to his mother Katherine, his three children and various charities. The filing the estate submitted indicated that his estate was valued at $7 million, for tax purposes. But in May the IRS said that was deficient by $505.1 million, plus penalties of $196.9 million. Tax Court documents indicating the amounts were released Tuesday, said Reuters.

Other disparities included Jackson's likeness and image. The estate said that taxable value was $2,105 — while the IRS says it's more like $434 million. The estate's stake in Jackson's recording assets was valued at $469 million by the IRS, but was not even included in the 2009 estate filing.

A spokesperson for the Jackson estate disputed the IRS's appraisals, telling Reuters that they were "based on speculative and erroneous assumptions unsupported by the facts or law."

So far, the Jackson estate has paid $100 million in taxes, said the spokesperson.

But as per Tax Court rules, the estate will not have to pay any taxes or penalties unless the court rules in favor of the IRS.

http://www.nbcnews.com/entertainment/irs-goes-after-michael-jackson-estate-702-million-8C11010436
Click to expand...
---------------------------------

So much for assessing, evaluating, Micheal's worth in reference to calculating alleged potential damages.
 
He's not "suddenly retired". He retired on January 1st 2013. It looks like he was planning to retire. People do retire after a while, it's not like they work forever.
 
ivy said:
He's not "suddenly retired". He retired on January 1st 2013. It looks like he was planning to retire. People do retire after a while, it's not like they work forever.
Click to expand...


well in my opinion, he knew he would deposed and questioned about his treatments and connection to the Jackson family so he suddenly retired this year.
 
ivy said:
^^

those are deposition videos. you can see that defendants - AEG- have stated which parts they want to play (designations), plaintiffs - Jackson- have stated which parts they want to play (counter designations) and the judge ruled on those (order).

Van Valin and Ratner videos are ready. They are having an issue with Metzger.

Jacksons do not want AEG to play Metzger deposition.

First Jacksons say Metzger is not a "treating physician" because he retired January 2013. AEG disagrees and says according to the law treating physician is a physician who have treated the patient and it doesn't require the doctor to be still practicing medicine. and Metzger still has an active license.

then Jacksons say they wanted to call Metzger live in their case but they couldn't because he was out of town. AEG says they had no problems in serving Metzger a trial subpoena and it doesn't matter. AEG is entitled to play Metzger's depo and Jacksons can call him live during rebuttal.
Click to expand...

More doctors testimonies:no:
I suppose after these 3 doctors, then AEG is done with medical stuff, so they can move on to something else, like bring in Rebbie and KJ.


Interesting that Jacksons don't want Metzger on stand, I wonder why.
Jacksons say that they wanted to call him live but he was out of town?
They accommodated KO schedule and had him testify in 2 separate days, so why couldn't they call Metzger and wait untill he was available?
 
jaydom7 said:
well in my opinion, he knew he would deposed and questioned about his treatments and connection to the Jackson family so he suddenly retired this year.
Click to expand...

retirement didn't and wouldn't stop him from being deposed or called as a witness. so his retirement is irrelevant

Bubs said:
More doctors testimonies:no:
I suppose after these 3 doctors, then AEG is done with medical stuff, so they can move on to something else, like bring in Rebbie and KJ.
Click to expand...

let me think, they have van valin and ratner ready. metzger is being argued. there's Dr. Quinn they mentioned at the opening statements. then there's 3 addiction experts, one being Jackson expert Shimelman and at least one of AEG experts Earley.

they have an actuarial who would testify the standard life expectancy wouldn't apply to Michael (standard is 29 years).

I would expect at least one Michael manager / business associate - Branca, Kane, Siegel or Tohme.

I think they mentioned recalling Phillips, Gongaware and Katherine and even Prince back to stand.

give or take a few more witnesses that can wrap up AEG's defense.


Interesting that Jacksons don't want Metzger on stand, I wonder why.
Click to expand...

Jacksons say they want metzger live on the stand and not through video deposition. AEg want to play deposition and say if Jacksons want to call him, call him during rebuttal

Jacksons say that they wanted to call him live but he was out of town?
Click to expand...

yes they couldn't reach him but AEG disagrees. AEg apparently served Metzger a 48 hr notice - that he would be on call to appear within 48 hours - and Metzger told them he would be around May and June and never said he was out of town and can't appear and so on .
 
8701girl said:
If i was a mother and my son was a celebrity who passed away i wouldnt do interviews, id rather be left in peace not have cameras in my face all the time. But i guess being infront of cameras is all she knows and is the reason why she wont stop now
Click to expand...

When MJ was alive he did not want her to give interviews and she didn't (except once she did and he was upset, saying he told her not to do that). So now he is not around to be a check on it, she has given quite a few high-profile interviews.

I think the family in general like the media attention, and KJ is treated very deferentially by the media as the grieving, saintly, "I did all I could" mum.
 
yep this week starts with addiction expert

ABC7 Court News ?@ABC7Courts 5m
MJ was secretive about the amount of medication he was taking and kept that information from his doctors.
Expand Reply Retweet Favorite More
ABC7 Court News ?@ABC7Courts 7m
Dr. Levounis said MJ doctor shopped to keep his supply of medications when his doctors expressed concern with the amount he used.
Expand
ABC7 Court News ?@ABC7Courts 9m
He testified the MJ was addicted to Opioids - in particular Demerol from 1993 to his death in 2009.
Expand
ABC7 Court News ?@ABC7Courts 12m
Dr. Petros Levouni the head of the Psychiatry Department at Rutgers Medical School in New Jersey is testifying. He is an addiction expert
Expand
ABC7 Court News ?@ABC7Courts 14m
It is Day 75 of testimony in the Jackson V AEG trial. No one from the Jackson family is here.
 
Is this the expert the Jackson family wanted banned? Because he could only get that information from family
 
Justthefacts said:
Is this the expert the Jackson family wanted banned? Because he could only get that information from family
Click to expand...

Why should the J.-family him wanted banned after they had given him that infotmation?

Michael was a few times in New Jersey.
Maybe he has meet this Dr. und told him this "story of his life"?:blink:
Or the Dr. has drunk tea with New Jersey family?

Nothing is impossible.
 
When the experts testify, I wish they would say which particular documents led them to certain conclusions? Today's addiction expert states that:

MJ was secretive about the amount of medication he was taking and kept that information from his doctors.
Dr. Levounis said MJ doctor shopped to keep his supply of medications when his doctors expressed concern with the amount he used.
He testified the MJ was addicted to Opioids - in particular Demerol from 1993 to his death in 2009.


How could doctors not know what medication he was taking, if he saw the same number of doctors and at least 3 knew what each other was giving him? From 93 to 09 if he was going to the same ones, e.g., Klien how could they not know what he was taking? At least they knew what they gave him, and would be able to know if it was too much medication. Maybe the expert means that other doctor's did not know what one doctor had given him. However, testimony shows that most knew each other and sent him to another to deal with a particular issue. Except for the doctor who said Michael asked for one for the road & the nurse who claimed Michael did not tell him about the implant, it seems they knew about his medication.

He said Michael doctor shopped for medication, so were these pills and he would keep a stack of them in the house in case he ran out. When he ran out wouldn't he still have to go back to his set of doctors again for more, and wouldn't they wonder why he needed pills and not give them to him.
Then he mentions Michael was addicted to Opioids - in particular Demerol from 93 to 09, but which other opioids was Michael addicted to? I keep seeing that word opioids as though Michael was addicted to several.

What I see happening from this case, is that doctors are pretending that they did not know Michael was getting medication. In no way would you not know if you see a patient more than once a year & he needs high dosages of the same medication. For him to be an addict, they must have known and supplied him with the medication anyway. So this idea that poor little doctors did not know because Michael kept his medication hidden I can't buy it. If you are addicted to opoids there are certain symptoms, which an educated doctor sees, and then you simply not prescribe the medication.

Let's see how Panish handles this. I am so tired of listening to 2 or 3 experts for the same expertise. It is any wonder this trial took so long. Both sides had more than one addiction expert, for example.
 
I wonder why Panish have an issue with Metzger. Yes I see the part about them wanting him to testify live, but there seems to be some other underlying reason for them to make such a fuss.
 
Allen Duke at CNN just posted this:

Los Angeles (CNN) -- Michael Jackson suffered a "quite extensive" drug addiction the last 15 years of his life, according to an addiction expert testifying Tuesday in the AEG Live wrongful death trial.
Lawyers for the concert promoter, accused of liability in Jackson's death, hired Dr. Petros Levounis to boost its defense argument that Jackson was so secretive about his addiction that its executives had no way of knowing the singer was in danger when he was preparing for his comeback concerts in 2009.
The conclusion was not a revelation, considering Jackson himself announced he was addicted to painkillers when he cut his "Dangerous" tour short to enter a rehab program in 1993.
"If he announced it to the world it's not very private, is it?" Jackson lawyer Michael Koskoff asked Levounis.
"At that moment, he was not secretive," Levounis replied.
Jackson's drugs of choice were opioids, painkillers given to him by doctors repairing scalp injuries suffered in a fire and during cosmetic procedures to make him look younger, Levounis testified.
Labeling Jackson an addict could tarnish the singer's image among jurors, but its relevance to AEG Live's liability is questionable. Opioids played no role in Jackson's death, according to the Los Angeles County coroner. His June 25, 2009, death was ruled a result of an overdose of the surgical anesthetic propofol.
Dr. Conrad Murray told investigators he infused the singer with propofol for 60 consecutive nights to treat his insomnia so he could rest for rehearsals. The judge would not allow Levounis to testify if he thought Jackson was addicted to propofol.
Anesthesiologist: Jackson recruited me to help with insomnia
Jackson's mother and three children are suing AEG Live, contending the concert promoter is liable for his death because it negligently hired, retained or supervised Murray, who is serving a prison sentence for involuntary manslaughter.
Levounis, who returns to the stand for more testimony Wednesday, said addiction happens when a chemical "hijacks the pleasure-reward pathways" in your brain. "You remain addicted for the rest of your life," Levounis testified.
"Michael Jackson's addiction was quite extensive and I have very little doubt that his pleasure-reward pathways had been hijacked and he suffered from addiction," he said.
The Jackson lawyers have never disputed the singer's drug dependence. In fact, they contend that AEG Live executives, including one who was Jackson's tour manager when he entered rehab, were negligent for paying a doctor $150,000 a month just to treat Jackson. The high salary created a conflict for the debt-ridden Murray, making it difficult for him to say no to Jackson's demands for drugs.
Levounis' testimony about the dangers of a doctor being too friendly with an addicted patient, which he said Murray was, could help the Jacksons' case.
"A very close friendship between an addicted patient and a doctor is problematic," Levounis testified. "It makes it much easier for a patient to ask for drugs and it makes it more difficult for a provider to resist."
Tuesday was the 76th day of testimony in the trial, which is expected to conclude near the end of September.
 
Labeling Jackson an addict could tarnish the singer's image among jurors, but its relevance to AEG Live's liability is questionable. Opioids played no role in Jackson's death, according to the Los Angeles County coroner. His June 25, 2009, death was ruled a result of an overdose of the surgical anesthetic propofol.

I agree with the above. I sometimes think that if AEG keeps hammering home this addiction for all these years, then the jury might begin to think they must have known about it, which is what Panish was saying. Good to see Duke point out that opiods did not play a role in Michael's death, but by now the jury is drowned in the demerol testimony. At this point I think both AEG and Panish lost their path at some point in this trial.

I hope AEG has a plan to show that they did not know about this continuous drug addiction. I want to see what AEG's rebuttal will be after Panish finishes.
 
jamba said:
When MJ was alive he did not want her to give interviews and she didn't (except once she did and he was upset, saying he told her not to do that). So now he is not around to be a check on it, she has given quite a few high-profile interviews.

I think the family in general like the media attention, and KJ is treated very deferentially by the media as the grieving, saintly, "I did all I could" mum.
Click to expand...


Youd think her cubs would be more protective of her though but aww no it looks like they using her and she knows it.
 
Labeling Jackson an addict could tarnish the singer's image among jurors, but its relevance to AEG Live's liability is questionable.
Click to expand...

oh Alan Duke. He doesn't realize it's also about life expectancy and damages?
 
This may have been my favorite Duke article to date regarding the civil trial. I believe Duke may be losing his patience with this trial which is very understandable.

AEG may be found liable for negligent hiring and they are defending themselves by portraying Michael as a secretive addict. Even if we were to imagine Michael as a secretive addict, which testimony has proven time and time again that he was not, it does NOT explain or support AEG not performing a background check on a doctor they allegedly hired for a third party.

"If he announced it to the world it's not very private, is it?" Jackson lawyer Michael Koskoff asked Levounis.

"At that moment, he was not secretive," Levounis replied.
Click to expand...

laughs

The judge would not allow Levounis to testify if he thought Jackson was addicted to propofol.
Click to expand...

This is why this witness is focused on opioids and this testimony may not help the defense. I agree that an addiction is a life long issue that is fought daily however, the addict is not always an active participant in the addiction; i.e., sobriety. Michael was not an active morphine addict in 2009; Klein's records prove that with dates and lowering dosages.

This expert may also have to explain the pill bottles found June 2009 with pills still in them; some with more pills than should have been in the bottles if Michael was taking them as prescribed.

Michael passed with only the medications the doctor gave him; his autopsy proved that.
 
Last edited:
It was the plaintiffs who brought the opioids addiction first. If it's not relevant why did they bring it up? Alan Duke is so transparent.
 
I am unsure if today was an abbreviated day in court; not many tweets.

serendipity said:
It was the plaintiffs who brought the opioids addiction first. If it's not relevant why did they bring it up? Alan Duke is so transparent.
Click to expand...

It is as Duke stated:

The Jackson lawyers have never disputed the singer's drug dependence.
Click to expand...
 
^^^^ Ivy said it earlier, it's about a reduced life expectancy which would equal less damages.
 
Tygger;3894251 said:
AEG may be found liable for negligent hiring and they are defending themselves by portraying Michael as a secretive addict. Even if we were to imagine Michael as a secretive addict, which testimony has proven time and time again that he was not, it does NOT explain or support AEG not performing a background check on a doctor they allegedly hired for a third party.
Click to expand...

I sure wish AEG had maintained focus on the negligent hiring and background check. Of course, my belief is different from yours as to what that would have proved. Which is that they are not liable for what happened to MJ.

If AEG had maintained focus on what they should have, this case would not be as much as a toss up and jurors wouldn’t be applauding a witness out of what I believe was sheer frustration with the antics going on in that courtroom, and them believing they had a straight shooter in Ortega back on the stand, who after expert after expert had bogged them down in so much stuff, it was just a relief to have a witness again who knew MJ and was being straight forward and not trying to play on their sympathies coming from the plaintiff’s side or their sensitivities about drugs coming from both sides.

It makes sense that the plaintiffs would go all over the place and distract this case from what it is supposed to be about and they have succeeded in what they hoped, and that is to make it that toss up, because the background check stuff is nonsense. It shows absolutely NO relevance to ability, and if the need for money is a reason to abandon all professional ethics, then keeping the patient alive is the ultimate motivation so you could actually get the money. It was up to AEG to always hammer that home and keep the case focused, and they are not doing that, regardless of how they are trying to also ward off any major award.

At one time, I cared that anybody would have to actually pay Mrs. Jackson some kind of reward in this money grab of a case. If she gets her payoff, for me it won’t be because it is deserved from AEG for what happened to MJ, but because of how AEG botched it with focusing on the wrong aspects. I know these lawyers are supposedly so smart, and know what they're doing, but then Conrad Murray was a licensed physician, so having credentials doesn't mean you're necessarily smart when you most need be.

Sorry for the early morning rant (in the U.S.), but reading another so called expert going on about MJ, knowing nothing about him really, and making definitive pronouncements about him is infuriating. Just like this whole case is.
 
LastTear said:
^^^^ Ivy said it earlier, it's about a reduced life expectancy which would equal less damages.
Click to expand...

Last Tear, I agree with Gerryevans for the most part. I want the defense to be stronger than it is. They could not show they did a background check which speaks to negligence however, they could have shown it was more than likely that Michael hired the doctor. With all of the emails and documents AEG had, there was not one to state Michael hired the doctor solely or that he wanted to. Instead it is a very distracting defense of Michael being a secretive addict which does not explain AEG's actions or their relationship with the doctor.

I understand very well that AEG has to defend itself; however, this is not the strongest defense. Yes, if AEG shows Michael's life would not be much longer, their damages can be lowered. However, damages is only a portion of their defense and they paid a large sum to Briggs to support lower damages. I personally do not believe that was money well spent.
 
Last edited:
Tygger said:
Last Tear, I agree with Gerryevans for the most part. I wanted the defense to be stronger than it was. They could not prove they did a background check which speaks to negligence however, they could have shown it was more than likely that Michael hired the doctor. With all of the emails and documents AEG had, there was not one to state Michael hired the doctor solely or that he wanted to. Instead it is a very distracting defense of Michael being a secretive addict which does not explain AEG's actions or their relationship with the doctor.

I understand very well that AEG has to defend itself; however, this is not the strongest defense. Yes, if AEG shows Michael life would not be much longer, their damages can be lowered. However, damages is only a portion of their defense and they paid a large sum to Briggs to support lower damages. I personally do not believe that was money well spent.
Click to expand...

To be honest I thought there was going to be more connected to the actual charges from both sides. I don't think the plantiffs have put up a very strong case and the defence is starting to bore me. It will be interesting to see how the jury have viewed all of this.
 
IMO the 'secret drug addict' idea goes to show that AEG did not know what was going on in 2009 re MJ and doctors--not only CM but all drs. That is the purpose of that testimony--to show they did not know.

So then the plaintiffs say --'well, he announced a dependency on prescription meds in 93, so that wasn't secret.' But the response to that is 1) that was 16 years before he passed and 2) AEG didn't know it was still ongoing in 09 and not taken care of in 93.

For example, there were statements MJ made (in the 93 TV statement and at the Legend Awards) that indicated he was now clean and no longer having a dependency issue ("I am doing well and I am strong".) So any testimony that this was NOT resolved in 93 and instead was 'secretly' ongoing up to 2009 takes AEG off the hook as far as they didn't know and couldn't have foreseen prescription meds/propofol issues in 09.

AEG is attempting to show

They didn't know what MJ was doing with drs and with CM--although they expressed suspicions re Klein in emails

CM was hired at MJ's request as his personal dr against the wishes of AEG

There was no suspicion re CM due to the check Lorrie did not revealing any red flags and the fact that MJ vouched/requested him

MJ had a longterm battle with dependency on prescription meds (as a result of legitimate injuries/cosmetic procedures needed for his work and stress/insomnia) but AEG WAS NOT AWARE of it.

MJ was in not in optimum health at the time of death (mainly natural sleep deprived) and may have had to cancel the TII shows rather than doing all 50

MJ's reputation was damaged by the allegations and he could no longer get sponsors/endorsements and was in bad shape financially

AEG supported MJ and wanted the tour to be successful, fronted MJ a lot of $ and had affection for him

The plaintiffs took months to make their case and that's why we are all fed up and wanting it to be over. But actually AEG has taken a lot less time than the plaintiffs did. Panish rested his case recently. I'm not bored by AEG's case--I am interested (so far). I just wish we had full transcripts. For example, this dr. now on the stand is not being covered in detail in the media (the media seems to have lost interest). Can we get them after the verdict is announced??
 
^^^ You are right Jambe, bored was too much of a blanket statement, I am tiring of all the addiction talk is a more accurate statement.

So slow with updates tonight.
 
I will be so happy when this damn trial is over. I am so sick of this poor man getting stomped on by both sides and he is unable to defend himself.
 
Actually I am bored. In the beginning AEG was moving swiftly and I was paying attention. They were scoring some good points for their claims even though some of the experts were too extreme. Now with another addiction expert on the stand AGAIN, I am now Super bored. I mean I have heard that testimony so many times by different people, that I could say it in my sleep. Yes I know they want to show reduced life expectancy & therefore damages, but they already had someone or was it 2 who already talked about how Michael would die soon. This is over kill to me. I think the jury GOT it. I want to see some new evidence soon, because if I am bored, then the jury has to be too. Maybe that was one of the reasons that jury got sick.

By the way, this last expert today who talked about Michael having a stash of medicine for when he could not get it from the doctors, what documents he say that told him that, and who was supposed to inject Michael with the demerol?
 
In my opinion I don't think it will be hard or take very long for the jury to reach a verdict. I'm sure the jury is as tired of this mess as most of us are and will throw this crap in the garbage where it belongs at least that's what I'm hoping. The sooner the better.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top