Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG

[LastTear]

^^^ Did the judge say she was surprised?

 

[passy001]

Alan Duke @AlanDukeCNN
AEG Live surprises judge today saying it may call Katherine and Prince Jackson back for more testimony in MJ wrongful death trial.

I don't understand what is surprising. AEG had long maintained that they will be calling KJ and Prince as hostile witnesses during the presentation of their case. so far KJ and Prince only testified as plaintiffs during the plaintiffs' presentation. now they will be testifying against themselves to refute their earlier testimonies.

 

[LastTear]

Ivy, did that help?

Last Tear, there is no question Michael chose the doctor. AEG did attempt to choose AND hire Michael’s doctor with Finkelstein.

Did Michael hire the doctor or did AEG? I have not seen any evidence or testimony to show Michael hired this doctor. AEG’s defense was spent attempting to minimize possible damage payout with the two highest paid experts in this trial and portraying Michael as a secretive addict.

If they truly want to call Katherine and Michael's oldest to the stand, I suspect they are going to fail on the direct of those witnesses. If they do not, the cross will fail them.

AEG still has time to show Michael hired that doctor and absolve themselves. There is a reason they have refused to focus on that.

How could they prove it though, realistically speaking. They showed the history and it's clear Murray was Michaels choice, AEG carried out Michaels wishes - that's my take on testimony so far on that subject.

AEG lawyers stated that they will disprove the encounter between Philips and Murray that Prince testified to, maybe that's why he may be called back.

 

[ivy]

Ivy, did that help?

My post was about Jacksons using emotion. Not about whether AEG is using logic or not. So no totally irrelevant comment. Tag me when you have something to say about Jacksons emotion angle.

^^^ Did the judge say she was surprised?

I don't understand what is surprising. AEG had long maintained that they will be calling KJ and Prince as hostile witnesses during the presentation of their case. so far KJ and Prince only testified as plaintiffs during the plaintiffs' presentation. now they will be testifying against themselves to refute their earlier testimonies.

I don't get what is surprising as well, it could be Alan Duke's biased commentary. They were always "subject to recall" and I believe Putnam maintained he would recall Phillips, Gongaware, Ortega, Katherine and Prince.

 

[Tygger]

How could they prove it though, realistically speaking. They showed the history and it's clear Murray was Michaels choice, AEG carried out Michaels wishes - that's my take on testimony so far on that subject.

AEG lawyers stated that they will disprove the encounter between Philips and Murray that Prince testified to, maybe that's why he may be called back.

When was it Michael's wish that AEG hire the doctor and make the doctor beholden to them instead of him? If Michael was going to hire the doctor, there would be NO relationship between AEG and the doctor because they would have paid the doctor with an advance. There is nothing to show Michael hired the doctor yet, the doctor was to be paid $150k/month to perform the duties Jorrie listed in the contract she drafted for AEG.

My post was about Jacksons using emotion. Not about whether AEG is using logic or not. So no totally irrelevant comment. Tag me when you have something to say about Jacksons emotion angle.

laughs nice attempt though.

 

[LastTear]

@Tygger

When was it Michael's wish that AEG hire the doctor and make the doctor beholden to them instead of him? If Michael was going to hire the doctor, there would be NO relationship between AEG and the doctor because they would have paid the doctor with an advance. There is nothing to show Michael hired the doctor yet, the doctor was to be paid $150k/month to perform the duties Jorrie listed in the contract she drafted for AEG.

Do you believe that AEG chose Murray without Michael wish? As I said earlier AEGs name on the contract is a grey area for me, and I don't think that has been explained during the trial.

 

[Tygger]

@Tygger

Do you believe that AEG chose Murray without Michael wish? As I said earlier AEGs name on the contract is a grey area for me, and I don't think that has been explained during the trial.

Choosing the doctor, which Michael did, is not the same as hiring the doctor.

May I ask you why you feel AEG's name is on the contract?

 

[twinklEE]

I hope Prince pulls through, I don't care about Katherine, I just hope Prince is strong enough to testify again (he seems strong but still). He has so much on his shoulders.
I can't keep but think how considerate Walgren, a mere stranger was toward those children and their loss, he avoided putting any of them on the stand (although his case was about ''justice'' not a multi mullion dollar handout for the evergreedy bunch), because he didn't wanna traumatize them, here we have their grandmother throwing them out there in order to secure $$$. I'm sure the pressure of testifying in this case was one of the contributing factors which lead to Paris's suicide attempt.

 

[LastTear]

Choosing the doctor, which Michael did, is not the same as hiring the doctor.

May I ask you why you feel AEG's name is on the contract?

I don't know, that is what I would like some testimony about, at the very least it might be on there because AEG co hired Murray. But I don't think that the penalty for agreeing to Michaels wishes should be 40 billion. It's late here now but tomorrow I will re read what testimony we have on the contract. I have said from the get go that I don't understand why their name is on the contract.

 

[ivy]

Alan Duke @AlanDukeCNN
The surprise was they now say they may call 7 more witnesses. Tuesday they indicated it would be maybe 3.

 

[Tygger]

I don't know, that is what I would like some testimony about, at the very least it might be on there because AEG co hired Murray. But I don't think that the penalty for agreeing to Michaels wishes should be 40 billion. It's late here now but tomorrow I will re read what testimony we have on the contract. I have said from the get go that I don't understand why their name is on the contract.

Michael was the patient, the killer was the doctor, and AEG is the 3rd party. If the contract was drafted on Michael's behalf, there would be no need for AEG to be in the contract. Michael had his own legal team so, there was no reason for AEG to draft contract on Michael's behalf.

Yes, the doctor was Michael's choice and wish. I have seen no evidence that Michael requested or wished that AEG hire the doctor. No, the damages are not $40B.

These are questions the jury will have to ask themselves. I am beginning to wonder how long deliberations may be.

 

[Petrarose]

Alan Duke @AlanDukeCNN
AEG Live surprises judge today saying it may call Katherine and Prince Jackson back for more testimony in MJ wrongful death trial.

This is no surprise, since AEG did say they will call them back. I just thought they decided not to do so. I want Prince to clear up that issue that was puzzling when he gave testimony before.

PS: I hope the 7 more witnesses are not addiction experts. I have had it up to my neck with the same testimony. I think the jury got the idea now.

When we see the jury instructions, then I will try to figure out what the verdict might be. Of course the jury will do their own thing.

 

[ivy]

I am beginning to wonder how long deliberations may be.

well they say a quick verdict favors the defendant but what is quick is subjective and depends on the case, the amount of evidence arguments needs to be considered, number of issues to decide on , due diligence of the jury and how strong either side's argument was. Murray was convicted after 9 hours, Casey Anthony was acquitted after 11.

 

[Petrarose]

I hope Putnam make his closing arguments in a clear strategic way showing a clear path why they did not hire Muarry. I don't want any rambling desperate argument with a lot of emotional rhetoric with no substance to it. I think with this case, whoever wins this month will be the final winner, because I don't see anything that an appeal can change.

 

[Bonnie Blue]

-Boyle also showed Earley the ethical guidelines of the American Society of Addiction Medicine, which state members should only provide general information about addiction and not offer diagnosis on celebrities or other public figures .

I'm assuming dr drew isn't aware of these guidelines.

Earley did not think he violated the guidelines, so why didn’t Boyle show him specific areas where his posts violated the guidelines, line by line. That would be very useful for a jury—to have Boyle point them out. If there are none, then Boyle should not bring up the question.

It seems from the guidelines that you're not supposed to offer any diagnosis on any public figure, so earley shouldn't have been doing any blog posts on mj full stop. I found those guidelines really interesting as it is really unethical how doctors write in the media about celebs offering their opinions on them. I looked at earlely's blog on mj and propofol, he wrote,

On awakening from propofol the user feels rested and sometimes sexually amorous. One can make wild and probably worthless speculations about how this effect fitted into mj's tragic life.

The man's a jerk. Not surprised he said in his deposition that murray would feel he was doing the best thing for mj by giving him propofol so he cd get some sleep, that it was just in retrospect that this feeling was misguided. As if murray's primary concern can possibly be mj's wellbeing.

 

[ivy]

PS: I hope the 7 more witnesses are not addiction experts. I have had it up to my neck with the same testimony. I think the jury got the idea now.

AEG had 2 addiction experts , Earley and Levenous both testified. they want to play an 18 minute video from Jackson's addiction expert Shimelman. That should wrap it up for addiction. Van Valin, Metzger and Ratner will cover up the remaining the doctors I believe.

Duke said 7 more witnesses and he mentioned Prince and Katherine Jackson as possible ones. Putnam had previously mentioned he would recall Phillips and Gongaware too. There was even a mention of recalling Ortega but I don't see what else he could bring.

As from the remaining witness possibilities

- Tohme : He could explain the UK before announcement events. Prince at times seemed to mix up Tohme with Murray.
- Marcel Avram : he's previous tour promoter and I believe he might have hired doctor before.
- at least one MJ manager: Siegel was mentioned before. Kane or Branca might also be relevant
- and finally perhaps another Jackson such as Rebbie.

 

[Petrarose]

I'm assuming dr drew isn't aware of these guidelines.


It seems from the guidelines that you're not supposed to offer any diagnosis on any public figure, so earley shouldn't have been doing any blog posts on mj full stop. I found those guidelines really interesting as it is really unethical how doctors write in the media about celebs offering their opinions on them. I looked at earlely's blog on mj and propofol, he wrote,


The man's a jerk. Not surprised he said in his deposition that murray would feel he was doing the best thing for mj by giving him propofol so he cd get some sleep, that it was just in retrospect that this feeling was misguided. As if murray's primary concern can possibly be mj's wellbeing.

'

I always wondered how they could go on tv being special correspondents for networks and talk about a star's issues. Now we see there are guidelines, although Earleys was the Addiction guidelines. I am assuming there is a set of guidelines for each type of professional? Earley mentioning the sexually amorous point really shows where his mind is. This is another reason why anyone should be alarmed when early uses his own drug addiction experiences to make conclusions about someone, like he did with Michael. Worse Boyle saw the blogs and did not use them properly in court yesterday.

Ivy I don't know about Rebbie. Is she well yet?

 

[jamba]

On awakening from propofol the user feels rested and sometimes sexually amorous. One can make wild and probably worthless speculations about how this effect fitted into mj's tragic life.

I haven't read Earley's entire blog post but this sentence is in poor taste no question. However, a blog is not the same as a peer-reviewed article on propofol addiction published in a reputable journal. The fact that this sentence is in poor taste does not invalidate a long-term study IMO. His professional work and conclusions are distinct from remarks made in an informal environment like a blog, etc. The other point he made re the euphoria, feeling of being rested, is just what others have said re propofol's effect on some patients--(I didn't know about the amorous effect, though.)

 

[Petrarose]

Jamba ^^when you have a witness on the stand who brings you a piece of writing, all his writings come into question, just like they go into all Michal's business. I don't think anyone wants to use that amorous statement to invalidate his study^^, which does not make sense. You show the problems in the study by looking at the sample, tests, looking at whether the sample is representative of the population you want to apply it to, if there are a comingling of factors (like person using prof and another drug), etc.

 

[jamba]

Here is the full blog post Earley wrote in August 09:

http://paulearley.net/70-michael-jackson-addiction-in-the-privileged.html

There are some interesting articles here on addiction and recovery as well. Another thing that was interesting was that his research showed that people who got addicted to propofol had a history of child abuse trauma (and PTSD). Anyway, I don't want to summarize so if anyone wants to check it out, here is the link (above).

 

[ivy]

^^

I read it. the title suggests to call Michael an addict but the body of the article calls it "hypotheses", "wild and worthless speculation" etc. So it's not like he makes a certain determination IMO. he knows he's speculating and he's clear about that. The last paragraph has more like "don't blame the addict" type of feel.

 

[AliCat]

Best news I have heard yet!

Michael Jackson trial expected to end later this month

AEG Live attorney Marvin Putnam has said he hopes to rest his case at the end of next week at the latest.

 

[Bubs]

I would be interested hearing Van Valin's testimony regarding this bit
"Dr. Earley said Dr. William Van Valin II testified that in 2002, Jackson brought him a box of propofol and asked him to give it to him."

I wonder why Michael needed propofol in 2002? Wasn't that the time when MJ was battling with addiction, re implants + Martin Bashit documentary was being filmed?

I suppose CM's lawyer heard about Van Valin's testimony, thus to talk about MJ having his own stash of propofol.
At least CM and his lawyers cannot say that MJ gave propofol to himself, as during this trial it is well documented that MJ wanted someone to administer it to him.

Ivy, any information when we are going to hear about judge's decision of nonsuit?

 

[LastTear]

Michael was the patient, the killer was the doctor, and AEG is the 3rd party. If the contract was drafted on Michael's behalf, there would be no need for AEG to be in the contract. Michael had his own legal team so, there was no reason for AEG to draft contract on Michael's behalf.

Yes, the doctor was Michael's choice and wish. I have seen no evidence that Michael requested or wished that AEG hire the doctor. No, the damages are not $40B.

These are questions the jury will have to ask themselves. I am beginning to wonder how long deliberations may be.

There is paperwork from the courts stating the $40B, I didn't invent it - but yes there has been talk of a lesser amount since. I don't know how you can say that the doctor was Michael wish but that Michael might not have wished that AEG organise the contracts, I don't see why they would spend time and money on any contract if Michael's wishes weren't clear - plus why write the clause that the artist has to agree if they were acting without Michael's knowledge.

The only way AEG could have kept their name off the contract was if AEG advance the funds to Michael and Michael paid him directly, I do agree that is what they should have done in this instance. But wasn't there some testimony about the reluctance to advance Michael money?

We have seen testimony that AEG hired Murray on Michael's request, it even says that on the draft contract. It also says that unless the artist signs the contract it is null and void.

Really the question of who hired Murray is just the tip of the iceberg in this case.

 

[ivy]

Ivy, any information when we are going to hear about judge's decision of nonsuit?

I think AP McCartney has said the hearing is delayed to Monday. She would probably have tentative ruling by then and media might report about it.

edit: edited the post to correct tentative hearing to tentative ruling.

 

[Petrarose]

The case is almost finished so the hearing at this point might be a mere gesture. It seems this case will go to the jury.

Bubs I am interested in what that doc has to say about the stash too, and I also thought of Muarry's comment about Michael having his own stash. Either Muarry made this up or heard it from someone. Anyway, during cross one of AEG expert witnesses was asked if there was any evidence that Micheal injected the drugs himself, and he said no.

What is the name of the Dr. who wrote Conversations in Neverland?

Who is that guy in the photo above with no hair? One has little or no hair and the one in the back has hair.

 

[jaydom7]

If Murray said MJ had his own stash, then why was Murray ordering so much?

 

[Petrarose]

If Murray said MJ had his own stash, then why was Murray ordering so much?

Good, and notice only when he was in jail that he came out with this information. Maybe his lawyer has access to some of the Defense exhibits and videos? Could she have found out some information from them and give it to Muarry?

 

[Bubs]

The case is almost finished so the hearing at this point might be a mere gesture. It seems this case will go to the jury.

Bubs I am interested in what that doc has to say about the stash too, and I also thought of Muarry's comment about Michael having his own stash. Either Muarry made this up or heard it from someone. Anyway, during cross one of AEG expert witnesses was asked if there was any evidence that Micheal injected the drugs himself, and he said no.

What is the name of the Dr. who wrote Conversations in Neverland?

Who is that guy in the photo above with no hair? One has little or no hair and the one in the back has hair.

I'm hoping judge throws this case out, as it would be a kick to Randy's b..s, which he more than deserves

About CM claiming MJ gave propofol to himself, I cannot even understand how anyone is able to administer propofol to oneself? There has been talk during the trial that medical personnel are addicted it, but I don't know how it is possible, if it knocks you out once its hits to your veins?
I know propofol wasn't controlled, but I wonder what kind of doctor wrote prescription or got box of propofol for MJ?

William Van Valin was the doctor who wrote Conversations in Neverland book.

Putnam in the man with little or no hair, I don't know who is the man behind Putnam.

 

[jaydom7]

who was the doctor that gave MJ his own stash? weren't the doctors concerned when they found out MJ was given a stash of anesthesia?:bugeyed These doctors should've been finding out who gave MJ such a thing and reported the doctor.