Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG

[Victory22]

I couldn't agree with you more! In my opinion the reason Katherine is so “sad” is because she knows she failed to protect and look out for her own son’s health and now he is dead. That’s why she wants to blame AEG.

Everything she is claiming in her lawsuit they should have done is exactly what SHE should have done to assure her sons wellbeing. Rowe talked to KJ and so did Joe and she did ZERO to try and help Michael or protect her grandchildren.

 

[Tygger]

if that's the case why did he have the need to tell Gongaware, Phillips he wanted a doctor? why not order his own people to do the hiring and never discuss the doctor with AEG?

Michael told AEG about all of his expenses that he needed an advance for like his chef Chase and his other doctor Klein did he not?

really now? saying I want Murray when AEg did not want to hire him. saying offer him 150 K per month when AEG refused to pay what murray asked for, isn't those control over not only AEG but the hiring process?

You have agreed that testimony has shown that Michael wanted Murray, yes? What makes you think Michael cared one way or another how he was hired.

The plaintiffs and the defense stipulated Michael wanted the doctor. Michael negotiated the rate and the rate ONLY for the doctor when AEG did not want to pay $5M which was a red flag to Gongaware but, not Phillips.

There is NO testimony or evidence even suggesting Michael told AEG to hire the doctor or told AEG to do anything for that matter. AEG was in control. AEG decided to hire the doctor when they could have easily given Michael an advance. Michael, nor anyone on his legal team, had any input into that contract which included responsibilities AEG assigned to the doctor.

Michael had no control whatsoever over the hiring process except choosing the doctor and negotiating a payrate. Michael did not decide if it should be a hiring process or an advance either; AEG did.

IMO the idea that MJ should have consulted his 'legal team' was not realistic b/c his 'legal team' was in Tohme's pocket, and this is one of the issues the Estate has with Tohme.

Jamba, Branca was on Michael’s legal team and instructed Phillips that Michael should not sign anything without his review.

 

[Mneme]

Rowe talked to KJ and so did Joe and she did ZERO to try and help Michael or protect her grandchildren.

And even she should receive 1 Million Dollar if she goes over to Michael's house!
But from what I understand were this money not for her work to persuade Michael for rehab but for the re-union/AllGood. (?)

 

[LastTear]

@Tygger And again, there is no evidence to say he didn't want them to handle hiring the way they were.

 

[Mneme]

However, after the Feb meeting where Rowe meets with MJ, he says he had that 3-way phone call in March re MJ needing rehab that I mentioned above. So the reason I thought it was important is that here you have KJ being told directly that MJ needs to go to a treatment facility and she does not intervene or act, yet in court she wants to know what happened to her son. Also Rowe says he and Joe and Randy tried very hard to get her to move in with MJ in Carolwood and she refused. Rowe claims the reason was to find out why MJ was looking so bad. What Rowe says contradicts KJ's testimony in court--that she did not know about drugs, was not told, if only AEG had called her, etc.

Maybe Rowe is full of it, but there were others involved who need to reveal what they know about it (Randy, Rebbie, Joe, KJ). Why were they trying to get KJ to intervene in 07 and 09 if not about drugs? Also it is not necessarily either drugs or AllGood pressure--it can be both together--we want him to do the AllGood shows and we want him to go into rehab and get off drugs.

I am trying to look at the whole picture and not just a piece of the puzzle. If we just look at one thing alone, we miss the complexity of the multiple influences.

/Jamba,
Your first sentence is related to 2007 (3-way phone: L. Rowe/Katherine/Rebbie)
If Rowe is writing the truth about that, why should Katherine UND Rebbie have signed this open letter about 'Michael has no drug issue...'?
Randy Jackson (I believe he was it) said this letter was Michael's wish. But why should K. + R. sign this letter if they were convinced about the opposite?

I am trying to look at the whole picture and not just a piece of the puzzle. If we just look at one thing alone, we miss the complexity of the multiple influences.

agree 100%!

 

[gerryevans]

@Tygger And again, there is no evidence to say he didn't want them to handle hiring the way they were.

Yep. AEG could have sent Michael to sign anything and everything they wanted. If MJ wanted his team involved, he could have then sent it to them after he received it. He certainly had control over doing that.

MJ may have been in a bind, but I still think he was getting what MJ wanted from AEG, even if he was biding his time to get it. Like that dancer said, the last couple of rehearsals he took over. He told Phillips that last night I can take it from here. He was not the hapless hopeless artist he's being depicted as.

 

[LastTear]

@Tygger

Jamba, Branca was on Michael’s legal team and instructed Phillips that Michael should not sign anything without his review. However, In my opinion the doctor had his employment contract in hand to give to Michael to sign on the 24th and Phillips never said directly and/or emailed Branca that Michael may sign that contract.

Where has the information that Murray was to hand the signed contract to Michael and not back to AEG come from? I may be wrong but I would think normal practice would be to sign and return to AEG. But anyway, as some point Michael would have received it and he could have shown it to his representatives.

 

[MIST]

Also Rowe says he and Joe and Randy tried very hard to get her to move in with MJ in Carolwood and she refused.

Maybe Michael didn´t want her to live there.
Maybe he wanted to concentrate on concerts and other business , not be with his mother-except for visits now and then.
Before earlier solotours didn´t Jacksons say they left Michael alone, to concentrate on the concerts.

 

[jaydom7]

I couldn't agree with you more! In my opinion the reason Katherine is so “sad” is because she knows she failed to protect and look out for her own son’s health and now he is dead. That’s why she wants to blame AEG.

Everything she is claiming in her lawsuit they should have done is exactly what SHE should have done to assure her sons wellbeing. Rowe talked to KJ and so did Joe and she did ZERO to try and help Michael or protect her grandchildren.

Exactly Victory! In my opinion she's trying to blame a corporation for something she didn't do.. It seems that MJ had his sleep disorder for over 25 years and yet his mother never took action to get him help?.. She herself knew he had problems yet she did zero to help. If anything she should've been seeking out sleep doctors or pain experts to help her son and yet MJ was getting referrals from bodyguards? It is just plain sad.. The entire family knew Klein, Hoefflin and Metzger. Why weren't they ever approached by Katherine to find out if MJ was ok? Katherine knew of Mike's scalp burn, like we all did, did she ever offer nurturing and care for MJ? It is just plain sad the lack of compassion and caring that MJ was shown.. We all saw MJ in the months before he died and we all could see he was painfully thin and we all saw him going and coming from Klein's office. Why wasn't Katherine aware or concerned?

 

[Victory22]

My opinion is Katherine didn't want to be aware of what was going on with her son's health. All she was concerned about was how much money he would give her during the tour.

 

[serendipity]

/Jamba,
Your first sentence is related to 2007 (3-way phone: L. Rowe/Katherine/Rebbie)
If Rowe is writing the truth about that, why should Katherine UND Rebbie have signed this open letter about 'Michael has no drug issue...'?
Randy Jackson (I believe he was it) said this letter was Michael's wish. But why should K. + R. sign this letter if they were convinced about the opposite?

IMO the rumors about drugs at that time were leaked by Randy to Friedman (MJ coughing blood and stuff) after MJ refused to tour with them and after he testified against Randy in the Damian Dash lawsuit. And this is when KJ and co signed that statement. I don't think anyone was concerned about drugs or rehab. Rowe is just making it look like that now so he doesn't look bad. But I believe all he and the Jacksons wanted was to get MJ on tour.

 

[ivy]

fyi - posted an article from CNN and updated the testimony summary thread , it provides more clarity and information about Van Valin deposition.

 

[qbee]

Thank you Ivy. Ill check it out. Iv'e been checking this thread to be updated and see opinions on recent testimony.

 

[LastTear]

Alan Duke is so transparently biased that I can't take him seriously, and I would feel the same way if his was bias was toward the opposite side.

 

[Tygger]

Last Tear, Gerryevans, if there was ANY evidence to state Michael had control over anything AEG did particularly in the hiring process then, AEG would have stated such in their defense. Such evidence would remove sole responsibility for hiring the doctor away from them and would have been placed on Michael. Not one witness or any evidence was shown that Michael indeed hired the doctor.

Evidence and testimonies show AEG did the alleged hiring without any input from Michael or his legal team. Michael ONLY chose the doctor and negotiated the payrate. If Phillips had his way, Michael would have only chosen the doctor as he was fine with the $5M request.

Michael controlling himself at rehearsals and what he wanted artistically and controlling AEG’s actions regarding hiring a doctor are two extremely different things.

Where has the information that Murray was to hand the signed contract to Michael and not back to AEG come from? I may be wrong but I would think normal practice would be to sign and return to AEG. But anyway, as some point Michael would have received it and he could have shown it to his representatives.

Last Tear, the doctor had a signed contract in his car on the night he went to Michael’s home. He could have faxed it directly to AEG and left it near the fax machine instead it was sitting in his car parked at Michael’s home. Take what you will from that however, there was no normal practice regarding this third party contract in my view.

Alan Duke is so transparently biased that I can't take him seriously, and I would feel the same way if his was bias was toward the opposite side.

Say what you will about Duke, he continued to cover this trial where other outlets did minimal coverage particularly during AEG’s defense. Tweets also became less detailed during AEG’s defense. Duke cannot fabricate testimony from Valin. Valin was simply an enabler who sought to profit from his friend after his passing with his self-published book and there is no need to spin that.

 

[Petrarose]

When Joe told Katherine to go check on Michael, why didn't he check on him as a dad. He knew she did not go, so if he was so concerned he should go himself. They both have to take responsibility for passing the buck.

This information about people wanting to make Katherine go and live with Michael is quite arrogant and shows they lack of respect for Michael as an adult. He is the one to say who should live with him. These men are not taking care of him, & in fact, they are getting money due to his work & talent. I would like to see Joe's sons make a decision and push Katherine to stay in his house, if he would allow that.

Well Duke's article does give some more information about Dr. Van's deposition:

Doctor: Jackson didn't fake pain to get drugs
AEG Live's defense includes the contention that Jackson cultivated friendships with doctors to gain access to drugs to feed a secretive addiction. But Van Valin denied Jackson ever used their friendship to get prescriptions to medication that were not clinically indicated.
Although he was compelled to testify as a witness for AEG Live, Van Valin's testimony boosted the Jackson case by showing that Jackson's use of painkillers was medically justified by chronic pain suffered in a 1997 stage accident, Jackson lawyers said.
The doctor said Jackson showed the "classic symptoms of lower back pain" and an MRI study confirmed a bulge in a disc in his lower spine consistent with where his pain was.

This information is helpful, because people were saying that Michael did surgery on his face, so he could get drugs. This to me was foolish, because he would have to do a surgery like what every month?

Does anyone remember if the police found any prof in Michael's bedroom closet when they searched the house. I remember Muarry said he wanted to go back to the house for a bag and the bodyguards would not drive him back. I am wondering if Muarry made that claim to Anderson about prof in the closet after he heard about the deposition from his lawyer. I don't understand why during and prior to the trial he never said Michael had it in there, when he gave his self-injection theory. Walgrene went through a list of all the prof bought by Muarry, so at some point the defense would have said Michael had his own too. That is why I think it is information he learned AFTER the trial.

 

[Bonnie Blue]

Maybe Rowe is full of it, but there were others involved who need to reveal what they know about it (Randy, Rebbie, Joe, KJ). Why were they trying to get KJ to intervene in 07 and 09 if not about drugs? Also it is not necessarily either drugs or AllGood pressure--it can be both together--we want him to do the AllGood shows and we want him to go into rehab and get off drugs.

Er what drug addiction were the family wanting to get mj into rehab for in spring 09? Or are you going with the aeg expert's view that mj was a continuous drug addict since the mid 80s and at any given point since then would benefit from a stint in drug rehab?

This idea of the allgood deal involved rehab only originated a year after mj's death - where were the concerns expressed before 25 june? joe and rowe wd have been mad at being cut out of the tii deal and wd have gone to the press with any damaging info. That issue of mrs j being asked to go and look after mj in carolwood was totally misrepresented by joe in a paid newsof the world interview in 2010 where he blamed mrs j for mj's death - classy. Joe only wanted mrs j to go and stay with mj in spring 09 as he wanted to retain the family's influence over mj - he knew mj wd try and shut them out. I don't know how anyone can possibly believe joe was concerned about mj's health at this time, the man was suggesting tours in the hospital on pajama day, when mj most definitely was not looking good.

 

[gerryevans]

Last Tear, Gerryevans, if there was ANY evidence to state Michael had control over anything AEG did particularly in the hiring process then, AEG would have stated such in their defense. Such evidence would remove sole responsibility for hiring the doctor away from them and would have been placed on Michael. Not one witness or any evidence was shown that Michael indeed hired the doctor.

Evidence and testimonies show AEG did the alleged hiring without any input from Michael or his legal team. Michael ONLY chose the doctor and negotiated the payrate. If Phillips had his way, Michael would have only chosen the doctor as he was fine with the $5M request.

Michael controlling himself at rehearsals and what he wanted artistically and controlling AEG’s actions regarding hiring a doctor are two extremely different things..

The fact that Conrad Murray was a part of the This Is It tour IS the evidence that MJ had control. He wanted Murray as his doctor and he was his doctor. If he did not want Murray part of the This Is It tour, he would not have been. It's that simple. All he had to say to AEG is "no, I don't want him". And Murray would have been gone.

 

[Petrarose]

^^Really it is best not to give too much credence to Rowe in these issues.

After they finish the video on Monday are they going to have the arguments for dismissal?

 

[Bonnie Blue]

I can certainly appreciate the pressure he was under, but why is it ok for the family to add to it? In my mind you can't criticise one without the other?

Where did i say it was ok for the family to add to mj's pressure? I wasn't denying the pressure from the family or condoning it so i'm not sure how you're misreading my post. I was COMPARING the pressures - i believe the overwhelming pressure that mj was feeling on the weeks leading up to his death were due to his comeback, the return to the spotlight and the rehearsals of tii etc rather than some deal that members of the family had failed to get him to sign on for.

Alan Duke is so transparently biased that I can't take him seriously, and I would feel the same way if his was bias was toward the opposite side.

Are you referring to the most recent article, i read it adn not sure what you think is transparently biassed.

@Petrarose. Prof was found in mj's closet but only after murray told the police it was there in his interview. There didn't seem any question at all that it was murray's stash that he had hidden the morning of 25 june.

 

[LastTear]

@Tygger As per normal we are just going round in circles, top and bottom line is that equally the Plantiffs have not given evidence to the contrary.

None of us know what Murray intended to do with the contract, leaving it in his car does not prove he was to hand it to Michael. But even if he did do that does not prove that Michael would have signed it without showing his lawyers. These things we will never know.

With Duke it's just a biased way of reporting, I never like to see the power of the press abused. It makes me not take it seriously.

@Bonnie Blue, I don't think my comment on family pressure was directed at you, it was just an observation.

Duke generally, and yes that recent article. Note how Van Valin is introduced.

 

[Tygger]

Gerryevans, yes Michael had the control to choose his doctor. However he did not control how he was to be paid (hiring versus advance); that was AEG's choice.

Last Tear, it was not up to the plaintiffs to show Michael hired the doctor, it was up to the defense. They are about to rest without showing even one shred of evidence Michael hired the doctor instead of AEG.

 

[LastTear]

@Tygger

Gerryevans, yes Michael had the control to choose his doctor. However he did not control how he was to be paid (hiring versus advance); that was AEG's choice.

In your opinion.

Last Tear, it was not up to the plaintiffs to show Michael hired the doctor, it was up to the defense. They are about to rest without showing even one shred of evidence Michael hired the doctor instead of AEG.

We were discussing control.

 

[ivy]

Jury hears more from Michael Jackson's doctors


September 07. 2013 12:36PM
Associated Press

FILE - In this May 10, 2000 file photo, pop star Michael Jackson gestures to spectators as he holds the "Millennium Award" which was awarded to him at the 2000 World Music Awards ceremony in Monaco. A Los Angeles jury heard testimony on Friday, Sept. 6, 2013, from Dr. William “Barney” Van Valin II, who testified that in the early 2000s the singer showed him a box of the anesthetic propofol that he had in his bedroom and wanted it administered intravenously to help him sleep. Van Valin refused and testified he told the singer it was dangerous to use propofol outside a surgical setting. (AP Photo/Lionel Cironneau, file)

More Story Tools
PrintPrint | E-MailEMail | SaveSave | Hear Generate QR Code QR
Send to Kindle
Font size:
(AP) A look at key moments this past week in the wrongful death trial in Los Angeles between Michael Jackson's mother, Katherine Jackson, and concert giant AEG Live LLC, and what is expected at court in the week ahead:


THE CASE


Jackson's mother wants a jury to determine that the promoter of Jackson's planned comeback concerts didn't properly investigate Dr. Conrad Murray, who was convicted of involuntary manslaughter by a criminal jury for Jackson's June 2009 death. AEG's attorney says the case is about personal choice, namely Jackson's decision to have Murray serve as his doctor and give him doses of a powerful anesthetic as a sleep aid. Millions, possibly billions, of dollars are at stake.


WHAT HAPPENED THIS PAST WEEK


Jurors watched the videotaped testimony of Dr. William "Barney" Van Valin II, who was one of Jackson's doctors in the early 2000s. Van Valin said Jackson had a box of the anesthetic propofol in his bedroom at Neverland Ranch and wanted him to administer it to help him sleep. Van Valin refused.


Van Valin said he stopped treating Jackson for pain issues after realizing the singer was seeing another physician who was also giving him injections of painkillers.


Dr. Paul Earley, a paid expert, testified that he believed Jackson's life expectancy was diminished because of his prescription drug use, but that he couldn't estimate by how much.


Earley's opinions were challenged by a plaintiff's attorney, who pointedly questioned him about writing a study on the anesthetic propofol that was paid for by AEG Live. The company paid $52,000 for the study, which Earley insisted was the basis for a small portion of his opinions in the case.


WHAT THE JURY SAW


Videotaped testimony of three of Jackson's doctors who described their treatments of the pop singer, including details of shots of the painkiller Demerol and painful injections into his back to try to alleviate pain from an injury sustained during a concert in the late 1990s.


QUOTABLE MOMENTS


"Each time, it's like playing Russian roulette," Earley said of Jackson's usage of propofol in his bedroom without proper medical monitoring equipment and an anesthesiologist present.


"Unfortunately because of his pain related problems, he was re-exposed to the drugs over and over again," Earley said of Jackson's use of opioid drugs.


"I told Michael, that's dangerous," Van Valin recalled, referring to Jackson's use of propofol in his home in the early 2000s.


"He had no fear of the stuff," Van Valin said of Jackson's perception of propofol.


"Michael would seek out avenues of sleep helpers, and that's another aspect of his secrecy," Dr. Allan Metzger said about Jackson, who he treated for more than 30 years of the singer's life and who said he often wasn't informed of other treatments the singer received.


WHAT'S NEXT


Jurors will continue to hear videotaped testimony by Metzger and AEG Live is expected to call its final witnesses. When AEG finishes its case, Katherine Jackson's lawyers will begin calling their rebuttal witnesses. The trial is expected to go to the jury by the end of the month.

 

[ivy]

After they finish the video on Monday are they going to have the arguments for dismissal?

as far as I can tell , video deposition and testimony will resume Wednesday.

Monday and Tuesday are motions/ hearings days. they have motion of nonsuit as well as I think they will work on verdict forms and jury instructions.

 

[serendipity]

Jurors will continue to hear videotaped testimony by Metzger and AEG Live is expected to call its final witnesses.

So AEG will call more live witnesses then.

 

[Petrarose]

Okay so Monday & Tuesday will be interesting if we get the results by the end of each day. I wonder if the judge will make a decision after both attorneys speak, or if she will take some days to make a decision?

Something I find irresponsible about most of the doctors who treated Michael, is that they are all so quick to say he asked them to give him prof for sleep, but none of them except Dr Van tried to give him something other than these drugs. Dr. Van tried reading. Then he claimed if the book was too interesting Michael will get excited and ask if something really happened. More dull books did not work, so we see he tried a non-drug remedy. Then he tried some other drugs and none worked maybe because once you use these drugs for about a week in the past, they don't work anymore.

In general we hear from these good doctors, that Michael asked for this to sleep and they all said No. How come they never decided to look up some sleep methods and try it with him. How come they never tried some procedure that worked with other people. How come they did not immediately call up a doc who deals with this and make an appt. for Michael to go see him. I mean these guys were getting thousands of dollars for house calls. For someone who paid big prices, he got the worst medical care:

He says--I can't sleep for 4 days now can I have prof. Doc says No. Michael says okay. Conversation continues about something else. Unbelievable.

If we look at our own experiences, if we go to our doc and say we have a problem, the doc doesn't say he/she doesn't know about it and end the visit. Doctors will look in their little book and call or give you the name of their friend who works with that. Sometimes if it is not their field, but a basic problem, they will look in a book, get the information, and treat you themselves.

At least Dr. F tried a detox treatment in his garage. He did something to help a condition he saw, even though his follow up and maintenance plan was missing.

I have been thinking of this and I see that if we chart the doctors' behavior from the burn, his dependency/addiction was really due to his doctors' lack of care or inadequate medical treatment. Form the time of the burn when he got the demerol, we see no evidence that a doctor said the dosages for the pain may cause addiction so after you take it for X days come back for a detox consultation or visit on X date. We saw a document where the doc said it was healing well and patient can go home. So the medical treatment for the burn was the first instance of bad doctoring which caused more problems later.

Next, the continued graphs on the head. What doc does not know that by the time he gave the first graph, which was very painful, he can't give more demerol since it is an addictive drug? What doc does not know that? By the 1st graph with more demerol we have more trouble.

Then we get the cosmetic surgery. It does not matter if Michael went to Klien, or another doc, because I notice they love to say that to claim their treatment did not lead to dependency/addiction. Once you give the patient the addictive drug for X number of days, you can't keep giving them again because it is addictive. You switch medication or set up a detox treatment. Yet, we see Klien giving him an addictive drug over and over, Van gave it over and over. Yes he had a legit pain, but nobody switched up. Everybody gave a drug that they knew was addictive, and made no notations in their charts about what they will do after the patient used the drug for X number of days. Michael saw each of these docs more than once. By the second time, none of them gave him another drug. None said the last time we gave demerol so this time we will use ABC. Even my doc switches on antibiotics which are not addictive, but he knows the body get's used to it and then it becomes ineffective. The first time I go for any antibiotics for the year he gives me one type, the next time I go for the same year, he says let's see what i gave the last time. Then, he switches. So it does not matter that Michael dr. shopped as they claimed. He saw each more than once and by the second visit a less addictive drug should have been used.

I am not even going to get into the prof issue because this post is too long.

As far as I am concerned Michael's burn, drug issues, sleep problems could have been solved a long time ago, and the drug issue did not even have to happen. All he needed were different doctors.

 

[serendipity]

Petrarose, this is exactly what I've been wondering about as well. So many doctors and no one sat him down and convinced him to see a sleep specialist? It's baffling.

I remember Debbie made a brief mention about Metzger going with him to a sleep clinic. I wish we'd get more info. What happened? Maybe Metzger will talk about it.

 

[ivy]

^

Nurse Lee also said that she mentioned a sleep study to Michael. I think perhaps back in the day he tried a sleep study / sleep specialist but could not or did not believe that was a solution to his insomnia.

 

[Tygger]

Last Tear, I did not lose sight of the discussion. It is not my opinion, view or belief that Michael did not have control. Evidence and testimonies are considered the facts as we have them, correct?

There is not one shred of evidence or one testimony that says Michael decided the doctor should be hired as opposed to an advance. AEG drafted the contract with no input by Michael or his legal team. AEG decided not to advance Michael any more monies because Phillips thought Michael was in breach of his contract when Michael did not show up to rehearsal although rehearsals were not in Michael’s contract.

The defense had plenty of time to show Michael preferred the doctor was hired as opposed to an advance. In fact, out of 28 defense witnesses (please correct my count if I am incorrect) speaking solely to minimizing damages, Michael being a secretive addict or, the few experts who tried to suggest a background check was unnecessary or the three party contact did not constitute a conflict of interest, not one word was spoken about Michael hiring the doctor. Maybe their last live witness will speak to that if they continue past Metzger's deposition.