Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG

[bouee]

Debbie's name came up in the testimony a few times. Does she have to testify any time soon or not at all?

she is on the witness list, for AEG I think (maybe jacksons too, I'm not too sure) but the AEG lawyer said during opening statements she would testify

 

[Gfresh]

Don't know if this was posted before but Arnold Klein posted this one facebook yesterday

 

[jrsfan]

Besides Karen Faye working with Michael Jackson, doing his hair and makeup, there was another woman, (Lynda Parrish) too. Same as Zaldy and Michael Bush and Dennis Thompkins, working with Michael Jackson on costuming.

Zaldy has been working on the costuming of "Immortal,' and now "One," at the Mandalay Bay in Las Vegas next week. http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/201...u-soleils-michael-jackson-one-/#axzz2TThadcKf That's why it gets confusing about what Karen Faye has been saying since Michael Jackson died. The other makeup artist (Lynda Parrish) that worked with Michael Jackson, after Karen Faye was dismissed in 2005, hasn't gone around saying negative things about Michael's death and neither has Zaldy.

The other makeup artist (Lynda Parrish) isn't even working with Cirque du Soleil and the Estate of Michael Jackson on "Immortal" or "One" schedule to open in one week at the Mandalay Bay in Las Vegas.

So what is the expertise that we are gleaning from in understanding how the frail Michael Jackson was slipping away from us and because he was receiving botox treatments at Arnold Klein's dermatological clinic, and using demerol to help with the injections of the botox, Michael Jackson would come to work slurring? I always thought Michael Jackson was receiving these botox treatments to look purty for us at the 02 Arena in London in 2009.

I look at it if you went to the dentist and received novacaine before dentistry work, you'd be slurring, too. Since demerol was used to help desensitized the pain of botox, lidocaine had the same purpose in administering propofol. The lidocaine helped so the propofol wouldn't burn as much, but the side effects were death dealing. I sometimes wondered if this was mixed up with the demerol that was used to help administer the botox treatments. Now, Judge Pastor ruled out Arnold Klein in Murray's trial because there was no demerol found in Michael's system at the time of his death.

By the way, you can see Michael Jackson slurring in the "This Is It," movie. It's where he is being shown computer graphics on making lots of soldiers, from twelve to thousands!

Klein & the other doctor's in his office, which I am sure he gave direction to- gave Michael too much demerol. In June he was lowering the amount, so Michael was suffering withdrawals that was countered by Murray's administration of propofol. Klein has alot to answer to imo.

Here is the interview where he is asked about Michael receiving over 900 mg in 3 days:

 

[8701girl]

Don't know if this was posted before but Arnold Klein posted this one facebook yesterday

How the heck did kilen get that email?

 

[bouee]

I'm lost....Yesterday we had Ms Hollister's testimony, and today a propofol expert will take the stand.
When is Karen Faye completing her testimony ?
Not that I miss her... I was actually happy to read about figures, it's a change.

 

[bouee]

How the heck did kilen get that email?

From the web (you can see from the 2 lines at the top it's coming from an article) :wink:

EDIT : I'm not sure about the post putting together Klein's message + Ortega's email. I don't understand the link between both, and I don't know who put them together.

Klein is mistaken, it was Travis who said "loopy", Ortega has not testified yet. I don't believe Travis gave dates of the visits to Klein, did he ? Klein certainly means that he was not treating always treating Michael himself : when he was away other doctors from his office would treat Miahael.

The demerol has been talked about during CM's trial, so nothing new about that, unless another expert testifies differently. It was said that it was weird to use it, Klein shouldn't have, but it did not have major effects on Michael (too little- too irregular).

 

[Tygger]

The statement is Dr. Murray saying he's employed by MJ but paid by AEG. Judge said the employment is one of the issues for the jury 2 decide
Ouvrir
ABC7 Court News ABC7 Court News ‏@ABC7Courts 3 min

Perfection

ABC7 Court News ‏@ABC7Courts 7m
On April 30, 2009, Panish showed a document with $300,000 budgeted for management medical.
Expand
ABC7 Court News ‏@ABC7Courts 8m
Panish showed the jury the budget from 5/16/09 for 27 shows:
Management Medical --300,000; 450,000; 750,000
Total: $1.5MM to pay Dr. Murray
Expand
ABC7 Court News ‏@ABC7Courts 10m
Hollander: I talked to Mr. Wooley about the inclusion of Dr. Murray in the budget. I talked to Mr. Trell as to the conditions he'd be paid
Expand
ABC7 Court News ‏@ABC7Courts 11m
Memo: MJ wishes to have permanent physician available on call thru pre-tour/operational period. There are 2 months at $150K newly budgeted

Companies do not budget for independent contractors they do not hire or do not have the intention to hire.

It is important that some witnesses discuss their resumes at length and Michael's performances be shown. Fans know this information but, the jurors do not. The jurors must understand the level of celebrity Michael was (is), the level of professionalism and quality his celebrity dictated and warranted, and how neglected that was with the alleged, negligent hiring of the doctor.

The plaintiffs’ lawyers are doing a very good job thus far from my point of view.

 

[ivy]

I'm lost....Yesterday we had Ms Hollister's testimony, and today a propofol expert will take the stand.
When is Karen Faye completing her testimony ?
Not that I miss her... I was actually happy to read about figures, it's a change.

Anthony McCartney @mccartneyAP
.@Ivy_4MJ The next several Fridays are dark or won't work. I'll update when attorneys say she's coming back.

Anthony McCartney @mccartneyAP
No - she's only available on Fridays now RT @Ivy_4MJ: When will Karen Faye complete her testimony? Any ideas?

Perfection

The plaintiffs’ lawyers are doing a very good job thus far from my point of view.

It's a good thing you don't hide what you think. I like honest, straight to the point people

Companies do not budget for independent contractors they do not hire or do not have the intention to hire.

Do you have experience in this regard or just a common sense observation?

 

[bouee]

Perfection



Companies do not budget for independent contractors they do not hire or do not have the intention to hire.

in my experience (europe), companies budget EVERYTHING they THINK they are going to need. Budgeting something doesn't mean you're going to actually use the money for the exact purpose you are planning. For me a budget is like a forecast, to estimate profits, or the possibility of doing this or that. Budgets change constantly : for eaxample here they talk of a budget with 27 shows. I imagine that at some pint they would have changed it to 50 shows (more income, more spendings). So it's only normal that they change the budget when they know that Murray is going to work, and so get paid.

The point is to show that they were planning to pay Murray, from May 1st, total amount 1.5 millions, etc.. it doesn't say anything about Murray's status (employee/independant contractor/something else). Murray could have beebn fired even if he was budgeted.

That's my understanding, is it different in the US ?

 

[Tygger]

This is the purpose of the trial: was the doctor hired negligently and supervised by the defendants. The defendants can use the interview just not the part about who the doctor felt hired him. The jurors need to decide if the doctor was hired by AEG or not.

The statement is Dr. Murray saying he's employed by MJ but paid by AEG. Judge said the employment is one of the issues for the jury 2 decide
Ouvrir
ABC7 Court News ABC7 Court News ‏@ABC7Courts 3 min

Ivy, I am trying to understand the legal aspects of this trial. I am happy I was able to understand why that portion of the doctor’s police interview could not be used. I believe everyone in this thread is expressing their honest thoughts.

Ivy, Bouee, the defendants budgeting in exact increments of $150,000 would be extremely odd if they did not hire or have the intention to hire this particular doctor at the rate Michael suggested.

 

[Petrarose]

But there are two different things for me. One is the fact of what the coroner states (though about the weight, Panish asked him if he knew how much fluids were give in the last hours that could have contributed to the weight and he replied he didn't know). The other thing is what the people around saw, how he felt, and how in spite of that nothing was done apart from relying in CM.



well, this is obvious, I'm not saying otherwise.




For me the whole situation is very depressing.

Yes I see what you mean. The thing is his health to me, was not centered in the weight but overall condition of his body as the coroner shows. His organs were good. He had some problems with lungs that were not life-threatening. He received liquids at the hospital, but really how much liquids can an already dead man get that would increase his weight so much? Did they give him 50 pounds of liquids--I doubt it.

Yes I see you feel nothing was done except relying on CM, but isn't that what a company would do if you have a doctor. Michael had his own private dr for his SOLE use. The dr was coming on a tour with him. Michael is missing, acting loopy at times, can't pick up his dance steps quickly--who do we call? His dr of course. To me that was the best thing to do. Of course now when we learn that Muarry was the problem, we will say oh they did nothing but rely on the dr. Even I would call the dr. & say look your patient is "off" so what is going on. Of course muarry would say everything is ok, which he did in reality. No company is then going to call in the police, other doctors, other medical staff and say look we have a guy & this is happening so can you see what is going on. To me, based on the circumstances, I cannot see what else this company with its horrible, nasty-mouthed staff were supposed to do. They were not Michael's mommy.

Alicat when I saw that part of TII, before we heard Travis testimony, I felt Michael was chewing gum & had swallowed incorrectly at that point when he began to speak. Now I still think the same thing. Sometimes we read into things after we hear certain information. It is like the fans claiming Michael walked up the ramp to announce TII with false bravado, because at the time the media was saying he was afraid, etc. I look at that footage & I do not see it--not even after hearing Randy's comment.

 

[Bubs]

Don't know if this was posted before but Arnold Klein posted this one facebook yesterday

Did he deny earlier that he saw Michael in June because he was in France or other country?

 

[Petrarose]

I thought Klien was sick. It is hard to judge what he says since 2010, because his mind has become unraveled. I remember him saying he was away during the times Muarry's team was saying he gave Michael demerol, thus implying that someone else in the office attended to Michael.

Maybe one thing that will happen after this case, it that businesses will send less e-mails to their staff when they want to discuss important information. They may go back to the old, "come to my office for a meeting" strategy. Now with computers people can find out all your correspondence & use it against you.

 

[bouee]

Did he deny earlier that he saw Michael in June because he was in France or other country?

Yeah, he did, but I thought it was May (I could be wrong). Anyway, Klein is obviously not well ,so I don't think we should pay too much attention to this.

He says he was reducing the dose, probably meaning he was being careful not to cause problems in spite of using demerol.

 

[PaceMioDolceCuore]

in my experience (europe), companies budget EVERYTHING they THINK they are going to need. Budgeting something doesn't mean you're going to actually use the money for the exact purpose you are planning. For me a budget is like a forecast, to estimate profits, or the possibility of doing this or that. Budgets change constantly : for eaxample here they talk of a budget with 27 shows. I imagine that at some pint they would have changed it to 50 shows (more income, more spendings). So it's only normal that they change the budget when they know that Murray is going to work, and so get paid.

The point is to show that they were planning to pay Murray, from May 1st, total amount 1.5 millions, etc.. it doesn't say anything about Murray's status (employee/independant contractor/something else). Murray could have beebn fired even if he was budgeted.

That's my understanding, is it different in the US ?

In the US you will find countless commercials of tough business people doing their estimate earnings pie. :smilerolleyes:
Typically the hired guns are experts in underestimating cost to maximize estimated and anticipated earnings and profits.
Particularly the US economy has GREAT experts available for cooking the books.
The one who presents the most drastic cost cutting measures to the boss that will reflect maximum earnings is gonna run the show.

It's stuff like that that leads to mass firings at GE - cost cutting. When the economy picks up, people get hired. Unfortunately cook bookers tend to forget that re-training new personal is not exactly a cost cutting measure. If you want to know about real cook booking though - gotta go see Wall Street. Or post a status update on facebook.
The expression of "too big too fail" refers to banks 'budgeting' and requiring a government bailout. These budget experts were so good at budgeting that they nearly drove an entire economy into the ground and that is REALLY swapping over in Europe right now.

This whole 'employment drama' around Murray is the ultimate expression of 'the American Dream'. Hire, fire. Oh wait, did we hire him??
So called "at will employment" is the norm. I had colleagues that have worked for 20 years in the same company and have never once signed a piece of paper that is called "contract". On the day they start their job, many sign the 'company handbook' that explains their 'at will' employment.

You'd be surprised how fast HR will strike a fired employee from the books. I have had countless patients standing in front of me who were employed and had of course their deductions for their health insurance. So...let's say after a month of working they came to us and handed us their information. But of course I can't find the lucky folks anywhere in the 'system'. Why? Oh, well, the largest employer of the region 'forgot' to forward their new employees information to the healthcare company - but the employer course didn't forget to deduct the deductions from their employees... If you have a few millions employees and deduct these costs that you are supposed to pay to the insurance company.... Wild, Wild West, baby.

If you are hiring independent contractors contractors sign, well, contracts.
I think AEG was pretty good at preselecting so many dancers from the European Union and the Commonwealth. Isn't that handy? If the majority are from the European Union they don't have to worry so much about visa and the like.

See the thing is - when you get fresh off the boat from Europe you have this Hollywood view of technological perfection, utter efficiency and professionalism. You would think that someone like AEG would treat their precious cargo (or "hot commodity" as Philipps said during the Murray trial) with gloves.
Then you discover paper checks that people send to their landlord, fax machines and people apparently working 'for free'. Remember the bodyguards saying that they didn't receive their salaries on time?

Budgeting is not done to cautiously reflect into the future - a budget is done to impress. If you think I'm kidding - I'm not.

So, I understood what Tygger meant. For a bunch of CEOs and Vice presidents to even include someone in their budget - I'd like to see how they get out of that number.

ABC7 Court News ?@ABC7Courts 7m
On April 30, 2009, Panish showed a document with $300,000 budgeted for management medical.
Expand
ABC7 Court News ?@ABC7Courts 8m
Panish showed the jury the budget from 5/16/09 for 27 shows:
Management Medical --300,000; 450,000; 750,000
Total: $1.5MM to pay Dr. Murray
Expand
ABC7 Court News ?@ABC7Courts 10m
Hollander: I talked to Mr. Wooley about the inclusion of Dr. Murray in the budget. I talked to Mr. Trell as to the conditions he'd be paid
Expand
ABC7 Court News ?@ABC7Courts 11m
Memo: MJ wishes to have permanent physician available on call thru pre-tour/operational period. There are 2 months at $150K newly budgeted.

Pretour? Newly budgeted? 2 months? He's in the budget? The email about "who's paying his salary" - pretty rough tone for a company that supposedly had not paid him a dime?

I am really not a mouthpiece of any sibling of the family.

AEG unfortunately is an expression of a huge problem in the US. This kind of cr*p happens every day. I do have to say though that it is not just "the big companies".
I recall many biotech companies that took great care of their employees - they were generous with health benefits and some even insured same sex partners where no law required them to do so.
Same thing goes for Union negotiated benefits.

And then compare that to AEG. Stuff like this really depends on company policy and the people who run them. I had a horrible experience at a family owned (!!) company - while other friends were quite happy working for a computer company with their own day care center. Most companies used to have an HR department with attorneys on call. That changed to an HR department apparently consisting of attorneys only - at least that's what I thought hearing about AEG. They don't produce anything, they seem to outsource and hire outside contractors only. It seems that for the most part AEG got away with this business model - in this case Michael actually died.

Okay, I went way beyond budget considerations here. Stuff is being done differently. The grass is always greener on the other side.

The corporate world in the US plays by one rule set - the non-profit world by yet another. Quite a learning process for me. I went to university in Europe and had my first 'real' job in the US, in a major city of all places. Talk about a reality check.
Things are also 'done differently' in what they refer to as "Small Town America".
Los Angeles has the reputation of a weird universe.

 

[bouee]

Ivy, Bouee, the defendants budgeting in exact increments of $150,000 would be extremely odd if they did not hire or have the intention to hire this particular doctor at the rate Michael suggested.

No I don't see it as odd at all. Budgets that I worked with were usually done by month, because where I live most invoices and salaries are usually paid every month. Murray's salary was to be paid every month, so they budgeted 150 000 every month. It sounds absolutely normal to me. You're right it means they were planning to hire him, so they budgeted the expense.
But it says nothing about the contract itself. It makes sense to budget the spending even if you are still negotiating the contract, and so you budget the cost even if you are not 100% sure that the contract will be finalised. You want to know the effect that that spending will have. A budget is really nothing more than a forecast, it's not "reality". Reality of what has been paid or is still pending would be shown in the company's accounting, it's completely different.

For example , people also do budgets (hopefully) with their personal money, even if it's not a "formal" budget : you know that you earn a given amount- say 1500 €/month , you know that you usually spend 150 € per month on food, etc. You want to make sure you're not spending more than what you earn.
Reality would be your bank account, and for example on a given month you may spend only 130 € on food, lose a part of your salary because you've been sick, etc... . If you know in advance you're going to have an extra spending, you will reajust your budget accordingly (working more, trying to save on other items...)

 

[LastTear]

I wonder how the fans would have reacted back then (without the benefit of hindsight) if AEG had denied Michael's request to chose his own doctor, or denied him a personal doctor at all, and then gone on further and refused him his own personal medical assistance during the rehearsal stage.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

 

[Bubs]

I wonder how the fans would have reacted back then (without the benefit of hindsight) if AEG had denied Michael's request to chose his own doctor, or denied him a personal doctor at all, and then gone on further and refused him his own personal medical assistance during the rehearsal stage.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

Travis P said it: Hindsight is perfect 20/20.

Yeah, he did, but I thought it was May (I could be wrong). Anyway, Klein is obviously not well ,so I don't think we should pay too much attention to this.

You might be right about the month, i just remembered it was June but it could have been May.

 

[bouee]

@ pace : I'm not sure what you mean, I'll try to explain

i understand budgets are not reality (one of the reasons I left my job) : budgets that don't reflect reality, unreachable goals, we do have masters at that. In my company tbudgets were done to impress bankers and share holders, and had nothing to do with reality, in the sense that budgets were over optimistic about income, to low about spendings. Supposedly super intelligent people also do weird stuff with accounting, and it takes even more super intelligent people who usually smoke a lot to control companies ( I'm in France, companies have to be checked regularly by extra super accountants)
The company I used to work for has managed to switch their results from positive, to a 600 million loss in 2012 to find a reason to further reduce the costs (meaning fire people), to get even more profits. The 600 millions loss was actually the loss of income because they sold a subsidiary company in the US....(don't laugh). It's a company controlled by pension funds, Colony Capital is one of them, the most important. This explains that IMO.

The difference is that here (France) employees are more protected than in the US I think, a boss can get into big trouble if someone works without a contract, and that will be more easily detected maybe, because employers will have to pay a lot of taxes for employees :a lot of things that are private in the States are public and mandatory here (health insurance, unemployment, retirement, social welfare are the main things). More protected doesn't mean that you don't find dishonest employers who don't pay the taxes and leave the employees in difficult situations, but I agree it must be a lot easier to do that in the US.

Translated into this case , I think- I'm not a specialist- Murray would be able to work without a contract for a while, because of all the e mail correspondance he had with AEG. It shows that they were negociating the contract, the conditions are clear enough I think (salary, duration, duties) . The problem would probably be not paying his salary (and so the taxes that go along). I don't know how they would argue that in France. You need to fire someone to stop paying a salary, so if you fire you are the employer. I think "monetary punishment", ie refusing to pay a salary because the employee has made a huge mistake is illegal here. If Murray was considered an independent contractor, I honestly don't know.

What I don't understand is how this relates to this AEG situation. Budgeting Murray means nothing more than budgeting him, and see the effects on the company. IMO, this is normal. Pre tour sounds like an internal distinction for me.

Now that i think of it, the only weird thing is that Michael was supposed to pay it back to AEG, so it should not have influenced their profits. Unless I miss something about how profits were calculated.

 

[Mechi]

I think it is pretty common. I'm a boss myself in the sense that I'm head to three different homes for psychological ill young adults, psychological ill older adults and psychological ill senior adults! However these three homes belong to a company.
At the beginning of each year I am told in budgets by this company how much money I can spend for example on staff, or renovation work, or media related stuff and so on. It's kind of an allowance I get from the company after they have received my plans and calculated.
My boss is pretty happy with me as long as I'm not spending more... because the calculations in the company are of cuz done the way that the whole company stays healthy and hopefully even earns money for new investment or higher saleries etc.
My boss is even paying the bosses in the different homes of our company bonuses (end of the year) if we make it to stay in the budget and do not go over the top.
Well I am a boss usually spending the budget and not really saving to get a bonus, my staff members as much as the ppl in our homes just deserve no less I think. Sometimes I'm even overstressing it... means I'm getting more money for something, however my budgets are very real, it's often combined with many talks with my very upset boss. I understand it's of cuz always a risk to do that cuz if everybody would do so, the company couldn't plan and would sooner or later go bankrupt! still exceptions are possible!
But you know who cares about a bonus for only one person! (hope my boss is not reading here *giggle*)

 

[bouee]

A few things that are not really clear for me from yesterday's testimony- I'm not used to this stuff and I'm not familiar with the contract between AEG and Michael , so maybe I'm not understanding it correctly :

Expand
ABC7 Court News ?@ABC7Courts 14m
Panish showed email from 5/18/09 from Hollander to Wooley: "Were in process of quickly putting together urgent re-forecast for Mr Anschutz"
Expand
ABC7 Court News ?@ABC7Courts 17m
Panish: AEG advanced money to MJ, is that right?
Hollander: Yes, it was an advance, recoupable in some capacity
Expand

what is so urgent if Michael was supposed to pay them back ? Why Mr Anschutz ? could this mean that the cost of the tour was becoming a problem ?

why in some capacity ?
.........

Expand
ABC7 Court News ?@ABC7Courts 19m
Hollander said that if all the terms of the contract were met and remained consistent, Dr. Murray would be paid retroactively from May 1, 09
Expand
ABC7 Court News ?@ABC7Courts 20m
Hollander said she used the term draft because the contract was not fully executed. Fully executed means all partied signed the contract.
..........

She agreed she saw Dr. Murray's contract, but says it was un-executed, since it was not signed by all parties.

One of AEG's argument is that the contract was not signed by everyone. How does that fit with the e mail exchange they had with Murray ? From my french point of view, this is very weird. They knew Murray was working already since they had meetings with him.
I guess that's one of the core issue of the trial.

"We had situations where contracts were signed later," Hollander said. "Due to abrupt end of the tour the contracts were being negotiated."

so they signed other contracts after the tour ended, or does it mean other people were not paid because of "not executed contract" or was it only Murray ?

.......

Expand
ABC7 Court News ?@ABC7Courts 25m
Hollander said the company had a policy manual saying payment would be predicated upon the execution of the contract.
Expand

Does that mean that as long as the contract was not "executed" (so signed by all parties) , people were not paid, even if they started working ?

 

[Pimboli]

Has there been any talks in court as to why the first dates were pushed back?

 

[Petrarose]

Bouee^^Maybe she means that because Michael died suddenly & they had contacted people to do XYZ, I guess if the people did the job or went into debt to create something for the show, AEG still signed a contract with them so they can be paid? I do know that with some companies, if you have not signed a contract, you will not be paid & your money will be retroactive when you do sign.

About the urgent^^: What I think is Michael had some exciting, elaborate, & costly ideas about what he wanted for TII, so that cost more than what AEG thought the show will be. Obviously, more money had to be allocated to the budget, & the big boss would want this information ASAP. We are talking about millions here, so even though Michael had to repay it, the money had to be available NOW to pay the expenses NOW as they happen. That is why I do not see the fuss about the budget. A company is paying for expenses that they will get back from the artist. Of course they have to put that money into a budget to see how much is needed for each month, since it is out of that money that ALL expenses related to the tour is paid. They are not going to take the money from Mr Anschutz's personal account.

^^From the evidence we only know about Muarry whose contract was not signed, & he was not paid. We have not heard yet if there were other tour personnel who had the same experience. At least I can't remember hearing of others.

Anyone knows who will be on the stand on Monday?

 

[smoothlugar]

@Bubs@bouee@Petra:

Definitely Klien left LA in May.

Budgeting Murray means nothing more than budgeting him, and see the effects on the company. IMO, this is normal. Pre tour sounds like an internal distinction for me.

Now that i think of it, the only weird thing is that Michael was supposed to pay it back to AEG, so it should not have influenced their profits. Unless I miss something about how profits were calculated.

I have the same question.

 

[Petrarose]

^^It would impact on the profits while the money is going out. They did not say exactly when Michael would pay back. Maybe it would be after the first 3 months, maybe at the end of the tour, who knows... However, before Michael paid back any payment for continued expenses will affect the profit, because the money is not paid back in full yet & they are using their own money to foot the bill. At least, that is the way I see it.

 

[myosotis]

Bouee^^Maybe she means that because Michael died suddenly & they had contacted people to do XYZ, I guess if the people did the job or went into debt to create something for the show, AEG still signed a contract with them so they can be paid? I do know that with some companies, if you have not signed a contract, you will not be paid & your money will be retroactive when you do sign.

About the urgent^^: What I think is Michael had some exciting, elaborate, & costly ideas about what he wanted for TII, so that cost more than what AEG thought the show will be. Obviously, more money had to be allocated to the budget, & the big boss would want this information ASAP. We are talking about millions here, so even though Michael had to repay it, the money had to be available NOW to pay the expenses NOW as they happen. That is why I do not see the fuss about the budget. A company is paying for expenses that they will get back from the artist. Of course they have to put that money into a budget to see how much is needed for each month, since it is out of that money that ALL expenses related to the tour is paid. They are not going to take the money from Mr Anschutz's personal account.

^^From the evidence we only know about Muarry whose contract was not signed, & he was not paid. We have not heard yet if there were other tour personnel who had the same experience. At least I can't remember hearing of others. Anyone knows who will be on the stand on Monday?

Do we know if Karen and Bush were paid by AEG? I'm surprised they (family attorney) did not ask Karen when she was on the stand.

Or maybe they know something and so did not want to ask that question.

 

[bouee]

Was Michael's share 90% of the income, or 90% of the profits ? (before he would have paid back the production costs)

 

[Annita]

Do we know if Karen and Bush were paid by AEG? I'm surprised they (family attorney) did not ask Karen when she was on the stand.

Or maybe they know something and so did not want to ask that question.

Karen Faye said MJ asked her to be on the "This is It" tour and she said yes. (ABC7) Jackson attorney Panish asks who Faye negotiated with. She says AEG executive Paul Gongaware negotiated her rate to work on tour.(AP) Gongaware signed Karen Faye’s contract, which was finalized in May 2009. She was with Jackson a lot during "This Is It" preparations. (AP)

 

[Annita]

Was Michael's share 90% of the income, or 90% of the profits ? (before he would have paid back the production costs)

Putaman opening statement: He says AEG advanced funds to Michael that he would have to pay back and any profits were split 90 /10.

 

[Petrarose]

^Yeah Karen did say her contract was signed, so I am assuming that she was paid. Otherwise she probably would be on her twitter complaining.

I think Qbee also posted some pages above about the split in profit. Anyway someone did.