Latest on MJJC

Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG

Status
Not open for further replies.
@ Big Apple : I think Murray felt his job wasn't safe. Was he sensing Michael would fire him, or was it something else, we'll probably never know..
 
As far as I know in USA, it's okay for only doctors and pharmacists to ship drugs (domestically and internationally) with a legit prescription (from a doctor with a DEA number).

(that's why the pharmacy was able to mail propofol from Vegas to LA)

So I would think technically he could have shipped the drugs.

License to practice medicine in UK is another thing though.

edited to add: Once my BF lost his medications overseas and his doctor sent him a months supply. I remember it was sent by the hospital pharmacy and it required 3 copies of the prescription. It went with no problems but of course it was only a small bottle of 30 pills which probably wouldn't raise alarms at the customs.

Also when younger I used to get an inhaler - only available in Europe- mailed to me. What happened was my doctor sent them a prescription and the overseas pharmacy mailed it.

so that's why I'm thinking drugs can be mailed with a prescription.

That being said who knows whether the vials and vials of propofol would be a red flag for the customs. and perhaps that's the reason why Murray tried to wean Michael off Propofol, who knows
 
ivy said:
I'm also curious - generally speaking not aimed at you personally - why people think Live Nation is any better than AEG? Generally you don't become number 1 by being nice to people.

the main issue is not necessarily money. During the opening statements Jacksons lawyer said they wanted the "truth" and "justice" and then comes this "Jackson family lawyer: 'Wrongful death trial could have been avoided'". A settlement would have hid this truth. A settlement would mean you never get the know that an AEG Inc. lawyer called Michael a freak, a settlement would mean you would not read this emails. So if Jackson lawyers are now saying "'Wrongful death trial could have been avoided'" can you say this is about "truth" and "justice"?

I also disagree with "settlement request was customary" comment, most of the time it is the defendants that offer a settlement and plaintiffs accept or refuse it and go to trial.

Also judge ruled cancellation, postponing is not relevant to the issue at hand. We might not hear much about it.
Click to expand...

Yes it is easy think in the hindsight that any other concert promoter would have been different, but I think they are all there to make money for themselves, and I seriously doubt they would have done much differently.

I agree with 2nd paragraph and add that this is the 1st time I hear plaintiff is offering settlement.
If judge ordered cancellation and postponing is not relevant, why she lets them talk forever about cancellation insurance etc?
 
Last edited:
Bubs said:
Yes it is easy think in the hindsight that any other concert would have been different, but I think they are all there to make money for themselves, and I seriously doubt they would have done much differently.

I agee with 2nd paragraph and add that this is the 1st time I hear plaintiff is offering settlement.
If judge ordered cancellation and postponing is not relevant, why she lets them talk for ever about cancellation insurance etc?
Click to expand...

good question, Bubs. There's 2 things about cancellation :
1)threatening to cancel, pull the plug (part of the tough love theory)
2) the risk of cancellation, loss for AEG. it's not mentionned directly though, and AEG don't seem to object.
 
a little addition here

I agree with 2nd paragraph and add that this is the 1st time I hear plaintiff is offering settlement.
Click to expand...

Plaintiffs can offer a settlement - generally when they aren't confident about their lawsuit. Or perhaps some other reason - such as to protect a party from all the stress of trial.

I disagreed with the "customary" comment of Tygger. It's a lot more customary for the defendant to offer a settlement to make the lawsuit go way. Plaintiffs on the other hand might hold on to their guns and refuse settlement especially to make a point.

so from my perspective AEG saying "let's settle so no one learns about the emails" would be the "customary" expectation. Jacksons saying "settlement? no way! we want all of these to be public because we want truth and justice" would be customary expectation. (also let's not forget that Jacksons wanted everything to be unsealed and they even wanted this trial to be televised)

to me saying "we want the truth and justice" and then saying "this could have been avoided if they settled" is conflicting. and it makes me ask "is this really about truth and justice?"
 
ivy said:
Plaintiffs can offer a settlement - generally when they aren't confident about their lawsuit. Or perhaps some other reason - such as to protect a party from all the stress of trial.

I disagreed with the "customary" comment of Tygger. It's a lot more customary for the defendant to offer a settlement to make the lawsuit go way. Plaintiffs on the other hand might hold on to their guns and refuse settlement especially to make a point.

so from my perspective AEG saying "let's settle so no one learns about the emails" would be the "customary" expectation. Jacksons saying "settlement? no way! we want all of these to be public because we want truth and justice" would be customary expectation. (also let's not forget that Jacksons wanted everything to be unsealed and they even wanted this trial to be televised)

to me saying "we want the truth and justice" and then saying "this could have been avoided if they settled" is conflicting.
Click to expand...
That's exactly how I see it also.

I mean, you can't be screaming for JUSTICE one minute, then turn around and ask for a settlement the next. And to top it off, they apparently made their request for a settlement TWICE.

At this point, in my opinion, not only do they want a settlement, the most likely do not want to take that witness stand. I'm sure some of them are stressing right now, when they think about being cross-examined on that witness stand. Direct examination will be a breeze, but now that pesky CROSS-EXAMINATION is a whole other story.
 
A little bit of fun while waiting for serious business to start ar court room:
Yeah, bring in the Jackson's on stand and we will see them squirming and writhering, and hopefully they get their arses whooped by any lawyer @ either side:)


"At this point, in my opinion, not only do they want a settlement, the most likely do not want to take that witness stand."

If it was possible, Randy would have asked AEG to send a check to his home, but unfortunately to him, he has to go through such an ordeal with trial and all :smilerolleyes:
 
I agree that the way they referred to MJ in those emails was very disrespectful, nut sadly not at all surprising. MJ has been treated as nothing but an ATM machine and disrespected (whether publically or behind his back) by so many, including family (need I mention LaToya's actions, Word To The Badd and so on). To me showing those emails seemed a little desperate IMO, not just to embarrass AEG, but possibly yet another try for a settlement.
 
bouee said:
^^ Ok, thanks, i see your point. Just so you know, I have edited my previous post at the same time you were writing yours.

I agree we need to wait for AEG's presentation, i could still change my mind. But so far I really don't see things the same way. I would understand if AEG were blaming Murray and the Jacksons, but so far, from their verdict form and opening statements, they're blaming Michael + Jacksons.

I assume Michael was not told by Murray about the side effects of propofol/benzos, and that he was led to believe, including by Murray, that it was "in his head".
This goes back to the unanswered question of was Michael beginning to doubt Murray, was there another doctor that could have been involved in TII (Adams), was Murray even going to London.
Click to expand...

In USA the doctor and especially a cardiologist has the highest autority among all professionals. Probably the costs and the time needed to achieve this title is the main the reason for this. Murray was a successful cardiologist and I don't believe that non medical people like Philips had any reason not to trust him. I think he as well as MJ was impressed very much with the title "a cardiologist". I suspect that most jurors thinks the same way. Financially Murray was in the same situation as Michael. Almost the same amount of debt. Which way AEG would argue against Murray because of his finances if the artist had the same problem?
 
elapentela;3828294 said:
In USA the doctor and especially a cardiologist has the highest autority among all professionals. Probably the costs and the time needed to achieve this title is the main the reason for this. Murray was a successful cardiologist and I don't believe that non medical people like Philips had any reason not to trust him. I think he as well as MJ was impressed very much with the title "a cardiologist". I suspect that most jurors thinks the same way. Financially Murray was in the same situation as Michael. Almost the same amount of debt. Which way AEG would argue against Murray because of his finances if the artist had the same problem?
Click to expand...

My argument is not Murray's finances , it's Murray's behavior and inefficiency since Michael was not improving under his care, on the contrary, he was getting worse.
But I wouldn't compare a cardiologist, who has a steady income, and an artist who doesn't.

EDIT, from Travis Payne's testimony :
http://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/t...mony-Summary?p=3823648&viewfull=1#post3823648

Payne said he felt that Dr. Murray didn't look like a doctor to him and didn't feel he was an official doctor who should be working for MJ. Payne knew MJ had sleeping problems and that Dr. Murray was treating him for that. Ortega also knew; Payne thought Gongaware was aware too (ABC7) Payne also said he and Ortega knew that Jackson was having sleep problems. Attorney Brian Panish asks if AEG executives knew. There were several objections, and Payne was only allowed to answer “No” as to whether Paul Gongaware knew about Jackson’s sleep problems. (AP) (Note : There’s a conflicting info here)

Something about Murray felt off, Payne said. “He didn’t feel like an official doctor,” he said. (LATimes)
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Anthony McCartney ?@mccartneyAP 1h
Folks, taking the day off and won't be in the Jackson vs AEG trial. AP's Linda Deutsch will be covering it.

LD doesn't have twitter account so we cannot follow her other than articles she posts?


Today on stand Trell will finish off his testimony and then it will be Gonga, am I right?



Moonwalker77 said:
It is not about justice and truth. IT IS ABOUT MONEY.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone can say it is about justice and truth after settlement offer from plaintiffs. If AEG had taken it, that would have been it, we wouldn't have heard a single thing out of Jackson's nor AEG so certainly it is not about the truth, even less justice as what kind of punishment it is to AEG if their insurance company pays settlement.
Basically, even if they lose, they don't feel the punishment in any way.
 
Bubs said:
Is AEG on trial because some of their employees is using nasty words of MJ?
Click to expand...

Re the emails, as panish himself said the emails are being shown to demonsrate what the attitude of the company was towards mj and presumably how that may have manifested itself in how they treated him. I think that's valid - internal business emails can show far more accurately what attidudes are like than some self-serving statements about how mj was a genius on a witness stand imo. They're not lowlevel employees' emails they're looking at, but those at the highest level at aeg. Describing mj as 'the freak' , creepy, lazy, full of self-loathing, a basketcase, so stupid that he doesn't even know the difference between gross and net receipts suggests a lack of respect, empathy and sympathy for mj, which all may have a bearing on how they reacted in june 09.

Certainly didn't like trell's observation on the witness stand that he didn't agree with mj's lifestyle choices, thought that was unnecessary when we all know what that's a euphanism for.

Justthefacts said:
Don't even go there. No one was forcing Michael to work with AGE. How many times have talked bad about a person behind there back? There are people who claim they love Michael who have called him worst
Click to expand...

What do you mean by 'don't even go there'? It was in response to greeneyedone posting she didn't like the emails and wondering how fans can support aeg. Perfectly valid point. No one was saying that this type of namecalling meant murray was hired, people were just criticising aeg's hurtful attitude towards aeg - is that not allowed? Every other person/media org/company gets called out on this forum for saying anything remotely negative about mj, but somehow aeg gets a pass and has people making excuses for them.
 
On a separate note, one thing that came up in Karen Faye's testimony, and since confirmed by her on twitter, is that the Addams Family Values music video that Mj began shooting in 93 is in fact not what would become Ghosts, as previously thought by some. This means that there is a complete or partially shot Mj music video that has never been seen.
 
elapentela said:
In USA the doctor and especially a cardiologist has the highest autority among all professionals. Probably the costs and the time needed to achieve this title is the main the reason for this. Murray was a successful cardiologist and I don't believe that non medical people like Philips had any reason not to trust him. I think he as well as MJ was impressed very much with the title "a cardiologist". I suspect that most jurors thinks the same way. Financially Murray was in the same situation as Michael. Almost the same amount of debt. Which way AEG would argue against Murray because of his finances if the artist had the same problem?
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree that a doctor (maybe in USA especially) has a very high level of regard in society. Two points about MJ (sorry I can't find the source at the moment): 1) he had a great respect for doctors (forget who said this--maybe Dileo? 2) Jermaine said that KJ taught them to see the good in everyone. I think over time MJ got diillusioned and started to question that assumoption that everyone was good, but others have said he was too trusting. So it would seem that chances are good he trusted CM and did not do his own "background check" on this guy--did nopt see thru him. Travis Payne's remarks that CM didn't 'feel' like an official dr. are interesting, but it's an opinion and was it partially formed after the fact or before--was it a hunch? Certainly, it could not have been more than that, unless Payne had done some serious research???

CM is an imposing person--very tall, arrogant, hostile (angry) full of himself--how DARE you question me.

The more I think about this situation, it seems too many people were between a rock and a hard place, AEG, MJ, and CM. There is a book I haven't read--best seller--called Thinking Fast and Slow. I have read enough to get the gist--that when things are rushed, thinking fast, errors are made--pressure makes for the drive towards fast decisions. Thinking slow--this is what was needed. To slow down, but there was pressure re dates, deadlines, budgets, etc. and things moved too fast under a kind of self-propelled momentum. I think everyone involved needed a time out to think slow about what was happening. Maybe this is what Ortega's email was trying to say when he said basically MJ needs help--maybe a nutritionist, maybe a shrink, maybe a better assistant. He was trying to figure it out. Branca also had some good suggestions--the spiritual/substance abuse advisor. Problem is CM was not open to anyone else coming into the picture and MJ was not either from all we know. He said I'm fine--how could he say that? WAS he fine, in spite of everything? Would he have been fine if CM had been a responsible doctor?

There are too many what if's. Bottom line--MJ and CM had a deal, and CM did not behave ethically, responsibly, competently. MJ trusted him and CM betrayed that trust. Could AEG have foreseen that CM and MJ had together decided to go down the propofol route and that CM was doing it in such a way to endanger MJ?
 
jamba said:
Could AEG have foreseen that CM and MJ had together decided to go down the propofol route and that CM was doing it in such a way to endanger MJ?
Click to expand...

I don't think anybody on this earth, could have forseen that Murray would be using, of all things, propofol to put Michael to sleep IN HIS BEDROOM each night. It's just so out there. It's just so outrageous.

I remember when Nurse Lee first came out with her story, I was like "she can't be telling the truth, who the heck is this woman." I was bad mouthing her to anybody who would listen to me. LOL!

But lo and behold, she was being truthful and to be honest, I STILL can't wrap my head around the use of propofol in somebody's bedroom. It's just so wild!
 
jamba said:
There are too many what if's. Bottom line--MJ and CM had a deal, and CM did not behave ethically, responsibly, competently. MJ trusted him and CM betrayed that trust. Could AEG have foreseen that CM and MJ had together decided to go down the propofol route and that CM was doing it in such a way to endanger MJ?
Click to expand...

Nobody knew about the Propofol. Only Mike, Murray, and other doctors, one who was on HIStory Tour, and maybe another one who deal with Mike for this problem. But the Jack$on$ didn't know, AEG didn't know, even the big looooooooooove of Mike, the woman of his life , according to her :rofl: ( sarcasm lol ) Karen Fake Faye didn't know about that. We all knew about drugs, for medical reasons Mike used but Propofol at night ? No one knew.
 
AEG means business. Nothing less, nothing more. They are not friends, not family or talent nurturing agency. Please don't be naive. You still didn't hear about the names MJ was calling AEG. Maybe Paris will mention them in her depositions. It's just the life. I don't Michael himself would be surprise by the freak and other names. It was nothing new for him. His own family called him drug addict(almost every sibling plus parents) and child molester (LaToya). Why you would expect that people who don't understand him would not call him a freak ? Again, don't be naive. It's very popular name for him. We would not talk about it loudly if Jacksons would not start with this ugly lawsuit. AEG could call Michael all kind of names but publicly they always talked about him with a big respect. Now this respect is definitely lost and I suspect there is a hate toward him and his children, which probably will last forever. There is no way AEG would have privilege to know what was going on the second floor of Carolwood house and they had no right to say no to Michael choosing his family doctor to accompany him and his children in London. Especially when it was Michael who in the end would pay for Murray services. When Jacksons will loose this case who is going to pay extra huge legal costs? Of course MJ estate. If AEG will loose they will appeal and the process will last forever. I don't believe AEG plans to pay anything. As the result of this ugly shame the Jackson name will be on the black list in Hollywood and in all show business industry for a very long time. Plus Michael's image will be damage almost the same way as during the molestation trial. He really didn't deserved it.
 
P.S. When a couple of the This Is It dates got moved, there were fans who didn't have very nice things to say about Michael either. Some folks were going crazy and were acting VERY mean.
Click to expand...

I found MJJC in the summer 2009 and I don´t know if there were discussions about that he had to sing live in This is it before his death but it was afterwards.
Michael had to sing live otherwise..he wouldn´t be good enough or something like that.
It´s possible that Michael wanted to sing live the whole concert because fans told him so.
How much pressure could that be for Michael?

Jacksons and AEG might have treated Michael bad but all fans haven´t been like angels either
 
Mod note: Please stop attacking other members based on their opinions. thread will be cleaned. and any future posts will be deleted. if it continues warnings will be given
 
MIST;3828339 said:
I found MJJC in the summer 2009 and I don´t know if there were discussions about that he had to sing live in This is it before his death but it was afterwards.
Michael had to sing live otherwise..he wouldn´t be good enough or something like that.
It´s possible that Michael wanted to sing live the whole concert because fans told him so.
How much pressure could that be for Michael?

Jacksons and AEG might have treated Michael bad but all fans haven´t been like angels either
Click to expand...

I think he didn't want a second HIStory Tour . Cause many musicians and fans, complained about that for the HIStory Tour, no live music almost just lip singing(sorry not sure for the english word for that)

But Michael Bearden the musical director for TII, said it would no be possible to sing all songs live, and Mike wanted to sing all songs live.
 
A few things to remember:

In 1993 Michael collapsed, cancelled the rest of the Dangerous tour leg and went into rehab.
In 1994 the Jackson brothers (Jermaine slang: "cubs") tried to talk Michael into a reunion with the brothers (see draft documents for cancelled "Humanity" project). The so-called "family dynasty" was quite sucessful in exploiting Michael's troubled situation back then with their odd "Jackson Family Honors" and behind-the-scenes happenings.

In 2001 Michael released his album INVINCIBLE.
The Jackson brothers were trying - again - to talk Michael into a reunion tour with his brothers.
Mainly to please Katherine, Michael included his brothers into his 30th anniversary celebration at 2 gigs.

In 2003 Michael's life was upside down when new BS charges were brought up against him.
The same year Randy Jackson was trying to be the person in control of Michael's business and the fan exploitation called MJJSource was set up which silently disappeared in 2005 - with the fans' money...

In 2008 and 2009 Michael was negotiating and preparing for the ill-fated "This Is It" concert series.
In both years the Jackson brothers were trying - again - to talk Michael into a reunion tour. Instead their "energy" had to go ino their "family dynasty" project.

When Michael left this planet, the family did two things:
a) securing personal hard drives from Michael (with poems, intimate self-reflections and music) [you can bet they will still try to get money for sending those to the Estate one day]
b) exploiting Michael's death through a worldwide televised extraordinary "memorial" celebration with ... yes, the company they are now suing [Mother and kids being milked for the sake of the "little cubs"]


Since 2009 some of them (Randy and Jermhasbeen Jacksun mainly) have been calling Michael's estate fraudulent, calling the will from 2002 fake while Joe and Katherine collaborated with several dubious persons, all focused on exploiting the King of Pop's fandom (Howard Mann, "Never Can Say Goodbye" / jackson treasures website (can't remember exact name), Joe's business deals which I won't even list).
And in 2013 they want to make the fans / general public believe that they are so focused on - allegedly - exposing the "powers that be" at AEG to be responsible for Michael's personal tragic issues and that the Jackson brothers always kept tabs on Michael's health.
Not to mention Jermaine and Randy introduced dubios persons like Tohme Tohme to Michael...

Gotta love that family.
 
Korgnex said:
Gotta love that family
Click to expand...

Some people love them so much than they forget to see the truth when even the Jack$on$'s lawyers say the Jack$on$ don't care about Mike and they will do anything for MONEY M.O.N.E.Y (settlement....)
 
^ I don't want to generalize but IMO that's because some cannot differentiate between the Jacksons as ARTISTS/PUBLIC FIGURES and as REAL LIFE PERSONAS/HUMAN BEINGS. Some think it would be inappropriate to criticize them because they are mistaking it for racism about a black family with a poor social background in their early life.
 
Big Apple2 said:
I don't think anybody on this earth, could have forseen that Murray would be using, of all things, propofol to put Michael to sleep IN HIS BEDROOM each night. It's just so out there. It's just so outrageous.

I remember when Nurse Lee first came out with her story, I was like "she can't be telling the truth, who the heck is this woman." I was bad mouthing her to anybody who would listen to me. LOL!

But lo and behold, she was being truthful and to be honest, I STILL can't wrap my head around the use of propofol in somebody's bedroom. It's just so wild!
Click to expand...

I agree. It was a wild 'solution' to insomnia. But it went beyond 'just' using propofol in a bedroom--it was Murray leaving the room and not monitoring MJ, making those calls, not calling 911, not knowing how to even administer propofol safely--it was the sheer, mind-boggling incompetence and irresponsibility of the way he used it.

MJ was unconscious so of course he had no idea that CM was NOT monitoring him. As long as he woke up, he assumed CM did his job. As Shafer said in the trial--MJ was at his most vulnerable when CM put him under the propofol.
 
as I said in my moderator capacity, let's not start anything. and stop taking jabs at other fans. otherwise infractions are coming.
 
Moonwalker77 said:
Yes ,let's just suck the Jack$on$.It seems only that is allowed.
Click to expand...

you can write your opinions without mentioning the other fans.

it shouldn't be that hard to do and like I said let's end this. Warnings are given, thread is cleaned. so move on.
 
I think AEG are going to come out worst in this. The testimony so far in my opinion has been pretty damning for them. It will be interesting if and when Prince and Paris testify. After all, it is they, along with Katherine that brought this lawsuit. The jury will come to the right decision either way I'm sure.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top