First of all let me remind you that it's law of the case that Murray was at most an independent contractor. I don't think supervising him is a possibility.
What would be the difference in this case, between employee or independent contractors ? My understanding based from my own experience with independent contractors - not in the US though- you don't directly supervise them, but if you're not happy with their services you stop using them, or you re negociate the services ?
Secondly all of those emails are shown to argue "AEG knew or should have known" , yes there were some warnings but nothing that said Propofol. Most of the emails such as the latest one we heard from stage manager Houghdal / Bugsy said "he needs a shrink". It looks like most of the time they thought the problem was psychological. They weren't aware of drugs and this is shown by emails that said "I don't if it's psychological or chemical" or Branca asking "do we know substance involved" or Dileo saying to Murray "give him a test find out what he's taking". As AEG's lawyer asked Michael did not die from being thin or being paranoid.
The judge dismissed the claim duty of care and you assume that they know CM was pumping MJ full of benzos. So far nothing has come out during this trial that they knew what was going on with CM and MJ.
My problem with this is AEG was not supposed to assume
anything. No, they didn't know it was propofol, they didn't know if it was chemical or psychological, and they could not know Michael would die as a result, I agree with this. No one is saying they should have guessed, Jacksons are saying that drugs should have been considered. And according to those e mails, they were, Phillips, maybe others, ruled it out thinking it was psychological. It was NOT his call.
AEG were aware there was a problem. And that problem started and got much worse, it became apparent on several occasions, not just once, and it all happened under Murray's care, Michael was much better before Murray came into the picture, and didn't show all those weird symptoms.
That should have been enough for them to at least, stay out of it, stop negociating with Murray, and let Michael deal with him through a cash advance. I say this from AEG's point of view, to protect themselves.
Third I agree with Trell and Hom, and say that it's okay to ask a doctor in general terms. I have had experiences when coaches ask the doctors when the player can play, or at work place employers asking doctors when the person can come to work, what can they do, what are the limitations and so on, even the diagnosis. BUT don't and can't ask the details of the treatment. In other words I don't see any problems with asking and a doctor telling "she has hurt her ankle, can't play for 2 weeks" without any specifics. (My BF volunteers as a coach and he asks and is told such information). It's no different that insurance doctor saying "other than hay fever he passed with flying colors" and not provide any specifics. So I don't see why it would be a problem for Phillips to ask Murray "is he okay, can he perform?" and Murray replying "yes he can" or "no he needs time off". As long as they don't go into specifics and keep it at the bare minimum it should be okay.
Yes, but they did not leave it at that. They had a strong reaction when Murray supposedly told Michael not to go to rehearsal - Ortega's reaction sounds very different to Gongaware's reaction- they had meetings with Murray, and it sounds like his job was to get Michael to rehearsal no matter what, and that came from AEG. Asking is OK, I agree, so they could re organise the rehearsals, postpone the shows or whatever they would have needed to do. But they went further than just asking. Instead of staying out of it, they used Murray... they ended up treating him like Ortega or any other independent contractor on the show.
Putnam said at opening statements that Prince will testify that Michael was giving Murray $100 bills
He did use his personal and company credit card and cheques to pay all the stuff he put into Michael, so he could have used the same method paying rent?
That is another thing that I'm sure AEG will bring on the table that CM purchased all the med himself and didn't send a bill to AEG. Then again, CM requested AEG to pay needles and stuff to UK, but all the meds were paid and kept separately from AEG.
Isn't the patient supposed to pay for the meds himself ?