[ Pretrial Discussion Closed ] AEG files summary judgment motion to dismiss Katherine's lawsuit

[Big Apple2]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

^ Re: Sharon Osbourne

Yeah, too bad she made her BIG reveal on television, instead of to the proper authorities.

Hopefully the proper authorities were watching, otherwise how are they supposed to know that Mrs. Osbourne holds the key to such vital information?

 

[Justthefacts]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

Put her personal feelings aside people. If she has something of value she should speak and let it be known. If she Dosen't like MJ that really dose not matter. The only thing that matters is the truth. AEG knew he was not right and if she can prove it she needs to be called. This trail will change concert tours forever.

And if Michael was telling people he was fine what she "heard" means nothing. And again I will ask can someone please tell me what was wrong with Michael?

 

[MsMo]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

Yeah, too bad she made her BIG reveal on television, instead to the proper authorities.

Hopefully the proper authorities were watching, otherwise how are they supposed to know that Mrs. Osbourne holds the key to such vital information?

Prince (the artist) is a much better witness to facts of that nature because unlike Sharon, he is also an artist like Michael and has also worked with AEG, like Michael...get it?

I think she used her best possible platform to say just what needed to be said.

'proper authorities' ? who would that be? This is not a criminal case.

 

[Big Apple2]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

Prince (the artist) is a much better witness to facts of that nature because unlike Sharon, he is also an artist like Michael and has also worked with AEG, like Michael...get it?

I thik she used her best possible platform to say just what needed to be said.

'proper authorities' ? who would that be? This is not a criminal case.

Ah, let me see, "proper authorities" would be THE JACKSON FAMILY. I mean, she did say "If the Jacksons want me to testify." Maybe she should contact Mrs. Jackson and speak to her, woman-to-woman.

Or Mother's attorney. Everybody knows who they are. I'm sure Mrs. Osborne can find their number in the phone book or online.

Best Possible Platform. Says who: LaToya. LOL! (Still waiting for her to reveal WHO the "bad guys" are.)

We can talk about Prince, IF and/or WHEN he actually takes the witness stand. Otherwise his name appearing on a witness list means nothing, in my opinion. If I recall correctly, there was a virtual Who's-Who on the witness list for Michael's trial, aside from Macualy Cukin, nobody else actually showed up. Get it?

 

[MsMo]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

Ah, let me see, "proper authorities" would be THE JACKSON FAMILY. I mean, she did say "If the Jacksons want me to testify." Maybe she should contact Mrs. Jackson and speak to her, woman-to-woman.

Or Mother's attorney. Everybody knows who they are. I'm sure Mrs. Osborne can find their number in the phone book or online.

Best Possible Platform. Says who: LaToya. LOL! (Still waiting for her to reveal WHO the "bad guys" are.)

We can talk about Prince, IF and/or WHEN he actually takes the witness stand. Otherwise his name appearing on a witness list means nothing, in my opinion. If I recall correctly,Sneedon had a virtual Who's-Who on his witness list, aside from Macualy Cukin, nobody else actually showed up. Get it?

I got it. I was hoping to shed some light from another perspective

Any number of people privey to the industry knows the same things Sharon does...it's no BIG secret in their circle, but few will talk about it outside because it's their livelihood.

All she did was let it be known, that she's willing to speak out IF they want to add her to the witness list. She chose to say it on TV because she knew it would not only get back to the Jackson camp, but she may have encouraged other artists to speak out as well. I sure don't see where she did any harm.imo

Anyways...

opcorn:

 

[Big Apple2]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

I sure don't see where she did any harm.imo

I hear you MsMo. It's all good.

I just think if a person has some information, doesn't matter who that person is, they should proceed by using the proper channels. That's just my opinion.

She "may" very well have some information, who knows. But this is a serious matter and should be treated as such. Otherwise all it amounts to is grandstanding and attention seeking. Again, just my opinion.

 

[LastTear]

<header class="entry-header" style="box-sizing: border-box; position: relative; color: rgb(116, 116, 116); font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 19px;">Jackson’s Attorney Continues To Defend Michael – Testifying At Wrongful Death Trial, Believes Lawsuit ‘Absolutely Has Merit’

Posted on Apr 3, 2013 @ 10:45AM | By jenheger

WENN/Splash News​

</header>
Michael Jackson‘s criminal defense attorney, Tom Mesereau, is continuing to fight on behalf of his late client — and as part of his ongoing defense, he will be testifying in support of Katherine Jackson during the upcoming trial for her wrongful death lawsuit against concert promoters AEG Live, RadarOnline.com is exclusively reporting.
“I’m on the plaintiff’s witness list because AEG Live plans on bringing up the 2005 molestation trial in which Michael Jackson was completely exonerated. I will be explaining to the jury that Michael was found not guilty on 10 felony counts involving allegations of child molestation and abuse,” Mesereau tells Radar. “Michael had a very strong reputation after the criminal trial and everywhere I went and spoke, people were always coming up to me offering their support – everyone was extremely positive.”

As previously reported, jury selection for the $40 billion lawsuit began Monday in Los Angeles. Katherine Jackson contends that AEG Live were negligent by hiring Conrad Murray, to be her son’s personal physician for his upcoming tour.
Jackson died just two weeks before the This is It tour was set to have kicked off at London’s O2 arena in the summer of 2009 – it was to be the Thriller singer’s much anticipated comeback.

In November 2011 Murray was convicted of the involuntary manslaughter of Jackson, and was sentenced to four years in county jail.
AEG Live asserts that Murray had been Jackson’s personal doctor before they hired him – and that the employment contract was never actually signed off on.

When asked what Michael would have thought about his mother and children, Prince and Paris testifying at the trial, Mesereau said his late client would not have wanted them thrust into the media glare, but that he would have understood the need to seek justice.
“Of course Michael wouldn’t want them to be in the media spotlight,” he says. “However, Michael loved his mother and I think he would have understood her need to go through with this. I’m sorry that the children and Katherine have to go through this ordeal, but it’s very important to them and I fully support them. This lawsuit absolutely has merit.”

http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2...eath-trial-tom-mesereau/#.UVxs4Q6Qf8E.twitter

 

[Big Apple2]

&#8220;Of course Michael wouldn&#8217;t want them to be in the media spotlight,&#8221; he says. &#8220;However, Michael loved his mother and I think he would have understood her need to go through with this. I&#8217;m sorry that the children and Katherine have to go through this ordeal, but it&#8217;s very important to them and I fully support them. This lawsuit absolutely has merit.&#8221;

"Of course Michael wouldn't want his children to be in the media spotlight." I think its safe to say, everybody knows that.

But just because Michael loved his mother doesn't necessarily mean that he would understand. In my opinion, it's just the opposite, and Michael would HATE the idea of his children being put into the middle of this drama. We all saw how Michael was, when it came to the privacy of his children.

"This lawsuit absolutely has merit." Since T-Mez fully supports them, I guess he is obligated to say that.

(I wonder how he feels about the Judge eliminating 4 of the 5 original claims.)

 

[LastTear]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

Clearly we know that TMez opinion of the case come from the 'siblings' as we discussed earlier. Perhaps it does merit the trial idk, certainly this judge seems to think so.

I don't understand how TMez can acknowledge that Michael wouldn't want his children in the spotlight but think he would understand this, a means to an end? It makes me think back to Michael's trial/ordeal where it would have been of huge benefit to his public persona to be photographed and filmed with his children and yet he didn't, that how much he protected them.

 

[mdiegee210]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

Before Michael died he and his childrens were out in public without masks in 2009.

 

[LastTear]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

Before Michael died he and his childrens were out in public without masks in 2009.

Not to promote or support anything they weren't.

ETA My point is that it's odd to me that people will say that Michael wouldn't approve and yet it's ok cos it suits at a particular moment.

 

[Big Apple2]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

Before Michael died he and his childrens were out in public without masks in 2009.

Out in public with no mask is one thing, but being thrusted into the middle of a lawsuit, wherein they "may" testify, is something completely different.

Samething goes for appearing to promote Mr. Pink and all of the OTHER stuff the Jacksons have gotten those children involved with since Michael's death are totally different things.

As if Michael would have allowed his children to promote Mr. Pink if he were still alive. I can see his face now: "you want my children to do WHAT!"

 

[elusive moonwalker]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

Tmez is pals with randy. hes just been sucked in.

 

[Big Apple2]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

Tmez is pals with randy. hes just been sucked in.

Reminds me of his support of that guy's recent book (can't remember his name). Anyway, T-Mez was ADAMANT in his support of that book, and didn't want to hear anything to the contrary. He surprised me.

 

[jamba]

<header class="entry-header" style="box-sizing: border-box; position: relative; color: rgb(116, 116, 116); font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 19px;">Jackson&#8217;s Attorney Continues To Defend Michael &#8211; Testifying At Wrongful Death Trial, Believes Lawsuit &#8216;Absolutely Has Merit&#8217;

Posted on Apr 3, 2013 @ 10:45AM | By jenheger

WENN/Splash News​

</header>
Michael Jackson&#8216;s criminal defense attorney, Tom Mesereau, is continuing to fight on behalf of his late client &#8212; and as part of his ongoing defense, he will be testifying in support of Katherine Jackson during the upcoming trial for her wrongful death lawsuit against concert promoters AEG Live, RadarOnline.com is exclusively reporting.
&#8220;I&#8217;m on the plaintiff&#8217;s witness list because AEG Live plans on bringing up the 2005 molestation trial in which Michael Jackson was completely exonerated. I will be explaining to the jury that Michael was found not guilty on 10 felony counts involving allegations of child molestation and abuse,&#8221; Mesereau tells Radar. &#8220;Michael had a very strong reputation after the criminal trial and everywhere I went and spoke, people were always coming up to me offering their support &#8211; everyone was extremely positive.&#8221;

As previously reported, jury selection for the $40 billion lawsuit began Monday in Los Angeles. Katherine Jackson contends that AEG Live were negligent by hiring Conrad Murray, to be her son&#8217;s personal physician for his upcoming tour.
Jackson died just two weeks before the This is It tour was set to have kicked off at London&#8217;s O2 arena in the summer of 2009 &#8211; it was to be the Thriller singer&#8217;s much anticipated comeback.

In November 2011 Murray was convicted of the involuntary manslaughter of Jackson, and was sentenced to four years in county jail.
AEG Live asserts that Murray had been Jackson&#8217;s personal doctor before they hired him &#8211; and that the employment contract was never actually signed off on.

When asked what Michael would have thought about his mother and children, Prince and Paris testifying at the trial, Mesereau said his late client would not have wanted them thrust into the media glare, but that he would have understood the need to seek justice.
&#8220;Of course Michael wouldn&#8217;t want them to be in the media spotlight,&#8221; he says. &#8220;However, Michael loved his mother and I think he would have understood her need to go through with this. I&#8217;m sorry that the children and Katherine have to go through this ordeal, but it&#8217;s very important to them and I fully support them. This lawsuit absolutely has merit.&#8221;

http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2...eath-trial-tom-mesereau/#.UVxs4Q6Qf8E.twitter

I am not happy with this for a few reasons. First, TM is not correct that MJ's reputation was "very strong" after the trial--the media was still bashing him and remember those 2 jurors who claimed they thought he was guilty but were railroaded by the others? They were in the media casting doubts. Nancy Grace went right in with "not guilty by reason of celebrity." I just don't buy that his reputation was "very strong." It was damaged a lot, let's be real.

TM was also on Piers Morgan saying that MJ was lucid and clear during the trial--the assumption is no drugs were used. However, can TM be sure of that? He only saw MJ at certain times and under circumstances where they were sitting in courtroom and TM was busy with the witnesses and the trial. How much time did he spend one on one with MJ during the trial--he ssaid he spent all day on the preparations and went to bed at 9 and got up at 5 am or something--a very grueling schedule with a single focus on the trial--not socializing with anyone.

Also, he says on Piers that if MJ was going to use drugs b/c he was stressed, he would have used them in the trial--therefore he did not use them in 2009. This could be valid or not. How one person behaves in 2005 and how they behave in 09 may be different b/c the circumstances are not identical. TM seems to be trying to draw a connection and argue if there were no drugs used in 05 then there were none in 09. (or at other times of stress). This is not a valid argument IMO although it might influence/persuade a jury.

Yes, there was huge stress in 05, and Dick Gregory says that MJ almost died due to dehydration during that time (he took him to a hospital for IV fluids and doc told him MJ would have died if he hadn't gotten the fluids). BUT the big difference is in 09 MJ had to perform and was looking at 50 concerts; in the trial he was stressed to the max but basically had to leave it to TM and Sanger and Yu to get him out of the Arvizo mad-house of lies created by them and Sneddon and the media.

 

[bluetopez]

Michael Jackson&#8216;s criminal defense attorney, Tom Mesereau, is continuing to fight on behalf of his late client &#8212; and as part of his ongoing defense, he will be testifying in support of Katherine Jackson during the upcoming trial for her wrongful death lawsuit against concert promoters AEG Live, RadarOnline.com is exclusively reporting.
&#8220;I&#8217;m on the plaintiff&#8217;s witness list because AEG Live plans on bringing up the 2005 molestation trial in which Michael Jackson was completely exonerated. I will be explaining to the jury that Michael was found not guilty on 10 felony counts involving allegations of child molestation and abuse,&#8221; Mesereau tells Radar. &#8220;Michael had a very strong reputation after the criminal trial and everywhere I went and spoke, people were always coming up to me offering their support &#8211; everyone was extremely positive.&#8221;

^Good for T-Mez! And it's totally fair game here. Since AEG want to go there with bringing the damn allegations up! SMH The media hating on MJ is one thing and not surprising. Nothin there hasn't changed with them throwing dirt to MJs rep! But, in terms of MJ rep being damage where no one wanted to work with him....well obviously that isn't true if AEG was after his ass for sometime before he decided to go with them. Even after the allegations and all. That's why I find their argument ridiculous!-_-

 

[PaceMioDolceCuore]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

I am not happy with this for a few reasons. First, TM is not correct that MJ's reputation was "very strong" after the trial--the media was still bashing him and remember those 2 jurors who claimed they thought he was guilty but were railroaded by the others? They were in the media casting doubts. Nancy Grace went right in with "not guilty by reason of celebrity." I just don't buy that his reputation was "very strong." It was damaged a lot, let's be real.

Most Europeans have never heard of Nancy Grace. Unless you were hugely into Entertainment and gossip programs - no problem avoiding coverage.
And I do remember German media outlets for example that celebrated the day Michael walked out of that court building a vindicated man.
And I think it is not a coincidence that TII was taking place in London. And apparently his reputation was strong enough to sell out a huge number of concerts in record time.

TM was also on Piers Morgan saying that MJ was lucid and clear during the trial--the assumption is no drugs were used. However, can TM be sure of that? He only saw MJ at certain times and under circumstances where they were sitting in courtroom and TM was busy with the witnesses and the trial. How much time did he spend one on one with MJ during the trial--he ssaid he spent all day on the preparations and went to bed at 9 and got up at 5 am or something--a very grueling schedule with a single focus on the trial--not socializing with anyone.

I think Mr. Mesereau also gave interviews about getting phone calls in the morning etc.
Of course he can't vouch for everything Michael did 24/7 - but he can certainly describe his experience.

http://www.reflectionsonthedance.com/Interview-with-Tom-Mesereau.html
(^^^I'm just quoting this as an example...and am well aware of 'issues and controversies', it's just an example of someone recounting his experience)
And attorney gets to know a client on an oddly personal level very quickly. You have to supply so much personal information about yourself, you meet with them, your paralegals and assistant communicate all the time. An attorney actually gets to know his client in a very interesting manner. Go to any practicing attorney and you'll see pretty quickly how many tissue boxes are available since by the very nature a loooot of emotions are involved. You're talking about someone's life.

You sit in a courtroom, you talk to your client during breaks etc. If you sit next to some one 5 days a week for 5 months while they rip your client's personal belongs apart - I would say that is quite an insight.

I could say that the 2 attorneys that I had in my life sometimes got a deeper look into my overall life than my relatives, believe it or not. And if you see a client every day under that kind of stress level, you see pretty quickly how people really are.

Being an attorney is quite an insight into human beings because you constantly deal with some of the most personal issues imaginable. You deal with every personality imaginable under the sun.

Heck, I even recall reading someone who recalled Michael's face when seeing a blonde flight attendant on the stand etc - Michael's eyes are pretty verbal universes in and of itself.

 

[marc_vivien]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

Aeg wants to bring the 2005 trial because of drugs issues and monetary damages. The problem with TMez is that the family is saying that MJ was a drug addict (interventions, etc....)

And for Aeg, they said in a motion that MJ managers contacted them to do a tour not the other way around

 

[bluetopez]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

Aeg wants to bring the 2005 trial because of drugs issues and monetary damages. The problem with TMez is that the family is saying that MJ was a drug addict (interventions, etc....)

Yes that does contradict what the family has said, no surprise there. But, T-Mez will testify to the part he knows of, which is still all good by me.

And for Aeg, they said in a motion that MJ managers contacted them to do a tour not the other way around

If that is true it doesn't matter. They still wanted to work with him, yet now say his rep was damaged, all because of the 40 billion claim. When they could easily use another argument since that amount is obviously ridiculous. They are playin dirty is all, forgetting they should be pointing at Murray!

 

[morinen]

Michael Jackson‘s criminal defense attorney, Tom Mesereau, is continuing to fight on behalf of his late client — and as part of his ongoing defense, he will be testifying in support of Katherine Jackson during the upcoming trial for her wrongful death lawsuit against concert promoters AEG Live, RadarOnline.com is exclusively reporting.

“I’m on the plaintiff’s witness list because AEG Live plans on bringing up the 2005 molestation trial in which Michael Jackson was completely exonerated. I will be explaining to the jury that Michael was found not guilty on 10 felony counts involving allegations of child molestation and abuse,” Mesereau tells Radar.

I'm getting a feeling that Jacksons are blowing the 2005 trial argument out of proportion. AEG planned to bring it up merely as a cause of emotional and financial distress for Michael, and Jacksons are planning to make it about child molestation again. Do we really need to revisit that?

“Michael had a very strong reputation after the criminal trial and everywhere I went and spoke, people were always coming up to me offering their support – everyone was extremely positive.”

Really? Was that when he moved to Bakhrain, and U.S. media sites screamed, "Hallelujah, the p******le has left America!"? Or was that when he moved back to Las Vegas and received a letter from the local community with a polite request to get out of their neighborhood and away from their children?

 

[StellaJackson]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

It seems that Tom Sneddon is in court for the jury selection. Bastard.

 

[ivy]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

^^ not confirmed. ABC7 said he wasn't. So it's at best unconfirmed rumor.

ABC7 Court News ?@ABC7Courts 10m
For those asking, Tom Snadden was not in the courtroom today. Only @ABC7, some Michael Jackson fans and law students/paralegals.

 

[mdiegee210]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

Did aeg forget about Cirque Immortal world tour a tribute to Michael. The 4th TOP grossing Tour in 2012. Michael's reputation took a hit, but Michael was still in demand even in death.

 

[Ashtanga]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

I'm praying that this trial not be televised.

 

[Aquarius]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

Really? Was that when he moved to Bakhrain, and U.S. media sites screamed, "Hallelujah, the p******le has left America!"? Or was that when he moved back to Las Vegas and received a letter from the local community with a polite request to get out of their neighborhood and away from their children?

Really? That can't be true? That's cruel. That had to hurt him.

 

[marebear]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

^That's terrible. I didn't know that.

 

[Victory22]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

T-Mez cut that fool of a lawyer murray is employing to shreads but he is totally off base about AEG trial. The jackson's will crash and burn in my opinion. Can't wait until it's over.

 

[8701girl]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

it seems that tom sneddon is in court for the jury selection. Bastard.

hell nawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww!

 

[Petrarose]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

Agreed!

Because if I'm not mistaken, Mother's law firm specializes in settlements. That, I believe, is their claim to "fame."

And the fact that they came up with that HUGE number so late in the game, leads me to believe that they are the ones who are running scared.

I'm sure they are also concerned with Mother being on that witness-stand. I mean, we all saw Mother during the "kidnapping" television interview, where Janet had to keep point to the NOTEBOOK, in order to keep Mother on script. Well there will be NO notebook on that witness-stand.

Good point, and sometimes firms that specialize in settlements, are not as good in the courtroom, so for grandma's sake I hope they are good trial lawyers too.

I too want to see grandma on the witness stand, without her notebook, because even though she is elderly, I can't forget that she was the one who brought all this nastiness about. I know her attorneys will not want to put her on the stand, because she will be a disaster on both direct & cross examination, since she cannot keep her stories straight.

 

[jamba]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

Most Europeans have never heard of Nancy Grace. Unless you were hugely into Entertainment and gossip programs - no problem avoiding coverage.
And I do remember German media outlets for example that celebrated the day Michael walked out of that court building a vindicated man.
And I think it is not a coincidence that TII was taking place in London. And apparently his reputation was strong enough to sell out a huge number of concerts in record time.



I think Mr. Mesereau also gave interviews about getting phone calls in the morning etc.
Of course he can't vouch for everything Michael did 24/7 - but he can certainly describe his experience.

http://www.reflectionsonthedance.com/Interview-with-Tom-Mesereau.html
(^^^I'm just quoting this as an example...and am well aware of 'issues and controversies', it's just an example of someone recounting his experience)
And attorney gets to know a client on an oddly personal level very quickly. You have to supply so much personal information about yourself, you meet with them, your paralegals and assistant communicate all the time. An attorney actually gets to know his client in a very interesting manner. Go to any practicing attorney and you'll see pretty quickly how many tissue boxes are available since by the very nature a loooot of emotions are involved. You're talking about someone's life.

You sit in a courtroom, you talk to your client during breaks etc. If you sit next to some one 5 days a week for 5 months while they rip your client's personal belongs apart - I would say that is quite an insight.

I could say that the 2 attorneys that I had in my life sometimes got a deeper look into my overall life than my relatives, believe it or not. And if you see a client every day under that kind of stress level, you see pretty quickly how people really are.

Being an attorney is quite an insight into human beings because you constantly deal with some of the most personal issues imaginable. You deal with every personality imaginable under the sun.

Heck, I even recall reading someone who recalled Michael's face when seeing a blonde flight attendant on the stand etc - Michael's eyes are pretty verbal universes in and of itself.

You can certainly say or claim that his reputation was good in Germany, UK, Europe, Japan, etc., but it was NOT "very strong" in USA. I don't think anyone can argue that. So how does this factor into the total claim of TM that MJ's repuatation after the 05 trial vindication was 'very strong"? The fact that in Europe no one knows N. Grace, and her ilk, such as DD, what does that mean? People in USA know those names very well. I still say that TM's statement that MJ's reputation --on the whole was no way "very strong." DJ's refused to play his music. He was trashed in the the eyes of the public. I agree with you that his rep in Europe was no doubt in much better shape, which was why the concerts were in UK. MJ did not tour in USA since Dangerous, and that was only in Hawaii, not mainland USA. Population is USA is large, so it has to affect his total overall reputation. (No offense to you intended if I continue to say in USA his rep was not very strong).