Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG

Status
Not open for further replies.

ivy

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
16,074
Points
0
Location
USA
This thread is for general discussion of the katherine Jackson vs AEG Trial


Judge has just announced that trial will start / opening statements will be heard on Monday April 29th.

This is the daily discussion thread. Moderators will start a "news only" thread Monday morning.


Judge said trial will be Mon-Thu from 9:30 am to noon, 1:30 pm to 4:00/4:30 pm and Fridays 9:00 am to noon, 2:30 to 4:00/4;30 pm.
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

Michael Jackson wrongful death trial to open
By Alan Duke, CNN


Los Angeles (CNN) -- The Michael Jackson wrongful death trial, which promises dramatic revelations and legal fireworks, begins in a small Los Angeles courtroom with opening statements Monday.
Jurors earning $15 a day will listen to several months of testimony before deciding whether one of the world's largest entertainment companies should pay Jackson's mother and three children billions of dollars for its liability in the pop icon's death.
Famous Jackson family members, including Janet, will sit just a few feet from the jury as Michael's oldest son and daughter describe their father's last days. But they will also endure weeks of tedious testimony from medical and financial experts offering opinions about the singer's health, addiction and career.
Only a handful of journalists and a few members of the public will be allowed inside the courtroom because many of its 45 seats are reserved for parties involved in the trial, including the Jackson family. Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Yvette Palazuelos denied CNN's request to televise the trial.
Pretrial hearings have featured angry and personal exchanges between lawyers for the two sides, made more intense by the intimacy of the tiny courtroom.
Jurors chosen to decide Michael Jackson wrongful death case

The central issue
The central issue is simple: Did AEG Live, the company promoting Jackson's comeback concerts in 2009, hire or supervise Dr. Conrad Murray, the physician convicted of involuntary manslaughter in Jackson's June 25, 2009, death?
Jackson died two weeks before his "This Is It" comeback concerts, organized by AEG Live, were to have debuted in London. The coroner ruled Jackson died from a fatal combination of sedatives and propofol, a surgical anesthetic that Murray told investigators he used to put Jackson to sleep almost every night in the month before his death.
The Jacksons will argue that AEG executives knew about the star's weakened health and his past use of dangerous drugs while on tour. They're liable in his death because they pressured Jackson and the doctor to meet their ambitious schedule to prepare for the London shows despite that knowledge, their lawyers contend.
A cornerstone of their case is an e-mail AEG Live Co-CEO Paul Gongaware wrote 11 days before Jackson's death. The e-mail to show director Kenny Ortega addressed concerns that Murray had kept Jackson from a rehearsal the day before: "We want to remind (Murray) that it is AEG, not MJ, who is paying his salary. We want to remind him what is expected of him."
Jackson lawyers argue the e-mail is evidence that AEG Live used Murray's fear of losing his lucrative job as Jackson's personal physician to pressure him to have Jackson ready for rehearsals despite his fragile health.
AEG will defend itself by arguing that Jackson was responsible for his own demise, that he chose Murray to be his full-time doctor and that his drug addiction led him to a series of fatal choices. Murray was never an AEG employee but rather was chosen and paid by Jackson for nearly four years until Jackson died, AEG lawyers contend.
"I don't know how you can't look to Mr. Jackson's responsibility there," AEG lawyer Marvin Putnam told CNN. "He was a grown man."
Child molestation accusations against Jackson, for which he was acquitted after a trial, are relevant because they "resulted in an incredible increase in his drug intake," Putnam said.
"Mr. Jackson is a person who was known to doctor shop," Putnam said. "He was known to be someone who would tell one doctor one thing and another doctor something else."
When Palazuelos ruled in February that case warranted a jury trial, she found there was evidence to support the Jacksons' claim that AEG Live executives could have foreseen that Murray would use dangerous drugs in treating the singer.

Jackson's family seeks billions
The lawsuit seeks a judgment against AEG Live equal to the money Jackson would have earned over the course of his remaining lifetime if he had not died in 2009. Jackson lawyers denied media reports that they were seeking $40 billion in damages if AEG Live is found liable, but it could cost the company several billion dollars, according to estimates of Jackson's income potential.
AEG Live is a subsidiary of AEG, a global entertainment company that was up for sale recently with an $8 billion asking price.
One of the Jacksons' experts, certified pubic accountant Arthur Erk, estimated that Michael Jackson could have earned $1.4 billion by taking his "This Is It" tour around the world for 260 shows. AEG executives discussed extending the tour beyond the 50 shows scheduled for London, Jackson lawyers said.
Jackson lawyer Perry Sanders, in arguing for the judge to allow Erk's testimony, said when "This Is It" tickets went on sale in March 2009, there was the "highest demand to see anyone in the history of the world. No one has ever come close."
"There was so much demand, they filled 2 million seats in hours," Sanders said, quoting an e-mail from AEG Live CEO Randy Phillips sent to AEG's owner.
"We would have had to do 100-plus shows to fill the demand" in London, he said Phillips wrote. Jackson could have packed the Tokyo Dome several times in a world tour, he said.
But AEG lawyer Sabrina Strong called it "very speculative" that Jackson would have even finished the 50 London shows before dying.
AEG lawyers argued that Jackson didn't perform 260 shows and make that much money even in his prime. "He never came anywhere close to that," Strong said. "No one other than Cher has ever done that."
Erk also calculated Jackson would have followed with four more world tours before he turned 65.
Palazuelos weighed in during a hearing on Thursday, noting that the Rolling Stones are still touring into their 70s.
The Jacksons will also try to convince jurors that he would have made a fortune off of a long series of Las Vegas shows, endorsements, a clothing line and movies.
Strong argued that Jackson had a history of failed projects and missed opportunities, calling Erk's projections "a hope, a dream, and not a basis for damages."
If AEG is found liable, the company's lawyers want the judge to tell the jury to reduce any damages by the amount Jackson's estate earned from the documentary made from video the company shot of his rehearsals. "If there is a benefit in it, then that is deducted from a loss," Strong said.
Jackson lawyer Brian Panish compared giving AEG credit for the "This Is It" profits to being "like you murdered someone, wrote a book about them and gave them the money."
Panish, who will deliver the Jacksons' opening statement Monday morning, said he was not sure who his first witness will be Tuesday morning. He did tell the court he will show several videos of the depositions given by AEG's top executives in the first week.
Panish and AEG's Putnam will each have two and a half hours to describe their cases to the jury in opening statements starting at 10 a.m. Monday.
The witness lists include many members of the Jackson family, including matriarch Katherine Jackson. Other celebrity witnesses on the list are Sharon Osbourne, Quincy Jones, Spike Lee, Ray Parker Jr., Lisa Marie Presley, Diana Ross and Lou Ferrigno.

Michael Jackson wrongful death trial to open - CNN.com
 
Thank you Ivy.

I hope this comment is acceptable here but it is important.

Whether you are spiritual or not can we all please send healing prayers for the trial tomorrow? It's important that we as a community don't feed into the frenzy that will most likely surround the trial and family. If we all hold good intentions for the outcome this could make a difference in terms of energy that surrounds the trial and everyone involved. As it is the media will be watching every aspect of this trial including the fan community. Thank you. Sending a major L.O.V.E. to you all.
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

260 shows? I don't get how they can claim that when Michael was struggling so much with stress (allegedly) over 50 shows. Yes there was the demand for Michael, that doesn't surprise me at all, but it doesn't mean it would have happened. Plus a lot of future earnings depended on how successful TII was and if Michael was all those things that BOTH sides maintain then I have to wonder how many cancelled shows there would have been.
 
I find it contradictive that they are saying AEG pushed MJ for 50 dates which they say he didn't want to do, his was in poor health, was full raging drug addict (not my words but his family's) and alcoholic too, yet they have expert testifying that MJ could have earned 1.4 billion and 260 dates!

I guess there is enough evidense for AEG to show that Michael wouldn't have done that amount of concerts, not matter how many ticket he could have sold. They can start with Michael's own words that he didn't want to end up like James Brown performing to his old age, and he hated touring.

----------------------------------------
AEG has said in court filings that Jackson’s family is seeking $40 billion in damages, but Panish denies that’s the figure he’s seeking.

“We’ve never asked for $40 billion,” he said. “The jury is going to decide what the loss is.”

The high figure, Panish said, is the company’s attempt to “prejudice everybody against the Jacksons.” He says the case isn’t about money.

“It’s about getting the truth,” he said. “We’d like to get out all the evidence. The evidence is going to speak for itself that AEG had a lot of involvement and they completely deny responsibility.”

We'll see if AEG offers settlement, what happens to the truth and this case is not about the money.

-----------------------------------------
Asked whether he and the Jacksons are concerned about the image of the "Thriller" singer that will emerge in court, Panish said the trial will show a different side of the superstar. "Mrs. Jackson and her grandchildren suffered a tremendous loss and AEG has never recognized that and continues to deny responsibility," he said. "The other side of the story hasn't been told."


We know by now what kind of image will emerge during the trial :puke:
 
Last edited:
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

^^^^ This is where I get irritated by KJs side.... They ARE the ones that put the 40 billion price, the legal documents show that! If this is about truth then tell the f*cking truth (sorry), it doesn't fill me with confidence that we will discover the truth when KJs side is lying before it even starts!

If there is damming evidence on AEG then I welcome hearing it, it still doesn't change the fact the restitution should have been sought from CM and that the Jacksons could have seriously damaged AEGs reputation without this trial and without letting CM off the hook.
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

I am sorry if this information can already be found anywhere, but does anyone know who will attend the trial and is likely to report without bias and in detail? God, I hate that it is not televised...
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

Unless I've read this incorrectly,I don't understand why Katherine and the children would want to portray Michael as an addict. If this were the case it would affect the amount of shows he could have done so that makes the amount of money to be claimed rather irrelevant. Whilst I wish the family success with this lawsuit, I do rather wish they hadn't have gone ahead with it.
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

Asked whether he and the Jacksons are concerned about the image of the "Thriller" singer that will emerge in court, Panish said the trial will show a different side of the superstar. "Mrs. Jackson and her grandchildren suffered a tremendous loss and AEG has never recognized that and continues to deny responsibility," he said. "The other side of the story hasn't been told."

Gotta love how he avoided to answer that question. Though we know what the answer is.
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

So he couldn't do 10 shows but now would do 260? How are some people going to defend this sudden switcheroo?

This trial and this family disgusts me.
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

Gotta love how he avoided to answer that question. Though we know what the answer is.

I would have loved to hear Michael's so called family's reply to that question.



So he couldn't do 10 shows but now would do 260? How are some people going to defend this sudden switcheroo?

This trial and this family disgusts me.

It depends on how much money is on the table. Michael was too weak and sick to do even 10, but when there is 40 billion on the table, he was superhero and healthy as horse.
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

I don't know why this trial needs to last three months when they've got a judge weighing in with remarks like that Rolling Stones one. After the closing statements today, she should just continue with her bias and give the jury the instructions... now how much do you want to award the Jacksons. Just end the misery.
 
Last edited:
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

This is going to be a rough ride. I love you Michael...I am so sorry for what it is they are about to do.
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

I just don't understand what kind of blame could AEG have? Conrat is the one who pumped Michael full of propfol and left him alone how is that AEG's fault? They should have known how the heck was anyone going to know ESP if Michael is telling you he is fine don't worry
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

Unless I've read this incorrectly,I don't understand why Katherine and the children would want to portray Michael as an addict. If this were the case it would affect the amount of shows he could have done so that makes the amount of money to be claimed rather irrelevant. Whilst I wish the family success with this lawsuit, I do rather wish they hadn't have gone ahead with it.

They are trying to say that everybody knew and had prior knowledge of Michael's addiction therefore AEG should have taken great care in 'employing' a doctor to look after him. ie A doctor with financial stress my be inclined to give his patient whatever he wanted through fear of loss of an income that would change his life.

@tresh
I am sorry if this information can already be found anywhere, but does anyone know who will attend the trial and is likely to report without bias and in detail? God, I hate that it is not televised...

Personally I would only really trust whatever transcripts we manage to get, there will be tweets during breaks from reporters in the court, hopefully they should be accurate, before it gets to the newspapers who will give everything a sensational headline.
 
Last edited:
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

I hope this comment is acceptable here but it is important.

Whether you are spiritual or not can we all please send healing prayers for the trial tomorrow? It's important that we as a community don't feed into the frenzy that will most likely surround the trial and family. If we all hold good intentions for the outcome this could make a difference in terms of energy that surrounds the trial and everyone involved. As it is the media will be watching every aspect of this trial including the fan community. Thank you. Sending a major L.O.V.E. to you all.
Yes :heart: Windy, you should check out this thread... there's a global prayer/visualization at 9am PT today :)

http://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/t...-Prayer-Visualization-on-April-29-(and-daily)
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

They are trying to say that everybody knew and had prior knowledge of Michael's addiction therefore AEG should have taken great care in 'employing' a doctor to look after him. ie A doctor with financial stress my be inclined to give his patient whatever he wanted through fear of loss of an income that would change his life.


That can work IMO if we were talking about pain killers but this was not pain killers
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

Justthefacts; That can work IMO if we were talking about pain killers but this was not pain killers[/QUOTE said:
Absolutely! I was just answering from Jacksons side.
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

Personally I would only really trust whatever transcripts we manage to get, there will be tweets during breaks from reporters in the court, hopefully they should be accurate, before it gets to the newspapers who will give everything a sensational headline.

Yeah, I guess so. But everything is so confusing. It is hard to find all the information and get a clear picture about this trial. I am glad I have found this thread. In particularly Ivy seems to be a very great source. I know it is a probably a stupid question but isn't there any newspaper that was halfway unbiased in their reporting in the past? :angry:
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

Asked whether he and the Jacksons are concerned about the image of the "Thriller" singer that will emerge in court, Panish said the trial will show a different side of the superstar. "Mrs. Jackson and her grandchildren suffered a tremendous loss and AEG has never recognized that and continues to deny responsibility," he said. "The other side of the story hasn't been told."

Well Mr. Panish certainly danced around that question, didn't he.

In my opinion, what he replied was NOT an answer!

But it does show how far the Jacksons are willing to go in order to collect their "billions."

"Michael, from the bottom of my heart, I'm so, so sorry!" (I honestly just feeling like crying.)
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

Oh I know I am just blown away by all of this. This was a deal Michael made with Murray before Murray was hired and I just don't understand how anyone could say AEG or anyone could have known
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

Isn't the trial supposed to start in 20 minutes time, and still no news who is going to appear?
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

Oh I know I am just blown away by all of this. This was a deal Michael made with Murray before Murray was hired and I just don't understand how anyone could say AEG or anyone could have known

That's the evidence that the lawyers will have to show in court. That AEG knew what was going on but turned a blind eye because they wanted Michael at rehearsal at any cost and put Murray under pressure to get him there. The email from Gongaware strongly suggests that they pressured Murray to do whatever it took. It was AEG that were to be paying Murray's salary.
 
Last edited:
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

And the judge threw that claim out already so
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

And the judge threw that claim out already so

No the claim that they hired him is what the whole case is about. The reasons behind that will have to be presented.
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

The email from Gongaware strongly suggests that they pressured Murray to do whatever it took. It was AEG that were to be paying Murray's salary.

Strongly suggested that Murray do something as dangerous as using Propofol in a home setting, or strongly suggest that Michael is afforded the best in order for him to be in the best shape possible. That is the question.

I'm just an outsider looking in, but I can't see the executives at AEG wanting to put Michael in any danger in order for him to be in performance shape. In my opinion, that defeats the purpose.

Even when Ortega made his suggestion, it was not for a quick fix. It appears that Orgeta was suggesting that Michael may want to talk to a professional, somebody who specialized in that area. (Now whether or not Michael would talk Ortega's advice is whole other can of worms, especially with Michael telling them all that he "was fine.")

One more thing of interest, if I were on that jury, would be that Murray WAS TO BE PAID a certain amount, but was never actually paid. Not even an advance, while the negoitations were going on. For me, personally, working for somebody means being paid by somebody. If AEG wanted Murray so badly, they would have thrown that dog a bone, in my opinion.
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

No the claim that they hired him is what the whole case is about. The reasons behind that will have to be presented.

"The undersigned hereby certifies that he has asked the producers to hire Dr. Murray. For the appointed time in the name and at the expense of the undersigned. "

Michael Jackson
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

Strongly suggested that Murray do something as dangerous as using Propofol in a home setting, or strongly suggest that Michael is afforded the best in order for him to be in the best shape possible. That is the question.

I'm just an outsider looking in, but I can't see the executives at AEG wanting to put Michael in any danger in order for him to be in performance shape. In my opinion, that defeats the purpose.

Even when Ortega made his suggestion, it was not for a quick fix. It appears that Orgeta was suggesting that Michael may want to talk to a professional, somebody who specialized in that area. (Now whether or not Michael would talk Ortega's advice is whole other can of worms, especially with Michael telling them all that he "was fine.")

One more thing of interest, if I were on that jury, would be that Murray WAS TO BE PAID a certain amount, but was never actually paid. Not even an advance, while the negoitations were going on. For me, personally, working for somebody means being paid by somebody. If AEG wanted Murray so badly, they would have thrown that dog a bone, in my opinion.

Well the only reason he wasn't paid was because Michael died, otherwise he would have gone to London and been paid. Well, Kent actually, cos that's where the house was they were renting. But it's down to the lawyers on each side to show the reasoning behind AEG either hiring Murray or giving in to Michael's demands that he be hired. Then the jury will have to decide who is right.
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

"The undersigned hereby certifies that he has asked the producers to hire Dr. Murray. For the appointed time in the name and at the expense of the undersigned. "

Michael Jackson

If it was as simple as that then the judge wouldn't have agreed to the issue being tried in court.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top