Joe Jackson wrongful death case against Murray / Murray wants case dismissed / Joe wants to add AEG

Re: Joe Jackson wrongful death case against Murray refiled / Court to hear motion to dismiss argumen

what do you mean by originally?

When Joe initially put this case out in 09 or 10, didn't the judge send him back to do some revisions and to put in more details. I know there are lot of cases going on, so I might mix them up.
 
Re: Joe Jackson wrongful death case against Murray refiled / Court to hear motion to dismiss argumen

Didn't the judge ask for more information originally? This needs a lot of revision.
Yes and then that federal judge didn't have the authority to handle the case so they went to a state judge.
 
Re: Joe Jackson wrongful death case against Murray refiled / Court to hear motion to dismiss argumen

He also told Johnson the suit may eventually be linked with a negligence case filed against AEG Live, the promoters of Michael Jackson's planned 2009 tour, by the singer's mother, Katherine Jackson.

Please! :smilerolleyes:
 
Re: Joe Jackson wrongful death case against Murray refiled / Court to hear motion to dismiss argumen

When Joe initially put this case out in 09 or 10, didn't the judge send him back to do some revisions and to put in more details. I know there are lot of cases going on, so I might mix them up.

Yes and then that federal judge didn't have the authority to handle the case so they went to a state judge.

yep it's the same complaint being turned down and being resurrected for multiple times.

as of now it's in state court, joe filed a complaint and Murray's team is trying for an dismissal. Hearings, objections etc is ongoing. We will see if the case goes to trial or not in a while.
 
Re: Joe Jackson wrongful death case against Murray refiled / Court to hear motion to dismiss argumen

Thanks Ivy.
 
Re: APNewsBreak: Jackson wrongful death case refiled

Oxman makes a mockery out of EVERYTHING he touches!

Even IF Joe Jackson had a good "case" (which in my opinion, he doesn't) it would lose credibility because Brian Oxman is at the helm. By law he's entitled to file whatever he wants to file, but I don't believe anybody takes him seriously, aside from Joe Jackson.

I would love to be a fly-on-the-wall when OTHER attorneys are discussing Oxman and his many antics. LOL!

Yeah, Brian Oxman, BULLS******R Deluxe! As for Joe Jackson, I ain't even gonna start "going there"!
 
Oxman is suspended for 2 years :


It is recommended that RICKEY BRIAN OXMAN, member no. 72172, be suspended
from the practice of law for three years; that execution of that suspension be stayed; and that Respondent be placed on probation for three years, with the following conditions:

1. Respondent must be actually suspended from the practice of law for the first two years of probation and until he provides proof to the satisfaction of the State Bar Court of his rehabilitation, present fitness to practice, and present learning and ability in the general law pursuant to standard 1.4(c)(ii).

2. Respondent must comply with the provisions of the State Bar Act, the Rules of
Professional Conduct, and all the conditions of this probation.

3. Respondent must maintain, with the State Bar‟s Membership Records Office and the
State Bar‟s Office of Probation, his current office address and telephone number or, if no
office is maintained, an address to be used for State Bar purposes. (Bus. & Prof. Code, §
6002.1, subd. (a).) Respondent must also maintain, with the State Bar‟s Membership
Records Office and the State Bar‟s Office of Probation, his current home address and
telephone number. (See Bus. & Prof. Code, § 6002.1, subd. (a)(5).) Respondent‟s home
address and telephone number will not be made available to the general public. (Bus. &
Prof. Code, § 6002.1, subd. (d).) Respondent must notify the Membership Records
Office and the Office of Probation of any change in any of this information no later than
10 days after the change.

4. Respondent must report, in writing, to the State Bar‟s Office of Probation no later than
January 10, April 10, July 10 and October 10 of each year, or part thereof, in which
Respondent is on probation (reporting dates). However, if Respondent‟s probation
begins less than 30 days before a reporting date, Respondent may submit the first report
no later than the second reporting date after the beginning of his probation. In each
report, Respondent must state that it covers the preceding calendar quarter or applicable
portion thereof and certify by affidavit or under penalty of perjury under the laws of the
State of California as follows:
(a) in the first report, whether Respondent has complied with all the provisions of
the State Bar Act, the Rules of Professional Conduct, and all other conditions of
probation since the beginning of probation; and
(b) in each subsequent report, whether Respondent has complied with all the
provisions of the State Bar Act, the Rules of Professional Conduct, and all other
conditions of probation during that period.

During the last 20 days of this probation, Respondent must submit a final report covering
any period of probation remaining after and not covered by the last quarterly report
required under this probation condition. In this final report, Respondent must certify to
the matters set forth in subparagraph (b) of this probation condition by affidavit or under
penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California.

5. Subject to the proper or good faith assertion of any applicable privilege, Respondent must fully, promptly, and truthfully answer any inquiries of the State Bar‟s Office of Probation that are directed to Respondent, whether orally or in writing, relating to whether
Respondent is complying or has complied with the conditions of this probation.
-
6. Within one year after the effective date of the Supreme Court order in this matter,
Respondent must attend and satisfactorily complete the State Bar‟s Ethics School and the
State Bar‟s Client Trust Accounting School and provide satisfactory proof of such
completion to the State Bar‟s Office of Probation. This condition of probation is separate
and apart from Respondent‟s California Minimum Continuing Legal Education (MCLE)
requirements; accordingly, Respondent Oxman is ordered not to claim any MCLE credit
for attending and completing this course. (Rules Proc. of State Bar, rule 3201.)

7. Respondent‟s probation will commence on the effective date of the Supreme Court order imposing discipline in this matter.


http://members.calbar.ca.gov/courtDocs/07-O-11968-3.pdf
 
Re: Joe Jackson wrongful death case against Murray refiled / Court to hear motion to dismiss argumen

What the heck did that fool do now?

It looks like he really messed up this time and the court is taking NO prisoners.

Could this be a little pay-back for all of the "mouth running" this man has done over the last almost 2-years!
 
Re: Joe Jackson wrongful death case against Murray refiled / Court to hear motion to dismiss argumen

LOL there goes joes lawsuit
 
Re: Joe Jackson wrongful death case against Murray refiled / Court to hear motion to dismiss argumen

Here we go again:yes:
 
Big Apple2;3330954 said:
What the heck did that fool do now?

It looks like he really messed up this time and the court is taking NO prisoners.

Could this be a little pay-back for all of the "mouth running" this man has done over the last almost 2-years!

It has got nothing to do with any case Michael related.

and to answer your question of what did he do: Failure to Obey Court Order, Failure to Report Judicial Sanctions, Commingling Personal Funds in Client Trust Account, Moral Turpitude – Dishonesty, Failure to Cooperate
 
<table id="post3330988" class="tborder" align="center" border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tbody><tr valign="top"><td class="alt1" id="td_post_3330988" style="border-right: 1px solid rgb(209, 209, 225);">and to answer your question of what did he do: Failure to Obey Court Order, Failure to Report Judicial Sanctions, Commingling Personal Funds in Client Trust Account, Moral Turpitude &#8211; Dishonesty, Failure to Cooperate
</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="alt2" style="border-width: 0px 1px 1px; border-style: none solid solid; border-color: -moz-use-text-color rgb(209, 209, 225) rgb(209, 209, 225);">
user_online.gif
</td> <td class="alt1" style="border-width: 0px 1px 1px 0px; border-style: none solid solid none; border-color: -moz-use-text-color rgb(209, 209, 225) rgb(209, 209, 225) -moz-use-text-color;" align="right"> </td></tr></tbody></table>

not much then lol
 
ivy;3330988 said:
It has got nothing to do with any case Michael related.

and to answer your question of what did he do: Failure to Obey Court Order, Failure to Report Judicial Sanctions, Commingling Personal Funds in Client Trust Account, Moral Turpitude &#8211; Dishonesty, Failure to Cooperate

Thanks for breaking that down.

When I mentioned Oxman running his mouth for the last almost 2-years, I was referring to the "what goes around, comes around" tip, not anything that had to do with a MJ related case. For almost 2-years, Oxman has been calling Michael everything but a child of God, I consider this a little payback.
 
Re: Joe Jackson wrongful death case against Murray refiled / Court to hear motion to dismiss argumen

Thanks for breaking that down.

When I mentioned Oxman running his mouth for the last almost 2-years, I was referring to the "what goes around, comes around" tip, not anything that had to do with a MJ related case. For almost 2-years, Oxman has been calling Michael everything but a child of God, I consider this a little payback.



me too.. that is what he gets... What a horrible lawyer he is. Joe's lawsuit is a done deal
 
Re: Joe Jackson wrongful death case against Murray refiled / Court to hear motion to dismiss argumen

"RICKEY"...? o_O lol Learn something new everyday even if it's irrelevant to u! lol

Hopefully, he will stop running his mouth now? But, I doubt it!:smilerolleyes:
 
Re: Joe Jackson wrongful death case against Murray refiled / Court to hear motion to dismiss argumen

This latest news made me laugh. It is funny how many of those who caused Michael misery have gotten or are getting their pay back now. I said before we need to tick them off a list.
 
Re: Joe Jackson wrongful death case against Murray refiled / Court to hear motion to dismiss argumen

There's a hearing about Murray's lawyers motion to dismiss on April 14. Oxman has filed oppositions to this request (yes he's getting suspended but that decision is waiting supreme court approval. It's just taking some time).

Murray's lawyers had argued that Joe missed the statue of limitations to file a wrongful death lawsuit and judge asked more information about it.

In the Joe Jackson documents it's stated that
- the reason they initially filed the lawsuit in federal court was that Michael is a California resident and that Murray and Applied Pharmacy was Nevada residents. In short they claimed "diversity jurisdiction".
- The documents state that Joe didn't discover the nature of Murray's negligence in Michael's death until March 1, 2010. (Reminder : Coroner ruled Michael's death a homicide in August 2009 and Murray was charged with IVM in February 2010. And still Joe / Oxman needed 1 more month to discover Murray's negligence? )
- The rest is claims about they filed within the statue of limitations.

The second document is against Applied Pharmacy and their request to be removed from the case.

- Joe argues that Applied Pharmacy is negligent because they shipped excessive amounts of drugs with no legitimate medical purpose to a unregistered location ( Murray's girlfriend's apartment) and didn't warn anyone (Murray and Michael) about the dangers of the drugs they shipped.
- I think that the above claims are quite simple and makes sense. However one interesting point that Joe argues that Applied Pharmacy knew the drugs was for Michael and therefore it should have warned Michael about the dangers, regulations etc.
- They make "Pharmacy should have known it was for Michael and warned him claim" based on "every prescription should identify the end user (would have the patient name address etc". However I talked with gatorgirl (who has a medical background) she says that some of the drugs aren't what seen as "prescription drugs" (in other words they aren't drugs that are taken twice daily with food) and that when ordering for a supply for a clinic (which Murray told the pharmacy) the doctor wouldn't need to put a patient name on their order / prescription.
 
Re: Joe Jackson wrongful death case against Murray refiled / Court to hear motion to dismiss argumen

There's a hearing about Murray's lawyers motion to dismiss on April 14. Oxman has filed oppositions to this request (yes he's getting suspended but that decision is waiting supreme court approval. It's just taking some time).

Murray's lawyers had argued that Joe missed the statue of limitations to file a wrongful death lawsuit and judge asked more information about it.

In the Joe Jackson documents it's stated that
- the reason they initially filed the lawsuit in federal court was that Michael is a California resident and that Murray and Applied Pharmacy was Nevada residents. In short they claimed "diversity jurisdiction".
- The documents state that Joe didn't discover the nature of Murray's negligence in Michael's death until March 1, 2010. (Reminder : Coroner ruled Michael's death a homicide in August 2009 and Murray was charged with IVM in February 2010. And still Joe / Oxman needed 1 more month to discover Murray's negligence? )
- The rest is claims about they filed within the statue of limitations.

The second document is against Applied Pharmacy and their request to be removed from the case.

- Joe argues that Applied Pharmacy is negligent because they shipped excessive amounts of drugs with no legitimate medical purpose to a unregistered location ( Murray's girlfriend's apartment) and didn't warn anyone (Murray and Michael) about the dangers of the drugs they shipped.
- I think that the above claims are quite simple and makes sense. However one interesting point that Joe argues that Applied Pharmacy knew the drugs was for Michael and therefore it should have warned Michael about the dangers, regulations etc.
- They make "Pharmacy should have known it was for Michael and warned him claim" based on "every prescription should identify the end user (would have the patient name address etc". However I talked with gatorgirl (who has a medical background) she says that some of the drugs aren't what seen as "prescription drugs" (in other words they aren't drugs that are taken twice daily with food) and that when ordering for a supply for a clinic (which Murray told the pharmacy) the doctor wouldn't need to put a patient name on their order / prescription.

And one would think Joe's lawyer (I know...I KNOW) would be cognizant of this fact before making the allegation. I think all of us found out real fast after learning it had something to do with MJ's death that propofol is NOT considered a prescription drug and, therefore, a prescription is not necessary. People aren't "prescribed" propofol so no prescription violations were incurred. Ethical violations for using it "off label", however, are another matter.

Whereas I agree that pharmacy let their guard down when shipping items to Santa Monica without confirming it was a legit clinic and SHOULD be held responsible for this, there's a few allegations that are just tacked on for the sake of padding. What it does though, IMO, is muddy the water for what's legit. That's unfortunate. Maybe they'll be able to overcome the shoddy presentation. Maybe not.

Thanks to all for the updates.
 
Re: Joe Jackson wrongful death case against Murray refiled / Court to hear motion to dismiss argumen

Joe argues that Applied Pharmacy is negligent because they shipped excessive amounts of drugs with no legitimate medical purpose to a unregistered location

no legitimate purpose? that makes no sense at all. we know the normal purprose of diprivan and murray was a dr so? and is there a law that the pharmacy has to make sure stuff is being sent to a registared practice? if not then there is no claim. murray lied to them and told them it was his clinic. if theres no law saying that the clinic should check and make sure then they arent liable imo
 
Re: Joe Jackson wrongful death case against Murray refiled / Court to hear motion to dismiss argumen

^^

According to gatorgirl Murray's practice /clinics based on the thing they do would't need propofol. (I know it's being used in dental areas and colonoscopy but if Murray wasn't doing minor surgeries with anesthesia in his clinics he wouldn't need that) So she thinks Murray ordering propofol in those amounts for a unrelated clinic could have raised some red flags. (reminder we don't know how Murray justified his order). Similarly she thinks California address could have been checked.

So it looks like "they knew the drugs were for Michael" wouldn't hold as propofol isn't a prescription drug per se but there could have been some red flags with the amount ordered and the address it was sent.
 
Judge Tentatives Rules Joe Jackson Can Move Forward With Murray Negligence Claim


<SCRIPT language=JavaScript type=text/JavaScript _extended="true"> function MM_openBrWindow(theURL,winName,features) { window.open(theURL,winName,features); }</SCRIPT><STYLE _extended="true"> .articleTitle{ font-size:18px; color:#000000; font-weight:bold; padding-right:10px; } .articleTitle a{ font-size:18px; color:#000000; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:none; } .articleTitle a:hover{ font-size:18px; color:#000000; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline; } .articleInfo{ color:#000000; font-size:11px; float:left; text-align:left; font-weight:100; width:100%; } .eventSidebar{ float:right; color:#000000; background-color:#D7D7D7; font-size:10px; font-family:Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; overflow:hidden; width:35%; } .eventLine{ background-color:#7F7F7F; height:1px; } .eventText{ padding-left:10px; } .ratingText{ color:#000000; } .articlePad{ padding-left:5px; padding-bottom:5px; float:left; } .articleImageCell{ color:#000000; background-color:#D7D7D7; font-size:10px; padding-left:10px; padding-right:10px; padding-top:10px; padding-bottom:10px; } .articleImageHolder{ padding-bottom:5px; } .articleImage{ border:1px solid #7F7F7F; } .caption{ font-size:9px; color:#000000; } .articleByLine{ font-family:Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:10px; overflow:hidden; color:#000000; } .articleByLineLink{ font-size:10px; } .articleByLineLink a{ text-decoration:none; color:#000000; font-size:10px; } .articleByLineLink a:hover{ color:#000000; text-decoration:underline; font-size:10px; } .spacer{ height:20px; } .contentBox p { margin:0px; padding:0px 0px 10px 0px; } .contentBox ul { margin:0px; padding:0px 0px 0px 40px; } .contentBox ol { margin:0px; padding:0px 0px 0px 40px; } .contentBox li { margin:0px; padding:0px 0px 5px 0px; } </STYLE>(CNS) Posted Wednesday April 13, 2011 &#8211; 3:20pm
A judge tentatively ruled today that singer Michael Jackson's father can move forward with a negligence claim against a Las Vegas pharmacy concerning the death of his son.

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Michael Johnson -- who will hear arguments from attorneys tomorrow before issuing a final ruling -- says the details in the suit filed Nov. 30 establish a basic case for negligence against Applied Pharmacy Services.

Joe Jackson's suit alleges company officials shipped propofol to the entertainer's physician, Dr. Conrad Murray, at a residential address in Santa Monica even though they should have known the amounts were excessive and not going to be used for legitimate medical purposes.

Federal regulations prohibit pharmacies from shipping certain drugs like propofol, typically used in a clinical setting during surgery, to a location not registered with the Drug Enforcement Administration.

The entertainer died June 25, 2009, at age 50 of acute propofol intoxication.

Lawyers for the pharmacy maintain the company had no obligation to warn the singer of the drug's effects and that Murray's alleged actions caused his death.

The 82-year-old Jackson family patriarch also sued Murray in the same lawsuit, alleging wrongful death.

The physician's lawyers maintain he waited too long to file the case, but Johnson has asked for more information before ruling on a motion to dismiss the part of the case against Murray.

Murray has pleaded not guilty in a separate criminal case in which he is charged with involuntary manslaughter in the singer's death.

Jury selection in his trial is under way in downtown Los Angeles.

Joe Jackson initially filed a wrongful death claim against Murray in U.S. District Court last June 25. However, a federal judge declined to hear the case and said it should be brought in Superior Court.

The complaint alleges Murray was negligent in administering propofol to Jackson and that he did not tell paramedics that he gave the singer the drug.

http://www.bhcourier.com/article/Lo...ve_Forward_With_Murray_Negligence_Claim/75648
 
Last edited:
copy of judge's ruling

Motion: Demurrer to Fourth Cause of Action
Moving Party: Defendant Applied Pharmacy Services LLC
Responding Party: Plaintiff Joseph Jackson

Tentative Ruling: Defendant&#8217;s Demurrer is Overruled. Defendant is ordered to file an answer within ten (10) days.

Plaintiff, Joseph Jackson filed this action for wrongful death and related claims against a number of defendants. Defendant Applied Pharmacy Services LLC demurs to the fourth cause of action for negligence. In that cause of action, Plaintiff alleges Defendant was negligent under the following theories: shipping drugs to an improper residential address; shipping drugs in excessive quantities; failing to determine whether drugs were for a legitimate use; and failing to give adequate notice and warning concerning the nature and dangers of the items supplied.

The first theory of negligence is that Defendant shipped drugs to an address in California, which Defendant knew or should have known was an improper residential address. Defendant contends that the decedent&#8217;s physician, Defendant Murray, is a medical doctor with a proper business address in Nevada; Defendant could have shipped the drugs to Murray&#8217;s Nevada address, so sending them to a Murray at a California would not have changed anything or caused any harm.

However, federal regulations expressly prohibit pharmacies from shipping certain drugs to an unregistered location. See 21 C.F.R. §1301.12. Plaintiff&#8217;s complaint alleges that the decedent&#8217;s home was an unregistered location within the meaning of these federal regulations. Administrative actions have been taken against those who violate the regulations, even by shipping drugs to a registered location and then re-shipping them to an unregistered location. See 72 Fed.Reg. 4031, 71 Fed.Reg. 77791, 71 Fed.Reg. 66975. Under these circumstances, Plaintiff has alleged facts which could support a theory of negligence per se under EC §669.

Defendant has argued extensively about proximate cause, but this is a factual question which cannot be decided on demurrer. Defendant has also argued that Plaintiff&#8217;s other theories of negligence are defective. The Court need not determine these issues. A complaint is sufficient to state a cause of action for negligence if at least one potential theory of negligence is well-pled. See Kong v. City of Hawaiian Gardens Redevelop. Agency (2003) 108 Cal.App.4th 1028, 1046.
 
Re: APNewsBreak: Jackson wrongful death case refiled

Although I have no respect for Joe Jackson, I do appreciate the fact that his lawsuit brings Murray and his actions back to the front. Murray is charged with homicide and folks should not forget that. Murray, a medical doctor, willingly gave MJ a plethora of sedatives along with anesthesia and left him alone to die. That should not be forgotten.

I agree with you he is a slimly greedy bastard and because of those traits Murray is going to be Held accountable for what he did.
 
Re: Joe Jackson wrongful death case against Murray refiled / Court to hear motion to dismiss argumen

Plaintiff alleges Defendant was negligent under the following theories: shipping drugs to an improper residential address; shipping drugs in excessive quantities; failing to determine whether drugs were for a legitimate use; and failing to give adequate notice and warning concerning the nature and dangers of the items supplied.
I agree here with Joe Jackson and support that Applied Pharmacy along with Murray should be held accountable for their negligence! All though Murray did more then that in my opinion!
 
Re: Joe Jackson wrongful death case against Murray refiled / Court to hear motion to dismiss argumen

I agree here with Joe Jackson and support that Applied Pharmacy along with Murray should be held accountable for their negligence! All though Murray did more then that in my opinion!

Totally.. I guess that is why the pharmacist went ahead and filed for bankruptcy and abruptly closed. He had no business shipping anesthesia to a home address. I guess he figured Murray was reputable and wasn't doing anything shady but still? shipping that much anesthesia to an apartment address should've been cause for alarm.
 
Re: Joe Jackson wrongful death case against Murray refiled / Court to hear motion to dismiss argumen

Also Murray lied to the pharmacist and said the propofol was for his clinic so he tricked him too.
 
Judge Mulls Consolidation of MJ Civil Suits

(CNS) Posted Wednesday April 27, 2011 &#8211; 11:00am
A judge considering Katherine Jackson's negligence lawsuit against AEG Live today said that she wants more time to decide if it should be consolidated with one filed by the late King of Pop's father.
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Yvette Palazuelos said she would study the issue. Katherine Jackson's estranged husband, Joe, is suing Dr. Conrad Murray, alleging wrongful death in Michael Jackson's June 25, 2009, death due to complications from an overdose of propofol.
"Maybe it will stay here,' the judge said, "maybe it won't.'
Palazuelos said she wants to talk to presiding Judge Carolyn Kuhl before making a final decision.
Lawyers for Katherine Jackson and AEG Live say they do not want the case linked in any way with a Joe Jackson's case against Murray. Murray is charged with involuntary manslaughter in the singer's death.
Joe Jackson's case -- now before Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Michael Johnson -- alleges Murray was negligent in administering propofol to Jackson and that he did not tell paramedics that he gave the singer the drug. Johnson this week denied a motion by Murray's attorneys to dismiss the case on grounds it was not filed on time.
The Jackson family patriarch's lawyer, Brian Oxman, filed a "notice of related cases' with Palazuelos. Oxman said he is agreeable to either Palazuelos or Johnson hearing the case.
Katherine Jackson's suit alleges AEG Live is responsible for the medical decisions made by Murray, who has pleaded not guilty to the involuntary manslaughter charge.
Because Katherine Jackson's is the older of the two lawsuits, Superior Court rules say Palazuelos is the one who makes the decision whether to have both of them before her.
Lawyers for AEG Live say the cases have nothing to do with each other.
"Whereas the vast majority of the factual allegations in Joseph Jackson's complaint concern the day of Michael Jackson's death and subsequent events, the allegations in Katherine Jackson's complaint almost entirely concern events prior to Michael Jackson's death,' the AEG Live court papers state.
Katherine Jackson's lawyers concur, saying in their court papers that her case has "the distinct factual and legal issues of AEG's direct negligence and whether or not it employed Dr. Conrad Murray.'

Copyright © 2011 City News Service

http://www.bhcourier.com/article/Local/Local/Judge_Mulls_Consolidation_of_MJ_Civil_Suits/75780
 
Re: Joe Jackson wrongful death case against Murray refiled / Court to hear motion to dismiss argumen

Lawyers for Katherine Jackson and AEG Live say they do not want the case linked in any way with a Joe Jackson's case against Murray. Murray is charged with involuntary manslaughter in the singer's death.
The "legalese" as to why those parties do not want the case joined with Joe's case sounds good.

But I bet, BEHIND CLOSED doors, the real reason is that neither set of attorneys (Katherine Jackson and AEG) want anything to do with Joe Jackson and Brian Oxman. ESPECIALLY BRIAN OXMAN. LOL!
 
Re: Joe Jackson wrongful death case against Murray refiled / Court to hear motion to dismiss argumen

My worry is that if Joe's case is thrown out Murray will be able to make money off selling his story in the future. His medical license will most likely be revoked but if he can get rich talking about Michael he will have suffered no punishment for his crime.
 
Re: Joe Jackson wrongful death case against Murray refiled / Court to hear motion to dismiss argumen

My worry is that if Joe's case is thrown out Murray will be able to make money off selling his story in the future. His medical license will most likely be revoked but if he can get rich talking about Michael he will have suffered no punishment for his crime.
If he's convicted in criminal trial he won't be able to sell his story.
California and Texas, have expanded their profiteering statutes (commonly known as "Son-of-Sam" laws) to prohibit convicted felons or their representatives from profiting from the sale of crime memorabilia, including Internet sales. California enacted its law in 2000 and Texas followed in 2001. Both states allow the profits to be used to reimburse crime victims for damages.

Most states have "Son-of Sam" laws that prohibit convicted criminals from profiting from the sale of stories about the crimes they committed, but not memorabilia. In a few states, including Connecticut, people accused of a crime (a violent crime in this state) are also subject to the prohibition. These laws, while fairly similar, vary in wording by state. In general, however, they require any party who contracts with a criminal for the rights (i. e. , book, television, movie, or other depiction) to his story about the crime he committed to pay to the state all profits which would otherwise be paid to the offender under the contract. Because these laws are limited to the reenactment of the crime through the telling of a story
 
Back
Top