Geragos: Saw no Evidence of Jackson Med Abuse - MiniB#73

whisper

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
5,693
Points
0
Location
In my skin...
(Why not? We can't depend on the media to do writeups of important information like this, can we?)


Geragos: Saw no Evidence of Jackson Med Abuse - MiniB#73

Attorney Mark Geragos who represented Michael Jackson for about 18 months after Jackson was falsely accused of molestation told CNN's Larry King he saw no evidence of prescription pill abuse.

Geragos appeared on Larry King Live July 10 calling Jackson "always engaged in his defense."

"I didn't see any evidence of what's almost become I think a way a caricature of who he was," Geragos said.

Geragos called a lot of the Jackson banter "speculation" saying, "I think a lot of it is speculation and I'm not so sure that a lot of the people who are out there saying certain things are actually telling the truth as they know it."

The attorney is pinpointing the problem with covering almost anything Michael Jackson-related because "leaks" from unnamed "sources" who give unverified, unconfirmed, unsubstantiated and/or totally unfounded stories make their way into the public consciousness.














In addition, the reconditioning of old rumors by alleged Jackson "friends" -- some of whom haven't so much as talked to Jackson in years -- add to the problem.

"The only people who I think would know are people who were in his inner circle within the last 6 months to a year. As we know, not a whole lot of them are talking,"
Geragos told King.

This could have been a direct jab at some of the irresponsible reporting done by CNN and other news agencies about allegations made of med use from 2004.

Nothing Jackson ingested in 2004 would have taken his life on June 25 2009, some five years later. It adds nothing to the narrative other than to continue to fuel a story that has been losing steam since Jackson's memorial.

"I did not see any evidence of disabling drug addiction or anything else, "
said Geragos.

His words echo a number of others like Kenny Ortega and Dorian Holley who were working with Jackson up until the morning of the day he died. Other members working with and for Jackson on the This Is It tour saw now signs whatsoever of drug dependence or frailty.

Jackson's former attorney who represented him in 2005, Thomas Mesereau, also confirms the view that he saw nothing amiss with Jackson's behavior or mental capacity, or ability to participate in his own defense.

Even a woman who was suing Jackson for millions of dollars up until the day he died, Raymone Bain, told Access Hollywood she never saw any evidence of prescription drug abuse (see AH: Raymone Bain Saw Nothing Amiss with Jackson).

Jackson took and passed a 5 hour comprehensive health examination just weeks before his death in order to get insurance to perform the This Is It concert shows in London.

MJEOL


Other news:

Jackson Lupus Diagnosis Puts New View on Meds Story - Bullet#334
AH: Raymone Bain Saw Nothing Amiss with Jackson - MiniB#72
VIDEO Gladys Knight Breaks it Down
 
Last edited:
Yet even more people (who were around Michael more recently) saying that he didn't appear to be on drugs or anything and seemed healthy and active. Something just doesn't fit here.
 
There are so many people who were with him up until the day he passed away saying there were no signs of him being loopy or acting weird, that he was ready and excited to perform.

Almost all the people who were working with him to prepare for the stage show -- the musicians and dancers, etc -- all say nothing was wrong.

The promoters of the concerts say nothing was visibly wrong. Two different attorneys who were representing Mike at different times say they saw no evidence of abuse or drug use back in 2003, 2004, 2005.

Despite what we think about Arnold Klein, he examined Mike days before his death and saw no tell-tale signs of drug use and no track marks on his arms, nothing.

Even Raymone Bain who was trying to get her hand in Mike's pockets, IMO, at the end say she never saw anything amiss with his behavior.

And if that weren't telling enough, Mike passes a 5 hour physical with flying colors just weeks before. (And you KNOW they a$ses were looking for a reason not to cover him)

There's something more to this story that the media either is refusing to cover or simply isn't paying attention to because it doesn't fit their narrative. They think they know everything like they thought they knew everything in 2005.

I don't know what's going on. I don't know what the brotha was taking. I'm sure he had some health issues he was dealing with. For example meds would be the only way to fight against Lupus flareups.

But a lot of stuff isn't adding up.
 
Last edited:
All throughout his life the media has tried to depict Michael as a pathetic figure,and they are doing the same thing now. All these speculations will happen when it concerns someone as huge as Michael. Honestly he appeared healthy and energetic to me, I agree with the dancers, but whatever the truth is I won't be shocked.
 
There's something more to this story that the media either is refusing to cover or simply isn't paying attention to because it doesn't fit their narrative. They think they know everything like they thought they knew everything in 2005.

Everything you posted makes the most sense, but the above really puts it together. Same shit, different year.
 
all of this is just truly heart breaking. The people you think you can trust say Michael was fine , he was ready for these concerts,he was energetic and happy. Then there are the one's who you really dont trust, these are the very ones coming out saying...oh yes he was on all kids of drugs, high doses of these drugs... so what they are really saying is...I knew Michael was on drugs BUT I didnt care ENOUGH about him to show him I loved him and get him help. This is all just so sad....It makes me cry
 
Just to add the story, all of this talk about med abuse would mean nothing if there were a possibility that if Mike got medical help on time he would have lived. Even if you wanted to give into the speculation: people OD all the time in this country and some of them live because they get adequate medical care in a timely fashion. ...just not the ones who lay there for 20, 25, 30 minutes before somebody calls the paramedics... ...dirty son of a bi+ch
 
I'm confused.

2 minutes ago people were talking about drug abuse and interventions, and now everyone's believing that he didn't have a drug problem? :mello:

Instead of yoyo-ing like this, why don't we first wait for the toxicology results?
 
The most trying time in Michael's life would have been that trial. Yet even his lawyers saw no visible signs of drug abuse including both Mesereau and Geragos stating Michael was alert, focused, coherent, engaged, and articulate...The trial took a huge toll on him mentally and physically obviously, that would have been the time for abuse of meds if any at all...yet those who were around him during that time saw no sign of it. The family was even there during that period of time as well. I hope the tox report comes out soon, cause I am tired of the media speculation and everyone and their momma coming out and talking nonsense.
 
And this is why we as well as the media need to wait until the damn tox report comes out.

What people need to realize is that the media wants to tell their own story about Michael. They don't want the truth. They want tragedy. They want a sad story to put at the end of Michael's life. But like Jesse Jackson is saying right now on LKL, the fans and people who love him don't want to hear that. They want to celebrate Michael's legacy.
 
Addicts can be quite good at concealing their addiction from people - but we won't have a clearer picture about all of this until the autopsy and toxicology reports are released.
 
And this is why we as well as the media need to wait until the damn tox report comes out.

What people need to realize is that the media wants to tell their own story about Michael. They don't want the truth. They want tragedy. They want a sad story to put at the end of Michael's life. But like Jesse Jackson is saying right now on LKL, the fans and people who love him don't want to hear that. They want to celebrate Michael's legacy.

Yep.

The media are putting their spin on it to make him seem like an addict, and the fans are putting their spin on it to make it seem like he wasn't.

We don't know anything yet!
 
I'm confused.

2 minutes ago people were talking about drug abuse and interventions, and now everyone's believing that he didn't have a drug problem? :mello:

Instead of yoyo-ing like this, why don't we first wait for the toxicology results?

:agree:

Ever since Michael's death the media have been going around in circles. This has been the most confusing two weeks of my life. First it was Demerol, then it was Oxycontin, then it was Diprivan, then it was Xanax... Can they not just wait?! Wouldn't it be less embarrassing for them if they just waited for the facts instead of picking up on every story and being proven wrong time and time again? Seriously, they make things so confusing, and it's just not nessesary. "Michael was taking drugs, no he wasn't, yes he was, no he wasn't, yes he was!" "Michael will be buried at Neverland, no he isn't, yes he is, no he isn't, yes he is!" "Michael Jackson has been buried, no he hasn't he's being cremated, no he's not! He's being buried with the white glove, will you stfu! He's ashes are being spread at Neverland, No they are not he's being buried at Neverland! He's being buried at Forest Lawn, but he hasn't been buried yet, yes he has, no he hasn't, yes he has!" I can't follow the news reports anymore. They are too damn confusing!
 
Re: Geragos: Saw no Evidence of Jacksonh Med Abuse - MiniB#73

That's why I am taking everything, including what is being said by so-called friends of Michaels, with a grain of salt.

If I were a true friend of Michael's and I knew he was abusing drugs, I still would not go to the media and get paid to talk about it. This is a true friend. You will never see Janet, Tito or Ms. Katherine on national tv calling their brother or son a drug addict...I am willing to betcha. You know why? Because they truly loved him. Love covers. The bible says so.

I find it very suspicious that all of the people who are speaking out are confirming exactly what the media wants them to confirm....that Michael was a drug addict. And they are getting paid for it.
 
What I found interesting in all this talk about drug abuse is the absence of any inclusion about the illnesses that may have required him to take the medicines in the first place. All discussion is as if he was just hunting for pills for no reason and that any reason given was simply made up.

Remember the time in '95, I believe, when he was hospitalized. All I ever heard was hospital and faking it to get out of a concert. Now, the doctor who treated him gives an interview stating how his life was on the line at that time when he arrived at the hospital. The media had the information then but went with their own slant to fit it to how they wanted Michael portrayed when there was no reason to disbelieve the doctor nor the hospital.

The same here. They want to pursue a particular slant and that is that. So, they are choosing who they interview very carefully. Don't tell me they don't know Schaffel's name and history with MJ. Yet, the continue to present him as a friend of Michael's. Same with Brian Oxman and the list can go on and on.

Something is just not right with this. And if Diprivan was truly found in the house, that alone should make this a criminal investigation regardless of any toxicology reports. So why the focus on all the other medications again without discussing the need for the medicines? Not one time have I heard a doctor explain if any of these would be consistent with a patient with lupus, chronic back pain, anxiety, etc.

I do find it strange that at the height of everything two very observant lawyers could miss if their client was strung out. What I wanted them to ask Mark or Tom was about the list of evidence found surrounding the medications found at Neverland. Did they see that and not ask Michael about it, especially since the D.A. went the route of accusing him of giving minors alcohol and could have easily decided to bring up the medicine saying that he used that at times as well as alcohol?
 
What I found interesting in all this talk about drug abuse is the absence of any inclusion about the illnesses that may have required him to take the medicines in the first place. All discussion is as if he was just hunting for pills for no reason and that any reason given was simply made up.

Remember the time in '95, I believe, when he was hospitalized. All I ever heard was hospital and faking it to get out of a concert. Now, the doctor who treated him gives an interview stating how his life was on the line at that time when he arrived at the hospital. The media had the information then but went with their own slant to fit it to how they wanted Michael portrayed when there was no reason to disbelieve the doctor nor the hospital.

The same here. They want to pursue a particular slant and that is that. So, they are choosing who they interview very carefully. Don't tell me they don't know Schaffel's name and history with MJ. Yet, the continue to present him as a friend of Michael's. Same with Brian Oxman and the list can go on and on.

Something is just not right with this. And if Diprivan was truly found in the house, that alone should make this a criminal investigation regardless of any toxicology reports. So why the focus on all the other medications again without discussing the need for the medicines? Not one time have I heard a doctor explain if any of these would be consistent with a patient with lupus, chronic back pain, anxiety, etc.

I do find it strange that at the height of everything two very observant lawyers could miss if their client was strung out. What I wanted them to ask Mark or Tom was about the list of evidence found surrounding the medications found at Neverland. Did they see that and not ask Michael about it, especially since the D.A. went the route of accusing him of giving minors alcohol and could have easily decided to bring up the medicine saying that he used that at times as well as alcohol?


totally with you on all of this. also, can you please post or pm me a link of where the dr who treated Michael for the '95 incident gave an interview?
 
I'm confused.

2 minutes ago people were talking about drug abuse and interventions, and now everyone's believing that he didn't have a drug problem? :mello:

Instead of yoyo-ing like this, why don't we first wait for the toxicology results?
I think the point that whisper so eloquently made is that

1. The reports coming out about MJ now doesn't square with the reports of people who were around them up to the time he died;
2. Dr. Klein's points are in a state of contradiction;
3. The most important things to know is exactly what happened to MJ from 1:00am to 1:00pm on June 25, 2009; and
4. There are so many stories coming out now about MJ that the mainstream media is just reporting on them with absolutely no verification or no qualification of the individuals making the claim. I think that is says a lot that Raymone Bain would set aside her foolishness to do the job that she should have done when the man was alive. But I give her some credit that she is strongly speaking out now because she knows that there is a lot of fiction is being mixed with few facts.

My opinion is simply this: since the LAPD so quickly dismissed other factors early on when they released the autopsy report, and given the fact that they returned to the Holmby Hills home to gather more evidence only after interviewing MJ's last attending physician AND after the family was allowed to collect his belongings and move them out of house, reveals either a botched investigation, or there has been a concerted effort to push the MJ OD'ed/is a druggie story or a combination of both.

It is no secret that if one looks under the rug of Hollywood's cabal, there is a dark veil network of doctors using their licenses to legally push prescription drugs onto the Hollywood community. Is the state/federal authorities willing to go down that rabbit hole? Perhaps not, but I will say that we are in the age of enlightenment -- meaning those who do their dealings in darkness will be revealed in the light of day.

They may have thought this angle was going to work and the book would be closed, but it's not going to happen.

No matter how hard they try.
 
What I found interesting in all this talk about drug abuse is the absence of any inclusion about the illnesses that may have required him to take the medicines in the first place. All discussion is as if he was just hunting for pills for no reason and that any reason given was simply made up.

Remember the time in '95, I believe, when he was hospitalized. All I ever heard was hospital and faking it to get out of a concert. Now, the doctor who treated him gives an interview stating how his life was on the line at that time when he arrived at the hospital. The media had the information then but went with their own slant to fit it to how they wanted Michael portrayed when there was no reason to disbelieve the doctor nor the hospital.

The same here. They want to pursue a particular slant and that is that. So, they are choosing who they interview very carefully. Don't tell me they don't know Schaffel's name and history with MJ. Yet, the continue to present him as a friend of Michael's. Same with Brian Oxman and the list can go on and on.

Something is just not right with this. And if Diprivan was truly found in the house, that alone should make this a criminal investigation regardless of any toxicology reports. So why the focus on all the other medications again without discussing the need for the medicines? Not one time have I heard a doctor explain if any of these would be consistent with a patient with lupus, chronic back pain, anxiety, etc.

I do find it strange that at the height of everything two very observant lawyers could miss if their client was strung out. What I wanted them to ask Mark or Tom was about the list of evidence found surrounding the medications found at Neverland. Did they see that and not ask Michael about it, especially since the D.A. went the route of accusing him of giving minors alcohol and could have easily decided to bring up the medicine saying that he used that at times as well as alcohol?

Stop making sense classic! Exactly. The story being spun by the spinners is that MJ has this long history of prescription drug abuse. The SBDA's office raided NLVR enough to have had collected all of these drugs. It would have made Sneddon's case a little easier as well.

But if they found prescriptions given to MJ for LEGITIMATE MEDICAL ISSUES, then they can't use that. They certainly couldn't expose it because of federal patient privacy laws.

If Geragos and Meseareu and not Bain are all saying that during their employ with Jackson that they did not see a drug - induced person around them back then and the AEG folk and all of the concert insiders did not see this up to the point he died, then either we have 2 MJs running around here or there's a big piece of the story missing.
 
Stop making sense classic! Exactly. The story being spun by the spinners is that MJ has this long history of prescription drug abuse. The SBDA's office raided NLVR enough to have had collected all of these drugs. It would have made Sneddon's case a little easier as well.

But if they found prescriptions given to MJ for LEGITIMATE MEDICAL ISSUES, then they can't use that. They certainly couldn't expose it because of federal patient privacy laws.

If Geragos and Meseareu and not Bain are all saying that during their employ with Jackson that they did not see a drug - induced person around them back then and the AEG folk and all of the concert insiders did not see this up to the point he died, then either we have 2 MJs running around here or there's a big piece of the story missing.

I agree with what you are saying. The only thing that makes possible sense is the sleep issue especially if he did indeed use the Diprivan on a previous tour; but, is that even fact, yet? And if true, I still don't see any way around criminal charges.
 
I agree with what you are saying. The only thing that makes possible sense is the sleep issue especially if he did indeed use the Diprivan on a previous tour; but, is that even fact, yet? And if true, I still don't see any way around criminal charges.

Well, all I know is that there are 2 versions of MJ out there.

One is of a person who stayed doped up on prescription drugs for years and years.

Another is of a person who was very much engaged and in tune with the people who were around him.

Maybe this person is one in the same and was able to hide the dark side of him from the people who mattered the most to him.

I think that the truth will all come out eventually.
 
I have not posted on this matter cause I am willing to wait for official word. But I do want to say that what Classic has said makes alot of sense and I support it. I also want to add that Michael went for help when he became addicted in 1993 when he had no children. I feel that if he had a problem in 2007 onwards, he would have gone to get help even if only for the sake of his children.
 
I'm not sure how possible it is to hide being drugged up to the hilt, i mean that deposition in 93 is extremely obvious he's on something. To me that recent rehersal footage dont lie, he was sharp.
Thus the points in contradiction. It doesn't square at all.
 
But, what makes me angry about the media is that no one is talking about these contradictions and trying to weigh credibility or trying to determine what you said, mello1, about there just being 2 different sides to him, which is human.

It's as if a story has been determined and that is it. Somebody should be trying to explain where all the contradictions are coming from. I just have a hard time thinking that a reputable director like Kenny Ortega would find reason to lie about his perceptions as well as Geragos, Mesereau, and Lester. But, this doesn't mean that he didn't just hide this side from others. But, did he also hide it from his children, whom everyone said was always with him? I just want a full discussion out there, not the caricature again.
 
But, what makes me angry about the media is that no one is talking about these contradictions and trying to weigh credibility or trying to determine what you said, mello1, about there just being 2 different sides to him, which is human.

It's as if a story has been determined and that is it. Somebody should be trying to explain where all the contradictions are coming from. I just have a hard time thinking that a reputable director like Kenny Ortega would find reason to lie about his perceptions as well as Geragos, Mesereau, and Lester. But, this doesn't mean that he didn't just hide this side from others. But, did he also hide it from his children, whom everyone said was always with him? I just want a full discussion out there, not the caricature again.
I don't know, but I just finished reading both the Daily News and NOTW articles that interviewed Latoya. Frankly speaking, I think the Daily News one is full of horse pucky because I just cannot believe that she would say all of those personal things about the children.

But I do believe that she said that she felt that MJ was murdered and the father, regardless of what people say or think about him has said the same thing.

I was just reading the thread that Chi started and I didn't understand what all of the fuss was about until Trish came on and explained the article she posted about Leonard Rowe's comments.

There is a pattern emerging here. I go back to the whole AGE situation and the meeting that MJ had with his parents, Rowe and Randy Phillips, I believe. Makes me wonder what that REALLY was all about.

I also read on another site that AEG's insurance covered the event of drug overdosing. I don't know if that's true or if it can be confirmed. But I say follow the insurance money.

The insurance folk made MJ take 2 thorough exams. I'm sure that they will not pay out a cent until they are absolutely sure that nothing happened here that would null and void the policy.

If natural causes, like Lupus caused his death, then the question would be how in the devil would a policy be underwritten for an underlying, preexisting ailment? Usually they don't take that risk.

But if he died because of either overdosing, illegal sleep induction, or the mixing of prescription drugs that caused a lethal reaction, then ca-ching!

AEG will be getting their initial $20 million investment back and then some...

I think that the AEG boys knows how bad this can look, so they release a video and say, hey! He was just fine, see... he's dancing and sanging here. We don't know what happened...

Yet Rowe and Latoya are both saying that he was over committed at the O2 and literally being worked to death...

We shall see.
 
I also read on another site that AEG's insurance covered the event of drug overdosing. I don't know if that's true or if it can be confirmed. But I say follow the insurance money.

I don't know if this is true or not because I've read both. But there is a completely different direction it could go also. Doing the concerts would have erased any debt and if MJ wanted to, he probably could have completely owned Neverland again. Now, sadly, with him gone, the OTHER owners of Neverland could be in possesion of a potential goldmine. Even though the family could have some say, really there is a lot that could be done. If turned into a tourist thing, they could be raking it in more and more - indefinitely. Seems like an interesting motive. But I don't know enough of the details of that agreement to really have a clue. It's just that there could be soooo many directions this could go in.
 
I don't know if this is true or not because I've read both. But there is a completely different direction it could go also. Doing the concerts would have erased any debt and if MJ wanted to, he probably could have completely owned Neverland again. Now, sadly, with him gone, the OTHER owners of Neverland could be in possesion of a potential goldmine. Even though the family could have some say, really there is a lot that could be done. If turned into a tourist thing, they could be raking it in more and more - indefinitely. Seems like an interesting motive. But I don't know enough of the details of that agreement to really have a clue. It's just that there could be soooo many directions this could go in.

Actually Lacey, I think it's all tied in together. The key to making Neverland into another Graceland is MJ's remains being buried there. Now there are news reports that the family is divided on that point. Jermaine went on NBC and said that MJ should be there. There have been reports that Joe Jackson has said the same, but I cannot confirm it because I don't watch his interviews. However Latoya in her interview 'allegedly' said that MJ will never be laid to rest there because MJ never wanted to return there and those are the sentiments supported by Katherine Jackson.

But you are right. Neverland is technically in the hands of that Colony group and they can do what they want to. Shortly after MJ died, there was a report that they had a private buyer who wanted it real bad, but I suspect that was before he died.
 
Back
Top