Latest on MJJC

Moving The Case From State To FEDERAL!

  • Thread starter Dangerous Incorporated
  • Start date
If this is true it's def good news. A federal case would draw more attention and I hope it could bypass state corruption.
I also hope it's not getting out there with empty words to the fans.
I guess time will tell.
Who is this guy anyway?
 
Maria MJ said:
If this is true it's def good news. A federal case would draw more attention and I hope it could bypass state corruption.
I also hope it's not getting out there with empty words to the fans.
I guess time will tell.
Who is this guy anyway?
Click to expand...

it's Eddie Jones
 
No, it's impossible.

We know that DEA are investigating some doctors. Yes, here it's a federal case.

but Murray's case is a LA county case
 
I got note from a friend that Eddie Jones is not to be trusted and that all he wants is to stick to the Jacksons.
I don't even know the guy as I don't live in the States. Apparently he has a radio show or something?
Can someone with more knowledge enlighten us here?
 
let's look to the jurisdiction of federal courts

location based jurisdiction: While the jurisdiction of state courts are limited by their boundaries, the federal court system covers the entire nation. FThe federal courts also have jurisdiction on some cases where one party is outside of the United States of America.

subject matter jurisdiction : federal courts also have "exclusive" subject matter jurisdiction over copyright cases, admiralty cases, lawsuits involving the military, immigration laws, and bankruptcy proceedings.

"federal question" jurisdiction: federal courts will hear cases that involve issues touching on the Constitution or other federal laws. Such as if a tenant can prove that he's being discriminated because of his race and this is against the Fair Housing Act (a federal law) this case can be seen in a federal court.

Diversity jurisdiction : Federal courts can oversee cases where the opposing parties are citizens of different states. In diversity cases, the federal court provides a fair forum where citizens of different states can have their cases heard.
 
Maria MJ said:
I got note from a friend that Eddie Jones is not to be trusted and that all he wants is to stick to the Jacksons.
I don't even know the guy as I don't live in the States. Apparently he has a radio show or something?
Can someone with more knowledge enlighten us here?
Click to expand...


Eddie Jones has a radio show - Ustream which he cohosts with Geraldine Hughes & shows up at the court. He has a civil rights association & shows up at city meetings as an advocate for civil rights for African americans. Is he totally trustworthy? Not sure but what can he possibly do? He can't steal anything, he is not in charge of the estate. He does get publicity for his causes by advocating for MJ, for which I don't have a problem with. Some of his guests have been Majestic, Joe Jackson, Oxman, musicians, someone from MJ hoax, June Gatlin, Karen Bass (Cal house speaker),some others. The only thing he could possibly do is sell Jackson family info to the tabloids. He is local in Los Angeles & seems nice enough to me. I hope he can get publicity out so more fans show up at the court house which will be hard to do as MJ has passed, fans will not see MJ as during the 2005 trial. We need as many fans as possible to advocate for justice for MJ.

link:
http://www.ustream.tv/channel/lacraspeaksout
 
So Ivy, would it be possible for this case to move to federal due to diversity jurisdiction?
Murray is a NV citizen I believe.
Or on what grounds could that happen?
 
^^

Perhaps but how can you argue that a California resident Michael Jackson will be unfairly treated in a California court? (Actually Murray has more valid argument in regards to diversity jurisdiction).

Race is out as well , it's black-on-black crime.

Perhaps a federal law? I don't know, I can't say that I know all the federal laws (because I don't).

In short to me, it seems like a hard thing to achieve at best.

Plus I believe in the last ustream Eddie Jones said that they are working with Oxman on this so that makes me more doubtful as well.
 
what difference would it make anyway. dont get your federal and state stuff
 
ivy said:
^^

Perhaps but how can you argue that a California resident Michael Jackson will be unfairly treated in a California court? (Actually Murray has more valid argument in regards to diversity jurisdiction).

Race is out as well , it's black-on-black crime.

Perhaps a federal law? I don't know, I can't say that I know all the federal laws (because I don't).
Click to expand...

Not really. This crime goes much deeper and definately others should be involved in this case with him.
 
kasume said:
Not really. This crime goes much deeper and definately others should be involved in this case with him.
Click to expand...

I'll say it once again. Unless you can prove it without a doubt, conspiracy theories don't mean a thing in a court of law.
 
Cases can be moved from State Court to Federal Court when opposing parties reside in different states or when State Court is showing parciality.

CNN Wrongful Death Suit in U.S. Court

TAVARES, Fla. -- A wrongful death lawsuit claiming that CNN's Nancy Grace pushed the mother of a missing toddler to suicide through aggressive questioning on her show has been moved to federal court.

The lawsuit filed by Melinda Duckett's relatives was moved from state court in Tavares to federal court in Ocala, according to court documents.

Lawyers for Grace and Atlanta-based CNN asked that the case be transferred to federal court, a move allowed when opposing parties in a lawsuit reside or are headquartered in different states. The provision ensures a state court will not be biased in favor of a party from its own state.

The lawsuit stems from a contentious Sept. 7 interview on Grace's CNN Headline News show in which she interrogated Duckett about her whereabouts on the August day that 2-year-old Trenton Duckett was reported missing. The network aired the segment after Melinda Duckett shot herself to death.

Investigators have since named Melinda Duckett as the prime suspect in his disappearance. An attorney for Duckett's estate has said that Grace encouraged Duckett to appear on her show by saying the goal was to draw public attention to help find the boy.

The lawsuit seeks unspecified punitive damages as well as a court order preventing the show on which Duckett appeared from being broadcast again.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy.../12/30/AR2006123000891.html?referrer=facebook
Click to expand...
 
why would moving it matter one way or the other?

and thats a civil case is it the same for a criminal one
 
Dangerous Incorporated said:
Cases can be moved from State Court to Federal Court when opposing parties reside in different states or when State Court is showing partiality.
Click to expand...


the important part is partiality - so are you going to argue that Michael Jackson - a California Resident - is getting an unfair treatment at a California court?

It works other way around - it would work for example if Murray said that as a Texas/ Nevada resident he doesn't stand a chance of a fair trial in California.

and yes doesn't criminal cases should be tried by the laws of the location they happened?

and could Oxman as an outsider get the case moved? doesn't the request have to come from DA or the defense lawyers?
 
ivy said:
the important part is partiality - so are you going to argue that Michael Jackson - a California Resident - is getting an unfair treatment at a California court?
Click to expand...

Doesnt he always? Yes of course.

Did you see Murray handcuffed? No. There are more examples but we already know what they are.
 
Point is we have every indication that there is going to be partiality against MJ in this trial.
How can this be prevented?
 
it cant. u just have to try and pick jurrors who will do their job properly like in 03-05. there will be issues where ever this trial is held
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top