Donate Now Goal amount for the next month: 187 USD, Received: 62 USD (33%)
We need your help...Please if you can help us with our cost's it will be hugely appreciated.

View Poll Results: Final verdict

Voters
166. You may not vote on this poll
  • AEG liable

    80 48.19%
  • AEG not liable

    86 51.81%
Page 70 of 114 FirstFirst ... 2060686970717280 ... LastLast
Results 1,036 to 1,050 of 1699

Thread: Verdict Reached: AEG NOT Liable - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

   
  1. #1036
    Points: 6,715, Level: 53
    Level completed: 83%, Points required for next Level: 35
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    116
    Points
    6,715
    Level
    53
    Thanks
    7
    Thanked 127 Times in 44 Posts

    Default Re: Verdict Reached: AEG NOT Liable - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

    Why didn't the Jackson's sue Conrad Murray?


    Now that the AEG trial is over, there is a real question that could be asked. There are enough fans with the power to post this question everywhere and make sure it becomes so widespread, the Jackson family may not want to answer but would most certainly hear about it. The question being, why didn't they sue Conrad Murray (The. Doctor)?.

    Given the situation that directly lead to his patients death, any other family of the victim would have pursued legal action against the doctor responsible. If Murray really is broke, a substantial civil judgement against him would first assure that he could not exploit Michael Jackson. It would also assure Murray having to continue paying for his wreckless actions long after being released from jail.

    Had The Jackson's sued Murray, given the lower burden of proof there is a very good chance they would have won. Also add the coronors ruling and the fact Murray was found guilty in criminal court, it may have been too much for even the best civil defense to overcome.

    So, why didn't the Jackson family sue Conrad Murray? Raising this question would accomplish 2 things. It would cause many outside of the MJ fan base to question the family's true motivation. further exposing a pattern of contradictory statements and behavior that perhaps did not put Michael's legacy or the best interst of his children first.

    Two, With AEG found not liable and Murray about to be releaed from jail, all of the focus would be put back on the person responsible for causing Michael Jackson's death.

    The MJ fan community may have been devided in their opinion of the AEG trial, but this issue gives something we can all agree on. That being, Conrad Murray is a convicted killer guilty of manslaughter, and that is no longer a question.

    https://www.facebook.com/pages/Micha...88817687803025
    Last edited by legacylegacy7; 06-10-2013 at 01:53 AM.

  2. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to legacylegacy7 For This Useful Post:


  3. #1037
    Points: 20,979, Level: 91
    Level completed: 26%, Points required for next Level: 371
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Three Friends10000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    4,869
    Points
    20,979
    Level
    91
    Thanks
    5,627
    Thanked 3,562 Times in 1,203 Posts

    Default Re: Verdict Reached: AEG NOT Liable - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

    Quote Originally Posted by gerryevans View Post
    That's basically what Tom Mez was always saying, that if AEG hired him, they assumed the "risk" for him, which always sort of pricked my insides, because MJ was the reason Murray was anywhere near TII, and it means if MJ is bringing someone into the picture, you're assuming some kind of risk, which turns out could endanger your entire company. When the fact of the matter is, EXCEPT for crazy Murray, everyone who worked with MJ professionally was the very best. Even Klien, was once one of the foremost,most respected dermatologist in his field. I understand yours and Mez' point, but can't help it, it bothers me hearing a competency risk is involved with an MJ recommendation.
    An MJ recommendation Yes, that AEG accepted and then hired Murray! Despite the ridiculous amount of money he asked for which should have sent red flags! So what can I say!? But the same thing I already posted!


    "I always want to do music that influences and inspires each generation. Let's face it: Who wants mortality?" -MJ

    I'll ALWAYS
    LOVE YOU MICHAEL!! <3

    My MJ FB
    page! https://www.facebook.com/pages/I-am-...44452185586019


  4. #1038
    Points: 1,677, Level: 23
    Level completed: 77%, Points required for next Level: 23
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Santa Fe, New Mexico
    Posts
    7
    Points
    1,677
    Level
    23
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 19 Times in 3 Posts

    Default Re: Verdict Reached: AEG NOT Liable - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

    "But his not calling 911 wasn't about skill or professional know how. A kid knows to call 911. Murray's was about covering himself and covering up. MJ was already dead when Murray started making any calls. And that he DID know."

    Juror 27. Though I am not part of the majority here that supports the verdict, I do honestly commend you for having the courage to come here to explain the jury's decision (which I now better understand) and share your feelings but most importantly to acknowledge your softening of heart towards Michael. I always loved Michael's music and had a soft spot for him when the media began their 25 year attack mode but regretfully didn't become a passionate fan until after he died and I read everything I could get my hands on about him. Then I fell in love with the MAN and his goodness of heart. Please understand that Michael's fans have been in battle mode for years, some for decades. It has produced very protective and passionate advocates as we saw the human being behind the genius shredded and ridiculed. For all the joy that Michael gave us - which is immense - we are often a community in pain. Sometimes that bubbles over into overzealousness and anger and we suffer errors in judgment. However, if nothing good came out of this trial except that more people like you came to see the decent and loving and brilliant person that he was, then for that I am thankful. Thank you for caring enough to "talk" to us.

  5. The Following 16 Users Say Thank You to corlista For This Useful Post:


  6. #1039
    Points: 22,365, Level: 93
    Level completed: 2%, Points required for next Level: 985
    Overall activity: 9.0%
    Achievements:
    Three FriendsOverdrive10000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    9,575
    Points
    22,365
    Level
    93
    Thanks
    17,273
    Thanked 12,211 Times in 4,014 Posts

    Default Re: Verdict Reached: AEG NOT Liable - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

    Quote Originally Posted by Bubs View Post
    I don't think that slap was vicious. I think he is kind of type that do a bit of boasting and exaggerating to color his stories.
    I don't know whether its a good thing hat they got some major legal bills as they can go to judge with their bills and ask plaintiffs to pay them. Randy is not going to pay them for sure, so it is either Panish's company or KJ, and we know what happen if KJ has to pay those.
    Yeah that is the thing about these bills. Both Katherine and AEG attorneys can use the bills as a business expense, which helps reduce your tax liability to the IRS. Then, if Katherine has any fees to pay to Boyle, her personal attorney, I am sure if she does not have enough from her allowance the estate will have to pay it. In no way would they leave her with a big debt, since it would not look good, & Michael gave very unspecific directives for taking care of Katherine. Randy and Oxman will run around saying the estate is making billions and Michael's mom has no money to pay her bills. I get the feeling that since 09 when Katherine got those lawyers to go to court about the will, she has cost the estate millions of dollars.

    What I don't understand is this Boyle situation. He is Katherine's personal attorney and is paid for that, so when he goes to court with Panish he is now acting as her attorney as part of her AEG defense? How does he divide up his payment for the different roles? Is someone clocking in what role Boyle is serving at a particular time, so that he does not try to get money from the estate for being in court for the AEG case? Is Boyle on retainer or just being paid when he does something? The next accounting is going to be a revelation indeed.

  7. #1040
    Points: 22,365, Level: 93
    Level completed: 2%, Points required for next Level: 985
    Overall activity: 9.0%
    Achievements:
    Three FriendsOverdrive10000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    9,575
    Points
    22,365
    Level
    93
    Thanks
    17,273
    Thanked 12,211 Times in 4,014 Posts

    Default Re: Verdict Reached: AEG NOT Liable - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

    Juror 27 Thanks for posting here. I don't see why you have to send in your certification. I think that information should be sent by pm to the staff only. Then the staff can say, we saw it and it is OK. Why should you have to post your private information here on people's demands.

    I see some found something or someone new to attack, which is a pity.

    Nina Hamilton medical license and board certification is not the same thing. The way you posted made it seem as the same. Also, not every doc is board certified.

    Blue the high wage Muarry wanted should have sent ^^Red Flags of What exactly?

  8. The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to Petrarose For This Useful Post:


  9. #1041
    Points: 11,517, Level: 70
    Level completed: 67%, Points required for next Level: 133
    Overall activity: 24.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Near a National Park
    Posts
    1,626
    Points
    11,517
    Level
    70
    Thanks
    2,694
    Thanked 1,912 Times in 789 Posts

    Default Re: Verdict Reached: AEG NOT Liable - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

    A great big thank you to the Juror and this individual's eloquence. What an honor that you have replied on here, I feel like a part of HIStory!


    Michael is really great! He has no snobbery to him, he's just a good kid. Michael is a gentle spirit and he takes over our kids. He loves kid's, we watch a lot of cartoons together. - Linda McCartney being interviewed by Oprah Winfrey https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhZPy0ZeuvI

  10. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to AliCat For This Useful Post:


  11. #1042
    Points: 13,929, Level: 76
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 121
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience PointsThree Friends

    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    US
    Posts
    1,195
    Points
    13,929
    Level
    76
    Thanks
    77
    Thanked 115 Times in 46 Posts

    Default Re: Verdict Reached: AEG NOT Liable - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

    Thanks for posting here Juror #27. Like others have said you should show the credentials to the staff but it's whatever you want to do. Either way welcome to the fandom.

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to marialovesmjj For This Useful Post:


  13. #1043
    Points: 22,365, Level: 93
    Level completed: 2%, Points required for next Level: 985
    Overall activity: 9.0%
    Achievements:
    Three FriendsOverdrive10000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    9,575
    Points
    22,365
    Level
    93
    Thanks
    17,273
    Thanked 12,211 Times in 4,014 Posts

    Default Re: Verdict Reached: AEG NOT Liable - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

    Alicat ^^ that was lovely. This forum has gotten some nice responses from those involved in cases relating to Michael. I hope the forum keeps up its quality.

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to Petrarose For This Useful Post:


  15. #1044
    Points: 5,696, Level: 48
    Level completed: 73%, Points required for next Level: 54
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    VeteranCreated Blog entry5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    134
    Points
    5,696
    Level
    48
    Blog Entries
    1
    Thanks
    425
    Thanked 403 Times in 105 Posts

    Default Re: Verdict Reached: AEG NOT Liable - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

    Thank you to Juror#27. This feedback is very much appreciated.

  16. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Kerry Hennigan For This Useful Post:


  17. #1045
    Points: 7,686, Level: 58
    Level completed: 68%, Points required for next Level: 64
    Overall activity: 3.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1,386
    Points
    7,686
    Level
    58
    Thanks
    893
    Thanked 3,412 Times in 883 Posts

    Default Re: Verdict Reached: AEG NOT Liable - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

    Quote Originally Posted by corlista View Post
    "But his not calling 911 wasn't about skill or professional know how. A kid knows to call 911. Murray's was about covering himself and covering up. MJ was already dead when Murray started making any calls. And that he DID know."

    Juror 27. Though I am not part of the majority here that supports the verdict, I do honestly commend you for having the courage to come here to explain the jury's decision (which I now better understand) and share your feelings but most importantly to acknowledge your softening of heart towards Michael. I always loved Michael's music and had a soft spot for him when the media began their 25 year attack mode but regretfully didn't become a passionate fan until after he died and I read everything I could get my hands on about him. Then I fell in love with the MAN and his goodness of heart. Please understand that Michael's fans have been in battle mode for years, some for decades. It has produced very protective and passionate advocates as we saw the human being behind the genius shredded and ridiculed. For all the joy that Michael gave us - which is immense - we are often a community in pain. Sometimes that bubbles over into overzealousness and anger and we suffer errors in judgment. However, if nothing good came out of this trial except that more people like you came to see the decent and loving and brilliant person that he was, then for that I am thankful. Thank you for caring enough to "talk" to us.
    Absolutely beautiful.

    Thank you for the heartfelt post.

    It's true that the fan community has been in friction since June 25 2009. it's quite scary when you think about it and I've never seen anything like that since I became a fan 20 years ago. When MJ was alive the community was always united, moving in the same direction. Sure, there was some disagreements, like any other communities out there, but not to the scale we see right now. in fact i'd say we are at war against each other. and it's rather sad.

    Hopefully this shall pass and someday we'll be united and stronger than ever before.

  18. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to passy001 For This Useful Post:


  19. #1046
    Points: 3,360, Level: 36
    Level completed: 7%, Points required for next Level: 140
    Overall activity: 27.0%
    Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    2,316
    Points
    3,360
    Level
    36
    Thanks
    1,409
    Thanked 1,274 Times in 702 Posts

    Default Re: Verdict Reached: AEG NOT Liable - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

    Interesting development.

    I believe we must be patient here. Juror27 is a new member and only has two posts thus far. Although Juror27 is already listed as a member as opposed to a junior member, the posts may be in moderation as it happens for those with less than 10 posts, i.e., junior members.
    Last edited by Tygger; 06-10-2013 at 07:49 AM.

  20. #1047
    Points: 3,902, Level: 39
    Level completed: 68%, Points required for next Level: 48
    Overall activity: 7.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    114
    Points
    3,902
    Level
    39
    Thanks
    9
    Thanked 932 Times in 113 Posts

    Default Re: Verdict Reached: AEG NOT Liable - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

    I have sent pics of the last two months of service certificates to ivy.

    I really wish I had held off posting initially until later. I didn't mean to drop a post and not be around to respond, but since it had to be approved and I didn't know how long that might take I posted right before I went to bed. Then had plans for all day today. So I apologize for my delay in responding.

    Quote Originally Posted by johnlomas View Post
    I have a question for you if question 2 had included the word ethical would your personal answer still have been no?
    The problem I have with what our foreman said and the question you are asking is that it mixes up the timelines. If the word unethical was included in question 2, we would still have to assess whether AEG knew that at the time they hired Conrad Murray.

    The most the plaintiffs could say in that area was that Murray asked for $5million initially and that should have sent up red flags. Asking for that amount would definitely catch my attention and maybe raise an eyebrow, but it still doesn't qualify in my mind as unethical. Asking for a lot of money doesn't mean one is unethical in my estimation (and I hope the irony of repeatedly implying that in court was not lost on the plaintiffs ;D). Also that Murray was being foreclosed on and had a lot of owed child support. Again, being in debt or being foreclosed on doesn't in itself cross an ethical boundary in my mind.

    So no, I don't think we would have answered differently if the question asked whether he was ethical because we didn't see any evidence that showed that AEG knew Murray was going to act unethically.

    Quote Originally Posted by TheChosenOne View Post
    I am so relieved that I was unnecessarily worried about the jurors and their perceptions.

    I was really hoping that they were able to see Michael as a human being, and a wonderful human being at that!
    Absolutely. I can't stress enough how much we all liked him by the end of the trial. So many witnesses and so much heartfelt testimony. Lots of pure love and affection for Michael poured out over these months and it left an incredible impression on all of us.

    Quote Originally Posted by suzynyc View Post
    Juror #27 thank you for your lovely comment. At first I was confused by the jury's answer to question #2 but reading into it further I think I see the logic. Although I had always known Michael Jackson and his music all my life I did not come to be a "super fan" until just after he died when I too began to research and learn more about him as a person and not just the "King of Pop" superstar. I liked what I learned. He was not a perfect person but he was a good person and a good father. I wish my own deadbeat father had been half the father Michael was to his children. Thank you for having an open mind.
    This hits the nail on the head. Throughout all the testimony and witnesses, that was one of the strongest recurring themes -- MJ was a wonderful father and person.

    Quote Originally Posted by Korgnex View Post
    Thank you, Juror#27.

    Before the verdict was read, we were going through the questions like you guys had to. Though I personally wouldn't have answered question 1 with a "yes", I can understand and thought it was very likely that this question had to be answered by 12 jurors with "yes" because it was realistic that at least 9 jurors would argue that both MJ and AEG Live could have hired Dr. Murray.

    If you go through my postings in this very thread here, I was trying to explain the meaning of the terms "unfit" and "incompetent" in question 2 and their association with "the work for which he was hired".
    I was also trying to show that even if that question would not lead us to a "no", there was nothing factual in those 5 months for question 3 that could tell us AEG Live had or should have had knowledge of Murray being unfit or incompetent.
    Like you, we noticed here that many are confused by the fact that Dr. Murray did infact cause involuntary manslaughter of Michael Jackson and why this fact has nothing to do with determining Dr. Murray being "fit" and "competent" for the work he was hired for.
    If you want to take a look at my thoughts on these questions and terms, here are some of my postings:




    As you might have read, there was a particular idea that came up here:
    it was whether a conflict of interest due to AEG Live advancing money to Murray (as per draft agreements) would a) be affirmed and b) thus determine Dr. Murray as "incompetent" in question 2.
    However I highly disagree with this point of view for these reasons:
    • There is no precedent that established a cash-stricken person would automatically provide substandard work / putting a patient at risk.
      [The person in question has to be cash-stricken as otherwise, he couldn't care less about the money and there would be no conflicting interest.]
    • Dr. Murray had ordered propofol before Michael even introduced him to AEG Live.
      [You can't establish a conflicting interest that way since Dr. Murray was not affected by AEG Live or any other third party at all.]
    • Every doctor that is receiving (advance) payment from a third party would then - after this idea - have to be considered "incompetent" and that's quite untrue.
    • A doctor's Hippocratic oath would dwindle in importance since the Hippocratic oath is the fundamental ethic framework for doctors.
      [Dr. Murray breaking his Hippocratic oath was his very own choice, his very own responsibility and noone else can be blamed for being or becoming unethic than the unethical person itself.]



    I would be interested what you think about this idea.
    You are right on the money in my opinion.

    The conflict of interest idea was countered by the defense saying that in actuality all 3 interests were aligned. It was clearly in everyone's best interest for Michael to be healthy and to do the shows and I see no way to dispute this. MJ being healthy and performing was good for everyone involved. And even if one wants to view this as a conflict of interest, I don't see how the existence of it in and of itself renders Murray unfit or incompetent. We were told over and over that conflicts of interest arise all the time in medicine and are the responsibility of the doctor to mitigate.

    So even if a conflict of interest was in place, it was on Murray's shoulders to mitigate it since he was the one providing medical care to MJ.

    As for question 1, our first vote had 3 answers.

    Hired him.
    Didn't hire him.
    Unsure.

    After first vote it was 6 votes unsure, 4 votes no and 2 votes yes. I initially voted no.

    But we then looked at the jury instructions which said that contracts can be written, oral, or partly written and partly oral. It said that oral contracts are just as valid as written contracts, and that implied-in-fact contracts could be valid through the parties' conduct.

    So we looked at AEG's behavior in dealing with Conrad Murray, and we felt that between the drawn up contracts, the fact that they backdated his starting date from June 1 to May 1 in one of the drafts, the Gongaware emails about who was paying Murray's salary, that Randy Phillips and Murray were in charge of getting MJ to rehearsals, it was all enough conduct to say that they "hired" him.

    It is late here and I'm off to sleep, will answer more posts tomorrow.


  21. #1048
    Points: 32,067, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 8.0%
    Achievements:
    OverdriveThree FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,856
    Points
    32,067
    Level
    100
    Thanks
    17,502
    Thanked 16,213 Times in 4,830 Posts

    Default Re: Verdict Reached: AEG NOT Liable - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

    Quote Originally Posted by Nina Hamilton View Post
    I was very happy to read your words, Jury No.27. that you have joined the band of followers of MJ. Maybe the trial has had a positive outcome after all. However, one or two points are bothering me. If AEG had checked Conrad Murray out, they would have discovered that his medical licences/board certifications in Nevada and Texas had expired in December, 2008. so indicating they were negligent in hiring him knowing that. Perhaps it didn't matter. But something else, I read that CM asked AEG for resuscitation equipment but failed to get it. Surely AEG would have wondered if he was carrying out a risky procedure, and was he competent? Over four years some information may have been forgotten. I don't remember hearing any of that in the civil trial.
    I haven't finished reading all the posts yet so I don't know if you got reply to your questions.
    This bit is from CM vs People trial
    "K Jorrie had a conversation on Jun 18th with CM about medical equipment needed to be included as a provision in the contract. KJ wanted to know why he needed this equipment including a CPR machine. CM said when MJ was performing at the O2 arena he was going to be performing extraordinary things. Also considering his age, CM wanted the machine. KJ asked wouldn't this be at the arena? CM told her he didn't want to take any chances. KJ was worried MJ might have a heart problem or was unhealthy. CM assured her he was healthy. CM told KJ three times that MJ was in perfect health."

    CM asked CPR machine to UK and it was approved, so it would have been in place in UK. I hope above answers to your question.
    About CM med licences,
    This is what Nevada Medical Board web site says:
    Issue Date: 8/17/1999 Expiration Date: 6/30/2011
    http://medboard.nv.gov/Verification/...cense_id=7323&

    This what Texas Medical board web site says:
    Expiration Date of Physician’s Registration Permit: 08/31/2012
    http://reg.tmb.state.tx.us/OnLineVer...sePermit=M0502

    This is what California med board web site says:
    Expiration Date: February 28, 2011
    http://www2.mbc.ca.gov/LicenseLookup...seNumber=71169

    If I remember right, K Jorrie did check his med licences?
    Check her testimony from
    http://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/th...timony-Summary
    Last edited by Bubs; 06-10-2013 at 09:48 AM.

  22. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Bubs For This Useful Post:


  23. #1049
    Points: 32,067, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 8.0%
    Achievements:
    OverdriveThree FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,856
    Points
    32,067
    Level
    100
    Thanks
    17,502
    Thanked 16,213 Times in 4,830 Posts

    Default Re: Verdict Reached: AEG NOT Liable - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

    Quote Originally Posted by Petrarose View Post
    Yeah that is the thing about these bills. Both Katherine and AEG attorneys can use the bills as a business expense, which helps reduce your tax liability to the IRS. Then, if Katherine has any fees to pay to Boyle, her personal attorney, I am sure if she does not have enough from her allowance the estate will have to pay it. In no way would they leave her with a big debt, since it would not look good, & Michael gave very unspecific directives for taking care of Katherine. Randy and Oxman will run around saying the estate is making billions and Michael's mom has no money to pay her bills. I get the feeling that since 09 when Katherine got those lawyers to go to court about the will, she has cost the estate millions of dollars.

    What I don't understand is this Boyle situation. He is Katherine's personal attorney and is paid for that, so when he goes to court with Panish he is now acting as her attorney as part of her AEG defense? How does he divide up his payment for the different roles? Is someone clocking in what role Boyle is serving at a particular time, so that he does not try to get money from the estate for being in court for the AEG case? Is Boyle on retainer or just being paid when he does something? The next accounting is going to be a revelation indeed.
    We will know soon enough who is going to pay KJ bills, and I certainly have my fingers grossed that the estate doesn't have to pay.

    Boyle is partner of Panish's company and not KJ personal attorney? Perry Sanders and Sandra Ribeira are KJ's attorney's and other attorney's are releated to this case. I could see that Perry and Sandra would send billing to KJ, and KJ sends it to the bottomless money bit of MJ's estate.

  24. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Bubs For This Useful Post:


  25. #1050
    Points: 13,841, Level: 76
    Level completed: 48%, Points required for next Level: 209
    Overall activity: 7.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    1,760
    Points
    13,841
    Level
    76
    Thanks
    1,129
    Thanked 2,314 Times in 525 Posts

    Default Re: Verdict Reached: AEG NOT Liable - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

    Quote Originally Posted by bluetopez View Post
    An MJ recommendation Yes, that AEG accepted and then hired Murray! Despite the ridiculous amount of money he asked for which should have sent red flags! So what can I say!? But the same thing I already posted!
    Okay!
    "Of all the thousands of entertainers I have worked with, Michael was THE most outstanding. Many have tried and will try to copy him, but his talent will never be matched." Dick Clark

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •