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 7 of 114 FirstFirst ... 567891757107 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 1699

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

   
  1. #91
    Points: 11,950, Level: 71
    Level completed: 75%, Points required for next Level: 100
    Overall activity: 3.0%
    Achievements:
    Three Friends1 year registered10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    4,245
    Points
    11,950
    Level
    71
    Thanks
    297
    Thanked 4,094 Times in 1,111 Posts

    Default Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

    Quote Originally Posted by jaydom7 View Post
    The fact that AEG saw MJ deteriorating in 60 days and did nothing is actually shocking to me..
    And when they became concerned, I "thought" they held a meeting wherein Michael said "I know you're worried, but I'M FINE." And then Michael's personal physician tells them to basically "mind their own business."

    What would YOU have done, if you were part of that meeting?

    Don't get me wrong, I can see how this would go down if Michael was a minor and needed an adult to guide his every move, but he was a 50-year old man, with 3 children.

  2. #92
    Points: 8,858, Level: 63
    Level completed: 36%, Points required for next Level: 192
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    4,246
    Points
    8,858
    Level
    63
    Thanks
    3,263
    Thanked 2,565 Times in 923 Posts

    Default Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

    Quote Originally Posted by Justthefacts View Post
    pulling out the old race car to make a point huh?

    just asking... big white corporation practically allowing the biggest black entertainer of all time to attempt to perform to bring them money knowing good and well he wasn't ready.. a lot of racial undertones to be looked at..

  3. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to jaydom7 For This Useful Post:


  4. #93
    Points: 8,858, Level: 63
    Level completed: 36%, Points required for next Level: 192
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    4,246
    Points
    8,858
    Level
    63
    Thanks
    3,263
    Thanked 2,565 Times in 923 Posts

    Default Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

    Quote Originally Posted by Big Apple2 View Post
    And when they became concerned, I "thought" they held a meeting wherein Michael said "I know you're worried, but I'M FINE." And then Michael's personal physician tells them to basically "mind their own business."

    What would YOU have done, if you were part of that meeting?

    Don't get me wrong, I can see how this would go down if Michael was a minor and needed an adult to guide his every move, but he was a 50-year old man, with 3 children.
    Big Apple,

    I would have told MJ the truth meaning you don't look healthy or good and that Doctor is not helping you. We can't go on until you get a second opinion or get yourself together.

  5. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to jaydom7 For This Useful Post:


  6. #94
    Points: 20,697, Level: 90
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 153
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Three Friends10000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Appalachians in the U.S.
    Posts
    9,147
    Points
    20,697
    Level
    90
    Thanks
    954
    Thanked 2,312 Times in 612 Posts

    Default Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

    I’ll give this a try, but with the disclaimer that I haven’t been following this trial nearly as intensively as I’ve followed other Michael-related court cases. I’m just sorry this trial ever happened. I don’t particularly care at this point who “wins.” I just want Michael to be left in peace.


    First, a little bit about the American legal system. “A jury of one’s peers” doesn’t mean that jury selection is terribly specific, in terms of educational background, race, religion, ethnicity, etc. Basically it means the jury is not comprised of lawyers and other legal experts. Sometimes it’s possible to opt out of jury duty if it represents a “hardship.” That might include professional people whose interests would suffer if they spent time on juries, and for other reasons. (Juries sometimes are top-heavy with retired people, who have the time to spend.) A jury will not usually have any specific knowledge of the law, other than what’s said in court. There is no way to know what a jury’s collective critical thinking skills might be. (there are those on this board with a high level of critical thinking skills, but we can't assume that the jury will be comprised of people of the same level.) Although they are supposed to focus on the law, EMOTION clearly plays a part in any judgments. That component would be very hard to predict. I think juries tend to rely heavily on common-sense, and not so much on the minutia presented in court by attorneys.


    If I have any opinion at all about the verdict, I’m leaning toward hoping for a win for the Jacksons. Not because they particularly deserve to be supported by Michael for the rest of their lives, but because if they get a substantial settlement, maybe they will finally leave Michael’s children alone as a money-making conduit for Michael’s estate?

    Question No. 1
    Did AEG Live hire Murray?


    Yes. I’m pretty sure this will be a “yes.” The law does not require a contract for every instance of “hiring,” and oral agreements are very possible. In a personal sense, I work as a consultant (professional editing) and in fifteen years have never required a contract. I do the work, and on the honor system expect periodic payment. This works well. The Murray contract shows intention to formalize what was already occurring, i.e. Murray’s “work.” The emails confirm a relationship between AEG and Murray, if not an actual contract. I think he was "co-hired" by Michael and AEG, so AEG was in that mix as an employer.

    Question No. 2
    Was Murray unfit or incompetent to perform the work for which he was hired?



    Yes. To me, key here is “the work for which he was hired.” I assume that in a general sense, that was to provide medical care for Michael. He did that. He killed him. This may seem far too simple, but it’s not impossible that the jury will give a lot of weight to this particular fact. Murray killed Michael.

    Question No. 3
    Did AEG Live know or should it have known that Murray was unfit or incompetent and that this unfitness or incompetence created a particular risk to others?



    This one is more difficult, and I’m not sure what I’d answer if I were on the jury. A Google search is NOT a background check. A human life was at stake, and a lot of money. Common sense might lead the jury to think that a thorough background check should have been done by AEG. Even baby-sitters may have background checks done on them! Murray had one arrest for domestic abuse. He had at least one instance where he was reprimanded for “patient abandonment” where he was unable to be reached after performing a heart procedure on a patient. His office staff were volunteers, and apparently not being paid. His home was in foreclosure, and he was in arrears on child-support. While none of these things may directly apply to Michael, they paint a picture of someone who is LESS than responsible. This question could probably go either way.

    Question No. 4
    Did Murray's unfitness or incompetence harm Michael Jackson and the Jackson plaintiffs?



    Yes. Michael died. Murray was doing medical procedures he was not qualified to do. To me, that indicates that as a doctor, he was incompetent because he should have known the risk, and yet he did it anyway. For this one, I’d think that AEG would not have had to have any specific knowledge that Murray was administering propofol. But this is a common-sense opinion, and I’m not really sure what the jury will do with it.

    Question No. 5
    Was AEG Live's negligence in hiring, supervising or retaining Murray a substantial factor in causing Michael Jackson and the Jackson plaintiffs' harm?



    Not sure about this one, either. It remains unclear to me what, exactly, AEG’s supervising role actually was. The emails may come into play here, that AEG DID have a major hand in supervising. This one depends on the jury’s interpretation.

    Questions No. 14-16
    The amount of damages calculated by the jury could be significantly reduced when they reach the last three questions on their verdict form. These ask them to decide how much, if any, Michael Jackson's own negligence was a factor in his death.



    I would think that if the jury gets this far, the damages could be significant. This one could go either way, but I doubt it would be even close to what is being asked for. There are too many unknowns. We do know that Michael supported his mother, but to what extent in the future that would have happened, and even how long Michael would have lived and what income he would have earned, remains speculation.
    Last edited by Autumn II; 27-09-2013 at 06:24 PM.

  7. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Autumn II For This Useful Post:


  8. #95
    Points: 11,950, Level: 71
    Level completed: 75%, Points required for next Level: 100
    Overall activity: 3.0%
    Achievements:
    Three Friends1 year registered10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    4,245
    Points
    11,950
    Level
    71
    Thanks
    297
    Thanked 4,094 Times in 1,111 Posts

    Default Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

    Quote Originally Posted by jaydom7 View Post
    Big Apple,

    I would have told MJ the truth meaning you don't look healthy or good and that Doctor is not helping you. We can't go on until you get a second opinion or get yourself together.
    And you would "most likely" have been KICK TO THE CURB, while Murray was kept on.

    But at least, unlike a bunch of folks that surrounded Michael, i.e. Karen etc., you would have been able to say "I told him something was wrong, but he wouldn't listen."

    ETA: I don't believe you can force an adult to get a second opinion. That would be up to them and them alone.

  9. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Big Apple2 For This Useful Post:


  10. #96
    Points: 5,910, Level: 49
    Level completed: 80%, Points required for next Level: 40
    Overall activity: 24.0%
    Achievements:
    1 year registered5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,992
    Points
    5,910
    Level
    49
    Thanks
    1,827
    Thanked 4,420 Times in 1,248 Posts

    Default Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

    Quote Originally Posted by jaydom7 View Post
    Big Apple,

    I would have told MJ the truth meaning you don't look healthy or good and that Doctor is not helping you. We can't go on until you get a second opinion or get yourself together.
    Agree. Aeg deny it, but there was a massive conflict of interest at play. Aeg say all parties,interests of mj murray and aeg were all aligned - have a healthy mj to do the tii tour. But the conflict was within that statement - a healthy mj was incompatible with doing the tii tour. Murray of course knew that. He knew mj was only able to get the rest needed to do rehearsals and perfs if he was put in a drug induced coma every night - how cd anyone think that this was in any way acceptable - but he was desperate for the over $1m fee and he cd only get that if mj went on tour.

    Aeg knew mj had been declining and losing weight throughout the rehearsal period, opening night to the most incredibly gruelling and exhausting tour was 2/3wks away and yet there was no question of getting a second opinion, of postponing the shows, of trying to find out what on earth was going wrong with mj. Randy's sole preoccupation was to go ahead with tii, he had no interest in finding out what was wrong with mj and in fact admitted after that meeting with mj/murray in an email that he doubted murray cd do much for mj but he felt it was all too late to bring anyone else in. Instead there was just an operation to neutralise ortega's concerns who's the only guy who comes out with any credit in this whole affair.

  11. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Bonnie Blue For This Useful Post:


  12. #97
    Points: 2,790, Level: 32
    Level completed: 27%, Points required for next Level: 110
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Rocky Mountains
    Posts
    413
    Points
    2,790
    Level
    32
    Thanks
    468
    Thanked 1,458 Times in 330 Posts

    Default Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

    Whenever we have these discussions about responsibility, it seems odd to me that we treat Michael as if he were a child or an adult who was mentally compromised in some way and couldn't make decisions for himself. When he started showing symptoms--what some call "deterioration"--he likely spoke to Murray about WTH was happening & Murray likely said--don't worry, it's just a reaction to the propofol. Otherwise, Michael would have been calling Klein, Metzger or whomever if he wasn't satisfied with Murray's explanation. Michael was no fool.

    There was a LOT going on behind the scenes that we don't know about. I suspect sadly it will be revealed in Murray's book that he's allowed to write (if he hasn't already) due to the absence of any restitution order.

  13. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to crillon For This Useful Post:


  14. #98
    Points: 32,078, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 65.0%
    Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteranOverdrive25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Mesa, Arizona
    Posts
    12,782
    Points
    32,078
    Level
    100
    Thanks
    74
    Thanked 4,674 Times in 2,197 Posts

    Default Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

    We can all sit here and say what we WOULD have done... The truth is we don't know how we would react to specific things until we are in the position.. First you don't know how much you would know if you were "them", if you'd be in position to subside him or be pushed out of his life you'd think a little different..

    We can go back and forth about if Michael had addictive personalities but anyone that has dealt with anything like that should know it's much easier said than done.. An addict of any sort first "out" is sympathy and guilt.

    I'm going off a tangent a bit so I'll stop - but we really don't know what it was like. We can only imagine and say what we hope we would have done..


    Plus I would like to add that the fan base at large is also a BIG reason why Michael felt the need to seclude himself, he never knew what normal life was like (not just because he was famous) but the fans did not let him. I don't think we (fans - but no one specific here) point the finger well but never take notice to what fans have caused..
    **He lives forever within us**

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to KOPV For This Useful Post:


  16. #99
    Points: 10,778, Level: 68
    Level completed: 82%, Points required for next Level: 72
    Overall activity: 13.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Slovenia
    Posts
    822
    Points
    10,778
    Level
    68
    Thanks
    152
    Thanked 637 Times in 233 Posts

    Default Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

    Quote Originally Posted by Autumn II View Post
    Questions No. 14-16
    The amount of damages calculated by the jury could be significantly reduced when they reach the last three questions on their verdict form. These ask them to decide how much, if any, Michael Jackson's own negligence was a factor in his death.


    I would think that if the jury gets this far, the damages could be significant. This one could go either way, but I doubt it would be even close to what is being asked for. There are too many unknowns. We do know that Michael supported his mother, but to what extent in the future that would have happened, and even how long Michael would have lived and what income he would have earned, remains speculation.
    What about the projections of how long Katherine would live? Does that play any role in calculating possible damages? Even if we take for granted that Michael would continue to financially support her, surely he would only do it until Katherine passes?
    Got to find a way somehow,
    nothing's gonna stop me now,
    got to find a way somehow,
    even though you're gone.
    Things don't seem as bad as they did
    yesterday,
    every minute I get stronger,
    somehow someway.

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to Billie Jean 78 For This Useful Post:


  18. #100
    Points: 17,093, Level: 83
    Level completed: 49%, Points required for next Level: 257
    Overall activity: 3.0%
    Achievements:
    Three Friends10000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,227
    Points
    17,093
    Level
    83
    Thanks
    166
    Thanked 1,258 Times in 458 Posts

    Default Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

    ^ Katherine's life expectancy isn't a factor in that calculation, however in determining how to split the awarded money between Katherine and the children it can become a factor


    Quote Originally Posted by Autumn II View Post
    Question No. 2
    Was Murray unfit or incompetent to perform the work for which he was hired?



    Yes. To me, key here is “the work for which he was hired.” I assume that in a general sense, that was to provide medical care for Michael. He did that. He killed him. This may seem far too simple, but it’s not impossible that the jury will give a lot of weight to this particular fact. Murray killed Michael.

    If Murray was hired for general medical care, him causing manslaughter of MJ wouldn't make him unfit or incompetent for performing the work for which he was hired.
    However I think, like you, some jurors also might not know these legal terms here:
    "unfit" means Murray was not skilled for the particular work he was hired (eg technical knowledge)
    "incompetent" means Murray was missing a legal prerequisite for the particular work he was hired (a qualification)

    Moral or ethical concerns (eg financial situation) are irrelevant for those terms.
    Legally, he was fit and competent to provide general medical care (he was not for the propofol infusion).

    That's a sore spot for Panish because he knows too well, there's no law that requires anyone to do a background check. Doing a background check is a wise thing for many businesses but it's nothing the law dictates you to do.
    Last edited by Korgnex; 27-09-2013 at 05:36 PM.

  19. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Korgnex For This Useful Post:


  20. #101
    Points: 8,858, Level: 63
    Level completed: 36%, Points required for next Level: 192
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    4,246
    Points
    8,858
    Level
    63
    Thanks
    3,263
    Thanked 2,565 Times in 923 Posts

    Default Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

    what time is deliberations today?

  21. #102
    Points: 9,572, Level: 65
    Level completed: 74%, Points required for next Level: 78
    Overall activity: 6.0%
    Achievements:
    Three Friends1 year registered5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    4,465
    Points
    9,572
    Level
    65
    Thanks
    222
    Thanked 508 Times in 182 Posts

    Default Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

    I'm wondering if there's someone taking care if the damages for the children are considered higher than those for Katherine... that the money really goes to the children.
    Is that for Katherine to decide or is there a possibility for the guardian ad litem... or even the estate to step in just to make sure such money really goes to the children like into a trust or something?

    I mean if there is any payment ever cuz there's the possibilities for appeals for years... what happens if Katherine Jackson would not live anymore when this finally will be decided?
    Listen!
    Listen most carefully to ppl who are talking bad about others!
    You'll hear them saying most important things about themselves!
    Think!
    Think before you talk! What do you want to say and how you want to say it.
    It will tell the most about yourself!

  22. #103
    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
    7,859
    Points
    32,067
    Level
    100
    Thanks
    17,536
    Thanked 16,232 Times in 4,840 Posts

    Default Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

    Quote Originally Posted by jaydom7 View Post
    just asking... big white corporation practically allowing the biggest black entertainer of all time to attempt to perform to bring them money knowing good and well he wasn't ready.. a lot of racial undertones to be looked at..
    Geez Jaydom:smilerolleyes:
    Seriously lay off that sort of insinuations. Big white corporation! Seriously Jaydom?
    Do you have any idea how you made yourself to look by airing such an statement?

    If Michael wasn't ready, as an 50 year old man with family, he was cabable saying no.
    He was asked to do concert was it in 2007 or 2008 but he was then cabable saying no, I'm not ready, so why wouldn't he be cabable saying it in 2009.
    Last edited by Bubs; 27-09-2013 at 05:51 PM.

  23. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Bubs For This Useful Post:


  24. #104
    Points: 8,858, Level: 63
    Level completed: 36%, Points required for next Level: 192
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    4,246
    Points
    8,858
    Level
    63
    Thanks
    3,263
    Thanked 2,565 Times in 923 Posts

    Default Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

    Quote Originally Posted by Bubs View Post
    Geez Jaydom:smilerolleyes:
    Seriously lay that sort of insinuations. Big white corporation! Seriously Jaydom?
    Do you have any idea how you made yourself to look by airing such an statement?

    If Michael wasn't ready, as an 50 year old man with family, he was cabable saying no.
    He was asked to do concert was it in 2007 or 2008 but he was then cabable saying no, I'm not ready, so why wouldn't he be cabable saying it in 2009.


    just giving facts..

  25. #105
    Points: 763, Level: 14
    Level completed: 63%, Points required for next Level: 37
    Overall activity: 9.0%
    Achievements:
    3 months registered500 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    25
    Points
    763
    Level
    14
    Thanks
    60
    Thanked 19 Times in 9 Posts

    Default Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

    Quote Originally Posted by Justthefacts View Post
    pulling out the old race car to make a point huh?
    what does this mean?

Tags for this Thread

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
  •