Page 21 of 38 FirstFirst ... 11192021222331 ... LastLast
Results 301 to 315 of 559

Thread: KJ vs AEG Trial outcome : Possible Appeal [closed]

   
  1. #301
    Points: 13,345, Level: 75
    Level completed: 24%, Points required for next Level: 305
    Overall activity: 33.0%
    Achievements:
    Tagger Second ClassThree FriendsVeteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    3,246
    Points
    13,345
    Level
    75
    Thanks
    5,925
    Thanked 3,874 Times in 1,384 Posts

    Default Re: KJ vs AEG Trial outcome : Appeal

    Quote Originally Posted by Mneme View Post
    Because Mrs. Jackson visited her son 10 days before his dead and she said in an interview that on this day he was glad, happy, good looking and he was joking to her.... She said in this interview too this was the last time she saw her son and that she want Michael in her memory how she saw him at this day.
    Fair enough but why then blame AEG for not being aware, we are only talking about 10 days, that what I don't understand.

    But actually the question was 'why didn't the siblings go, given that have have stated that they knew of a problem, so nothing was actually mentioned about Katherine.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to LastTear For This Useful Post:


  3. #302
    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: KJ vs AEG Trial outcome : Appeal

    Quote Originally Posted by LastTear View Post
    Fair enough but why then blame AEG for not being aware, we are only talking about 10 days, that what I don't understand.

    But actually the question was 'why didn't the siblings go, given that have have stated that they knew of a problem, so nothing was actually mentioned about Katherine.

    Exactly... as soon as MJ announced the shows, Janet. Randy, and Rebbie should've went to AEG and said our brother has a problem. He is not well enough to do these shows, His health and well being is important to us, please help him or stop the shows. According to Janet's interview with Oprah in 2010, she saw MJ in May 2009 at the party for her parents that she threw for them and she agreed with Oprah that MJ was very thin back then and she offered to say he had a problem and we all knew it. So why not do an intervention at the May 2009 party with all the family members there?

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to jaydom7 For This Useful Post:


  5. #303
    Points: 13,345, Level: 75
    Level completed: 24%, Points required for next Level: 305
    Overall activity: 33.0%
    Achievements:
    Tagger Second ClassThree FriendsVeteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    3,246
    Points
    13,345
    Level
    75
    Thanks
    5,925
    Thanked 3,874 Times in 1,384 Posts

    Default Re: KJ vs AEG Trial outcome : Appeal

    Quote Originally Posted by jaydom7 View Post
    Exactly... as soon as MJ announced the shows, Janet. Randy, and Rebbie should've went to AEG and said our brother has a problem. He is not well enough to do these shows, His health and well being is important to us, please help him or stop the shows. According to Janet's interview with Oprah in 2010, she saw MJ in May 2009 at the party for her parents that she threw for them and she agreed with Oprah that MJ was very thin back then and she offered to say he had a problem and we all knew it. So why not do an intervention at the May 2009 party with all the family members there?
    Honestly? The reason being IMO is that they would have kissed goodbye the possibility of doing some shows with Michael. I don't blame the family for Michaels death, I don't blame Katherine but what I have issue with is when they state that others should have done what they did not. People in glass houses etc. That is what I take issue with.

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


  7. #304
    Points: 152,225, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 19.0%
    Achievements:
    Three FriendsOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    16,078
    Points
    152,225
    Level
    100
    Thanks
    423
    Thanked 34,440 Times in 7,257 Posts

    Default Re: KJ vs AEG Trial outcome : Appeal

    Quote Originally Posted by jaydom7 View Post
    Exactly... as soon as MJ announced the shows, Janet. Randy, and Rebbie should've went to AEG and said our brother has a problem. He is not well enough to do these shows, His health and well being is important to us, please help him or stop the shows. According to Janet's interview with Oprah in 2010, she saw MJ in May 2009 at the party for her parents that she threw for them and she agreed with Oprah that MJ was very thin back then and she offered to say he had a problem and we all knew it. So why not do an intervention at the May 2009 party with all the family members there?
    you always say/ask the same thing. Don't you know the answer by now? It's obvious no one had the balls to face Michael. They ignored some topics, did not raise concerns and perhaps Michael wouldn't be willing to listen to others as well. And blaming others is a good way to not feel guilt.
    Twitter : Ivy_4MJ

  8. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ivy For This Useful Post:


  9. #305
    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: KJ vs AEG Trial outcome : Appeal

    Quote Originally Posted by LastTear View Post
    Honestly? The reason being IMO is that they would have kissed goodbye the possibility of doing some shows with Michael. I don't blame the family for Michaels death, I don't blame Katherine but what I have issue with is when they state that others should have done what they did not. People in glass houses etc. That is what I take issue with.

    I agree.. they are blaming AEG for not watching or caring about MJ's health, when they obviously didn't care either. Same with Debbie Rowe blaming the singers, dancers and back up team of TII for not intervening when she herself sat and watched MJ being given dangerous drugs by medical doctors and she did nothing to stop it herself.

  10. #306
    Points: 3,211, Level: 35
    Level completed: 8%, Points required for next Level: 139
    Overall activity: 1.0%
    Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Mneme's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Berlin (Germany)
    Posts
    387
    Points
    3,211
    Level
    35
    Thanks
    1,866
    Thanked 609 Times in 189 Posts

    Default Re: KJ vs AEG Trial outcome : Appeal

    Quote Originally Posted by LastTear View Post
    But actually the question was 'why didn't the siblings go, given that have have stated that they knew of a problem, so nothing was actually mentioned about Katherine.
    I know that, LastTear, but sometimes I think other peoples are thinking 'round the corner' like myself.

    What I meant was: If Mrs. Jackson had this positive impression 10 days before Michael's dead perhaps she may have told her sons/daughters about her visit.
    Think about that in this time the family members came together often because the AllGood problem was not solved and erverybody in this family was always interesting in Michael's matters and specially in his matters with AEG/TII.
    If I remember right, Frank DiLeo said he had a very good connection to Mrs. Jackson in this time; he sent a copy of the terminating from Leonard Rowe to Mrs.Jackson for her information.

    Therefore I think the siblings had no reason for an intervention neither with AEG nor with Michael.

  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Mneme For This Useful Post:


  12. #307
    Points: 13,345, Level: 75
    Level completed: 24%, Points required for next Level: 305
    Overall activity: 33.0%
    Achievements:
    Tagger Second ClassThree FriendsVeteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    3,246
    Points
    13,345
    Level
    75
    Thanks
    5,925
    Thanked 3,874 Times in 1,384 Posts

    Default Re: KJ vs AEG Trial outcome : Appeal

    Quote Originally Posted by Mneme View Post
    I know that, LastTear, but sometimes I think other peoples are thinking 'round the corner' like myself.

    What I meant was: If Mrs. Jackson had this positive impression 10 days before Michael's dead perhaps she may have told her sons/daughters about her visit.
    Think about that in this time the family members came together often because the AllGood problem was not solved and erverybody in this family was always interesting in Michael's matters and specially in his matters with AEG/TII.
    If I remember right, Frank DiLeo said he had a very good connection to Mrs. Jackson in this time; he sent a copy of the terminating from Leonard Rowe to Mrs.Jackson for her information.

    Therefore I think the siblings had no reason for an intervention neither with AEG nor with Michael.
    Ok I'm with you. The point remains that the family blame AEG when in fact why should AEG see something that his own family didn't.

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to LastTear For This Useful Post:


  14. #308
    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
    1,410
    Thanked 1,274 Times in 703 Posts

    Default Re: KJ vs AEG Trial outcome : Appeal

    If I may:

    IMO The plaintiffs have a strong argument. Additional duties given to the doctor by his employer speaks to supervision. The jurors did not deliberate on negligent supervision or retention. The jurors only deliberated three days and decided the doctor was hired but, not negligently without reviewing evidence. The seven affidavits prove the decision was based on what was heard during trial, NOT an actual review of five months of evidence. That confirms what the four other affidavits stated.

    AEG’s original response should have been more technical. Instead it confuses the “or” operator between these three separate claims for their benefit. The original response uses the tactic they used effectively during trial: give enough of a story to benefit them and leave the receiver of the story to generate their own ending; the more negative against their opponent the better.

    AEG seems to have forgotten these last two claims were NOT discussed by the jurors as per the seven affidavits THEY submitted. Jurors stopped at question two which was negligent hiring so they did NOT discuss supervision OR retention as a “no” answer caused deliberations to end. These affidavits stating jurors would say “no” to question three is seven jurors basically predicting they would rule in favor of the defense without stating any evidence that would be used to support that negative response as no evidence was reviewed as per their own affidavits.

    Based on Ivy’s summary of their second reply, yes, they are more technical however, the logic is absent. If the jurors could not make a decision on question two, they were not allowed to skip it and give a favorable verdict to AEG on question three. AEG cannot explain why two claims (supervision and retention) were ignore so they choose to ignore it as well and focus on affidavits (which actually put the defense at a disadvantage), the timing of the filings, and the verdict form wording that they already argued in the original response.

    The judge ruling in favor of the plaintiffs would be an admission of an error in judgment. Not many people in general will admit they are wrong. She may rule for the defense simply for that reason only. If she does, I do not believe an appeal court will have an issue with stating there were some legal errors made during this trial.

  15. #309
    Points: 13,345, Level: 75
    Level completed: 24%, Points required for next Level: 305
    Overall activity: 33.0%
    Achievements:
    Tagger Second ClassThree FriendsVeteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    3,246
    Points
    13,345
    Level
    75
    Thanks
    5,925
    Thanked 3,874 Times in 1,384 Posts

    Default Re: KJ vs AEG Trial outcome : Appeal

    The judge ruling in favor of the plaintiffs would be an admission of an error in judgment. Not many people in general will admit they are wrong. She may rule for the defense simply for that reason only. If she does, I do not believe an appeal court will have an issue with stating there were some legal errors made during this trial.
    I have no idea which way this will go, however there would also be another possibility if the Judge rules for the defence, by law it could be the right action to take. I cannot say one way or another because I don't fully understand the legalities of jury instructions. But if someone disagrees with her decision doesn't mean she is corrupt.

  16. #310
    elusive moonwalker
    Guest

    Default Re: KJ vs AEG Trial outcome : Appeal

    The family was clueless about his insomnia clueless about any problems mj had with the whole deal. they like to push the "tight nit" mantra and we tried to help inorder to make themselves look good. god forbid they ever admit they were clueless about mj and his life because he kept his distance because they only came to him to hassle him for reunion shows or to create biz deals were mj would end up being sued.

    all the family cared about was getting in on the shows and cashing in. you had the allgood mess and the nasty little articles attacking mj thanks to joe and his allgood buddies you had tito running to the press saying how good it would if mj let the bros perform with him during some of the shows.

    the jacksons like to throw stones to hide their hands. when in the end they just make themselves look like hypocrites and in the process are prepared to throw mj under the bus with lies and b.s to get what they want.

  17. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to elusive moonwalker For This Useful Post:


  18. #311
    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 931 Times in 113 Posts

    Default Re: KJ vs AEG Trial outcome : Appeal

    To whom it may concern:

    I am aware that there are claims being made about my posts here immediately after the verdict where I said that we focused primarily on the time of hiring when considering how to answer question 2, and that these posts supposedly stand in contrast to my sworn affidavit where I said that we considered both the time of hiring and the period thereafter in reaching our verdict.

    This is only a contradiction if one were to conveniently ignore my posts where I specifically stated that we ALSO considered the period after the hire of Conrad Murray in our deliberations:

    Example 1

    Quote Originally Posted by Juror#27 on Oct. 6, 2013
    You bring up good points, and we did consider Murray's competence over the entire period and whether what AEG saw was enough to conclude that he was not fit. We felt that based on what they saw and were communicated, there was not enough to say that they should have known CM was breaking his sworn duty to do no harm.
    Example 2

    Quote Originally Posted by Juror#27 on Oct. 7, 2013
    To answer your question, it was not an either/or, we looked at both the time of hiring and the 2 month period of 'deterioration', but we felt that the most pertinent part was the time of hire.

    We discussed what Murray was hired to do. We discussed whether he was fit and competent to do that work. And we discussed MJ's alleged deterioration and whether the time after Murray was hired showed him to be incompetent or unfit. We talked about all of that.

    This characterization of our deliberations as being somehow limited to this very specific area of "time of hire" is simply untrue. That is where most of our time was spent on that question, but it was not to the exclusion of considering MJ's 'deterioration' or the time period after Murray's hire. That was also considered.

  19. The Following 22 Users Say Thank You to Juror#27 For This Useful Post:


  20. #312
    Points: 152,225, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 19.0%
    Achievements:
    Three FriendsOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    16,078
    Points
    152,225
    Level
    100
    Thanks
    423
    Thanked 34,440 Times in 7,257 Posts

    Default Re: KJ vs AEG Trial outcome : Appeal

    Katherine Jackson seeks new trial in AEG wrongful death case

    By Jeff Gottlieb
    January 3, 2014, 8:09 a.m.

    Katherine Jackson is heading back to court Friday to ask a judge for a new trial in the family's wrongful-death case against AEG Live, which previously ended with jurors finding the concert promoter not liable for her son Michael Jackson's overdose death.

    Her motion came after four jurors gave sworn statements that they found the verdict form confusing.

    The 12 jurors had to answer yes to five questions in order to find AEG liable.

    Jurors agreed that AEG Live had hired Dr. Conrad Murray, who administered the fatal dose of the anesthetic propofol to Jackson.

    But they rejected the second question, which asked whether Murray was unfit or incompetent, ending deliberations.

    The Jacksons’ attorneys argue that the verdict form only allowed jurors to focus on Murray’s fitness when he was hired, not “during the course of the relationship” with the pop star.

    MICHAEL JACKSON: Complete trial coverage

    “There is no question in my mind that AEG Live was liable,” one juror said in a declaration filed with the motion.

    Another juror said, “I believed that Mrs. Jackson had proven her case against AEG Live. Despite this fact, I had no way of voting in favor of the plaintiffs because of the way the verdict form was worded.”

    A third juror wrote that “some of the jurors were stunned and upset after learning that we had to stop deliberations after answering 'no' to Question 2.”

    After the verdict, the jury foreman told reporters that panel members were somewhat confused by the question about Murray’s competence but understood its ramifications.

    "We felt he was competent," Gregg Barden said.

    "That doesn't mean we felt he was ethical. If ethical was in the question, it might have been a different outcome," the foreman said.

    In a statement to The Times after the motion was filed last month, AEG attorney Marvin Putnam called it "an act of pure desperation."

    "Katherine Jackson just can’t accept that her son is gone and that there is no one left that she can blame, well, aside from Dr. Murray, obviously," Putnam said. "The evidence at trial and the verdict told her just that. This long trial showed us — and her — that Michael Jackson had abused and demanded propofol, the drug that killed him, for decades."

    The Jacksons argued during the five-month trial that AEG Live negligently hired and supervised Murray.

    AEG said that Murray worked for Jackson and that any money the company was supposed to pay the doctor was an advance to the singer.

    Putnam also noted that the juror affidavits were not admissable under California law. And even if they were, he said only two of the four jurors indicated they would have changed their answers on the forms -- not enough to change the outcome of the verdict.



    http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/l...#ixzz2pMAgVVsF
    Twitter : Ivy_4MJ

  21. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ivy For This Useful Post:


  22. #313
    Points: 152,225, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 19.0%
    Achievements:
    Three FriendsOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    16,078
    Points
    152,225
    Level
    100
    Thanks
    423
    Thanked 34,440 Times in 7,257 Posts

    Default Re: KJ vs AEG Trial outcome : Appeal

    Attorneys For Katherine Jackson To Seek New Trial In Suit Against AEG
    January 3, 2014 6:58 AM

    LOS ANGELES (CBSLA.com) — Attorneys for Katherine Jackson Friday are expected to seek a new trial for her wrongful death lawsuit against AEG Live in the death of her son, Michael Jackson.

    Jackson’s attorneys claim the jury instructions and verdict form were misleading during the trial, prompting jurors to clear AEG of wrongdoing back in October.
    They argue that once the panel found that Dr. Conrad Murray was fit and competent to be Michael Jackson’s doctor when he was hired, it prevented the jury from deliberating AEG Live’s actions in supervising and retaining Murray.

    KNX1070 legal analyst Steve Meister says Jackson’s lawyers would have to have a specific argument that the court did something wrong to taint the outcome that unfairly resulted in a bad verdict.

    “That’s what they have to show,” explains Meister. “If they don’t show that, they don’t get a second bite at the apple just because they wish the outcome had been different.”

    In their filing, AEG Live lawyers argue that Jackson’s attorneys never challenged the instructions when they were originally being discussed.

    http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2014/...t-against-aeg/
    Twitter : Ivy_4MJ

  23. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to ivy For This Useful Post:


  24. #314
    Points: 152,225, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 19.0%
    Achievements:
    Three FriendsOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    16,078
    Points
    152,225
    Level
    100
    Thanks
    423
    Thanked 34,440 Times in 7,257 Posts

    Default Re: KJ vs AEG Trial outcome : Appeal

    Margaret Carrero @MargaretCarrero
    Judge tentatively DENIES request by Katherine #Jackson lawyers for a new trial against #AEGLive, but both sides are being heard. @KNX1070
    Twitter : Ivy_4MJ

  25. The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to ivy For This Useful Post:


  26. #315
    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: KJ vs AEG Trial outcome : Appeal

    Quote Originally Posted by ivy View Post
    Margaret Carrero @MargaretCarrero
    Judge tentatively DENIES request by Katherine #Jackson lawyers for a new trial against #AEGLive, but both sides are being heard. @KNX1070

    Good.. I hope it is permanently denied

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


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
  •