Katherine & MJ's kids sue AEG / Trial date April 2, 2013

[elusive moonwalker]

Re: Katherine & MJ's kids sue AEG / Trial date set Sept. 10, 2012

Yeah i think thats the pic. only seen it once but it looks familiar. So it wasnt 07 then. strange they would say that on f.b that it was. have to go have a look for the pic on f.b to see if it is the same one

 

[jaydom7]

Re: Katherine & MJ's kids sue AEG / Trial date set Sept. 10, 2012

Did Mike's family even know about lupus? Just listening to them I think they doubted any of MJ's issues. Listening to Katherine on Oprah she sounded hesitant to me when it came to the vitiligo saying 'she doesn't know what he did' or some comment like that. Maybe the trial taught them more as well. I know one thing it will be very interesting to hear their depositions

 

[Big Apple2]

Re: Katherine & MJ's kids sue AEG / Trial date set Sept. 10, 2012

Well tomorrow is April 24th - Hearing Day.

I wonder if Mrs. Jackson was ever deposed. Her attorney said she would be deposed BEFORE the April 24th hearing date.

They were also trying to set up dates for Janet and Jermaine to be deposed. I have a feeling that both of them will TRY and stall just like their mother. If Tito was asked about "missed alimony payments," I can only imagine what type of questions Jermaine will be asked. YIKES!

 

[Bubs]

I found this post about MJ' being at Neverland 2007
On his birthday in 2007, Michael Jackson flew legendary street ball player Hot Sauce to Neverland Ranch to meet his nephews and two of his children, Prince and Paris. Following is Hot Sauce’s memory of what he described as the most inspirational moment of his life.
“His nephews requested to see me. That was a shock in itself because they could have gotten any celebrity they wanted and they chose me. He flew me in on his birthday. When we pulled up he was waiting at the door. I was in awe, at first I thought he was a statue. Once I went inside the house, I could hear tourists telling me to open the door so they could see inside. I met his children and nephews and we went to the zoo on the premises in golf carts.
Once we returned to the house we had dinner. We sang happy birthday and ate so much food. He kept asking me did I get enough and did I want more. I could barely eat because I was still in shock that I was even there. He made sure everyone was full. After dinner we sat at the table and talked. He acted like the average dad and uncle with the children. I was playing around with the basketball with his nephews when he asked me to show him some moves. So I did my boomerang and hurricane handles. Then I asked him to show me some of his moves. He did the air walk/moon walk move and said ‘that’s all I’ma give you.”
The most inspirational moment with him for me was towards the end of the day when he pulled me to the side and said ‘you are an inspiration to the kids. If I flew you out you know you’re special. Don’t let nobody bring you down ,do it the way you want to do it and do it right.’”

http://www.tambriapeeples.com/hot_sauce_remembers_michael_jackson

I got an impression (see bolded part in the text) that it was MJ's birthday?
I thought MJ spent his birthday 2007 with Cascio's and at Cascio's home?

 

[StellaJackson]

I found this post about MJ' being at Neverland 2007
On his birthday in 2007, Michael Jackson flew legendary street ball player Hot Sauce to Neverland Ranch to meet his nephews and two of his children, Prince and Paris. Following is Hot Sauce’s memory of what he described as the most inspirational moment of his life.
“His nephews requested to see me. That was a shock in itself because they could have gotten any celebrity they wanted and they chose me. He flew me in on his birthday. When we pulled up he was waiting at the door. I was in awe, at first I thought he was a statue. Once I went inside the house, I could hear tourists telling me to open the door so they could see inside. I met his children and nephews and we went to the zoo on the premises in golf carts.
Once we returned to the house we had dinner. We sang happy birthday and ate so much food. He kept asking me did I get enough and did I want more. I could barely eat because I was still in shock that I was even there. He made sure everyone was full. After dinner we sat at the table and talked. He acted like the average dad and uncle with the children. I was playing around with the basketball with his nephews when he asked me to show him some moves. So I did my boomerang and hurricane handles. Then I asked him to show me some of his moves. He did the air walk/moon walk move and said ‘that’s all I’ma give you.”
The most inspirational moment with him for me was towards the end of the day when he pulled me to the side and said ‘you are an inspiration to the kids. If I flew you out you know you’re special. Don’t let nobody bring you down ,do it the way you want to do it and do it right.’”

http://www.tambriapeeples.com/hot_sauce_remembers_michael_jackson

I got an impression (see bolded part in the text) that it was MJ's birthday?
I thought MJ spent his birthday 2007 with Cascio's and at Cascio's home?

It's a typo. It was 2000 not 2007.

 

[Victory22]

@ Prometheus77:
And it’s also understandable that Michael was tired of carrying his brothers and didn’t want to be bothered with the constant bickering, demands and lack of creativity they brought to the table. They drove him crazy on the Victory tour and there is absolutely no reason why he should have had to deal with constant pressure from them when they are all grown men and capable of starting businesses of their own to support themselves and their families.

Also Jermaine has said in many interviews that he never attended ANY drug interventions for Michael and MJ was not on drugs.

 

[Bonnie Blue]

^ Yes, i don't get how the jacksons wanting to continue performing with mj is a remotely reasonable request. With thriller mj became a once in a genertation phenomenon, the biggest solo star ever, and the family acted like nothing had changed? He should just stick with the family act he had been in since age 7 and let the family organise his tours with their car-crash organisational skills (see victory)? Selfish doesn't even begin to cover this attitude. And the more i think about that impact statement and the inclusion of how they won't ever be able to perform with mj again, the more i can't shake the feeling that it was a dig.

Re the interventions, jermaine did mention an intervention at neverland in 2001ish in his book, can't remember if he attended. A doctor went too with some members of the family (including latoya on her first visit to neverland) and they found mj fine so the family just left. It was a period when mj did look off his game, so i actually find the story believable. But @prometheas, that 07 anti-drug statement was nothing to do with this incident, it was released, i imagine at mj's insistance, as roger friedman had been writing stories that summer about mj being drugged up and incapicitated, doubtless fed by randy who was in a legal dispute with mj at this time. From june 07 -

Michael Jackson’s siblings — including Janet — and his parents are so worried about the failing pop star that they’ve sent out an emergency 911 call.


Sources tell me that the Jacksons are in the process of contacting Thomas Mesereau, the superstar criminal lawyer who won Jackson an acquittal two years ago in his child molestation trial.


The word from the Jacksons is that they’ve met several times as a family and discussed bringing Mesereau in for an intervention to save Michael.


Mesereau, who did not return calls to this column, is said to be open to finding out what Jackson’s true mental and health status is at this point. If he doesn’t like what he sees, the Jacksons will ask him to do something legal to save their brother’s life.


Jackson, according to insiders, is in perilous health right now. There is talk that his liver is damaged and that he’s been seen vomiting blood, although there’s no confirmation of that.



Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,287309,00.html#ixzz1ssvl8k7y

This was published around the time of the meetings in lasvegas regarding LRowe's plans for a concert tour with all the bros and janet. And as his autopsy showed, mj's liver was just fine.

 

[marebear]

Re: Katherine & MJ's kids sue AEG / Trial date set Sept. 10, 2012

I don't think they ever understood the pain he had to deal with the vitiligo and his lupus. It wasn't until jermaine saw Michael in the hospital during the trial he saw the extent of it. He said that in his book. When people try to make their stupid comments about Michael to me regarding his looks, I always try to explain the vitiligo to them.

I really don't think his family can answer health questions about Michael. They way they answer in tv interviews don't show me much at all. I don't know if they are guessing or hearing it from someone else.

 

[Prometheus77]

Re: Katherine & MJ's kids sue AEG / Trial date set Sept. 10, 2012

^ Yes, i don't get how the jacksons wanting to continue performing with mj is a remotely reasonable request. With thriller mj became a once in a genertation phenomenon, the biggest solo star ever, and the family acted like nothing had changed? He should just stick with the family act he had been in since age 7 and let the family organize his tours with their car-crash organisational skills (see victory)? Selfish doesn't even begin to cover this attitude. And the more i think about that impact statement and the inclusion of how they won't ever be able to perform with mj again, the more i can't shake the feeling that it was a dig.

Yes, apparently you don't get it and feel that the Jacksons are all evil people just for asking. I do get it and seeing that the Jackson 5/Jacksons is the "family business" and them asking to do a couple of shows, doesn't seem unreasonable to me. Especially after 2001, once his deal with Sony was pretty much fullfilled and he was free to do whatever he wanted. All of you are upset because you (maybe rightfully) think that they all were depending on him financially without doing anything. But apparently, they wanted to work, they wanted to tour and in '98 they were close to doing an album together.

I also understand that Michael may have been upset about them asking. But if that was his worst problem, then he was a happy man. I don't view it as such a bad thing (them asking I mean). It's his family, he could have just dealt with it. He could have done that tour on his term, with his people and them joining in or explain once and for all to them why he doesn't want to do it (I mean in the years '85 until '97 I guess it was pretty much obvious to anyone that his solo career was his priority). We don't really know how often they really asked him anyway, so it's not enough for me to hate on them, just for asking him to work together.

Re the interventions, jermaine did mention an intervention at neverland in 2001ish in his book, can't remember if he attended. A doctor went too with some members of the family (including latoya on her first visit to neverland) and they found mj fine so the family just left. It was a period when mj did look off his game, so i actually find the story believable. But @prometheas, that 07 anti-drug statement was nothing to do with this incident, it was released, i imagine at mj's insistance, as roger friedman had been writing stories that summer about mj being drugged up and incapicitated, doubtless fed by randy who was in a legal dispute with mj at this time. From june 07 -

Yes. That's what I'm saying, so the only 'intervention' that ever happened was the one in '01/'02, which Jermaine confirmed and in '07 they said that no intervention ever happenend (and by that they also deny the '01/'02 one, obviously to help Michael and it's also no ones business really). But some people now hold that statement against them, saying that the intervention must have happened after that statement at a time when they also wanted to talk him into doing a reunion tour.

Sorry, but this view "Ooh, the evil Jacksons" is too one sided to me, especially since you can twist and turn everything to match your case. I do think this suit against AEG is bogus, I can understand though how it came to that suit in the first place. Do not forget that Katherine Jackson lost her son.

 

[ivy]

Re: Katherine & MJ's kids sue AEG / Trial date set Sept. 10, 2012

Well tomorrow is April 24th - Hearing Day.

I wonder if Mrs. Jackson was ever deposed. Her attorney said she would be deposed BEFORE the April 24th hearing date.

we will find it out when the hearing order is filed.

Btw -it might take some time for us to get the document. In this court there could be a few day delays before the documents are posted.

 

[8701girl]

Re: Katherine & MJ's kids sue AEG / Trial date set Sept. 10, 2012

I too always kinda felt the family didnt belive michael bout the vitiligo cuz they always this hesitstion when they talk bout it. But like someone here said , it maybe just cuz they dont know the full extent of what michael was going through and they are unsure of it

 

[Acafan]

Re: Katherine & MJ's kids sue AEG / Trial date set Sept. 10, 2012

I have a question (Ivy?), sorry if it's been asked/explained before (if so, please direct me to the appropriate thread).

Why is the Murray restitution bid an either/or with AEG? As in, I keep hearing that the family had the option of pursing Murray (and ensuring his silence by squashing further earnings via TV interviews) OR pursuing AEG? Am I right in assuming that it's an either/or, and if so, why is it like that?

 

[Victory22]

I believe a few of the Jackson’s are evil but most of them are just selfish, greedy and lazy. I think they harbored a lot of jealousy and resentment toward Michael because his career skyrocketed and theirs did not. Their feelings turned into anger toward Michael and he knew it. They tried to guilt him into performing with them by telling him they were the reason why he was a big star and they are still peddling that load of manure. Michael was exploited by both outside leeches and family members. It must have broken his heart to know his family resented him so deeply and viewed him as the family cash cow. He was a son and brother not a darn ATM! AEG and most of the world knows how the Jackson's used Michael.

 

[Bubs]

Re: Katherine & MJ's kids sue AEG / Trial date set Sept. 10, 2012

I have a question (Ivy?), sorry if it's been asked/explained before (if so, please direct me to the appropriate thread).

Why is the Murray restitution bid an either/or with AEG? As in, I keep hearing that the family had the option of pursing Murray (and ensuring his silence by squashing further earnings via TV interviews) OR pursuing AEG? Am I right in assuming that it's an either/or, and if so, why is it like that?

http://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/threads/121001-Murray-won-t-be-asked-to-pay-restitution/page8
post no 109 and 149

 

[Mirabella76]

Re: Katherine & MJ's kids sue AEG / Trial date set Sept. 10, 2012

Where is it confirmed that Michael had lupus? Was it in the autopsy report? I find that very hard to read so don't really want to look.

Chopra used to say it as well. He also sad if a child was exposed to any type of abuse much later he can get lupus.
http://www.people.com/people/package/article/0,,20287787_20288162,00.html

 

[jaydom7]

Re: Katherine & MJ's kids sue AEG / Trial date set Sept. 10, 2012

Victory, I totally agree with you.

The fact that their impact statement wasn't even impactful and it mentioned 'not performing with him again' shows you exactly what Mike meant to them. They didn't care about his health, safety, well being or state of mind. They just wanted to know if he could perform with them.

 

[jaydom7]

Re: Katherine & MJ's kids sue AEG / Trial date set Sept. 10, 2012

I still don't understand why Katherine wouldn't seek the restitution against Murray considering he was convicted so it would've been easy to make sure he didn't profit from his killing MJ. She could've sued AEG as well even though restitution was being sought right?

 

[Big Apple2]

Re: Katherine & MJ's kids sue AEG / Trial date set Sept. 10, 2012

Since today is hearing day, it will be very interesting to know whether or not Mrs. Jackson ever sat down for a deposition. As AEG has repeatedly asked for.

Because if the Judge in this case has to end up COMPELLING her to submit to AEG's deposition, that will not be a good look for her or her lawsuit, in my opinion.

Time will tell. I look forward to all updates in this matter.

 

[walkingonthemoon]

I also don't understand why is only the Jackson family is being blamed for dropping the restitution claim when appearantly the estate and the children's guardian ad litem also agreed with this decision? So if people are mad about it, why aren't you also mad at the estate and the GAL, since they agreed?

From the press release in the other thread: http://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/t...-restitution?p=3583052&viewfull=1#post3583052

LOS ANGELES — Prosecutors will not seek restitution against the doctor convicted of killing Michael Jackson after conferring with the singer’s parents and attorneys for his estate and children.
The request for payments from Conrad Murray was withdrawn Wednesday during a brief court hearing, just days before a judge was scheduled to consider how much the former cardiologist should pay to members of Jackson’s family or his estate.
...
Deputy District Attorney David Walgren told the judge handling the case that he was withdrawing the restitution request after speaking with Jackson’s mother, Katherine, and attorney for his father, Joseph. Walgren also consulted with an attorney for the singer’s estate and a court-appointed attorney representing the interests of Jackson’s three children, a transcript of the proceedings shows.

 

[Bubs]

I also don't understand why is only the Jackson family is being blamed for dropping the restitution claim when appearantly the estate and the children's guardian ad litem also agreed with this decision? So if people are mad about it, why aren't you also mad at the estate and the GAL, since they agreed?

From the press release in the other thread: http://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/t...-restitution?p=3583052&viewfull=1#post3583052

"Deputy District Attorney David Walgren told the judge handling the case that he was withdrawing the restitution request after speaking with Jackson’s mother, Katherine, and attorney for his father, Joseph. Walgren also consulted with an attorney for the singer’s estate and a court-appointed attorney representing the interests of Jackson’s three children, a transcript of the proceedings shows."

This is my take:
David Walgren spoke to Katherine and Joe's attorney, they wanted restitution to be dropped which was done at their request. Then David had to consult = tell to estate and kids GAL Katherine + Joe's atty decision to drop the restitution. Therefore blame is correctly directed at them. I think only beneficiaries can get or drop the restitution, in this case Katherine and kids, and Katherine was acting on behalf of kids.

Also I think even if estate and kids GAL didn't agree with Katherine's decision, they have no say in this matter.

 

[walkingonthemoon]

Re: Katherine & MJ's kids sue AEG / Trial date set Sept. 10, 2012

Also I think even if estate and kids GAL didn't agree with it, they have no say in this matter.

That is exactly what I'm wondering about. I may be wrong about this, but I believe they would have a say, I think the estate is also a "victim" in this case. For example the funeral costs were part of the restitution claim, and those were paid by the estate, why would the family get to decide if they reclaim that from Murray or not? It wouldn't make a lot of sense if the estate had no say in this.

 

[Justthefacts]

Re: Katherine & MJ's kids sue AEG / Trial date set Sept. 10, 2012

No they had no say it was all up to the Jacksons

 

[ivy]

Re: Katherine & MJ's kids sue AEG / Trial date set Sept. 10, 2012

Restitution is to make the family of the victim whole, it's to give you what you lose. Therefore it's not indefinitive. It's limited to your loss - in this case to $102 Million (loss from TII concerts + funeral costs).

Family of the victim is the main determinant of such requests. Although MJ Estate represents Michael , they are not a "victim". Also MJ Estate and Guardian ad Litem's duties are profit oriented. It's a multiple million dollar Estate, they don't really need the money.

 

[Bonnie Blue]

Re: Katherine & MJ's kids sue AEG / Trial date set Sept. 10, 2012

The estate's only role is to make the best use of mj's music legacy and expand and exploit business opportunities on behalf of his beneficiaries, it's not to take revenge against the doctor who killed him. That is the role and responisibility for a grieving family to take. I agree with bubs, it's clearly the family who has taken the decision in this, the estate executors can't be expected to interfere in this.

 

[Big Apple2]

Re: Katherine & MJ's kids sue AEG / Trial date set Sept. 10, 2012

I agree with bubs, it's clearly the family who has taken the decision in this, the estate executors can't be expected to interfere in this.

I also believe that The Estate of Michael Jackson knows what time it is with regarding to the Jackson family and their on-going quest for LARGE sums of money. The Estate has dealt with them long enough to know exactly WHY the family did what they did when they refused to go after The Murderer Murray, i.e it's not about justice for Michael, it's about a big payday from AEG.

 

[walkingonthemoon]

Restitution is to make the family of the victim whole, it's to give you what you lose. Therefore it's not indefinitive. It's limited to your loss - in this case to $102 Million (loss from TII concerts + funeral costs).

TII income would have been Michael's money, not the family's. Funeral was paid by the Estate, not the family. So these would be losses of the Estate. Why would the Estate not have a say in whether they want to recover it?

Family of the victim is the main determinant of such requests. Although MJ Estate represents Michael , they are not a "victim". Also MJ Estate and Guardian ad Litem's duties are profit oriented. It's a multiple million dollar Estate, they don't really need the money.

Ok, so I checked and "lawful representative of a deceased victim" does indeed count as a "victim". Michael's lawful representative would be the Estate, I assume? It just makes no sense to me that their opinion wouldn't matter at all, why would Walgren even consult them about it if they had no say anyway?

http://oag.ca.gov/victimservices/content/faq

Frequently Asked Questions
Who is a victim?

Prior to the passage of Proposition 9, "Victim" was defined under the Penal Code "as the person against whom a crime had been committed." With the passage of Proposition 9, "victim" as used in the California Constitution article I, § 28 is defined as "a person who suffers direct or threatened physical, psychological, or financial harm as a result of the commission or attempted commission of a crime or delinquent act. The term 'victim' also includes the person's spouse, parents, children, siblings, or guardian, and includes a lawful representative of a crime victim who is deceased, a minor, or physically or psychologically incapacitated.

The estate's only role is to make the best use of mj's music legacy and expand and exploit business opportunities on behalf of his beneficiaries, it's not to take revenge against the doctor who killed him. That is the role and responisibility for a grieving family to take. I agree with bubs, it's clearly the family who has taken the decision in this, the estate executors can't be expected to interfere in this.

I agree the estate's job is not to take revenge, but it is also their job to collect any money that was owed to MJ (just like it is their job to pay any outstanding debts.) If someone caused MJ a lot of financial damage, that is as if someone owed him money, it's a debt that can (and should) be collected. For example the estate would also be entitled to sue Murray for wrongful death and claim damages, if the family hadn't done that. (But they don't need to do it in this case of course because the family already sued him.)
It's not about revenge, but about collecting all possible outstanding claims for an estate that had a lot of debt to cover.

 

[Bonnie Blue]

Re: Katherine & MJ's kids sue AEG / Trial date set Sept. 10, 2012

I agree the estate's job is not to take revenge, but it is also their job to collect any money that was owed to MJ (just like it is their job to pay any outstanding debts.)

The estate, like everyone else, would know that murray would never be able to pay the $100m or anything significant. It was a symbolic amount designed to make murray's life difficult and hopefully counter any attempts for murray to cash in on a big mj expose once he's out of jail -the obvious responsibility of family members not executors appointed to look after his business affairs.

The only possible reason behind dropping this restitution is that it could reduce the money claimed from aeg in a civil judgment - a reason that only affects the family (kj and ppb) and nothing to do with the estate who is not a party to the civil case.

 

[Mirabella76]

Re: Katherine & MJ's kids sue AEG / Trial date set Sept. 10, 2012

Ivy may I re-post and translate your trial updates? I will refer to MJJC and you.

 

[Victory22]

Re: Katherine & MJ's kids sue AEG / Trial date set Sept. 10, 2012

Ivy I make the same request and will give all credit to you and MJJC.

 

[Bubs]

Re: Katherine & MJ's kids sue AEG / Trial date set Sept. 10, 2012

For example the estate would also be entitled to sue Murray for wrongful death and claim damages, if the family hadn't done that. (But they don't need to do it in this case of course because the family already sued him.)
It's not about revenge, but about collecting all possible outstanding claims for an estate that had a lot of debt to cover.

I only reply to one part of your question and leave rest of it to other legal eagles.

Thing is that family didn't sue him,Murray is not part of Katherine vs AEG suit. Joe named him as one person in his long list of culprits, but as Joe is not beneficiary in MJ's will, he might not have a case at all against Murray. Joe also stated in one TV interview that Michael didn't support him and Murray's atty's are asking Murray to be removed from Joe's case. So after all, if Joe's case doesn't hold, Murray walks free after 2 years and will be on telly and tabloids singing sad stories about how Michael forced him to give propofol, how messy Michael was etc. You know the drill if you saw his lousy document, and what is the worst, he gets paid doing it!