Putnam is truly gifted. I agree much of what he said made logical sense however, it lacked depth as did AEG's defense. Putnam understands it is not what is said, it is how it is said. The jurors have access to the evidence. Matching evidence to many of Putnam statements will disprove them and I hope the jurors take the time to do just that.
Putnam said Dileo signed a declaration that he viewed an employment contract draft for the doctor. He stated this proves Michael’s team saw a draft. Beneath the surface of that statement, Putnam gives no evidence of which draft Dileo saw, if Dileo saw each draft as there were a few, if Dileo spoke to Michael about it or only
saw a draft, and lastly and most importantly, if anyone else on Michael’s team, particularly one of his lawyers saw any and all drafts which would not be the final copy that was emailed directly to the doctor for his signature.
Putnam said Michael died of a propofol overdose and that it was inevitable. AEG could not prove Michael was a propofol addict yet, they suggest it and some may find it logical. Beneath the surface of that statement, Putnam refused to mention the doctor serving two years for involuntary manslaughter for his negligent administration of propofol. Propofol did not cause Michael’s passing, the negligent administration of it did. It was not inevitable that Michael would pass from the negligent administration of propofol.
Putnam said Michael paid the doctor ten times before he passed. Beneath the surface of that statement, the doctor was paid in Vegas more so than in Carolwood, before Michael signed the TII contract, and often included the general care of Michael’s children, not for the administration of propofol.
Putnam dodged instances of AEG having any possible responsibility whatsoever when they inserted themselves into the doctor-patient relationship. All onuses were placed squarely on Michael’s shoulders. He repeated Michael hired the doctor with no substance behind it; just a directive statement to the jurors to accept blindly when AEG never touched this ideal once during their defense.
The written contract that was not valid because it lacked two signatures should have its clauses considered valid when those clauses might benefit AEG. Putnam was extremely fond of the indemnity clause and the "general care" phrase in a contract that is not valid. For Putnam, an implied contract did not exist and a relationship between AEG and the doctor did not exist despite evidence (including conversations and emails) contradicting him. The implied contract does not take into account the indemnity clause or the "general care" phrase as it relies on verbal clues and actions.
And I remember you said the sleep issues came again later so MJ had the right to not remember about it during medical for insurance.
Elapentela, allow me to repost my statement again. If the evaluation was in February and Michael found he could not sleep the following April, how could he honestly state he had sleep issues in February during the insurance evaluation if he did not? Should he predict he may not be able to sleep in July? When he found he could not sleep in April, how many medical professionals did he reach out to as per testimony? Was he fabricating his insomnia to any of those medical professionals then? Was he keeping his insomnia a secret then?
As for the remainder of your post, AEG decided on their defense which included besmirching Michael’s character and past actions to deflect from their own actions in 2009. They have blamed a Jackson for their actions since this suit has been filed; namely Michael. It is not surprising when those who support AEG being found not liable blame Michael and other Jacksons as well.
Tygger;3908510 said:
Elapentela, repeating, Michael’s insomnia did not resurface until April and the insurance evaluation was in February. Michael did NOT fabricate his answers during that evaluation. I am unsure why you insist that he did.
I think you don't follow the views of general public opinion about possible results of this trial and the total lack of advertisement deals in future for an estate (because of the "new" addict image) is not your concern.
Elapentela, you are referring to the general public without a chart, graph, or survey being requested. No need to fret, no one will request one.
Ironic that AEG is supposed to have noticed a deterioration that his own mother and father did not notice or if they did, did nothing about.
Jamba, none of the numerous emails to AEG executives about Michael’s visible deterioration were sent to Michael’s parents.
