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

[Tygger]

Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

and now you are writing the story of my life in MJ fan community...

Not just you. Happens to anyone who holds a specific stance that others do not agree with.

I voted AEG liable.

 

[jamba]

Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

Not just you. Happens to anyone who holds a specific stance that others do not agree with.

I voted AEG liable.

What???? I thought you were pro-AEG all this time.

 

[Tygger]

Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

What???? I thought you were pro-AEG all this time.

For a moment, I thought I had to re-write my posts here and some are rather lengthy!

laughs

 

[gerryevans]

Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

What???? I thought you were pro-AEG all this time.

For a moment, I thought I had to re-write my posts here and some are rather lengthy!

laughs

For a moment, I thought I was still in the gold pants thread. I just smiled here. thx, folks.

 

[Bubs]

Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

That's the way it should be.

Do you think successful verdict is if KJ wins?
Maybe for you and Jackson family, but don't forget a "little" hitch on the way.
If jury finds AEG negligent hiring CM, then they go to awards and start thinking of responsibility percentage.
Panish put out this pie chart

Plaintiffs (meaning Katherine) already gave in and said that MJ is 20% responsible of his own death.

Have you listen the testimonies in this trial? Do you think that MJ's responsibility is going to stay @20%. I'm sorry, but if jury decides AEG negligently hired CM, I can quarantee that percentage for MJ is going to be more than 20%.
Plaintiffs did not prove that anyone at AEG was aware of propofol treatement. Jurors also heard from many medical personnel that they warned MJ that propofol is dangerous.You may want to insert in here that MJ trusted to doctors to monitor him, but that is not AEG's fault that MJ trusted on doctors. They also heard MJ wanted CM despite AEG offering to find another doctor for him from UK. Jurors also heard that MJ wanted CM and he was MJ's doc prior AEG came to picture. Jurors also heard that CM ordered propfol,whether he used it or not prior he was indrtoduced to AEG, but it shows the MJ and CM had intention to use propfol whether or not AEG agreed to any contract.
They also heard that MJ had propofol before, and asked it for treatments that really didn't require anesthesia. Jurors also heard from certain family members and their so called "interventions" and how they failed, which shows that MJ did not listen even his family members and family couldn't help him. You may want to insert here that we know those family members were talking shite, as we know how they operate, but then again if jurors are not fans like us, they believe those family members and think they told the truth, which is that MJ was in constant need for interventions.

Then in comes personal responsibility of your own health. I just ask you 1 question, who is responsible of your own health?

Also on jury instructions page 56
http://www.scribd.com/doc/170454633/Jackson-vs-AEG-Live-Final-Jury-Instructions
Affirmative defense - Patients duty to provide his or her own well-being
A patient must use reasonable care to provide for his or her own well-being.
AEG live claims that MJ death was caused by his own negligent in conncetion with his medical care. To succeed, AEG must prove of the following: That MJ did not use reasonable care to provide for his own well-being, and
that MJ failure to use reasonable care in conncetion with his medical care was a substancial factor in causing his harm.

and next page on jury instruction - Comparitive fault of Decedent
AEG live claims that MJ's own negligence contributed to his death. To succeed on this claim, AEG must prove both of the following:
1 That MJ was negligent, and
2 That MJ negligent was substancial factor in causing his death.

Now consider what evidense defence showed to prove this part.

In case AEG loses and jurors get this far, this part is going to push MJ share on that pie chart higher than 20%.
What if they put MJ share to 90%, do you think that is right?
Plaintiffs wins, AEG wins, CM wins and the only one who loses is MJ.

You posted this earlier:

So let's take a look at this poll.
The guys who are saying 'AEG is NOT liable' - are you really aware this also means: It was all Michael's fault? Whose else?
And this especially to the public.
This is devastating for Michael's reputation.
And we as a fan community are responsible for his reputation.

Even if the jury finds AEG negligent for hiring CM, the outcome still can be MJ's fault as I meantioned above. Think about it, if they find MJ percentage highier than Panish put in his pie chart.

 

[Bubs]

Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

Jury seems to be stuck with first questions. They haven't asked anything else than jury instructions, CM independed contractor agreement and This is it, or maybe they are still watching is 2nd or 3rd time?

 

[Bubs]

Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

Yesterday I wrote that we will be hearing from CM or his lawyer after verdict is out, but Wass wanted her opinion out already
From ABC article:
Wass says Murray has been following the five-month civil case in which jurors are asked if concert promoter AEG Live hired him, and if so, were they negligent in supervising him.

Wass believes the jury may get stuck on the second question on the verdict form, which is essential for the Jackson attorneys to prove to win the lawsuit. The question is: "Was Conrad Murray unfit or incompetent to perform the work for which he was hired?"

Wass say Murray's understanding of the work for which he was hired was to treat Jackson's dehydration after laborious performances.

"There was no mention of any sleep issues or addiction issues or addiction issues or anything like that. In fact my client has maintained all along that he did not know about Jackson's addiction and that Jackson kept that from him," said Wass.

Wass says Murray's record shows he was fit as an internist to provide basic medical care for Jackson and his family.

The Jackson attorneys assert that AEG created a conflict of interest for Murray and that they should have looked further into the doctor's financial background to find out he was in debt. Wass rejects that reasoning.

"What is the difference if you and I go into a doctor, and a doctor is having financial problems and the doctor recommends surgery? Should we question it because the doctor is having financial difficulties? We wouldn't know that," said Wass.

Speaking from jail, Murray maintains he did not deliver the fatal dose of propofol and that he wants the medical board to restore his license. Wass is appealing his conviction.

"I'm pretty certain that if his conviction is affirmed on appeal that he would lose his license. If that doesn't occur, then it will be a fight to prove that what happened was an aberration and not something that speaks of his entire history and ability as a doctor uke::mat:," said Wass.
--------------------------

I cannot believe he still has licence :mat:
I hope his appeal is kicked to the curb and he will never practice again.

 

[LastTear]

Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

I don't know what happened here but I'm glad to see an injection of some humour.

Thank you. I did not know.



Actually, I am not surprised. Many people do not participate in online discussions because they are unfortunately and unnecessarily combative. Some have a difficult time separating a person from their views or beliefs and when disagreements happen. As a result some automatically become combative with the person whose views and/or beliefs they disagree with instead of understanding that they simply disagree with their view and/or belief.

*Drum roll*........ I agree, and you know what Tygger, as much as we bash heads and chase each other in circles I take my hat off to your steadfastness when you were the only vocal party to what seemed to be the opposing view.

We are debating here, there are bound to be times when it gets heated especially when its hard to read tone and sometimes frustration is bound to come to the surface, but we are all good, I may not agree with some peeps point of view - but I respect that they have them and are open and interested to read and try to understand, even if the result is the same.

Anyway, onwards and upwards, what were you saying about question 3?

 

[Bubs]

Were the independent contractor laws explained in depth to the jury?

I found this from summary thread:
Independent contractor versus Employee

AEG and Jacksons were having disagreements about in regards to independent contractor and employee. They asked Judge for a clarification.

AEG claims as the judge has dismissed the respondeat superior, court found that Murray was an independent contractor and not an employee.

Jackson’s disagree and say that court’s ruling did not establish any facts and Jackson’s can argue to the jury that Murray was AEG’s employee.

Judge responds to clarification as it follows :

"Plaintiffs (Jacksons) asked for clarification that the court found Murray was “as a matter of law” not an employee”. The court finds that based on evidence presented at summary judgment that it is the “law of the case” Murray (assuming he was hired) was an independent contractor and not an employee. This is so because the court summarily adjudicated Plaintiffs (Jacksons) respondeat superior claim/ theory in favor of Defendants (AEG)”

 

[LastTear]

Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

@Bubs

Speaking from jail, Murray maintains he did not deliver the fatal dose of propofol and that he wants the medical board to restore his license. Wass is appealing his conviction.

"I'm pretty certain that if his conviction is affirmed on appeal that he would lose his license. If that doesn't occur, then it will be a fight to prove that what happened was an aberration and not something that speaks of his entire history and ability as a doctor uke::mat:," said Wass.

Is his licence on hold? Confused one minute she says about restoring his licence then she says he could lose it?

 

[MIST]

"There was no mention of any sleep issues or addiction issues or addiction issues or anything like that. In fact my client has maintained all along that he did not know about Jackson's addiction and that Jackson kept that from him," said Wass.

Why did Murray agree to give to buy drugs including propofol and to give it to Michael?

Murray maintains he did not deliver the fatal dose of propofol

Murray must suffer from personality disorders, the one with more than one personality in one body and they don´t know about each other.
He needs a long treatment at a psychiatric hospital

 

[LastTear]

I found this from summary thread:
Independent contractor versus Employee

AEG and Jacksons were having disagreements about in regards to independent contractor and employee. They asked Judge for a clarification.

AEG claims as the judge has dismissed the respondeat superior, court found that Murray was an independent contractor and not an employee.

Jackson’s disagree and say that court’s ruling did not establish any facts and Jackson’s can argue to the jury that Murray was AEG’s employee.

Judge responds to clarification as it follows :

"Plaintiffs (Jacksons) asked for clarification that the court found Murray was “as a matter of law” not an employee”. The court finds that based on evidence presented at summary judgment that it is the “law of the case” Murray (assuming he was hired) was an independent contractor and not an employee. This is so because the court summarily adjudicated Plaintiffs (Jacksons) respondeat superior claim/ theory in favor of Defendants (AEG)”

It was more the law on independent contractor liability I meant. I read this:

[h=2]Tort Liability[/h]The common-law doctrine of Respondeat Superior holds an employer liable for the negligent acts of its employee. Generally, under Common Law, the hiring party is not responsible for the Negligence of an independent contractor. The Restatement (Second) of Torts identifies a few exceptions to this rule. The hiring party may be liable when, owing to its failure to exercise reasonable care to retain a competent and careful contractor, a third party is physically harmed. Also, when an independent contractor acts pursuant to orders or directions negligently given by the hiring party, the latter may be held liable. Notwithstanding the exceptions, the hiring party's risk of liability is greatly reduced by hiring independent contractors rather than employees.

And it sets me back over a year of wondering why this came to trial............... I think I may just give up, my brain is way to small. LOL

 

[LastTear]

Why did Murray agree to give to buy drugs including propofol and to give it to Michael?


Murray must suffer from personality disorders, the one with more than one personality in one body and they don´t know about each other.
He needs a long treatment at a psychiatric hospital

Because he chose to over extend the scope of general medical care.

When he is out we will have endless interviews where Murray will state how Michael begged and begged him and given Michael's desperate state he conceded against his better judgement, blah blah, blah, he will say that to appease Michael he gave him small amounts to calm him and that whilst he was on a toilet break Michael injected himself.

 

[gerryevans]

Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

I don't know what happened here but I'm glad to see an injection of some humour.

*Drum roll*........ I agree, and you know what Tygger, as much as we bash heads and chase each other in circles I take my hat off to your steadfastness when you were the only vocal party to what seemed to be the opposing view.

We are debating here, there are bound to be times when it gets heated especially when its hard to read tone and sometimes frustration is bound to come to the surface, but we are all good, I may not agree with some peeps point of view - but I respect that they have them and are open and interested to read and try to understand, even if the result is the same.

LastTear, BIG totally agree on every word of this post.

Do you think successful verdict is if KJ wins?
Maybe for you and Jackson family, but don't forget a "little" hitch on the way.
If jury finds AEG negligent hiring CM, then they go to awards and start thinking of responsibility percentage.
Panish put out this pie chart

Plaintiffs (meaning Katherine) already gave in and said that MJ is 20% responsible of his own death.

Have you listen the testimonies in this trial? Do you think that MJ's responsibility is going to stay @20%. I'm sorry, but if jury decides AEG negligently hired CM, I can quarantee that percentage for MJ is going to be more than 20%.
Plaintiffs did not prove that anyone at AEG was aware of propofol treatement. Jurors also heard from many medical personnel that they warned MJ that propofol is dangerous.You may want to insert in here that MJ trusted to doctors to monitor him, but that is not AEG's fault that MJ trusted on doctors. They also heard MJ wanted CM despite AEG offering to find another doctor for him from UK. Jurors also heard that MJ wanted CM and he was MJ's doc prior AEG came to picture. Jurors also heard that CM ordered propfol,whether he used it or not prior he was indrtoduced to AEG, but it shows the MJ and CM had intention to use propfol whether or not AEG agreed to any contract.
They also heard that MJ had propofol before, and asked it for treatments that really didn't require anesthesia. Jurors also heard from certain family members and their so called "interventions" and how they failed, which shows that MJ did not listen even his family members and family couldn't help him. You may want to insert here that we know those family members were talking shite, as we know how they operate, but then again if jurors are not fans like us, they believe those family members and think they told the truth, which is that MJ was in constant need for interventions.

Then in comes personal responsibility of your own health. I just ask you 1 question, who is responsible of your own health?

Also on jury instructions page 56
http://www.scribd.com/doc/170454633/Jackson-vs-AEG-Live-Final-Jury-Instructions
Affirmative defense - Patients duty to provide his or her own well-being
A patient must use reasonable care to provide for his or her own well-being.
AEG live claims that MJ death was caused by his own negligent in conncetion with his medical care. To succeed, AEG must prove of the following: That MJ did not use reasonable care to provide for his own well-being, and
that MJ failure to use reasonable care in conncetion with his medical care was a substancial factor in causing his harm.

and next page on jury instruction - Comparitive fault of Decedent
AEG live claims that MJ's own negligence contributed to his death. To succeed on this claim, AEG must prove both of the following:
1 That MJ was negligent, and
2 That MJ negligent was substancial factor in causing his death.

Now consider what evidense defence showed to prove this part.

In case AEG loses and jurors get this far, this part is going to push MJ share on that pie chart higher than 20%.
What if they put MJ share to 90%, do you think that is right?
Plaintiffs wins, AEG wins, CM wins and the only one who loses is MJ.

You posted this earlier:



Even if the jury finds AEG negligent for hiring CM, the outcome still can be MJ's fault as I meantioned above. Think about it, if they find MJ percentage highier than Panish put in his pie chart.

Bubs, phenomenal recap and assessment.


This day has had a good start...with humor, facts and appreciation for the MJ community members, whatever their positions.

Maybe, the day will end just as good and we have a verdict by the end of it.

 

[maviefly]

Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

I voted AEG is liable.

Some reasons:

'A so-called "smoking gun" e-mail sent by AEG Live Co-CEO Paul Gongaware 11 days before Jackson died said, "We want to remind (Murray) that it is AEG, not MJ, who is paying his salary. We want to remind him what is expected of him."

....There is also a television interview soon after Jackson died in which AEG Live CEO Randy Phillips said AEG Live "hired" Murray.

Executives ignored a series of warning signs that Jackson was at risk in his last weeks, including deteriorating health that included weight loss, inability to perform his trademark dances or remember lyrics to his standard songs, and paranoia, the Jacksons argue.

A sleep expert testified that the nightly propofol infusions robbed Jackson of vital REM sleep, which caused the deterioration.'

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/10/01/showbiz/michael-jackson-death-trial/index.html

edit:
And there is another very important reason to me: I am Michael Jackson fan. My heart goes out to Michael and I have no words to describe my feelings by reading all the harm they did to him.

I don't think what happened was Michael's fault. Michael was under pressure by AEG. AEG didn't care if Michael was well or not, that's the point. I'm convinced if AEG did care for Michael in the right way, Michael would be still alive.

 

[Bubs]

Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

@Bubs
Is his licence on hold? Confused one minute she says about restoring his licence then she says he could lose it?

I couldn't check his California medical license as their site is unavailable at the moment, but here is what Nevada medical board says

MURRAY, Conrad Robert Suspended NP-Active-Restricted

and here is what Texas med board says
http://reg.tmb.state.tx.us/OnLineVe...asp?ID_NUM=481975&Type=LP&LicensePermit=M0502

Can you see it?

Btw, lates action date and issue:
Action Date: 09/19/2013
Description: ON SEPTEMBER 19, 2013, A MOTION FOR REHEARING WAS FILED BY DR. MURRAY.

It is my understanding that he still have license but in suspended status. If the status is revoked, then he would have lost them.
I could be wrong in this but if someone in US can correct me?

 

[ivy]

Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

^^

You are correct. all of the 4 states have suspended his license. appeal might make a difference, if he wins his appeal he might get it back, if he loses the appeal, it might get revoked.

It's just that these legal stuff takes a long time.

Similarly we can get a verdict soon in this case but any appeal would probably take years and years before any verdict is confirmed.

 

[LastTear]

Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

I voted AEG is liable.

Some reasons:

'A so-called "smoking gun" e-mail sent by AEG Live Co-CEO Paul Gongaware 11 days before Jackson died said, "We want to remind (Murray) that it is AEG, not MJ, who is paying his salary. We want to remind him what is expected of him."

....There is also a television interview soon after Jackson died in which AEG Live CEO Randy Phillips said AEG Live "hired" Murray.

Executives ignored a series of warning signs that Jackson was at risk in his last weeks, including deteriorating health that included weight loss, inability to perform his trademark dances or remember lyrics to his standard songs, and paranoia, the Jacksons argue.

A sleep expert testified that the nightly propofol infusions robbed Jackson of vital REM sleep, which caused the deterioration.'

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/10/01/showbiz/michael-jackson-death-trial/index.html

Unfortunately is not so straight forward.

The smoking gun is probably one of the reasons this came to trial - some would say that AEG didn't do enough questioning of Murray others would say they were too involved.

The television interview: Phillips said a lot more than 'we hired him' - this was the interview where he says Michael wanted Murray.

The execs did do something, it wasn't ignored - they asked and they were re-assured. In hindsight I'm sure we all wish they or somebody, anybody had done more.

The sleep expert is of course correct, however, were AEG to know that at the time? Were they expected to put all those symptoms together and come up with propofol?

 

[ivy]

Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

Jury seems to be stuck with first questions. They haven't asked anything else than jury instructions, CM independed contractor agreement and This is it, or maybe they are still watching is 2nd or 3rd time?

Alan Duke - who repeats everything Jacksons say - seems to be thinking they passed question one. It might be true, oral agreements, negotiations and so on versus not signed contract, I wouldn't be surprised if the jury said AEG had hired Murray. Question 2 and 3 seems to be a lot more complex IMO.

 

[Bubs]

Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

Alan Duke - who repeats everything Jacksons say - seems to be thinking they passed question one. It might be true, oral agreements, negotiations and so on versus not signed contract, I wouldn't be surprised if the jury said AEG had hired Murray. Question 2 and 3 seems to be a lot more complex IMO.

If they answered Yes to question 1, then I'm quite sure then MJ's percentage will raise at the end of the verdict form.
Defense has proved a lot of things which I mentioned in my long post, re MJ wanting AEG to hire CM and having CM his personal physician a lot earlier than AEG came into picture.

In a different note, I saw a post in LSA that said it was Alan's girlfriend who was suspicious of juror no 6 flirting with defence attorney and reported that to judge

 

[#MJforever57]

Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

That is what i am thinking too their have gotting pass question 1. but i just can't understand why Putnam want the jury to watch This Is It maybe he felt that Michael was okay but this is edit alots has been taking out.

I notice in TII that Michael has forgot words to his songs his icon move on Billie Jean there are part in the movie that show Michael having problems like the parts on the J5 meoldy and on SC Michael stood there with Travis and Kenny said that the cue and i notice in Earth Song too how Michael was saying differance words at the end on ES as he was on the cherry picker just like Michael said he was save his voice maybe that why he did.

 

[Bubs]

Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

@Maviefly

'A so-called "smoking gun" e-mail sent by AEG Live Co-CEO Paul Gongaware 11 days before Jackson died said, "We want to remind (Murray) that it is AEG, not MJ, who is paying his salary. We want to remind him what is expected of him."

You do know that mail was never sent to CM? If you read the whole contest of that email, it also says that CM has been dodging long enough Dileo. Do you remember Dileo sent an email to CM to do bloodwork on MJ to find out what is going on? We now know that never happen as CM knew damn well what was going on. I suspect that as everybody were running around like headless chickens and noone knew what was going on and why MJ was on that condition, so Gonga started huffing and puffing. I think it was more like boasting, as much RP's tv interview in which he says we hired CM.
There is an interview of KJ in which she says MJ hired CM, so much of that.
---------------------
Executives ignored a series of warning signs that Jackson was at risk in his last weeks, including deteriorating health that included weight loss, inability to perform his trademark dances or remember lyrics to his standard songs, and paranoia, the Jacksons argue.

Actually there was only one bad day when MJ was in bad condition. Inability to remeber lyrics and paranoia thing happen in that one day. He lost weigh over period of time, and it is not easy to see if this person wears layers of clothing.
-------------
A sleep expert testified that the nightly propofol infusions robbed Jackson of vital REM sleep, which caused the deterioration.'

Once again, AEG did not know nighty infusions of propofol.
-------------------

edit:
And there is another very important reason to me: I am Michael Jackson fan. My heart goes out to Michael and I have no words to describe my feelings by reading all the harm they did to him.

They didn't do harm to MJ, Conrad Murray did, he and him alone is the reason why Michael is not here.
---------------

I don't think what happened was Michael's fault. Michael was under pressure by AEG. AEG didn't care if Michael was well or not, that's the point. I'm convinced if AEG did care for Michael in the right way, Michael would be still alive.

You need to put your fandom aside and think like not fan. MJ signed contract in which he promised to do this tour to get the money he so needed. Why MJ needed money? It has nothing to do with AEG and it wasn't their fault that there were screwed people in MJ life that nearly took him to the cleaners, so he had to go on tour again. MJ was in pressure by AEG?
They all were under the pressure (including MJ), and if you think you can go through your life without it, you live in the bubble. They didn't care if MJ was well or not. Did you miss the testimonies from Kenny's and others worries, emails about getting nutrionist, masseuse, therapists etc on board? To me it shows they were caring, but they run out the time.

What is right way? Just give money for MJ which he desparately needed and tell him "you don't have to full-fill your part of contract" just take the money and pay your debts? We fans would have gladly done that if we had the money, but you seriously cannot expect that happen outside of fanbase. Right way to care Michael was to have vision that allowes them to see what was going on in MJ's home at night time, and vision to see which person is crooked by looking at their face.
They did not have that benefit and they dealt it as best they could under the circumstances, considering that they were more suspicious of Klein than anything else because everytime MJ came out of Kleins office, he was loopy.

What you think of MJ's responsibility has no room in jury delibiration room. They decide by law and jury instructions, and jury instructions says they have to consider MJ part of his death.

I would be interested to hear what you think about the following:

Affirmative defense - Patients duty to provide his or her own well-being
A patient must use reasonable care to provide for his or her own well-being.
AEG live claims that MJ death was caused by his own negligent in conncetion with his medical care. To succeed, AEG must prove of the following: That MJ did not use reasonable care to provide for his own well-being, and
that MJ failure to use reasonable care in conncetion with his medical care was a substancial factor in causing his harm.

and next page on jury instruction - Comparitive fault of Decedent
AEG live claims that MJ's own negligence contributed to his death. To succeed on this claim, AEG must prove both of the following:
1 That MJ was negligent, and
2 That MJ negligent was substancial factor in causing his death.

 

[maviefly]

Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

You need to put your fandom aside and think like not fan.

Excuse me? I guess this is supposed to be a joke.....

 

[Allusio]

I was very suprised how the poll was split so even. I thought it would be a big majority for AEG not liable because the majority in this thread don't believe they should be held liable. But We have members across the board that don't debate in this thread that voted as well. So our members are about 50/50 on if they think AEG will be held liable. I almost voted they would be myself but that doesn't mean I think they should be.

I say honestly, I couldn’t vote AEG not liable … Somehow I just couldn’t do it.

 

[Bubs]

Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

Excuse me? I guess this is supposed to be a joke.....

No, it wasn't joke. What I meant it when you view testimonies and evidense presented, you need to view them like outsider, like you have no intrest on this trial.
Better yet, if possible when you view testimonies and evidense, take away Michael and put Joe Doe in his place. Would you still agree with your assessment?

 

[LastTear]

I say honestly, I couldn’t vote AEG not liable … Somehow I just couldn’t do it.

Fair enough, even the jury may chose an emotional vote.

 

[Vici]

Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

Re THIS IS IT. Putnam said MJ was great in that movie and suggeste the jurors to watch it. The jurors need to be critical of what they see. Lots of editing in that movie and I believe every performance in that movie is from the last rehearsals June 23 and June 24. Those rehearsals were the ones everyone said MJ came back strong after week(s) of issues.

 

[Mneme]

Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

Many times in this forum I read "AEG pressured Michael"; "AEG did harm to Michael" and

HONESTLY, I don't know what exactly this means.
My impression about the connection AEG ./. MJ was that were 2 parties to a contract and every side had to fulfil this contract.
I am in a deep respect and sympathy for Michael. But from what I see in relation to AEG Michael was not a re-liable and correct partner.
They (i.e. AEG) couldn't help him because he wasn't open to them.

 

[Bubs]

Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

^^

You are correct. all of the 4 states have suspended his license. appeal might make a difference, if he wins his appeal he might get it back, if he loses the appeal, it might get revoked.

It's just that these legal stuff takes a long time.

Similarly we can get a verdict soon in this case but any appeal would probably take years and years before any verdict is confirmed.

I checked California medical board what is going on with CM's licence. It is suspended status but seemingly they are proceeding getting CM's med licence revoked
http://www2.mbc.ca.gov/LicenseLooku....DID&licenseType=G&licenseNumber=71169#page=1

After reading that document, I find it hard that even with appeal CM would get his licence back. They listed other things on that document that CM did wrong like failing to keep medical records etc.

 

[Annita]

Re: Verdict Watch - Discussion- Katherine Jackson vs AEG

Re THIS IS IT. Putnam said MJ was great in that movie and suggeste the jurors to watch it. The jurors need to be critical of what they see. Lots of editing in that movie and I believe every performance in that movie is from the last rehearsals June 23 and June 24. Those rehearsals were the ones everyone said MJ came back strong after week(s) of issues.

I don`t see that much editing. In real you can see many performances in full, in reality you can see diffrent performances in full from one song.
Further there are no witnesses or testomony who said the film is a fake and doesn`give the real the situaiton, for exmaple nothing from Karen Faye. The opposite Karen Faye is the reason why there is no footage where Michael is ill. She said to Ortega it should not be filmed and cameras where off on this days.