passy001
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 1,386
- Points
- 0
Re: KJ vs AEG Trial outcome : Appeal
But "getting mj to rehearsals" as the jacksons put it is such a generic term that it is hard to argue that Murray was unfit and incompetent to do it. I mean how could AEG determine that murray was unfit and incompetent for that? by the way doesn't that fall under general care? or are they suggesting AEG should have hired a nany to handle those?
the jacksons are trying to work around the fact that murray was secretly treating mj for insomnia using propofol and as such AEG had no knowledge of it.
they are suggesting that Murray could have been competent and fit for the general practitioner role - for what he was hired but then he could have been given additional duties for which he was unfit and not competent.
But "getting mj to rehearsals" as the jacksons put it is such a generic term that it is hard to argue that Murray was unfit and incompetent to do it. I mean how could AEG determine that murray was unfit and incompetent for that? by the way doesn't that fall under general care? or are they suggesting AEG should have hired a nany to handle those?
the jacksons are trying to work around the fact that murray was secretly treating mj for insomnia using propofol and as such AEG had no knowledge of it.
Last edited: