Estate, Cascio and Porte Sued Over Three Songs on the "Michael" Album - Vera Senova Class Action

[Koopa Troopa]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

What if they show a clear video of Michael singing the songs in the studio at the court? Would you then believe that it was Michael's voice? Just a queston. I don't personally have an opinion on this subject. I'm just not sure.

The sceptics would probably say that it was Virtual Valentino and demand an apology from the Estate for fooling them.

 

[Birchey]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

So you are suggesting that the Estate makes up fantasy figures to fool the fans? Some will go far to nail the Estate, it appears...

The statement hold no merit at all, the musicologists are not named. its like me saying I go so and so to test the vocals, its just BS crap released to please the fans. Only the people in that meeting who were directly involved in the production of those tracks has publicly stated they thought the vocals were MJ, well Teddy kinda backtracked saying he was "setup" that just leaves what, Eddie and Stuart Brawley xD

Other people present have said publicly and in private interview not yet released that by the time that meeting well there was more than one, ended the impression given was that the songs were not Michael and were not to be released, in fact one of the participants was unaware of the statement until 2013.

Whereas we have a seasoned professional who has been named who has done analysis. I know which one I would go with.

People need to know, if this gets to trial under oath witnesses will destroy the songs, Eddie also has nothing, not a single piece of evidence to back up his claims. I still don't know how people can't see its complete BS, just take a day out to study Michaels studio habits, work rate and standards, you might change your mind.

 

[Koopa Troopa]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

What difference would it have made if the musicologists were mentioned? You don't believe the people named by the Estate either. And Teddy "backtracking" may have something to do with rabid fans hounding him non-stop. If any of those people thought it wasn't Michael, why didn't they tell the Estate when they had the chance? Why wait after the hearing session to tell their "true feelings"? Where they held under gunpoint by Weitzman?

 

[Birchey]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

What difference would it have made if the musicologists were mentioned? You don't believe the people named by the Estate either. And Teddy "backtracking" may have something to do with rabid fans hounding him non-stop. If any of those people thought it wasn't Michael, why didn't they tell the Estate when they had the chance? Why wait after the hearing session to tell their "true feelings"? Where they held under gunpoint by Weitzman?

It makes a world of difference if they are mentioned, this isn't the way things work in the real world. Experts need to be named, or the merit of such a claim is zero. Teddy dealt with fans harshly in the beginning, but his recent statements suggest he owes it to Michael to tell the truth, nothing to do with fans.. As for the experts in the meeting, I have covered that.

Again I am only going on the words of people who were IN THE MEETING and who have nothing to gain or lose from the songs, simply people who knew Michael and cared about him very much.

 

[elusive moonwalker]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

Yet people have no problem with the book Frank wrote exposing all of the things Michael told him in confidence. Ironic

yeah funny isnt it. i guess thats ok writing tell alls so some fans can hear some private info and gossip regardless of whether thats fake or not and the disrespect it shows mj.

lawsuits like this will not imo bring any closure because all u will get is one sides expert saying one thing and the other sides saying the other. no evidence just opinion.

 

[HIStory]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

yeah funny isnt it. i guess thats ok writing tell alls so some fans can hear some private info and gossip regardless of whether thats fake or not and the disrespect it shows mj.

lawsuits like this will not imo bring any closure because all u will get is one sides expert saying one thing and the other sides saying the other. no evidence just opinion.

IMO if the Estate/Sony/Eddie cannot show ANY evidence for the authenticity of these songs then that would be telling in itself. I mean if these tracks are real there should be outtakes, there should be different takes, just something that proves MJ did work on these songs. Just like there are demos and different takes for every song he did. If there isn't anything for these songs then that is pretty telling in itself IMO. Didn't Eddie claim at one point that MJ destroyed all demos and takes because he was so satisfied with the result? Wasn't that the excuse for why there isn't anything to backup the authenticity of the songs. But MJ never worked like that. He never destroyed demos and different takes just because he was satisfied with the end result. He was satisfied with Billie Jean but that did not make him destroy the demos/different takes. He was satisfied with a lot of songs but the demos/different outtakes still exist. So it's odd to claim this for these songs.

 

[Koopa Troopa]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

It makes a world of difference if they are mentioned, this isn't the way things work in the real world. Experts need to be named, or the merit of such a claim is zero. Teddy dealt with fans harshly in the beginning, but his recent statements suggest he owes it to Michael to tell the truth, nothing to do with fans.. As for the experts in the meeting, I have covered that.

Again I am only going on the words of people who were IN THE MEETING and who have nothing to gain or lose from the songs, simply people who knew Michael and cared about him very much.

Bruce Swedien, Greg Phillinganes and Matt Forger were named, yet you refuse to believe them. Hypocrisy, no?

 

[Birchey]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

IMO if the Estate/Sony/Eddie cannot show ANY evidence for the authenticity of these songs then that would be telling in itself. I mean if these tracks are real there should be outtakes, there should be different takes, just something that proves MJ did work on these songs. Just like there are demos and different takes for every song he did. If there isn't anything for these songs then that is pretty telling in itself IMO. Didn't Eddie claim at one point that MJ destroyed all demos and takes because he was so satisfied with the result? Wasn't that the excuse for why there isn't anything to backup the authenticity of the songs. But MJ never worked like that. He never destroyed demos and different takes just because he was satisfied with the end result. He was satisfied with Billie Jean but that did not make him destroy the demos/different takes. He was satisfied with a lot of songs but the demos/different outtakes still exist. So it's odd to claim this for these songs.

The Hard drive was broken then destroyed. Eddie actually presented the Hard drive in question at a meeting, only for someone to test it and find out it was brand new, and never contained any data ever. Eddie just bought it and broke it., hopefully y'all will find out more about all this when the time comes. Gonna be fun stuff

 

[elusive moonwalker]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

yeah i agree that is odd. but the proof is on the plaintif to prove their case not the defence As i posted above early back in thread.all the other songs on the albums had long historys of others working on them etc etc. what if there just isnt any evidence of their work? Doesnt mean the songs are fake. this will come down to experts opinion.as the estae have already said they checked before release with experts so unless they can prove the estate knew and lied about checking i dont see how the case goes anywhere

IMO if the Estate/Sony/Eddie cannot show ANY evidence for the authenticity of these songs then that would be telling in itself. I mean if these tracks are real there should be outtakes, there should be different takes, just something that proves MJ did work on these songs. Just like there are demos and different takes for every song he did. If there isn't anything for these songs then that is pretty telling in itself IMO. Didn't Eddie claim at one point that MJ destroyed all demos and takes because he was so satisfied with the result? Wasn't that the excuse for why there isn't anything to backup the authenticity of the songs. But MJ never worked like that. He never destroyed demos and different takes just because he was satisfied with the end result. He was satisfied with Billie Jean but that did not make him destroy the demos/different takes. He was satisfied with a lot of songs but the demos/different outtakes still exist. So it's odd to claim this for these songs.

 

[Birchey]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

Bruce Swedien, Greg Phillinganes and Matt Forger were named, yet you refuse to believe them. Hypocrisy, no?

I have not heard anything from them to be honest, what did they say? oh and I know about Bruce Swedien, don't believe everything you read

 

[Koopa Troopa]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

IMO if the Estate/Sony/Eddie cannot show ANY evidence for the authenticity of these songs then that would be telling in itself. I mean if these tracks are real there should be outtakes, there should be different takes, just something that proves MJ did work on these songs. Just like there are demos and different takes for every song he did. If there isn't anything for these songs then that is pretty telling in itself IMO. Didn't Eddie claim at one point that MJ destroyed all demos and takes because he was so satisfied with the result? Wasn't that the excuse for why there isn't anything to backup the authenticity of the songs. But MJ never worked like that. He never destroyed demos and different takes just because he was satisfied with the end result. He was satisfied with Billie Jean but that did not make him destroy the demos/different takes. He was satisfied with a lot of songs but the demos/different outtakes still exist. So it's odd to claim this for these songs.

The real question is: would you believe the Estate if they did show hard evidence of it? Or would you discard it because it doesnt fit with "the truth." And regarding the supposed Cascio claim, what is your source for this? You are speculating as if it were true.

 

[HIStory]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

yeah i agree that is odd. but the proof is on the plaintif to prove their case not the defence As i posted above early back in thread.all the other songs on the albums had long historys of others working on them etc etc. what if there just isbt any evidence of their work? just mean the songs are fake. tbis will come down to experts opinion.as the estae have already said they checked before release with experts so unless they can prove the estate knew and lied about checking i dont see how the case goes anywhere

Well, if, for example there will be testimony about what Birchey claimed in his previous post (Eddie trying to present a brand new, destroyed hard drive as proof) that would be, for example, pretty damning for defendants. Why would anyone do that if he was telling the truth? Or if there is testimony from those present at that meeting that the Estate lied about all musicologists and producers agreeing that it was MJ then that too is damining evidence against the defendants. These are just some examples, but it won't necessarily go down just to expert testimony.

 

[Birchey]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

"Didn't Eddie claim at one point that MJ destroyed all demos and takes because he was so satisfied with the result?"

The real question is: would you believe the Estate if they did show hard evidence of it? Or would you discard it because it doesnt fit with "the truth." And regarding the supposed Cascio claim, what is your source for this? You are speculating as if it were true.

There is no evidence, we know there isn't unless Eddie has gone back to manufacture it.

This is the benefit of researching a subject and having friends who research it too and go out in the field and talk to people, you get information. Which is a great contrast to sitting waiting on a forum for information to be passed too you, there are plenty of bullets loaded in the gun aimed right at the Cascio tracks.

 

[Koopa Troopa]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

I have not heard anything from them to be honest, what did they say? oh and I know about Bruce Swedien, don't believe everything you read

They believed it was MJs vocals. How they formulated it surely won't reverse your position on this matter. What do you "know" about Bruce Swedien? I'm curious.

 

[Birchey]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

They believed it was MJs vocals. How they formulated it surely won't reverse your position on this matter. What do you "know" about Bruce Swedien? I'm curious.

Read above post about Research.

 

[HIStory]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

The real question is: would you believe the Estate if they did show hard evidence of it? Or would you discard it because it doesnt fit with "the truth." And regarding the supposed Cascio claim, what is your source for this? You are speculating as if it were true.

I said earlier in this thread that if there is hard evidence for the authenticity of the tracks then I will accept it. Right now I do not believe it's MJ on those tracks but I'm not one of those fans who obsess about this subject day in, day out so spare me of your "the truth" comments and assumptions about me not being able to to accept hard evidence. I have no dogs in this fight and I am not as emotional and partisan about it as some others seem to be - including you.

I don't remember the source for that thing about Eddie, maybe someone else will. I just remember reading it, that's why I asked. It was a question. But it's a fact no one ever presented any evidence for the authenticity of these tracks, which is, given the uproar in the fan community is odd. I'd think they would have presented something already if they had it .

 

[Koopa Troopa]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

There is no evidence, we know there isn't unless Eddie has gone back to manufacture it.

This is the benefit of researching a subject and having friends who research it too and go out in the field and talk to people, you get information. Which is a great contrast to sitting waiting on a forum for information to be passed too you, there are plenty of bullets loaded in the gun aimed right at the Cascio tracks.

So if the Estate does provide hard evidence, then it's "manufactured." You remind me of Randy Jackson and the "fake will."

 

[Birchey]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

So if the Estate does provide hard evidence, then it's "manufactured." You remind me of Randy Jackson and the "fake will."

Well, let me see. When was the time to show Hard Evidence of the recordings...............

When they first claimed to have recordings................no

When they got pal Friedman to listen to the songs and write a super positive review...................no

Did they hand any outtakes/voice snippets etc over with the 12 Demos to John Doelp in July 2010........................no

When questions arose before release..........................no

During numerous meetings involving MJ collaborators/Experts etc........................no

After Breaking News streamed and fans went nuts.....................no

With Weitzmans statement...........................no

On Oprah.............................no

Making of Michael doc where handwritten notes etc were shown............................no

Anytime since............................no

So what they held back evidence just on the off chance someone might one day sue them 4 years later? Gimme a break xD

 

[Koopa Troopa]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

I said earlier in this thread that if there is hard evidence for the authenticity of the tracks then I will accept it. Right now I do not believe it's MJ on those tracks but I'm not one of those fans who obsess about this subject day in, day out so spare me of your "the truth" comments and assumptions about me not being able to to accept hard evidence. I have no dogs in this fight and I am not as emotional and partisan about it as some others seem to be - including you.

I don't remember the source for that thing about Eddie, maybe someone else will. I just remember reading it, that's why I asked. It was a question. But it's a fact no one ever presented any evidence for the authenticity of these tracks, which is, given the uproar in the fan community is odd. I'd think they would have presented something already if they had it .

I did not make any assumptions, that's why I asked you a question. I don't have "no dogs in this fight" either, I just wonder why people are hell-bent about these songs being fake. It reminds me of people insisting on the "fake will." I'm glad this is taken to court. As I posted earlier, I will accept whatever outcome.

 

[Koopa Troopa]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

There is no evidence, we know there isn't unless Eddie has gone back to manufacture it.

This is the benefit of researching a subject and having friends who research it too and go out in the field and talk to people, you get information. Which is a great contrast to sitting waiting on a forum for information to be passed too you, there are plenty of bullets loaded in the gun aimed right at the Cascio tracks.

"Researching to fit the agenda" you mean. It doesnt't really matter how much you "research," you don't have inside information that the Estate does. So I prefer to believe the Estate's experts and MJs collaborators over guys on the internet "proving" that these songs are "fake."

 

[HIStory]

I did not make any assumptions, that's why asked you a question. I don't have "no dogs in this fight" either, I just wonder why people are hell-bent about these songs being fake. It reminds of people insisting of the "fake will." I'm glad this is taken to court. As I posted earlier, I will accept whatever outcome.

It's not about being "hell-bent". It's about the simple fact that some of us... well, many of us do not think it's MJ's voice on those tracks. Very simple, nothing to do with being "hell-bent". He never sounded like that before or after. Then the Estate's/Sony's/Cascio's failure to provide any evidence and failure to give convincing arguments for why the tracks are MJ it just deepens the suspicion.

Here is an article from Friedman (who is the Cascio's buddy, so his source is probably the Cascios themselves):

As Michael Jackson‘s new single, “Hold My Hand,” goes “live” tonight (www.michaeljackson.com) , I can tell you a bit more about his new album.
There had been some concern that no outtakes existed of the tracks Jackson recorded with Eddie Cascio. Michael’s nephews have gone into overdrive trying to discredit the tracks. They’ve claimed it’s not their uncle’s voice on the recordings.


But now sources tell me that there were “work tapes” made during the Cascio sessions. These aren’t outtakes of the songs, but tapes running in the studio while Michael discussed what was going on with Eddie Cascio and other members of the Cascio family. Jackson’s own kids even make cameo appearances on the tapes. At some point, the work tapes will be released, although it’s unclear by whom. The main thing is, there’s plenty of evidence of Michael Jackson working with Eddie Cascio.


Still, it’s nice to know that the tapes prove once and for all what was going on in the Cascios’ home studio in the summer of 2007. It’s truly, without a doubt, Michael Jackson on the recordings.


There are three Cascio tracks on the new album. “Breaking News,” of course, has already been heard. Last Friday, “Keep Your Head Up” was leaked to the internet. Some people heard it, but Sony’s legal team moved quickly to have it removed. It’s a great record. The third Cascio track, “Monster,” with 50 Cent, remains a mystery, although I’ve heard good things about it.

http://www.showbiz411.com/2010/11/1...work-tapes-will-prove-its-his-voice-on-tracks

So they tried to pass a tape of MJ just hanging out in the studio with his kids as a "proof of authenticity". Friedman however says: "These aren’t outtakes of the songs" themselves! Very, very odd. How come you work on 12 songs and there aren't existing outtakes, nothing? Coupled with the fact that the songs do not sound like Michael it's all just very weird and make it suspicious.

But now here is the chance for each side to put what they have on the table. This is the chance for Eddie and the Estate to prove the songs are authentic, for once and for all.

 

[Birchey]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

"Researching to fit the agenda" you mean. It doesnt't really matter how much you "research," you don't have inside information that the Estate does. So I prefer to believe the Estate's experts and MJs collaborators over guys on the internet "proving" that these songs are "fake."

You are wrong on so many levels, but I will leave it at that, you seem happy enough

 

[darkmed]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

There is no proof.

There's no proof on your side too buddy (apart from your expert ears and your vision of how a true fan should be).

Fan suing she got her evidence wait for the other side to provide what she got and then we'll see as someone suggested here before calm down

 

[elusive moonwalker]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

if such evidence is shown yes i agree with u on that

Well, if, for example there will be testimony about what Birchey claimed in his previous post (Eddie trying to present a brand new, destroyed hard drive as proof) that would be, for example, pretty damning for defendants. Why would anyone do that if he was telling the truth? Or if there is testimony from those present at that meeting that the Estate lied about all musicologists and producers agreeing that it was MJ then that too is damining evidence against the defendants. These are just some examples, but it won't necessarily go down just to expert testimony.

 

[Koopa Troopa]

It's not about being "hell-bent". It's about the simple fact that some of us... well, many of us do not think it's MJ's voice on those tracks. Very simple, nothing to do with being "hell-bent". He never sounded like that before or after. Then the Estate's/Sony's/Cascio's failure to provide any evidence and failure to give convincing arguments for why the tracks are MJ it just deepens the suspicion.

Here is an article from Friedman (who is the Cascio's buddy, so his source is probably the Cascios themselves):



http://www.showbiz411.com/2010/11/1...work-tapes-will-prove-its-his-voice-on-tracks

So they tried to pass a tape of MJ just hanging out in the studio with his kids as a "proof of authenticity". Friedman however says: "These aren’t outtakes of the songs" themselves! Very, very odd. How come you work on 12 songs and there aren't existing outtakes, nothing? Coupled with the fact that the songs do not sound like Michael it's all just very weird and make it suspicious.

But now here is the chance for each side to put what they have on the table. This is the chance for Eddie and the Estate to prove the songs are authentic, for once and for all.

I understand your reasoning, but there is one thing to be suspicious, and another to be unequivocal. Friedman's involvement doesn't make Cascio look good though. We will see how this works out.

 

[OnirMJ]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

It's really sad to see that some fans are still defending those bastards and their songs. Sad, sad, really really sad. And possible only in Michael Jackson fan community. No Beatles or Elvis fan would allow this to happen. Sad.

 

[Soundmind]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

In my opinion the Casicos found ways to get money out of their friendship with MJ; Eddie with the songs and Frank with the book.

Well, their way of exploiting that friendship was much better than that of Chandlers, Arvizos and Robsons. Nevertheless, they did exploit that friendship.

It is a scary thought as I believe in a desperate moment (financially) those guys did have the potential and could have also turned on MJ for $$$$.

 

[ivy]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

I think"likely" is a commonly used term in test like these, like in a DNA test where they'd say a person is 99.999999 percent likely the father or not. Even if they hadn't used the term itself, that .1 percent represents the "likely". Just saying.

as for test such as DNA test "likely" isn't a commonly used term. they used certainty, probability which means the tests are 99% accurate and there's 1% error rate.

I have no idea what is the norm for forensic tests or if "likely" is commonly used in that setting or if such tests comes with percentages of certainty and error rates, however just mathematically if someone says "this is more likely than it's not" it would be a 51-49 split at the minimal.

defendants who have a strong case do not settle

generally speaking - not true. There's no general rule that says people with strong cases doesn't settle - especially in civil cases, people settle for many reasons which doesn't necessarily mean guilt/innocence /liability or strong/weak case. (Remember MJ settlement). Cases take a long time, documents / trial evidence gets public, they require a lot of money and jury verdicts are impossible to predict (remember KJ case). That's why a settlement is highly recommended and offered and/or taken. Plus if you look to the cases that Estate was involved in you'll realize that they all either ended with successfully dismissal requests or a settlement. None of them went to a trial.

 

[Koopa Troopa]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

It's really sad to see that some fans are still defending those bastards and their songs. Sad, sad, really really sad. And possible only in Michael Jackson fan community. No Beatles or Elvis fan would allow this to happen. Sad.

Those "bastards" were close and loyal friends of Michael for almost 25 years, as well as praising him non-stop since his death. Nice that you have perspective on things, though...

 

[LastTear]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

In my opinion the Casicos found ways to get money out of their friendship with MJ; Eddie with the songs and Frank with the book.

Well, their way of exploiting that friendship was much better than that of Chandlers, Arvizos and Robsons. Nevertheless, they did exploit that friendship.

It is a scary thought as I believe in a desperate moment (financially) those guys did have the potential and could have also turned on MJ for $$$$.

To be perfectly honest I would rather their way than Wade Robson's way! Give me positives books and alleged fake vocals any day.