Lawyer for Michael Jackson's Dad Targets AEG

[tofdel1]

That is utterly outrageous! No narcotics were found in Michael's system. Propofol is not physically addictive/not a controlled substance. What IS Oxman doing?

oh god it never ends.:no: Maybe thats why the DA is not charging him with higher charges. These loose cannons dont know when to shut the f up. And Randy on CNN. Looks like they are gonna file suit for $$$$$.

 

[PCR]

By using the ADA Oxman is actually saying that MJ was not currently using drugs. The ADA does not offer protection for individuals actively using drugs. From the ADA regs:

Individuals who are current illegal users of drugs are not protected under the ADA. The legal use of a controlled substance under medical perspective is permitted. Addiction is considered a disability. A person who is addicted to drugs, but is not actively using drugs, is considered a person with a disability and is protected by the law.

Not sure if Oxman is smart enough to realize this.....

MJ disclosed that he had an addiction problem years ago therefore AEG could ask him if he needed accomodation. But, yes, MJ would have had to request 'reasonable' accomodation under the ADA. If he didn't then AEG wouldn't be liable for violating the ADA.

I also believe that Oxman would have to prove that there was an 'employment' relationship, in the legal sense, between AEG and MJ to even go down the road of ADA protection.

thanks so much for such valuable legal info
this is quite interesting, indeed.
I just wonder where all this will lead us to, all this talk about MJ being this and that... aaahhh....:scratch:

 

[Annie123]

It's related to the illegal use of drugs. This would include using legal drugs in an illegal manner. Sorry, I mistated that in my original post.

OK, I see that, thanks. I actually was thinking legal use of legal drugs, but I don't really want to give Brian Oxman's nonsense any more air time.

 

[curlybrat]

thanks so much for such valuable legal info
this is quite interesting, indeed.
I just wonder where all this will lead us to, all this talk about MJ being this and that... aaahhh....:scratch:

You're welcome. I work with ADA regs from time to time so I thought it was strange that Oxman was citing the ADA in this circumstance.

 

[TheChosenOne]

What is ironic is that Mr Joe Jackson wanted his 'drug addicted' 'disabled' son to perform for AGE!!!

Michael wasn't so 'drug addicted' and 'disabled' that he would not have been able to perform for AGE. It seems like it was okay for Michael to be 'disabled' as long as he was still able to line Joe's pockets.

At NO POINT, in all the research we have done, has it even be hinted at that Joe Jackson said to AGE "Michael is not well. He really needs to get help. He is deep denial about his drug problem. Pushing him to perform now would be morally wrong. It would be taking advantage of him in a vulnerable state."

From what I have seen and read it is a case of some members of the family wanting Michael to go on tour with them DESPITE knowing/believing that he was addicted to drugs. What does that say about them?

Peace out.

 

[PCR]

From what I have seen and read it is a case of some members of the family wanting Michael to go on tour with them DESPITE knowing/believing that he was addicted to drugs. What does that say about them?

Peace out.

this... wowow.....:no:

 

[curlybrat]

What is ironic is that Mr Joe Jackson wanted his 'drug addicted' 'disabled' son to perform for AGE!!!

Michael wasn't so 'drug addicted' and 'disabled' that he would not have been able to perform for AGE. It seems like it was okay for Michael to be 'disabled' as long as he was still able to line Joe's pockets.

At NO POINT, in all the research we have done, has it even be hinted at that Joe Jackson said to AGE "Michael is not well. He really needs to get help. He is deep denial about his drug problem. Pushing him to perform now would be morally wrong. It would be taking advantage of him in a vulnerable state."

From what I have seen and read it is a case of some members of the family wanting Michael to go on tour with them DESPITE knowing/believing that he was addicted to drugs. What does that say about them?

Peace out.

Very ironic!

I don't think Oxman will dare claim that 'performing' was the problem. From what I gather, he is trying to state that AEG didn't give Michael reasonable accomodation for his "disability" by subjecting him to the show schedule or possibly the rehearsal schedule that AEG dictated. I cannot find the logic in his use of the ADA. I think it just shows he's really grasping at straws.

The worst part is that it gets 'drug addict' back in the headlines and most people don't know that by using the ADA he's stating that MJ was NOT currently abusing drugs.

 

[JMie]

We must have faith.

Sorry Jacksons fans but everything has a limit. Even blindness.

I'm tired of all this mess.

Or the Jacksons start acting with some dignity or shut up and go all to #@!$.

The Jackson 5: Michael was the Jackson 5. Period.

La Toya: The only thing she does is give interviews to tabloids. Period.

Tito: A mediocre musician. Period.

Janet: She is over. Even after American Idol her album (copied from MJ's Number Ones) failed to enter into Billboard 200. Period.

Jermaine: a loser. Period.

Rebbie: At least Janet had a career one day. Period.

Marlon and Jackie: Nobody remembers them. Period.

Randy: Who is Randy? Period.

The only brother that I respect is Brandon.

Joe: The old man is a JOKE. PERIOD.

I know the cousins and nephews can not do very much but I hope the 3T start doing something to protect the legacy and the children of the man who helped them.

my thoughts exactly.

 

[ivy]

Very ironic!

I don't think Oxman will dare claim that 'performing' was the problem. From what I gather, he is trying to state that AEG didn't give Michael reasonable accomodation for his "disability" by subjecting him to the show schedule or possibly the rehearsal schedule that AEG dictated. I cannot find the logic in his use of the ADA. I think it just shows he's really grasping at straws.

The worst part is that it gets 'drug addict' back in the headlines and most people don't know that by using the ADA he's stating that MJ was NOT currently abusing drugs.

I'm trying to make sense of Oxman's logic (perhaps it's a lost cause to start with).

Now please correct me if I'm wrong..

So addiction is considered a disability and with the 1993 pain medicine event it could fall under this category.

But doesn't this addiction should result in a physical or mental impairment that affects life activities to be considered a disability? Just having an addiction issue wouldn't equal to automatic disability, would it?

Then we're seeing that he says "keep a grueling and dangerous work schedule", so that means a physical disability.

so is his theory something like this "Michael's past issues had caused him some health problems (and we know Oxman also goes around saying he wasn't healthy) this falls under a disability and he should have been provided accommodations?

still I can't see how he can make this stick honestly.

 

[Sophielo]

I'm trying to make sense of Oxman's logic (perhaps it's a lost cause to start with).

Now please correct me if I'm wrong..

So addiction is considered a disability and with the 1993 pain medicine event it could fall under this category.

But doesn't this addiction should result in a physical or mental impairment that affects life activities to be considered a disability? Just having an addiction issue wouldn't equal to automatic disability, would it?

Then we're seeing that he says "keep a grueling and dangerous work schedule", so that means a physical disability.

so is his theory something like this "Michael's past issues had caused him some health problems (and we know Oxman also goes around saying he wasn't healthy) this falls under a disability and he should have been provided accommodations?

still I can't see how he can make this stick honestly.

Of course its not going to stick, its ridiculous to think it can and isn't he still suspended from the bar anyway? He's just a joke, pure and simple. And Nancii is right, Michael wasn't 'disabled' when they wanted him to do that AGE concert now was he?

 

[curlybrat]

I'm trying to make sense of Oxman's logic (perhaps it's a lost cause to start with).

Now please correct me if I'm wrong..

So addiction is considered a disability and with the 1993 pain medicine event it could fall under this category.

But doesn't this addiction should result in a physical or mental impairment that affects life activities to be considered a disability? Just having an addiction issue wouldn't equal to automatic disability, would it?

Then we're seeing that he says "keep a grueling and dangerous work schedule", so that means a physical disability.

so is his theory something like this "Michael's past issues had caused him some health problems (and we know Oxman also goes around saying he wasn't healthy) this falls under a disability and he should have been provided accommodations?

still I can't see how he can make this stick honestly.

I agree that Oxman will have a hard time making this stick.

First he has to establish that AEG was in a position to violate the ADA. The ADA was established to guarantee equal opportunity for individuals with disabilities in public accommodations, employment, transportation, State and local government services, and telecommunications. (The only one that I can think of that would apply would be employment so he would have to prove there was an employment relationship.)

Oxman will have to prove that MJ had a disability under the ADA. Then he has to prove the disability substanitally limited a major life activity. (You are correct that the addiction itself isn't enough to require protection.) And then he has to prove that AEG discriminated against MJ because of his disability which would include providing reasonable accomodation.

 

[myosotis]

Apologies if my query has already been answered elsewhere...but I don't really understand why more is not being made of Michaels' lung inflammation (is that the correct finding(?) from the autopsy report, a) because any physical problems during rehearsals would be related to this, and it would not be surprising that mj would require medication for symptoms including exhaustion, pain and difficulty in sleeping, and also b) why AEG is not being challenged over insufficient / insufficiently complete medical checks for insurance before rehearsals started...ie as they said Michael was 'fit' AEG must have 'missed' this physical problem therefore putting Michael at risk of injury through overwork and stress.

 

[dianadebraga]

Apologies if my query has already been answered elsewhere...but I don't really understand why more is not being made of Michaels' lung inflammation (is that the correct finding(?) from the autopsy report.

Michaels' lung inflammation was related to LUPUS, MJ talks on lung inflammation in his auto-bio.

Especially on one episode when he & Jermaine as kids were at beach, Michael collapsed - because a lack of air (something like that) - and Jermaine led him to the hospital.

The vitiligo, insomnia also is because LUPUS, was A. Klein who diagnosed the LUPUS in Michael

Michael had LUPUS


http://www.lifewithoutlupusproject.com/In_Memory_Of/Michael_Jackson.aspx

 

[Laura.L.]

Could someone just

I'm getting more and more frustrated as the story evolves. I can't even find anything smart to say about Joe&Oxman's latest activities for they are so ludicrous!! Like so many of you have already stated, there's a time when one should just STFU and that's something the Jackson family + their lowlife representatives have yet to learn.

It's miraculous how a beautiful and generous person like Michael came out of such a money-hungry family.

What is ironic is that Mr Joe Jackson wanted his 'drug addicted' 'disabled' son to perform for AGE!!!

Michael wasn't so 'drug addicted' and 'disabled' that he would not have been able to perform for AGE. It seems like it was okay for Michael to be 'disabled' as long as he was still able to line Joe's pockets.

At NO POINT, in all the research we have done, has it even be hinted at that Joe Jackson said to AGE "Michael is not well. He really needs to get help. He is deep denial about his drug problem. Pushing him to perform now would be morally wrong. It would be taking advantage of him in a vulnerable state."

From what I have seen and read it is a case of some members of the family wanting Michael to go on tour with them DESPITE knowing/believing that he was addicted to drugs. What does that say about them?

Peace out.

For real. I feel like crying out of frustration. :no:

 

[Diplomate]

What is ironic is that Mr Joe Jackson wanted his 'drug addicted' 'disabled' son to perform for AGE!!!

Michael wasn't so 'drug addicted' and 'disabled' that he would not have been able to perform for AGE. It seems like it was okay for Michael to be 'disabled' as long as he was still able to line Joe's pockets.

At NO POINT, in all the research we have done, has it even be hinted at that Joe Jackson said to AGE "Michael is not well. He really needs to get help. He is deep denial about his drug problem. Pushing him to perform now would be morally wrong. It would be taking advantage of him in a vulnerable state."

From what I have seen and read it is a case of some members of the family wanting Michael to go on tour with them DESPITE knowing/believing that he was addicted to drugs. What does that say about them?

Peace out.

BRAVO.

No need to say more, you said EVERYTHING.

 

[Suzie B]

whatever he can to get Joe money - regardless of anything else. Doesn't matter if they lie to ruin Michael's reputation and legacy or if what he spouts helps Murray's defense. As long as Joe gets his cash nothing else matters. It's sick and sad, but not at all surprising.

If anyone is responsible for Michael's rehearsing habits it's Joe. In Moonwalk, Michael describes how he and his brothers had to rehearse for shows and recordings late into the night, doing things over and over until perfect - often getting home late at night to the early morning hours and having to go to bed without even time or energy to eat. When habits are ingrained in childhood they are hard to break and that sounds just like the rehearsal pattern Michael was following for TTI. Joe needs to look at the "Man in the Mirror" and realize his own contributions to Michael's problems. Be a REAL father and fight for justice for his son - not money to line his pockets.

I agree, I don't want to get off subject but it seemed likely that Michael was overdoing it with the rehearsals going on so late etc - those habits were in the Bad tour and way back to J5 days and learnt from Joe. I really think Joe needs to take a good look at himself and what he has done to Michael over the years. Joe really loves his money perhaps more than his own son.

 

[MJJ:G.O.A.T]

What is ironic is that Mr Joe Jackson wanted his 'drug addicted' 'disabled' son to perform for AGE!!!

Michael wasn't so 'drug addicted' and 'disabled' that he would not have been able to perform for AGE. It seems like it was okay for Michael to be 'disabled' as long as he was still able to line Joe's pockets.

At NO POINT, in all the research we have done, has it even be hinted at that Joe Jackson said to AGE "Michael is not well. He really needs to get help. He is deep denial about his drug problem. Pushing him to perform now would be morally wrong. It would be taking advantage of him in a vulnerable state."

From what I have seen and read it is a case of some members of the family wanting Michael to go on tour with them DESPITE knowing/believing that he was addicted to drugs. What does that say about them?

Peace out.

Quoted For Truth.

 

[TheChosenOne]

I know this is slightly OT, but the question burning in me is - these family members were worried about Michael but had little access to him and when they did see him he rebuffed their help. If they did not SEE Michael abusing prescription drugs WHY did they think he was abusing them?

None of them have said that they SAW him over-medicating. So they were going on their worries and somebody else's word? Who's word? Who told them that Michael was abusing medication?

 

[elusive moonwalker]

randy if u beleive some. as alot accuse him of being the sources for freidmans druggie articles back around 06. theres also the issue of wanting to blame something else for why your brother doesnt want to see you. so instead of looking at themselves as the reason they need to find an alternative.even if that alterantive just confirms u had no contact and no clue about what was happening in your bros life. but ratherthan that loking at the real reason ie YOU

 

[marc_vivien]

the medical board has no authority over AEG

here :

The Medical Board is responsible for investigating complaints and disciplining physicians and other allied health professionals who violate the law. If a doctor or other Board licensee appears to have violated the laws that apply to the practice of medicine, Board staff will investigate and charges may be filed.

http://www.medbd.ca.gov/consumer/complaint_info.html