Latest on MJJC

Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG

Status
Not open for further replies.
Something Putnam says that we never really discussed is that a lot of the evidence about Michael like weight loss & drug use in 93 does not show that people would conclude Muarry was giving him prof in the night.
 
Im leaning towards AEG getting off. Both sides have bought up valid points but I still don't think the Jacksons have made their case.
 
I had no idea that Houghdal responded to 'get MJ a cheesburger' when an email on June 14 was forwarded to him about MJs physics.

Michael LePerruque did say MJ looked well on May 14th but also skinny... Putnam just said LePerruque said MJ looked GREAT!
 
Last edited:
Mneme, All Good did come up with the email between Phillips and Branca so it was not forbidden; it simply did not have relevance. Michael himself said his stress was from the TII tour.

Annita, I would like to see Dileo declaration as well. I would like to see proof Michael's legal team, who would advise him regarding the three party conflicted interest contract, did indeed see it.

Last Tear, AEG believes there was no written contract and that is correct; it was implied. Putnam suggested in closing that the jury review the indemnity clause that would protect them as the third party against the doctor's actions. Putnam would like the jury to see the non-executed written contract's indemnity clause as a valid clause in the implied contract but it was not discussed explicitly there.

The same with the "general care" phrase. Putnam wants the jurors to believe the doctor was fit for general care as per the non-executed written contract however; the doctor was not performing general care duties. In the implied contract, the doctor did what was necessary to ensure Michael showed up for rehearsal although he was not qualified to do what was necessary.

Putnam wants the jurors to believe AEG would have no foresight to be suspicious of the doctor however Gongaware spoke with two of Michael's tour doctors who forewarned him about Michael's health issues on tour. Previous tour doctors dealt with Michael's addiction and sleep issues in an non-ethical manner on two successive tours. Gongaware had to assure Finkelstein Michael was clean for TII as Finkelstein remembered what happened on the Dangerous tour. Gongaware and Phillips testified to not remembering discussing Michael's sleep issues for TII.
 
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. I don't understand why the AllGood stuff was off limits when everything else going back 20 years was on the table. B/c not only did they do nothing to try and help an 'obviously" deteriorating person who was their son, but they were trying to get him to perform with AllGood and Mrs. J was walking around with a check from that company for 2 million $. Patrick Allocco said Mrs J was totally 'on board" from the beginning.

So this is the hypocrisy of saying AEG should notice what you claim you did not. That AEG was applying pressure, but forgetting you did too--that you refused to take MJ's NO for an answer, that you kept up the pressure for him to perform in a family reunion at a critical time in his career--a major comeback after a devastating trial.

I just feel that regardless of the legal outcome, this was wrong and cruel to do, to look at that thin, pale, courageously striving person who had chosen to work with AEG and rather than offer support, add to his stress and try and get more out of him for yourself.

My mother used to present me with this quote: "How sharper than a serpent's tooth is an ungrateful child." However, this could be said also of an ungrateful family--they were not grateful-- but wanted more, and still do.
 
marebear said:
Do they have to answer yes to all the questions to get the verdict for the jacksons or all no for aeg?
Click to expand...

to get a verdict for Jacksons, jurors need to answer the first 5 questions with yes and later determine money amount and responsibility %

for AEG verdict, they only need to say no to one of the first 5 questions.
 
I did not realize Putnam is younger than Michael. What I liked so far with this argument is that it went right back to 09 and what was known prior to June 25, and I think it was good to remind the jury of that.

After reading the final jury instructions that Ivy posted, It really hit home to me why AEG presented their case in the way they did. I mean, I don't like it, but after looking at the finial instructions, I see that Putnam was addressing certain points listed in the instructions.
 
Putnam made valid point by showing what AEG saw to compare what Karen fake told about MJ being so thin that she could see his heart beat. Putnam said that AEG never went to MJ's dressing room so they couldn't have seen him like that, and when they saw MJ, he was wrapped up with clothing.
Karen as usual said nothing, only after when it was too late, she opens her mouth and get her pointy finger ready.
 
^Not sure why putnam made a thing about being unaware of mj's thinness. Aeg can't deny they thought mj was thin as they were discussing the need for a nutritionist. Mj losing 8/9lb per perf (?), made his weight an issue for a long tour.

LastTear said:
The question is whether Murray was unfit to carry out work relating to general medical needs.... at the point he was hired.
Click to expand...

Where in the jury instructions does it say that q2 refers to 'at the point he was hired' - i didn't see that or have you just added those words yourself.
 
Big Apple2 said:
But wasn't that exactly what Michael was doing?

Murray was a heart doctor with NO proper knowledge in the administration of propofol, nor how to alleviate any problems that might arise from same.

Michael knew it also, that's why he continued to search out a person with propofol experience. Just my opinion.
Click to expand...

To say mj knew murray was a rookie re prop is pure supposition. I can't see a man like murray admitting this, he wanted the gig so wd do his best to convince mj. Telling mj he had no prop experience but wd be willing to 'practise' on him, fingers crossed, doesn't sound the best way to go about that. Who knows why mj was searching out for others to help with his sleep in april, it cd be that he was looking for someone in addition to murray or instead of murray. All we know is that once murray began using prop in may (at least acc to his interview with the detectives) we have no more evidence that mj was still looking for someone. Mj had options, he cd have gone back to dr adams if he felt murray wasn't competent, he didn't.
 
scream-michael-jackson-music-videos-15316498-315-240.gif
cabecadanocomp%5B1%5D.gif
*big sigh*
 
Now we are learning more things that were not in the tweets like after Gonga told Muarry no about the 5 million and hung up the phone, Muarry ordered more prof. Muarry knew he was going on tour with Michael before he had contact with AEG, and this is very important to me.

He did great with #5, to me.

The next question, he is saying a lot of the things we said about plaintiffs saying he was so sick and yet he would go on & tour and make millions. Now he gets into the speculative because the jury can't give for speculative damages.
 
Last edited:
Ouch, Putnam is using plaintiffs own words against them.
 
Bonnie Blue said:
To say mj knew murray was a rookie re prop is pure supposition. I can't see a man like murray admitting this, he wanted the gig so wd do his best to convince mj.
Click to expand...

And Mother's side is blaming AEG for not doing a background check. Go figure.

As per YOU, Murray said he could do it, and Michael just believed him. Okay?!?

In my opinion, Michael (God love him) wanted to believe anybody who was willing to meet with his request.
 
marebear said:
Panish goes again tomorrow?
Click to expand...

He'll "probably" play his MTV inspired MJ montage again.

I mean, seriously, what's left except to TRY and play with the jury's heart strings again.

Keeping in mind that Mr. Panish is not only trying to win this case, but his firm is also banking on their cut.

I have to laugh at not just Mr. Panish, but any civil attorney, who makes a claim for their client, when we all know that close to the majority, of any money won, goes to them and not their client.

Just like AEG trying to make a profit with the 50-dates, so is Mr. Panish and his law firm with this lawsuit. IN THE REAL WORLD IT'S CALLED BUSINESS AS USUAL.

You know me, just trying to keep it real!
 
Last edited:
^^Yeah he has the rebuttal closing.

Well I have to say Putnam's closing made me realize we missed a lot of key testimony. We were only getting tweets that helped the family side. Now from what Putnam said I see a lot of information came out that supported AEG. I did not know they had a timeline with Muarry's activity with Michael before AEG's first contact with Muarry, for example. If we had that, we could have discussed all this at the time.
 
Petrarose said:
^^Yeah he has the rebuttal closing.

Well I have to say Putnam's closing made me realize we missed a lot of key testimony. We were only getting tweets that helped the family side. Now from what Putnam said I see a lot of information came out that supported AEG. I did not know they had a timeline with Muarry's activity with Michael before AEG's first contact with Muarry, for example. If we had that, we could have discussed all this at the time.
Click to expand...

Actually we knew those points, like Gonga refuse point blank 5 million and hung up, and we knew the timeline when CM was ordering propofol, but what we didn't do was to put it all together like Putnam did, and if this case was to go on jury now, I would be willing to bet that plaintiffs lost their case.

Additional note, I think Alan Dukes article about defense's closing article is going be rather short today.
 
Tygger said:
Mneme, All Good did come up with the email between Phillips and Branca so it was not forbidden; it simply did not have relevance. Michael himself said his stress was from the TII tour.

Annita, I would like to see Dileo declaration as well. I would like to see proof Michael's legal team, who would advise him regarding the three party conflicted interest contract, did indeed see it.

Last Tear, AEG believes there was no written contract and that is correct; it was implied. Putnam suggested in closing that the jury review the indemnity clause that would protect them as the third party against the doctor's actions. Putnam would like the jury to see the non-executed written contract's indemnity clause as a valid clause in the implied contract but it was not discussed explicitly there.

The same with the "general care" phrase. Putnam wants the jurors to believe the doctor was fit for general care as per the non-executed written contract however; the doctor was not performing general care duties. In the implied contract, the doctor did what was necessary to ensure Michael showed up for rehearsal although he was not qualified to do what was necessary.

Putnam wants the jurors to believe AEG would have no foresight to be suspicious of the doctor however Gongaware spoke with two of Michael's tour doctors who forewarned him about Michael's health issues on tour. Previous tour doctors dealt with Michael's addiction and sleep issues in an non-ethical manner on two successive tours. Gongaware had to assure Finkelstein Michael was clean for TII as Finkelstein remembered what happened on the Dangerous tour. Gongaware and Phillips testified to not remembering discussing Michael's sleep issues for TII.
Click to expand...

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. You can not have this both ways. Again double standard. You definitely present Michael Jackson as a little boy who needs an adult with him during a medical examination.

After listening to the AEG closing I'm even more disappointed at Jacksons. Their greed totally destroyed the chance of improving Michael's image for general public consumption. Whatever he was doing in privacy of his bedrooms or doctor's offices he was doing it with dignity keeping it private. Even as an "addict" he still was able to work hard and support his children, his mother and other Jacksons. We absolutely did not need to hear about all the details which came to the light during this trial. At least not so soon after his death. It will take a long time when his name will be mention by presidents or any business advertisements. This trial didn't present Michael Jackson as a role model for sure and I don't blame AEG for this. They are not the ones who started to promote "the addict" image, they just followed Jacksons clues.
 
Bubs said:
Actually we knew those points, like Gonga refuse point blank 5 million and hung up, and we knew the timeline when CM was ordering propofol, but what we didn't do was to put it all together like Putnam did, and if this case was to go on jury now, I would be willing to bet that plaintiffs lost their case.

Additional note, I think Alan Dukes article about defense's closing article is going be rather short today.
Click to expand...

When did Murray start ordering Propofol, did that come up in Mr. Putnam's closing at all?

Oh and I totally agree with you regarding Mr. Dukes next article. LOL! Somebody needs to tell him that all of his hard work will not garner him an interview with MJ's children after the verdict has been announced. That promise has already been extended to Oprah Winfrey, in my opinion. I mean, why mess with a small potato like Alan Duke, when you have Ms. Winfrey on SPEED DIAL.
 
Did anyone catch Putnam taking something from Randy's testimony and using it against KJ?
Randy testified that MJ told his family members to sign that letter sent to People magazine that they all denying participating "interventions" and MJ had no drug problems. Putnam took it and run with it in his closing argument. He said MJ hid his drug use and KJ sign it to hide (or something similar).
If Randy was watching, I bet his big head is about to pop, and he'll be courssing himself for talking too much.


Big Apple2 said:
When did Murray start ordering Propofol, did that come up in Mr. Putnam's closing at all?
Click to expand...

We knew the dates from CM trial. Putnam said that even after the date when Gonga hung up with CM, CM still went on ordering propofol. He was saying no matter what, CM was still going to give propofol to MJ. It wasn't like Panish said that CM felt pressure from AEG and started giving propfol to MJ. He couldn't have felt any pressure from AEG because they hung up on him when he asked 5 mill.
 
Last edited:
Did Tito's boys testify as to their knowledge regarding Michael's SEVER insomnia issues?

I was just wondering, since they have always "claimed" how close they were to their Uncle Mike.
 
Why is the plantiff allowed a rebuttal? Isnt't the defendant supposed to have the last word?
 
elapentela said:
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. You can not have this both ways. Again double standard. You definitely present Michael Jackson as a little boy who needs an adult with him during a medical examination.

After listening to the AEG closing I'm even more disappointed at Jacksons. Their greed totally destroyed the chance of improving Michael's image for general public consumption. Whatever he was doing in privacy of his bedrooms or doctor's offices he was doing it with dignity keeping it private. Even as an "addict" he still was able to work hard and support his children, his mother and other Jacksons. We absolutely did not need to hear about all the details which came to the light during this trial. At least not so soon after his death. It will take a long time when his name will be mention by presidents or any business advertisements. This trial didn't present Michael Jackson as a role model for sure and I don't blame AEG for this. They are not the ones who started to promote "the addict" image, they just followed Jacksons clues.
Click to expand...

Please.. MJ will be fine... you are overexaggerating.. If his image wasn't destroyed with false allegations over 25 years and a fake 2005 molestation trial, then it won't be over this bullcrap... If anything this trial made me more sympathetic to MJ because it proved he had real medical conditions and it showed his doctors took advantage for money and didn't help him at all.. He was the victim in my opinion. The medical profession and the doctors let him down and his family or friends didn't help him.
 
Big Apple2 said:
Did Tito's boys testify as to their knowledge regarding Michael's SEVER insomnia issues?

I was just wondering, since they have always "claimed" how close they were to their Uncle Mike.
Click to expand...

As far as I remember, they didn't say anything about MJ's sleeping problem, but Randy said MJ didn't have any problems for sleeping and loved to tour, and he was addict in need for countless intervention, and Tito's boys testified they never saw MJ on under influence.
 
Big Apple2 said:
Did Tito's boys testify as to their knowledge regarding Michael's SEVER insomnia issues?

I was just wondering, since they have always "claimed" how close they were to their Uncle Mike.
Click to expand...


Of course not.. None of MJ's family helped him at all.. His parents expected AEG to do it, yet neither of them did anything to help MJ with his medical concerns.
 
Bubs said:
As far as I remember, they didn't say anything about MJ's sleeping problem, but Randy said MJ didn't have any problems for sleeping and loved to tour, and he was addict in need for countless intervention, and Tito's boys testified they never saw MJ on under influence.
Click to expand...


YEP! a big mess.. Randy said he did 10 interventions, yet Taj said he lived with MJ during the trial and never saw him under the influence.. go figure:black_eye:
 
I wanted to watch AEG's closing but HLN didn't show much. By your comments I think Putnam did a good job. Is there a link where I can watch it?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top