Latest on MJJC

Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

Is the case being televised? I haven't been to the forum in a while, I wasn't sure where to find that info. Thanks =)
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

Panish is saying that b/c Murray was in debt and b/c Gongaware/Phillips pressured him to get MJ to rehearsals, therefore CM was forced into doing what MJ wanted (propofol) or face not getting paid. Well, this seems to beg the result--that if he killed his one patient, he wouldn't get paid either.

It would seem Panish is trying to create a logical connection for the jury that CM had no choice but to give MJ propofol in that way--to do what MJ and AEG wanted him to do--seems like he is saying CM is the victim here (??). How does pressure to get someone to rehearsals translate into killing them? So AEG is the big bad stressor on both MJ and CM. Stress plus no supervision is the gambit here. Yes, CM asking for 5 Million is a joke (almost like asking for 40 Billion) and was a 'red flag' in the sense to show his inflated sense of self-worth and his greed, but was it a 'red flag' that he was going to kill MJ?

If the judge is on the ball, this trial IMHO should not last 2 to 4 months.
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

from Opening statements KJ lawyer Panish said this and I have added it to my siggy where it will be for all time. :(

"His stirring voice, his musical genius, his creativity and his generosity and his huge heart was extinguished forever."
 
Last edited:
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

He didn't mean a word of it. Damn this is the longest fifteen mminutes
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

jamba said:
Panish is saying that b/c Murray was in debt and b/c Gongaware/Phillips pressured him to get MJ to rehearsals, therefore CM was forced into doing what MJ wanted (propofol) or face not getting paid. Well, this seems to beg the result--that if he killed his one patient, he wouldn't get paid either.

It would seem Panish is trying to create a logical connection for the jury that CM had no choice but to give MJ propofol in that way--to do what MJ and AEG wanted him to do--seems like he is saying CM is the victim here (??). How does pressure to get someone to rehearsals translate into killing them? So AEG is the big bad stressor on both MJ and CM. Stress plus no supervision is the gambit here. Yes, CM asking for 5 Million is a joke (almost like asking for 40 Billion) and was a 'red flag' in the sense to show his inflated sense of self-worth and his greed, but was it a 'red flag' that he was going to kill MJ?

If the judge is on the ball, this trial IMHO should not last 2 to 4 months.
Click to expand...

Neither side is arguing Michael was intentionally killed by Murray - they're working under the paradigm that it was an accident, but nevertheless CM still was the licensed professional who went against ethics to give a wealthy patient what he wanted, regardless of its detrimental effects. They're insinuating that the stressor was AEG who (almost surely) insisted CM do what he had to do to get Michael to, for want of better phrasing, "shut up and go to rehearsals."

My two cents:
The burden of proof isn't astronomical for KJ and her side really. It would appear AEG did hire and negligently supervise CM, though correlation to Michael's death takes evidence to jump to causation. And as much as I'd have done anything for Michael to do a 260 show tour, bigger than any other, showing the world that he was still the performer I was a generation too late to see... Even I have to admit it was a tall order when 50 shows seemed to cause him so much stress and anxiety. And the $40 billion asking-price is just in case anyone for a moment assumed good faith from the Jacksons when it comes to Michael's Estate, and ultimately his legacy.
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

MJMarty said:
Neither side is arguing Michael was intentionally killed by Murray - they're working under the paradigm that it was an accident, but nevertheless CM still was the licensed professional who went against ethics to give a wealthy patient what he wanted, regardless of its detrimental effects. They're insinuating that the stressor was AEG who (almost surely) insisted CM do what he had to do to get Michael to, for want of better phrasing, "shut up and go to rehearsals."

My two cents:
The burden of proof isn't astronomical for KJ and her side really. It would appear AEG did hire and negligently supervise CM, though correlation to Michael's death takes evidence to jump to causation. And as much as I'd have done anything for Michael to do a 260 show tour, bigger than any other, showing the world that he was still the performer I was a generation too late to see... Even I have to admit it was a tall order when 50 shows seemed to cause him so much stress and anxiety. And the $40 billion asking-price is just in case anyone for a moment assumed good faith from the Jacksons when it comes to Michael's Estate, and ultimately his legacy.
Click to expand...

Seems like there are probabilites here--if indeed they did not supervise CM enough, how probable would it be that a lack of supervision (after agreeing what is appropriate supervision) led to the death of his patient? How probable or improbable was that?

It seems the jury has to agree that Murray or any employee could be a killer, and that therefore a lack of supervision by the employer means that death is a probable outcome. I think it's a stretch.
 
Last edited:
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

who said Michael was going to do 260 shows?
 
Anthony McCartney Anthony McCartney ‏@mccartneyAP 5 min

Putnam focused on Rowe for a bit, saying that she was aware of Jackson’s propofol use as far back as the 1990s.
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

Justthefacts said:
He didn't mean a word of it. Damn this is the longest fifteen mminutes
Click to expand...

Exactly. He used that statement to make it seem a great person died, but in his next breath he presents a Michael who was so pitiful that he was shouted at, lacked choices, & resorted to prof due to his stress. Now he hides the true use for prof which was for sleep. With Panish prof was due to Michael's stress due to AEG stressing him out & the rehearsals. It seems according to Panish AEG stressed Muarry out too. Panish needs to make up his mind on a lot of things. Did Michael take prof due to an addiction caused by demerol, or did he take prof because he was stressed by AEG.

I guess when we get the transcript we will get a clearer picture of what he means.
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

I was in the news thread but does anyone know about the note Michael wrote his mother?
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

Debbie knew about Michael using Propfol?
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

jamba said:
Neither side is arguing Michael was intentionally killed by Murray - they're working under the paradigm that it was an accident, but nevertheless CM still was the licensed professional who went against ethics to give a wealthy patient what he wanted, regardless of its detrimental effects. They're insinuating that the stressor was AEG who (almost surely) insisted CM do what he had to do to get Michael to, for want of better phrasing, "shut up and go to rehearsals."
Click to expand...


Unfortunately it is very odd. Murray's acts weren't negligent but intentional. Licensed doctor after all can't be that idiot.

As for "wrongful death" lawsuite, I believe KJ will not win cause AEG did not hire CM who's contract never was signed, he never was paid for helping MJ to sleep. Even though AEG agreed to pay, they did not and could not agree to supervise CM. Licensed doctor is not subject of supervision by someone who has expertise in that field.
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

So sad.... :( I just keep wondering if Katherine is quiet sitting in court listening to all these atrocities about her son..... (Panish > :puke: :perrin:) I could not bear. :no: Michael did not deserve this! This family is not worth anything! :puke:






Justthefacts said:
Debbie knew about Michael using Propfol?
Click to expand...


She is not on the witness list? :scratch:Because if is it, for sure will ask her about it.
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

Panish keep going on about that e-mail, so I think that is the worst one they have. I remember Randy saying there were worse, but it does not seem so. How does he know AEG wanted to compete with Live Nation as #1? Anyone knows why TMez was there on opening day. He seems to be giving the family support. Katherine dabbed her eyes when the letter was read. I guess the family is hoping emotion will sway that jury.

Putnam is coming across as even more offensive toward the dead person than Panish. If Putnam is not careful, he is going to turn the jury against his side by his attitude. He started off attacking Michael too severely. Then he brings up Michael's debt. What does the debt have to do with this trial? I know on of muarry's several defense was that Michael wanted to sleep and knew if he did not perform he could not pay his debt, so in desperation he took too much prof. However, with Putnam, what is he using the debt to show?

I was hoping at the end of today, that Panish would say who his first witnesses would be.
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

Petrarose said:
Panish keep going on about that e-mail, so I think that is the worst one they have. I remember Randy saying there were worse, but it does not seem so. How does he know AEG wanted to compete with Live Nation as #1? Anyone knows why TMez was there on opening day. He seems to be giving the family support. Katherine dabbed her eyes when the letter was read. I guess the family is hoping emotion will sway that jury.

Putnam is coming across as even more offensive toward the dead person than Panish. If Putnam is not careful, he is going to turn the jury against his side by his attitude. He started off attacking Michael too severely. Then he brings up Michael's debt. What does the debt have to do with this trial? I know on of muarry's several defense was that Michael wanted to sleep and knew if he did not perform he could not pay his debt, so in desperation he took too much prof. However, with Putnam, what is he using the debt to show?

I was hoping at the end of today, that Panish would say who his first witnesses would be.
Click to expand...

Putman is bringing in MJ debt to show that his debt was also contributing to his pressure, which led him to use propofol and other drugs. Remember MJ was heavily indebted and was facing foreclosure. so he had to perform almost urgently or faced the prospect of losing his assets. that also piled on the pressure on MJ. But as the pressure mounted, MJ was resorting to some drugs as a way of managing his anxiety and stress.

these pressures were not AEG making.

that's the way i'm seeing things.
 
Last edited:
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

It shows that their was pressure on Michael put it was pressure that had nothing to with AEG
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

Justthefacts said:
It shows that their was pressure on Michael put it was pressure that had nothing to with AEG
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's also the way i see why AEG would mention mj debt.
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

Ashtanga said:
So sad.... :( I just keep wondering if Katherine is quiet sitting in court listening to all these atrocities about her son..... (Panish > :puke: :perrin:) I could not bear. :no: Michael did not deserve this! This family is not worth anything! :puke:









She is not on the witness list? :scratch:Because if is it, for sure will ask her about it.
Click to expand...

I heard today on tv she is on witness list?????
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

Passy & Justhefacts thanks, so the debt pressure caused him to use prof, rather than AEG causing that pressure. Unless AEG is saying look not only us pressured him but his debt did too. Since Michael had debt a long time, why wasn't he taking the prof, then, before Muarry came on board? You see I don't think that type of argument is going to help AEG, because Panish could show that AEG added a more immediate pressure on top of the debt. Then, again how was Michael going to continue the TII show with AEG, and make all that money, according the family side, if AEG was stressing him out so much. I guess both sides will throw up all these possibilities in order to cause some doubt in the jurors mind.
 
Last edited:
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

I seriously don't understand how some fans are supporting the Jacksons, how someone so kindhearted, so sweet and loving could come from that family of vultures. :mad: I hope you're happy Katherine for what you started letting others and yourselves throwing your son to the mud in the name of greed!
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

Petrarose said:
Passy & Justhefacts thanks, so the debt pressure caused him to use prof, rather than AEG causing that pressure. Unless AEG is saying look not only us pressured him but his debt did too. Since Michael had debt a long time, why wasn't he taking the prof, then, before Muarry came on board? You see I don't think that type of argument is going to help AEG, because Panish could show that AEG added a more immediate pressure on top of the debt. Then, again how was Michael going to continue the TII show with AEG, and make all that money, according the family side, if AEG was stressing him out so much. I guess both sides will throw up all these possibilities in order to cause some doubt in the jurors mind.
Click to expand...

My impression is the debt had reached a crisis point b/c there was a big loan payment due at the end of 09, and he had to come up with a way to cover it and could not rely on loans based on assets as that had already been done and banks were not willing to lend to him. The bank loans he had were at high interest rates (16%). Also the problematic relationship with Tohme was adding to the stress as at the very moment he needed a great or good manager, he was actually afraid of Tohme (according to June Gatlin) and at minimum didn't trust him. So he really had no manager as DiLeo didn't seem active, except for trying to 100,000 out of AllGood. According to Karen Moriarty he was also facing 15 lawsuits when he died.

Mega stress.
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

Poor michael everyone was out to use him expect liz taylor and his kids!
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

Katherine has some nerve to come and cry in front of the jurors :smilerolleyes:, the more haters on that jury the better, they won't award her a penny for her tacky performance .

How do they believe anyone especially those jurors with strong opinions of MJ would show any sympathy toward him if he was the screwed up druggie they described ?
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

To me one bombshell from today is that Debbie Rowe was there in the 90's helping to administer propofol or witnessing it. This must have been during the Dangerous tour. So I gather she is going to testify to that for the defense. I wonder how that affects her relationship with Paris--oif it does.Maybe she has no choice but testify if she was subpoened.

The other surprise was Michael's note to his mother saying "all my success" was to win her "smile of approval." How old was he when he wrote it? Sounds like something a young and insecure person would write. Also where is the unconditional love if he has to strive like that for her "smile of approval."
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

A lot of what Panish says is true. Yes, AEG were the heartless assholes who didn't care. The summary, btw, misses one email Panish read:

ABC7 Court News ?@ABC7Courts 2h
Email when AEG was putting together This is it movie: make sure we take out shots of MJ in red jacket... He looks too thin, skeletal

That says it all. But the thing is, this doesn't make them negligent in hiring Murray. This trial is not about them being assholes, this trial is about who hired the doctor.

A lot of what Putnam says is also true - MJ knew how to hide his private matters from people, he kept everyone at a distance, and I'm sure AEG didn't know. And their argument that they are not responsible for Murray is very convincing.

But the bottom line is: we've heard all of this before. We've seen the leaked emails, we've heard what the witnesses say, we know Michael had addiction problems. Is it really necessary to reiterate this and rub it into public consciousness: "He was an addict, he was an addict, he was an addict..."? To make sure he is remembered as one? Do Jacksons even ask themselves this question?
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

Debbie was with him during the history tour. She gave birth to their two kids during the history era.
 
Re: Jacksons vs AEG - Day 1 - April 29 2013 - Discussion

jamba said:
To me one bombshell from today is that Debbie Rowe was there in the 90's helping to administer propofol or witnessing it. This must have been during the Dangerous tour.
Click to expand...

I think rather HIStory tour. I've never heard of claims of Propofol use during Dangerous tour, but there were such claims made about HIStory (Ratner).


The other surprise was Michael's note to his mother saying "all my success" was to win her "smile of approval." How old was he when he wrote it? Sounds like something a young and insecure person would write. Also where is the unconditional love if he has to strive like that for her "smile of approval."
Click to expand...

That's very sad if he wrote that. It reminds me of what he said to the Rabbi that the reason why he wanted to be successful and big is to feel loved and appreciated. In Katherine's place I would not be proud of such a note, because it means Michael did not feel appreciated by her unless he was successful.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top