Now we can confirm again that it WAS MJ's insurance company paying for 93 case.
"Reports at the time said the Chandlers got between $16 million and $20 million from Jackson's insurance company."
http://www.cnn.com/2009/SHOWBIZ/12/22/michael.jackson.fbi/index.html?iref=allsearch
Memo in Support of Objection to Subpoena for Settlement Documents
In released court documents a few years ago (during trial), it turns out that Michael Jackson’s insurance company negotiated and settled the 1993 civil suit against his wishes.
The following are excerpts from that released court document:
Part 1:
Pg3
The settlement agreement was for global claims of negligence and the lawsuit was defended by Mr. Jackson’s insurance carrier. The insurance carrier negotiated and paid the settlement, over the protests of Mr. Jackson and his personal legal counsel.
It is general practice for an insurer to be entitled to control settlement negotiations and the insured is precluded from any interference.
…Under the majority of contracts for liability insurance, the absolute control of the defense of the matter is turned over to the insurance company and the insured is excluded from any interference in any negotiation for settlement or other legal proceedings (emphasis added).
…An insurance carrier has the right to settle claims covered by insurance when it decides settlement is expedient and the insured may not interfere with nor prevent such settlements.
Pg2
Because insurance companies were the source of the settlement amounts, and the insurance companies make the payments based on their contractual rights to settle the proceeding without Mr. Jackson’s permission, the settlement does not constitute an admission and cannot be used to create such an impermissible inference to the jury.
Pg3
The speculative suggestion that Mr. Jackson somehow made an admission when an insurance company required a settlement, and in fact paid for the settlement, creates an impermissible inference to the jury that would deprive Mr. Jackson of due process of law.
Part 2:
This motion filed by T-Mez during the trial last year should clear that info:
Hightlights: Memo in Support of Objection to Subpoena for Settlement Documents
The following are excerpts from the court document:
Pg3 The settlement agreement was for global claims of negligence and the lawsuit was defended by Mr. Jackson’s insurance carrier. The insurance carrier negotiated and paid the settlement, over the protests of Mr. Jackson and his personal legal counsel.
It is general practice for an insurer to be entitled to control settlement negotiations and the insured is precluded from any interference.
…Under the majority of contracts for liability insurance, the absolute control of the defense of the matter is turned over to the insurance company and the insured is excluded from any interference in any negotiation for settlement or other legal proceedings (emphasis added).
…An insurance carrier has the right to settle claims covered by insurance when it decides settlement is expedient and the insured may not interfere with nor prevent such settlements.
Pg2 Because insurance companies were the source of the settlement amounts, and the insurance companies make the payments based on their contractual rights to settle the proceeding without Mr. Jackson’s permission, the settlement does not constitute an admission and cannot be used to create such an impermissible inference to the jury.
Pg3 The speculative suggestion that Mr. Jackson somehow made an admission when an insurance company required a settlement, and in fact paid for the settlement, creates an impermissible inference to the jury that would deprive Mr. Jackson of due process of law.
Pg 4 It is unfair for an insurance company’s settlement to be now held against Mr. Jackson or for the Settlement Agreement to be admitted as evidence of Mr. Jackson’s prior conduct or guilt. Mr. Jackson could not control nor interfere with his insurance carrier’s demand to settle the dispute.
Pg9-10 Permitting evidence of settlement agreements or amounts would be speculative because there is no evidence Michael Jackson made the settlement. Settlements in civil suits many times are dictated by insurance companies who settle claims regardless of an individual’s wishes.
Although Jordan Chandler was interviewed “thereafter” by detectives seeking evidence to offer in a child molestation prosecution of Michael Jackson, “no criminal charges were filed as a result of that interview.”
This interview took place prior to the decision of the United States Supreme Court in Stogner v California, 539 U.S. 607, 613 (2003), holding California’s retroactive extension of the statute of limitations to be unconstitutional.
In other words, Jordan Chandler’s statements were not sufficient even at that earlier time, to support child molestation charges against Michael Jackson, and to now permit the suggestion of a settlement agreement for some improper act is not only irrelevant, but also a speculative violation of the statute of limitations
After this motion, the judge ruled that the prosecution were not allowed to allude to or include any information or suggested allegation that MJ paid the Chandlers because he didn’t the insurance paid over MJ’s and his lawyers objections…
Another thing to note… when Evan was filing suit he included “negligence course of distress” knowing full well the insurance would pay for that which would pave way for the Chandlers to avoid the criminal trial. MJ and his team were pushing for the criminal trial, they filed a motion to stop the civil trial, put in on hold to wait for the criminal trial but they were denied that chance…..