Latest on MJJC

The Estate sues HBO

The confidentiality provisions include some discussion that obligations on non-disclosures post-date HBO's relationship with the singer, but it's less clear whether those post-term obligations extend to non-disparagement, and HBO will surely argue that it wasn't the intention of either party to bind what HBO could say about Jackson throughout eternity.
 
mkgenie said:
The confidentiality provisions include some discussion that obligations on non-disclosures post-date HBO's relationship with the singer, but it's less clear whether those post-term obligations extend to non-disparagement, and HBO will surely argue that it wasn't the intention of either party to bind what HBO could say about Jackson throughout eternity.
Click to expand...

Yes but I'm sure the mj estate know they aren't likely to win. They're just using this as a way to release a load of information to the public in the hope it'll be reported, and to damage hbo's reputation at the same time as well as pepler himself. It's quite clever actually.
 
myosotis said:
I'm imagining potentially massive damages to pay here..... (especially since the trailer is already on 'global' release...at least as far as people using the internet can see).

Well done whoever drew up the Bucharest contract!
Click to expand...

My guess is that it was John Branca who drew up that contract. This is excellent news and I totally expected that something like this would happen all along.

I'm not sure if the lawsuit will make HBO and Channel 4 pull the plug on the documentary, but I hope so. In any case, there are huge damages coming for them.
 
8701girl said:
Took em long enough
Click to expand...

Legal proceedings take time and have to be handled correctly - there are protocols to follow. Also, even though it feels an AGE since all of this began, it's barely a month and there has been a LOT of push back from the Estate, the family, celebrities, Michael's friends and of course, fans.....for that entire time.
 
MJTruth said:
Yes but I'm sure the mj estate know they aren't likely to win. They're just using this as a way to release a load of information to the public in the hope it'll be reported, and to damage hbo's reputation at the same time as well as pepler himself. It's quite clever actually.
Click to expand...

I'm sure the reverse is true and they expect to win. The Estate is successful in winning most of its lawsuits, just as Michael was, in life. Releasing information and damaging reputations are bonuses and yes, very clever.
 
Mikky Dee said:
Legal proceedings take time and have to be handled correctly - there are protocols to follow. Also, even though it feels an AGE since all of this began, it's barely a month and there has been a LOT of push back from the Estate, the family, celebrities, Michael's friends and of course, fans.....for that entire time.
Click to expand...

i just hope they win this lawsuit
 
I believe the Estate will win the lawsuit against HBO. In the meantime this shows that MJs legacy cannot be easily destroyed by mockumentary and that the Estate are not playing.
 
Mikky Dee said:
I'm sure the reverse is true and they expect to win. The Estate is successful in winning most of its lawsuits, just as Michael was, in life. Releasing information and damaging reputations are bonuses and yes, very clever.
Click to expand...

If HBO thought the MJ Estate could win damages of $100million+ they wouldn't have announced so quickly they'll show it regardless. HBO are confident the chance for success is very low, and that's why I'm sure the MJ Estate know that too. I'm no legal expert, and I'm sure the MJ Estate have good lawyers, but this feels like they're grasping at straws.

The time is coming where their business could be destroyed in only a few days so they have to do something but they have very limited options now because of the lack of legal protection for the dead. As far as I see it the MJ Estate should hold nothing back. As MJ said, "This is it!".

As I've said before, this is going to be critically damaging to MJ unless the accusers' credibility can be comprehensively destroyed IN THE PUBLIC CONSCIOUSNESS. So far the message about their lack of credibility is being drowned out by the media who do not want to publish anything to counter the allegations. It's a very one sided situation and it's incredibly frustrating.

I have personally contacted staff at media outlets, and at TV networks.

NONE will engage in any discussion about the other side of the story. ALL responses totally ignore the evidence presented.

MOST simply issue the standard response of "watch the show". Or they don't respond at all.

I am a well educated man. I keep an open mind. Even if I have a strong opinion on something I can be persuaded to change my mind if there is a good reason why I should. I simply cannot understand why, when they are presented with all the evidence of lies, that they do not at least question the credibility. I'm not asking any media outlet to declare MJ is totally innocent of any wrongdoing.
All I'm asking them to do is report the facts, and the facts are that Wade and Safechuck have lied. Repeatedly. Demonstrably.

As I have told those in the media, this is NOT opinion. This is NOT because I'm a fan of Michael Jackson. This is fact. Fact that is exposed by the information that THE ACCUSERS have filed in their own legal documents. It is both contradictory and non-factual.

It's like they are all brainwashed to believe the accusers despite all evidence. MeToo seriously has a lot to answer for.
 
The media hate mj. Its very simple. Even if they know its lies and look at the court docs they will still push their agenda against him. While this lawsuit is good it does nothing to attack the P.R rampage that reed etc are on. This is what is causing damage
 
Even though I have seen it with my own eyes over the last couple of decades I STILL can't get my head around the media's behaviour. Why do they all swarm around this anti-MJ agenda with no regard for impartiality or balance?

Why do the press regulators allow them to get away with it?


To me, the BIGGEST story of all is the one that exposes MJ's side of the story. The story that exposes Wade and Safechuck as the liars. The one that provides the details behind the Chandler extortion.

But that is the story nobody is willing to tell. They'd rather recycle and update stories from 20 years ago as though they're new. They'd rather pay for stories from people who have already been proven in court to be liars.
 
MJTruth said:
If HBO thought the MJ Estate could win damages of $100million+ they wouldn't have announced so quickly they'll show it regardless. HBO are confident the chance for success is very low, and that's why I'm sure the MJ Estate know that too. I'm no legal expert, and I'm sure the MJ Estate have good lawyers, but this feels like they're grasping at straws.

The time is coming where their business could be destroyed in only a few days so they have to do something but they have very limited options now because of the lack of legal protection for the dead. As far as I see it the MJ Estate should hold nothing back. As MJ said, "This is it!".

As I've said before, this is going to be critically damaging to MJ unless the accusers' credibility can be comprehensively destroyed IN THE PUBLIC CONSCIOUSNESS. So far the message about their lack of credibility is being drowned out by the media who do not want to publish anything to counter the allegations. It's a very one sided situation and it's incredibly frustrating.

I have personally contacted staff at media outlets, and at TV networks.

NONE will engage in any discussion about the other side of the story. ALL responses totally ignore the evidence presented.

MOST simply issue the standard response of "watch the show". Or they don't respond at all.

I am a well educated man. I keep an open mind. Even if I have a strong opinion on something I can be persuaded to change my mind if there is a good reason why I should. I simply cannot understand why, when they are presented with all the evidence of lies, that they do not at least question the credibility. I'm not asking any media outlet to declare MJ is totally innocent of any wrongdoing.
All I'm asking them to do is report the facts, and the facts are that Wade and Safechuck have lied. Repeatedly. Demonstrably.

As I have told those in the media, this is NOT opinion. This is NOT because I'm a fan of Michael Jackson. This is fact. Fact that is exposed by the information that THE ACCUSERS have filed in their own legal documents. It is both contradictory and non-factual.

It's like they are all brainwashed to believe the accusers despite all evidence. MeToo seriously has a lot to answer for.
Click to expand...


The estate has attacked Richard Plepler, HBO CEO, personally and stopped short of calling him a complete desperate failure. They do not want him to pull off the doc, they did not ask him to stop it in this lawsuit. At this stage they are asking for damages. The estate has a strong case with a very strong argument. HBO does not seem to have even considered the contract from 1992. they thought this would be a defamation of the dead and as such they are protected. The estate did point out that the CEO should be held responsible for what HBO will face sooner than later because he was around when that contract was signed so he cannot come now and blame HBO lawyers for the oversight.

Plepler and HBO's push to get more ratings for this doc is now playing against their own interests. The more damage they cause the more money they will pay to MJ's estate. They are not merely distributors. they are co-producers. they have created this mess themselves and will have to pay for all the damage it will create. the estate is asking for punitive damages also.
 
MJTruth said:
Even though I have seen it with my own eyes over the last couple of decades I STILL can't get my head around the media's behaviour. Why do they all swarm around this anti-MJ agenda with no regard for impartiality or balance?

Why do the press regulators allow them to get away with it?


To me, the BIGGEST story of all is the one that exposes MJ's side of the story. The story that exposes Wade and Safechuck as the liars. The one that provides the details behind the Chandler extortion.

But that is the story nobody is willing to tell. They'd rather recycle and update stories from 20 years ago as though they're new. They'd rather pay for stories from people who have already been proven in court to be liars.
Click to expand...
Great questions. I especially agree that the "framing of MJ" is the biggest story, it could be a "dream job" for an investigative journalist - and noone's there in mainstream media to pick it up?!

At this point the thought of pulling of the show is only wishful thinking unfortunately, so I'm not surprised HBO insists on airing it.

What's strange for me is why don't they offer some kind of a rebuttal opportunity? It would make them seem unbiased and would generate ratings as well. There's just no reasonable explanation for this.
 
ozemouze;4242316 said:
Great questions. I especially agree that the "framing of MJ" is the biggest story, it could be a "dream job" for an investigative journalist - and noone's there in mainstream media to pick it up?!

At this point the thought of pulling of the show is only wishful thinking unfortunately, so I'm not surprised HBO insists on airing it.

What's strange for me is why don't they offer some kind of a rebuttal opportunity? It would make them seem unbiased and would generate ratings as well. There's just no reasonable explanation for this.
Click to expand...
It is easy to think that there is an agenda but there is not necessary so, atleast not all the media. Right now I think the media outlets that has already decided to air the ”documentary” has been told to say ”watch the film” and ”it powerful” etc. wastn’t there some radio channel or something who said ”it’s powerful” but then during the same show said it is very onesided but other times maybe it’s just a group mentalitet thing. They have few employees and little time for research. I have posted this before but the whole group mentality thing remind me a lot of a person Sture Bergwall who was a disturbed person who had molested boys but he made up storys for many years that he was a serial killer and changed his name to Thomas Quick and was convicted for a number of murder is Sweden which he had not comitted with 0% evidence. This was a huge thing. He had ”repressed the memories” of the murders and recovered them in therapy. The finally a journalist Hannes Råstam, now dead in cancer started to investigate. For years though there had been people who said I do not beleive this but they were in minority. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/oct/20/thomas-quick-bergwall-sweden-murder
 
Last edited:
FINALLY!!! Yes Estate

Side note I love the way they savage this "documentary" in their statements, very well written
 
I think its a good idea for eveyone to go to the LN trailer on the HBO YouTube channel, give it a thumbs down (and maybe leave a negative or informative comment there) to increase the pressure on HBO.
The best thing is when donig this is to use an apperatus which didn't play the trailer automatically and count your visit of the video as a view. I have for example a Wii U which does not play videos directly when I use the Internet Explorer there and click on it.
I read somewhere that a click only count as a view after three seconds. So when you stop the trailer directly it maybe didn't count as a view.
 
La74;4242334 said:
It is easy to think that there is an agenda but there is not necessary so, atleast not all the media. Right now I think the media outlets that has already decided to air the ”documentary” has been told to say ”watch the film” and ”it powerful” etc. wastn’t there some radio channel or something who said ”it’s powerful” but then during the same show said it is very onesided but other times maybe it’s just a group mentalitet thing. They have few employees and little time for research.
Click to expand...
I just don't understand their steps (I'm talking about HBO here mainly). E.g. offering to show the other side as well would cover their bases (against litigation as well as against being criticed as biased), and would also generate ratings. So why not?

I also honestly think that investigating the background of all the allegations against MJ would be a huge story (meaning ratings and possible critical acclaim).

Apart from the reputation of MJ, especially the shady background and continuous involvement of Gutierrez is suspicious enough IMO to look further - even if he's just some lone lunatic, but I wouldn't rule out there's something more to his story either (that "book" of him itself should have raised a red flag long time ago).
 
Last edited:
Mikky Dee said:
I'm not sure if the lawsuit will make HBO and Channel 4 pull the plug on the documentary, but I hope so. In any case, there are huge damages coming for them.
Click to expand...

HBO already doubled down and said the release date won't move.

Pulling the plug on Leaving Neverland would be a completely irrelevant move since its very existence is grounds for the Estate's breach of contract claim. HBO is staring down the barrel of a $100mil gun whether it airs or not, but they seem well aware that shutting it down even temporarily would be incredibly damaging to their reputation, especially in the #MeToo era.

So it's either air the documentary and fight the lawsuit; or pull the documentary, fight the lawsuit, and face the wrath of the anti-Jackson lynch mob. It's no surprise to me that they're sticking to their guns.

ozemouze said:
I also honestly think that investigating the background of all the allegations against MJ would be a huge story (meaning ratings and possible critical acclaim).
Click to expand...

HBO and Dan Reed avoided properly assessing the accusations (i.e., reading legal documents, pursuing court transcripts) because they know the evidence is stacked against them. That's also why they decided to sidestep 95% of Robson and Safechuck's various contradictions, inconsistencies, and position shifts; doing so would damage their credibility. (There's also the theory that Dan Reed did little to no research on the Chandler or Arvizo cases, but that's another story.)

In my opinion, the only way a pro-Jackson documentary would garner any ratings is if they promoted it as neutrally as possible. If you believe Jackson is guilty and you see a trailer that says, "Here's proof that he was innocent," you're not gonna bother. But if you see a trailer that says, "We're using court documents and interviews with witnesses and alleged victims to determine the truth once and for all," you might be drawn in some.
 
Since we now have a lawsuit, years may go by, who knows. HBO must love the free advertising, I mean, publicity they are getting for this doco. Let's see Disney was being sued by the Estate and the next thing you know Janet Jackson gets an award for being in Show Business a long time for being a living legend by the Disney Awards. Janet then dedicates it to her Dad for getting them out of Gary, Indiana.
 
What about the “One night only” contract? Would that supersede the Bucharest contract. I don’t remember the year it was set to be aired but this might be a issue
 
I'm hoping Channel 4 will see the light and pull the doc here in the U.k as other posters have mentioned. I think it all comes done to money and the image of Channel 4. The image the channel wants to project. There have been a lot of dodgy docs on channel 4 over the years about MJ and other trashy stuff so I don't know what is going to happen. Who would want to watch something so pornographic in nature?
 
Just read the complaint. ouch!!! Credit where credits due. Love the use of the " " marks and clever how they brought in the dangerous tour and brett to show how they attacked the very concert tour they were making money off. Shame gen public woll never see the facts though

The one night contracts has nothing to do with bucharest. The not attacking mj clause is seperate and stands on its own
 
AlwaysThere said:
In my opinion, the only way a pro-Jackson documentary would garner any ratings is if they promoted it as neutrally as possible. If you believe Jackson is guilty and you see a trailer that says, "Here's proof that he was innocent," you're not gonna bother. But if you see a trailer that says, "We're using court documents and interviews with witnesses and alleged victims to determine the truth once and for all," you might be drawn in some.
Click to expand...
I agree if it's strictly seen as a "MJ case" people won't be that interested in the guilty/non-guilty factor, there's no real revelation there. However if the focus would be on the web of behind-the-scene actors, revealing how they were always connected somehow, presented in a sort of "connect-the-dots" manner that could engage the general public as well.
 
The Michael Jackson's lawsuit against HBO will be the financial end of HBO.
 
CherubimII said:
The Michael Jackson's lawsuit against HBO will be the financial end of HBO.
Click to expand...

Despite what some say about the validity of the complaint as MJ is dead , i think the estate has a strong case here .
How long does it take for a judge to give an answer ?
 
If they had any sense they would cancel it but they’ve already started advertising it here in the UK on Channel 4..
Sparklesocks;4242382 said:
I'm hoping Channel 4 will see the light and pull the doc here in the U.k as other posters have mentioned. I think it all comes done to money and the image of Channel 4. The image the channel wants to project. There have been a lot of dodgy docs on channel 4 over the years about MJ and other trashy stuff so I don't know what is going to happen. Who would want to watch something so pornographic in nature?
Click to expand...
 
Hbo will take the hit. Makes no difference to channel four. Over the last few years they have turned into a gutter channel interms of OTT docs
 
AlwaysThere said:
In my opinion, the only way a pro-Jackson documentary would garner any ratings is if they promoted it as neutrally as possible. If you believe Jackson is guilty and you see a trailer that says, "Here's proof that he was innocent," you're not gonna bother. But if you see a trailer that says, "We're using court documents and interviews with witnesses and alleged victims to determine the truth once and for all," you might be drawn in some.
Click to expand...

Another great post by AlwaysThere completely agree with this. Estate please take note
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top