<br /> <br />Thanks paula. :icon_mrgreen: Once again, I wonder if the triable claim for the trial is an "out" for AEG - so they are no longer answerable for the dismissed claims.<br /><br />Can dismissed claims still be brought up in the trial, as they may have to do with the triable claim?<br />
<br />
<br /><br /><br />I guess what I'm wondering, about the "out" for AEG, is if AEG (or certain people within) are aware of the hoax, if they are "willingly" participating in the trial or if they will be defiant and come out fighting.<br /><br />I'm curious if there would be a "double jeopardy" scenario after conviction or acquittal, if the dismissed claims were brought up in the trial. Although they are not the same offenses...Katherine mentions in the "breach of contract" part (which was dismissed) - AEG controlled all aspects of MJ's life including medical care, advisers, finances and financial future. However Katherine was not able to cite anything to back this up - so if AEG is found guilty or not guilty of negligence with Murray...I suppose they could still be charged and tried for conspiracy to commit fraud, or something. Also, notice how it didn't say there was no evidence, but instead said Katherine was not able to cite anything to back her claim up. I don't know, I wish we had a lawyer on here, lol.
In the two days we've been offline (anyone know what that was all about??) I've been looking at stuff relating to this trial. I found this summary which may be of interest: <br /><br />http://www.lasuperiorcourt.org/civilcasesummarynet/ui/casesummary.aspx?CT=CI<br /><br />N.B. The case number is BC445597 which it doesn't seem to remember, so I think you have to type it in each time you visit the page.
I looked up Katherine Jackson's case and I found some interesting stuff. This is what was found on 3/14/2013.<br /><br />03/14/2013 Miscellaneous-Other (SEPRATE STAEMENT RE EX PARTE APPL )<br />Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner<br /><br />03/14/2013 Miscellaneous-Other ( STATEMENT RE: EX PARTE APPL )<br />Filed by Attorney for Defendant/Respondent<br /><br />03/14/2013 Ex-Parte Application (RE DEPOS OF SHAWN TRELL )<br />Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner<br /><br />03/14/2013 Order ( GRANTING EX PARTE RE DEPOSITION OF SHAWN TRELL )<br />Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner<br /><br />03/14/2013 Opposition Document ( TO PLTFS EX PARTE TO CONT. DEPO OF SHAWN TRELL )<br />Filed by Attorney for Defendant/Respondent<br /><br />In Case somne of you want to know who Shawn Trell is, he is an attorney for AEG Live.
[size=14pt]Katherine Jackson’s Wrongful Death Lawsuit Suffers Major Legal Setback[/size]<br /><br />Katherine Jackson‘s suffered a huge legal setback this past week in her wrongful death lawsuit for her son Michael Jackson when a California court dismissed all of her claims against AEG and its President Tim Leiweke RadarOnline.com is exclusively reporting.<br /><br />Additionally all but one of her claims against the remaining defendants were dismissed and the California Court of Appeals ordered Michael’s medical records unsealed.<br /><br />DOCUMENT: AEG Files With Court Of Appeal<br /><br />Those remaining defendants have filed legal documents with the Court of Appeal in California to dismiss that one remaining claim on the question of whether AEG Live negligently hired Dr. Conrad Murray, Jackson’s long time personal physician. Murray was convicted in 2011 of the involuntary manslaughter death of Michael Jackson after administering a fatal dose of propofol to help the pop singer sleep. Murray hadn’t signed formally signed his employment contract with AEG at the time of Jackson’s death.<br />In response to the filing, the Court of Appeal indicated that it would be unsealing certain records of the late pop singer, including Jackson’s medical records.<br /><br />PHOTOS: Paris Jackson & Brothers Chill Out With Coffee<br /><br />In court documents obtained by RadarOnline.com, AEG Live asserts, “absent this Court’s immediate intervention, defendants will shortly begin a long trial based on the trial court’s fundamental misapplication of California law. Plaintiffs seek more than $40 billion in damages from defendants arising from the 2009 death of pop music star Michael Jackson….On February 27, 2013, Respondent Court summarily adjudicated all of the Jackson’s claims except negligent hiring….Specifically, Respondent Court held that there was a triable issue of fact as to whether AEG Live should have suspected Dr. Murray “may compromise his Hippocratic Oath” because Dr. Murray was in debt, and because Mr. Jackson was known to have had a prior problem with painkiller abuse. Respondent Court provided no explanation as to how such knowledge would have made it legally foreseeable that Dr. Murray would administer a fatal dose of anesthesia to Mr. Jackson in his home for sleep.”<br /><br />When contacted by RadarOnline, com, Marvin Putnam, attorney for AEG Live responded, “The Court of Appeal rarely grants these extraordinary requests, although I am confident, whether before or after trial, that the courts of this state will find the law does not allow Mrs. Jackson’s claim. Any other outcome would wreak havoc on California’s business community.”<br /><br />PHOTOS: Michael Jackson’s Kids: Three Years After His Death<br /><br />If the case does proceed to trial, Putnam told us, “AEG Live had no idea Jackson was looking for a doctor to give him propofol or that Dr. Murray had agreed to provide the dangerous drug to him. Mr. Jackson’s death was a horrible tragedy for which AEG Live is simply not responsible.”<br /><br />Murray is going to be deposed on Monday, March 18 at the Los Angeles County Men’s Central Jail in connection with Katherine’s wrongful death lawsuit.<br /><br />PHOTOS: Michael Jackson Through The Years<br /><br />The trial is expected to begin on April 1.<br /><br />Jacko Kids Will Be Called As Witnesses In Doc’s Trial; Daughter To Be Pressed On Drug Use<br />Why Our Gun Debate Is Off Target (WSJ.com: Life/Culture)<br />‘Little Couple’ Surrogate Has Tragic Miscarriage<br />Angry Viewers Are Writing the Academy (and Here’s What They’re Saying) (The New York Times)<br />Real Housewives Star’s Home In Foreclosure; She Sues The Banks.<br /><br />http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2013/03/michael-jackson-mother-katherine-jackson-wrongful-death-lawsuit-major-legal-setback/
Could this be a way to overturn Murray’s conviction? If it is found that AEG is responsible for hiring Murray and Murray in fact states under oath that he was instructed by AEG to administer what ever it took to ensure that Michael slept & was prepared to be at rehearsals the next day by any means necessary, showing that they had the capacity to turn their backs & not really care what happened to Michael except that he “performed” then a large part of the guilt could fall on AEG calling for Murray to possibly be released with time served. :Pulling_hair: It’s all so technical. Going for the big fish. I wish there were some legal advisors on board here also. :computer-losy-smiley:
California judicial system is as corrupt as can be. Why would a California court dismiss all of Katherine's claims against AEG and its president Tim Leiweke?<br />Also all but one of her claims against the remaining defendants were dismissed........... <br />These big fish are always protected by loopholes found in contracts, big name lawyers AND YES BY JUDGES.........<br /><br />When contacted by RadarOnline, com, Marvin Putnam, attorney for AEG Live responded, “The Court of Appeal rarely grants these extraordinary requests, although I am confident, whether before or after trial, that the courts of this state will find the law does not allow Mrs. Jackson’s claim. Any other outcome would wreak havoc on California’s business community.”<br /><br /><br />This above statement from the article speaks volumes about what the outcome to Katherine's claim is going to be..........
“...Any other outcome would wreak havoc on California’s business community.” Statements like these burn me up. Who but the government cares more about the business community than righting the wrongs done to a human being? :Crash:<br /><br />I think my computer has a ghost writer… it types what it wants to when ever it gets the notion :computer-losy-smiley:
Too funny hes :thjajaja121:<br /><br />It seems like we already know (or they are hinting at) what the outcome of this trial is going to be............<br /><br />But may be we should not be concentrating on the outcome of the trial, but the trial itself.......I mean may be during this trial that's supposed to start on April 1st, the truth will be revealed and a lot of questions will be answered, questions that did not get answered during Murray's trial........
<br />Too funny hes :thjajaja121:<br /><br />It seems like we already know (or they are hinting at) what the outcome of this trial is going to be............<br /><br />But may be we should not be concentrating on the outcome of the trial, but the trial itself.......I mean may be during this trial that's supposed to start on April 1st, the truth will be revealed and a lot of questions will be answered, questions that did not get answered during Murray's trial........<br />
<br /><br />Agree and... believe :icon_e_wink: :michael-jackson:,,,the best is yet to come !!! :ghsdf: :moonwalk_:
<br />In the two days we've been offline (anyone know what that was all about??) I've been looking at stuff relating to this trial. I found this summary which may be of interest: <br /><br />http://www.lasuperiorcourt.org/civilcasesummarynet/ui/casesummary.aspx?CT=CI<br /><br />N.B. The case number is BC445597 which it doesn't seem to remember, so I think you have to type it in each time you visit the page.<br />
<br /><br />To see it you have to click "Beverly Hills Courthouse".<br />Very interesting, thanks for sharing Curls.
<br />In the two days we've been offline (anyone know what that was all about??) I've been looking at stuff relating to this trial. I found this summary which may be of interest: <br /><br />http://www.lasuperiorcourt.org/civilcasesummarynet/ui/casesummary.aspx?CT=CI<br /><br />N.B. The case number is BC445597 which it doesn't seem to remember, so I think you have to type it in each time you visit the page.<br />
<br /><br />To see it you have to click "Beverly Hills Courthouse".<br />Very interesting, thanks for sharing Curls.<br />
<br /><br />Interesting... again I was curious about dates and numbers :icon_geek: <br /><br />Filing Date: 09/15/2010 = 18<br /><br />BC445597 = 7<br /><br />03/21/2013 = 6+6=12 <br />04/02/2013 = 6+6=12<br />07/31/2013 =11+6=17 or 8 <br />08/16/2013 = 15+6=21 or 12<br /><br /> :suspect: 21 weeks<br /><br />from 6/25/09 to 04/02/2013... 196 weeks =7<br /><br /><br />
Thanks for sharing 2good2btrue.<br /><br />Some remarks:<br /><br />1- Some witnesses: Kai Chase, Diana Ross, Karen Faye, Jackie - Jermaine and Marlon Jackson (Unity Tour), Quincy Jones, Debbie Rowe, Lisa Mary Presley.<br /><br />2- Defendants: Jermaine La Juane Jackson http://www.geni.com/people/Jermaine-Jackson/6000000000782392628<br /><br />3- Why Jermaine is Jermaine Jackson on the witnesses' list and Jermaine La Juane one the defendant's list <br /><br />4- I am trying to figure out if Unity Tour has any concert during AEG trial but the last listed date is March 26 http://www.thejacksons.com
I notice that Tohme Tohme was on the original list but not on the second—shame. Is he being protected by AEG, or is MJ’s keeping him for a special role later.
When did we ever hear that Michael had a narvan implant? :icon_eek: This is one of the subjects Katherine is requesting to keep out of the trial. Also questions concerning parentage (mother & father) of Michael’s children; that she, the children, and the estate did not sue Murray; benefits for her & the children from the estate; marital discord between she and Joseph; assumed financial problems of Michael’s siblings; Katherine’s kidnapping; that the estate didn’t file suit against AEG; that Michael intentionally kept his narcan implant secret :icon_eek: to name a few. However she has decided to allow testimony that Michael was an alcoholic and possibly drunk during the 0-2 announcement. :Crash:
hes, have I missed something? Where did you hear or read about all these in your post? This is the first time I'm hearing about that, what is a narvan implant? Please let me know, thanks.
The reasoning is simple: A depot injection is one that stays in your system for as long as a month. If you’re tempted to use opiates, why bother since you won’t get high? Better still, a matchstick-sized implant (placed under your skin) of Probuphine – also naltrexone-based – can stay in place for up to six months. The implant is being examined by the FDA for clinical trials in early 2011.<br />Wow! Finally, a drug that can save you from your own poor judgment! Unfortunately, people addicted to opiates are notorious for non-compliance with treatment, including controversial methadone maintenance programs. Vivitrol and Probuphine, if they pass FDA muster, can really ruin your day if you want to get high on illegal street opiates or those prescribed by your physician for pain management. Nope, a judge can’t order you to use depot injections or implant naltrexone; he/she can merely send you to the slammer for crimes related to your misuse of controlled substances. If you’re really serious about kicking the dope habit, is it not wise to take advantage of any and all treatment options to prevent relapses?<br />It’s interesting to note that Vivitrol was initially approved by the FDA to treat alcoholism in 2006. The results weren’t very impressive since alcohol and opiates don’t have many brain receptor sites in common.
<br /><br />But could MJ have had this put under his skin against his will/knowledge when he was put under for other purposes?<br />Don't know what to make of this, or most likely it is bunk.
<br />hes, have I missed something? Where did you hear or read about all these in your post? This is the first time I'm hearing about that, what is a narvan implant? Please let me know, thanks.<br />
so enlighten me is there possible other suit planned? reason i ask , if thome was his manager does he not bare any kind of responsibility ( in the eyes of katherine) in this mess? just wondering.
Comments