michael jacksons family lose

not sure this is in right forum so please forgive me if its not.

to me the right decision has been made here,you can,t hire a doctor for one of the biggest stars in the world and then claim after his unfortunate death that the promoters were to blame,surely jacksons advisors done the checks them selfs to make sure he was fit and reliable for the job?

this is one case i think justice has seen sense and not paid out hundred of millions for their own failures.

reply to post by sparky31

Got a link to the news article? It would be helpful for those who don't know what you're talking about.

ETA: Links provided. Thanks.

It sounds like the Jackson family was throwing mud against the wall, hoping some of it would stick. It isn't the promoters job to gauge the health of an entertainer. It is the entertainers responsibility to know the state of his/her own health.

The man hired was a practicing doctor from my understanding. There was no reason to suspect that he would turn out to be grossly negligent beforehand, that I know of presently. So yes, based on the information I currently have available to me, I would say the jury reached a proper verdict.

reply to post by sparky31


I wholeheartedly agree he was a drug addled paedophile who's insane lifestyle and delusions lead to his early death. For them to try and blame the promoters is a joke I'm glad they lost and hope his estate has to pay the legals.

reply to post by Klassified


Here is one.

www.bbc.co.uk...


Oh and Iam happy they lost, lets face it they have been milking MJ for years and continue to do so, just release another greatest hits LP (Iam old :cheers If you are that strapped for $$ Jacksons.

reply to post by Klassified
sorry i should have done that,i,m bad




news.sky.com...

On the level
reply to post by sparky31

 

I wholeheartedly agree he was a drug addled paedophile who's insane lifestyle and delusions lead to his early death. For them to try and blame the promoters is a joke I'm glad they lost and hope his estate has to pay the legals.

Just asking

was a drug addled paedophile

Is there any proof of that? Just because someone likes children doesn't make them a fiddler! I'm not a Jacko fan, just wondering if there's any real proof?

reply to post by VoidHawk


You don't pay off the family's of the kids If you have done nowt wrong...in my opinion.

reply to post by VoidHawk


Any proof for #sake have a Google man he was a guilt as sin and if he was a normal person instead of a millionaire singer he would be under lock and key as we speak. He paid off numerous families, ex members of staff, journalists etc he is where he belongs now, in the pit

reply to post by boymonkey74
i would say that too,ok maybe easier to settle out of court and not make it in to a circus but hell if i knew i was innocent then i wouldn,t be paying anyone a penny no matter what happened to me.

On the level
reply to post by VoidHawk

 

Any proof for #sake have a Google man he was a guilt as sin and if he was a normal person instead of a millionaire singer he would be under lock and key as we speak. He paid off numerous families, ex members of staff, journalists etc he is where he belongs now, in the pit

Googling is not proof.
I'm not defending him, but I know full well the msm create such stories when someone steps out of line!
Maybe those "paid off families" were paid by the msm to say those things? Thats why I asked if you had any real proof.

On the level
reply to post by sparky31

 

I wholeheartedly agree he was a drug addled paedophile who's insane lifestyle and delusions lead to his early death. For them to try and blame the promoters is a joke I'm glad they lost and hope his estate has to pay the legals.

Have you really taken a look at the story about those allegations. It seems Evan Chandler got 15 Million dollars but his wife seem to be of another opinion and wanted the kid to be able to go on tour with Michael after the allegations. I will not know the truth on this side but this has the stink of greed being the reason for the accusation and it paid of for Evan.

On July 2, 1993, in a private telephone conversation, Chandler was tape-recorded as saying,

There was no reason why he (Jackson) had to stop calling me ... I picked the nastiest son of a bitch I could find [Evan Chandler's lawyer, Barry Rothman], all he wants to do is get this out in the public as fast as he can, as big as he can and humiliate as many people as he can. He's nasty, he's mean, he's smart and he's hungry for publicity. Everything's going to a certain plan that isn't just mine. Once I make that phone call, this guy is going to destroy everybody in sight in any devious, nasty, cruel way that he can do it. I've given him full authority to do that. Jackson is an evil guy, he is worse than that and I have the evidence to prove it. If I go through with this, I win big-time. There's no way I lose. I will get everything I want and they will be destroyed forever ... Michael's career will be over.[13]

In the same conversation, when asked how this would affect his son, Chandler replied,
That's irrelevant to me ... It will be a massacre if I don't get what I want. It's going to be bigger than all us put together ... This man [Jackson] is going to be humiliated beyond belief ... He will not sell one more record.[13]

Sounds like a person that you want to be your friend?

VoidHawk

On the level
reply to post by sparky31

 

I wholeheartedly agree he was a drug addled paedophile who's insane lifestyle and delusions lead to his early death. For them to try and blame the promoters is a joke I'm glad they lost and hope his estate has to pay the legals.

Just asking

was a drug addled paedophile

Is there any proof of that? Just because someone likes children doesn't make them a fiddler! I'm not a Jacko fan, just wondering if there's any real proof?

Sleepinging with them, their own statements about the things that happened, new claims by former jackolads, paying a few mill to keep it hush hush.

no, any old joe with a penchant for little boys would have been bailed up, beaten by the father and incarcerated for a lengthy term.

Jacko gets to then con someone to give him his very own children to play with.

Ahh the parents in this were just as bad, giving their kids as play things to a sicko.. and then satisfied with the hush money.

to put it into context. Jacko was a big kid. His mentality was obviously that of a child, yearning for his childhood, living in fantasy. BUT his body was that of a man.

Sleeping with young boys? come on....

But in terms of the doctor. He's as guilty of negligence as you can get.

Something called a duty of care should prohibit you from wandering around someone so obviously ill and then administering them with yet more of the 'problem'.

But yeah, his family have milked that guy - michael - from the day they found out his wee little voice could warble in tune.

He had no chance. Rather sad when you think about it that way, despite the monster he became..


"ShamWOW..."

winofiend
But in terms of the doctor. He's as guilty of negligence as you can get.

Something called a duty of care should prohibit you from wandering around someone so obviously ill and then administering them with yet more of the 'problem'.

But yeah, his family have milked that guy - michael - from the day they found out his wee little voice could warble in tune.

He had no chance. Rather sad when you think about it that way, despite the monster he became..

"ShamWOW..."

yeah wholly agree but they hired him and its on their head and their head alone what happened,promoters will accept the doc they hired,why wouldn,t they?up to jacksons entourage to make sure he was fit for purpose.

winofiend

VoidHawk

On the level
reply to post by sparky31

 

I wholeheartedly agree he was a drug addled paedophile who's insane lifestyle and delusions lead to his early death. For them to try and blame the promoters is a joke I'm glad they lost and hope his estate has to pay the legals.

Just asking

was a drug addled paedophile

Is there any proof of that? Just because someone likes children doesn't make them a fiddler! I'm not a Jacko fan, just wondering if there's any real proof?

Sleepinging with them, their own statements about the things that happened, new claims by former jackolads, paying a few mill to keep it hush hush.

no, any old joe with a penchant for little boys would have been bailed up, beaten by the father and incarcerated for a lengthy term.

Jacko gets to then con someone to give him his very own children to play with.

Ahh the parents in this were just as bad, giving their kids as play things to a sicko.. and then satisfied with the hush money.

to put it into context. Jacko was a big kid. His mentality was obviously that of a child, yearning for his childhood, living in fantasy. BUT his body was that of a man.

Sleeping with young boys? come on....

Give me enough money and I'll get as many people saying the same stuff about you. Give me the media to play with and I'll get the whole world to believe it!

I hope you guys are right because it would be an awful thing to say if its not true.

reply to post by VoidHawk


I'm the first to say that too. Mud sticks. People really want to be sure about an accusation like this before they throw it, especially when I've seen an alleged crime reported here and people, without the facts or even prosecution, state a desire to lynch someone. Scary.

But jacko admitted to everything except abuse.
The kids claimed they were being abused. Even now more are coming out to claim it.
He paid millions to have it go away.

He plied them with wine, and they were able to identify marks on his genitals.

5. I have reviewed the statement made by Jordan Chandler in his interview on December 1. 1993. I have examined the drawing made by Jordan Chandler at Detective Ferrufino's request and the photographs of the Defendant's genitalia. The photographs reveal a mark on the right side of the Defendant's penis at about the same relative location as the dark blemish located by Jordan Chandler on his drawing of Defendant's erect penis. I believe the discoloration chandler identified in his drawing was not something he could or would have guessed about, or could have seen accidentally. I believe Chandler's graphic representation of the discolored area on the Defendant's penis is substantially corroborated by the photographs taken by the Santa Barbara Sheriff's detectives at a later time.

www.sbscpublicaccess.org...

It's a lot more than baseless accusations. That kid saw his dick.

Regardless, a grown adult man sleeping with pre teen boys who are not his own children, sets off alarm bells in my mind. There is definitely cause for concern.

reply to post by sparky31


I agree it was probably their intent to hire a shady quack who would do the things requested without asking questions or refusing to comply.

That's why I say the doc should have never been a doc. He has no business treating anyone.

There are many doctors out there who certain people know and return to as they give them what they ask for. Doctor shopping used to be really big where I live. "Just go in and say you need some valium.. he wont ask why." and you'd get benzos like that.

makes me really confused why people spend SOOO long to become something they have no intention of protecting. Or somehow these guys are picking up qualifications without any effort.

and it scares me that they are all around us, negligence when you really need qualified care, is always something that plays on my mind. One stupid lapse of thinking because someone is day dreaming about a holiday and suddenly they've sewn up a patient with clamps inside them, and they die of septicaemia a week later.