Skip to content

JOHN BRANCA as a villain, AEG as an angel and KAREN FAYE as a business adviser in Michael Jackson’s affairs

March 3, 2012

Several articles were brought to my attention yesterday and took me off the other subjects concerning Michael. I immediately sat down to them and in the hurry of it posted a rather rough copy of the text (which has been amended by now, so hopefully this variant will be more comprehensible to you). The first subject of the post is a big 5-part series of articles written by Johnnie L. Roberts about John Branca’s role in Michael Jackson’s life.

1. THE ‘VILLAIN’

Both look great

Frankly out of the whole series I read only the first and the last parts which were enough to confirm my worst suspicions – so now they are working not only against Michael Jackson but against the Executors of his Estate too.

The titles are telling it all.

How Michael Jackson Nearly Lost His Prized Music Catalog” is about – no, not about AEG as we could expect it, but about John Branca instead; and the last one is “A Superlawyer Returns, a Pop Icon Dies — a Will Is Discovered is about the fact that as soon as the lawyer returned, Michael Jackson immediately died and a certain will appeared, and all this is supposed to be in some connection with each other as the title more or less suggests it.

Okay, so the outline of the way we are going to be brainwashed is clear now and it is also clear who is the most interested party in washing our brains in these muddy waters – the one through whom Michael Jackson indeed nearly lost his catalog. Their name is the first thing that came to my mind, and if you see any other candidates who could be ordering the same kind of music for Branca and other Michael’s supporters please share your ideas with us.

The text in the first article is written in the best traditions of propaganda style which its seasoned victim like me recognizes when it appears on the horizon only. The key phrases are careful drops of doubt in Branca’s integrity, implications that he brought into the picture a mobster Alvin Malnik and all this is sprinkled over with terms of conspiracy, secrecy and intrigue. Here are some quotes:

    • But did Branca …always have his client’s best interests at heart?
    • But some might conclude that Branca is no hero at all.
    • Branca had a previous encounter with the songs and the debt. From 2003 to 2004, virtually the identical financial crisis — almost $300 million of debt, with the songs at stake — was met with a momentous initiative led not by Branca but by a power cast that included Wall Street-savvy Goldman Sachs, veteran music entrepreneur Charles Koppelman and a Florida entrepreneur dogged by mob suspicions, Alvin Malnik. A cache of confidential documents from the seven-year-old episode reveals an intriguing inside look at the far-reaching effort, which long has been an object of media fascination and Internet-based conspiracy theorists.
    • In the documents, Goldman’s master financial alchemists began proposing a venture to position Jackson as “the Bill Gates of the music industry… but only if he would sell his interest in Sony/ATV and in Mijac, the catalogue of Jackson’s own hits.
    • A proposal in 2003 …would lead some to question Branca’s role in Jackson’s business affairs.
    • Alas, the Goldman deal, more than a year in the making, got no further than the paper on which it was written.
    • So why then had Branca worked so hard, as the secret files appear to indicate, for an outcome most feared by his client?

The replies of Branca’s lawyer (added to the same article) are in stark contrast to these dark hints and amaze you with their simplicity:

As regards Goldman’s possibility of obtaining rights for Michael’s catalog the answer is:

  • While the Goldman proposal might have divested Michael Jackson of his interest in the Beatles and MIJAC catalogues in the long run, it would have created a larger entity that increased the value of his interests.

As regards the origin and the outcome of Goldman’s proposal the answer is:

  • “Branca was asked to review a proposal brought to Michael by others and gave advice to Jackson. The decision not to enter into the agreement was Michael Jackson’s based primarily on this”. “Branca advised Jackson that he would be giving up too much control based on the proposal and Jackson vetoed the deal.”

And as regards the “secret files” the answer is:

  • “There were no secret files, and ultimately the Goldman proposal was never accepted.”

Frankly, the long and elaborate attacks and simple answers to them reminded me of the so-called “love letters”, “child porn” and “voodoo blood baths” thrown at Michael Jackson during various periods of his life and of a simple answer to all that nonsense that none of it was true. Same innuendos, same simple answers – history repeats itself, doesn’t it? First it was Michael, now it is those who support his interests – everything is old under the sun…

To finish off with Branca the author hints that the deal collapsed because Branca was fired (which supposedly saved the situation). The article concludes with the following:

    • As for Branca, by the time the deal collapsed, the superlawyer had been fired.

To prove his point the author gives a link to the letter firing Branca and to the The Secret Probe That Got Branca Fired from which we suddenly learn that there were no reasons to fire him at all, as all suspicions of him being involved in some dirty business behind Michael’s back turned out to be false. But this, as I understand, does not really matter as very few people bothered to open that document and really look. Everyone is so busy these days to look up anything at all and the pace of life is so quick that the first impression is everything you need, right?

But the biggest impression I get from the “Branca-nearly-lost-him-the-catalog” part is from the picture which is actually the centre piece of the article, though it has nothing to do with its content. It is a comparison of two Michael Jackson’s signatures and is clearly meant for someone like us, who also compared Michael’s signatures in the so-called AEG contract and came to the conclusion that one of them was forged.

In our posts the comparison was the key matter for the discussion, while over here a similar comparison is totally inexplicable as it has little to do with Branca and is really far-fetched from the main subject. No, it is here for a different purpose… Why this sudden twist in the narration and in whose interests is it placed here at all? Do you happen to know the guys who might be interested in a debate over Michael’s different signatures? If you do, please share your ideas with us too.

Let us look at the author’s find and his comments which say:

“At left, Jackson signs off on the firing of John Branca in Gebruary 2003; six months after Branca was out of the picture, Jackson authorizes trustees to borrow $35M from Bank of America. The scrawls are clearly different. Was it drugs, coincidence or hanky panky? No one in the Jackson camp would comment…”

So this is what the article is all about.

Michael Jackson's signatures from the AEG contract. The one on the left is for the company (the main one), the one on the right is for the artist as an individual. Now that you see all the four of them what is your opinion about their authenticity?

Branca is a sort of a side subject to it – though splashing some dirt at him has never been a bad idea as he is doing too good a job for Michael Jackson – but now we see that the main thing is the signatures of course!

The main idea is show to us that firstly, the difference in Michael’s handwriting here means that the same difference could be found in the AEG contract too.

And all the rest of it implies that Michael’s hand was unstable for various dirty reasons ranging from him being an “addict” to signing the papers in some “hanky-panky” circumstances like fiddling with someone in the back of the car, for example.

also had to look up the urban dictionary to see what “hanky-panky” means and found that it is something dirty, dubious or illicit, all of which are of course, the exact words which the media wants Michael Jackson to be associated with – the fact which didn’t surprise us in the least as we never expected anything different from the media.

Urban dictionary explains that hanky-panky is: 1. dubious or suspicious behaviour  2. foolish behaviour or talk  3. illicit sexual relations. The last point is especially meaningful in the context of what the media always insinuated about Michael. So this is what explains all the difference in his handwriting!

But the above comparisons didn’t convince us that the signatures are that different after all – three out of these four look similar as they have round curves and circles inside them while the fourth one is decidedly different – it is too much pointed, has no circles inside and is too much slanted to the left, and surprise-surprise –  it happens to be exactly the signature where Michael allegedly signed the AEG contract as head of his company!

But let’s get back to the article. To make it clear how the author really feels about Michael he drops from time to time little poisonous things like:  “Jackson’s drug-fueled death” . This made me furious again – Michael died in the hands of a doctor and not because he was “taking” drugs! It is the same as saying that someone died of a knife and not a murder’s stab, and it is the knife which is to blame and not the murderer!

Another drop of poison is about propafol (sic) which this time shows both the author’s hidden sneer and open ignorance: “After the dressing-room meeting, Jackson headed off apparently to his intravenous Propafol drip” .

And if you click on the picture of Malnik and Jackson in the original article you’ll see its short description as “malnik at 70 and jacko” which makes it finally clear that the whole, seemingly neutral, series is made by a usual media hater. However, if everything is clear about its author whose idea it was to handle Branca so severly (in a 5-part investigation) and present all those “findings” about him in such an insinuating manner?

 2. THE ‘ANGEL’

The last part of the series tells it all. Over here we finally see where the author’s heart really is. After the somewhat sinister role attributed to Branca’s emergence and reemergence in Michael Jackson’s life Randy Phillips is painted as an angel pictured on the background of sweet pink roses.

First Randy Phillips kindly tells us that it was Branca who pressed himself on Michael Jackson:

“Branca had begun to seek a return to the fold no sooner than Jackson wrapped up the press conference unveiling “This Is It” in early March 2009. The lawyer phoned Phillips. ‘“I’d do anything in the world to be involved,”’ Phillips remembers Branca saying. The AEG executive was noncommittal then.”

The matter of Branca’s coming is presented in a way that makes you think Randy Phillips was the happiest person to have John Branca on board. You know, the problem was that Michael had only Dr. Tohme beside him and poor Randy Phillips was extremely “concerned” that it would “potentially lessen the legal and financial predicament for AEG” (and this is probably why they included Tohme’s salary into a contract with AEG, though it was absolutely none of their business how much Michael paid to his own advisors). The article says:

By the time DiLeo returned, Jackson’s inner circle had shriveled practically to nothing — no lawyers or accountants, for example — with the July kickoff of “This Is It” just weeks away, DiLeo contended in an exclusive interview. Only  Jackson’s then-manager, the “mysterious Dr. Tohme Tohme,” as the press sometimes described him, remained, DiLeo says. And soon Tohme Tohme’s status turned murky.

Phillips, too, was anxious to have Branca return to the fold. According to a well-placed music industry leader briefed on the matter, the lawyer’s re-emergence appeared to lessen a potentially massive legal and financial predicament for AEG Live and Phillips.

Okay, so AEG knew of the potential massive legal and financial predicaments (difficulties) as a result of their business with Michael Jackson? By the way all the calculations of the expenses borne by both parties were to be done by AEG only and Michael had only the right to check up. So whatever production costs Randy Phillips included into his bill for Jackson (who was to cover all production costs) Michael’s people would not be able to physically check up whether AEG indeed provided the best price for each service or stage prop, or derived extra profit from dishonest deals with their sub-contractors.

“Phillips was concerned that the company could be on the hook for tens of millions of dollars –productions costs, guarantees, ticket sales and more — if the fragile Jackson were unable to perform his 50-date London run, according to the music industry leader.”

And what was there for Randy Phillips to be so terribly concerned about the production expenses? They were to be covered by Michael Jackson anyway and In case Michael failed to fulfill his obligations AEG was to get all Michael had.

And isn’t it an interesting choice of words by the author – it is Jacko for Jackson, but a ““music industry leader” for AEG? It is Freudian vocabulary indeed, betraying which party the author is siding with and whose interests he is actually representing….

These good AEG people were “concerned” about the 50 dates… as if it was not them who imposed this number of dates on Jackson… after all they could have sold his tickets at twice as high price and people would still be buying while it would have spared Michael a bit. People would have understood – he was 50 after all… and they did pay almost three times as much for one concert by Barbara Streizand if I remember right what Leonard Rowe said, thus giving her triple the profit Michael was supposed to get.

At some point in the final part of the series the author suddenly tells us some truth about Randy Phillips’s real worries at last. He says that Randy Phillips is concerned that their contract could be found void! The real reason for his worries is not mentioned of course (a fake signature, a letter instead of a contract form, discrepancies between its different parts,etc.) – the cause for worry is presented as a conflict of interest which Randy Phillips evidently found by accident, because it is only now that he says he is worried because both parties shared the same lawyer!

Only wasn’t it a little too late for our old darling Randly Phillips to be concerned about it at the time when Branca joined the team? The contract was signed (according to AEG) 6 months prior to Branca’s employment and all Branca was supposed to do was executing it, while all conflict of interest had taken place half a year before that - when the contract was allegedly signed. And our angel CEO of AEG didn’t know that they were sharing one lawyer, poor thing…

By the way Randy Phillips’ revelation that they were sharing one lawyer is very interesting indeed.

Previously we thought that Katz was Dr. Tohme’s lawyer and was therefore representing Michael’s interests, but now we learn that he was working for AEG too – evidently through the same Tohme? Which simultaneously makes it clear for whom Tohme was working? And they are admitting it themselves?

Amazing things are revealed in that rosy fairy tale by Johnnie L.Roberts:

“I felt another attorney that had nothing to do with my company” was prudent, Phillips acknowledged in an exclusive interview. “I felt it was important for Michael.” He added: “That was one reason I was supportive” of Branca’s return.

And whatt does our AEG angel tell us about the role for which Branca was employed by Michael? He says that he was hired  …no, not for looking into their contract of course. Instead of studying legal and financial affairs which Michael was very much concerned about (he said he didn’t know what was going on with is finances and where he was at all) Randy Phillips tells us that Branca’s primary responsibility was elsewhere:

“There was a serious aspiration to make a movie,” says Phillips. “Michael wanted to finish a movie called ‘Ghost’ … and a 3D version of Thriller.’ He wanted John to do the film financing and DVD deal.” Phillips said AEG had planned to contribute cash for developing projects.

AEG was always ready to contribute cash for the developing projects – especially if they were backed up with everything Michael Jackson had – except for the cases when they were worried about “potentially massive legal and financial predicament for AEG Live and Phillips” of course.

Somewhat in passing Randy Phillips also tells us that Michael wanted Branca to handle Sony as they had the loan guarantees – which looks to me like a shot ritually made against Sony to make sure that everyone remembers who is the worst Michael Jackson’s enemy:

“With the due date on a $300 million debt to Barclays on the distant horizon, Jackson also wanted Branca in Sony’s face about “restructuring the loan because Sony had the loan guarantees,” Phillips said, adding that he was thrilled for Michael to have a corner man “who knew where all the bodies were buried.”

Well, we do remember that Branca successfully handled those loan guarantees with Sony later – however what we do need to refresh in our memory are the huge guarantees given by Michael to AEG for the advance money (including the production expenses) they gave to him under their infamous Promissory Note.

Since our well-informed author Johnnie L.Roberts does not say a single word about this matter, let me compensate a bit for his lapse in memory and remind you that under the Promissory Note signed with Michael Jackson’s LLC company AEG was to get everything this company ever possessed or was to possess in the future if Michael did not speedily pay back all the advances.

And it doesn’t matter whether Michael Jackson Company LLC did or did not  hold any of Jackson’s music publishing catalogs at the time – as a result of a default in paying back the advance money AEG was becoming Michael Jackson full attorney-in-fact who could conduct all Michael Jackson’s business ever afterwards.

ALL of it.  Including the CATALOGUE of course.  And FOREVER AFTER too.

The legal reason for this possible situation was that if Michael Jackson had not paid the advance AEG would have obtained a sort of a General Power of Attorney and would have had full rights to act on his behalf in all his present and future transactions too.

Attorneys-in-fact may be restricted by the Power of Attorney they have, but were there any restrictions in the rights which AEG was to receive as a result of Michael’s possible default in payment?

There were NO RESTRICTIONS whatsoever.

Let me quote my earlier post  here where I retyped part of the Promissory note and point 16.3 of their so-called contract which specified the future rights of AEG in case they became Michael Jackson’s full attorney-in-fact:

Point 16.3 refers to the Artist’s property as “Security” and makes a flat statement that in case of a default in paying back the advances the Promoter can exercise their rights to ALL  properties, shares, interests, etc. listed above – whether they are owned now or will be owned in the future and will have the right to claim any other property in order to collect the Collateral and even make amendments to the Collateral (or change it).

To ensure that all future property will also be theirs the Promissory Note says that in an Event of Default AEG will be irrevocably (or without a possibility to reconsider it) appointed as the ONLY attorney-in-fact of the Artist’s company.

The attorney-in-fact will have full authority to act in the name of the company to do as follows: 

(a) ask, demand, collect, sue for, recover, compound, receive and give acquittance and recepts for, money due and to become due in respect of the Collateral;

(b) receive, endorse and collect any drafts or other documents in connection with it;

(c) file claims or take any other action and proceedings necessary for collecting the Collateral;

(d) file financial statements or amendments relative to the Collateral.

In short if the Artist did not immediately pay back the advances, AEG was to receive full right to take any legal or other action necessary on behalf of the Artist’s company in connection with claiming the Collateral.  

Including the proceedings concerning the catalog of course.

And this, I am afraid, refutes the point that “it is absolute misinformation” to say thatAEG would’ve taken ownership of Michael Jackson’s music catalogs if he failed to perform for 2009 ‘This Is It’ Tour in London which I saw in one of the blogs.

What I am afraid of is that it would be absolute misinformation to totally rule such a possibility out.

3. ‘HELP’ from unexpected quarters

Let us finally put aside the series of articles by Johnnie L.Roberts repaying AEG for all the good this company evidently did to this journalist and look in the direction of those who say that Ed Chernoff wanted to use Michael’s difficult financial situation as a way to exonerate Conrad Murray of his guilt.

Well, I clearly remember that Ed Chernoff did try to introduce the financial matter into the picture, only I do not understand how AEG’s horrible plans to strip Michael of all his money can exonerate Conrad Murray of his guilt, as it is in his hands and not AEG’s that Michael actually died.

Do AEG’s devilish plans make Murray’s negligence lesser? No, they do not. He will still remain guilty as hell.

But the only thing those financial matters can probably do is explain WHY Murray was so terribly negligent in dealing with his patient. Such negligence can be expected only if someone wants another one to fail and be unable to fulfill his obligations. And this is all the “damage” to Michael the revelation of the financial side of the matter can do.

In fact Ed Chernoff’s arguments found in this blog even struck me as true – he is a lawyer and has surely studied the AEG contract, so his opinion is valuable to us because it may be the additional proof that AEG was planning to rob Michael of his money, catalog and ultimately his life. The only thing it does NOT prove is that Murray may become less guilty as a result of discovering all those circumstances:

“The crux of the defense is going to be that Jackson did a desperate act and took desperate measures that caused his own death” declared lead defense attorney Ed Chernoff during April 6, 2011 court hearing.  “Mr. Jackson’s greatest asset happens to be music catalogs. He was actually in more debt as a result of the concert. The Estate has information about what Jackson actually was facing if he didn’t complete these concerts” he continued, hinting that had Michael Jackson failed to perform in O2 Tour—assuming he was alive– then AEG would’ve foreclosed on his prized music catalogs.”

It is good that Chernoff said it. At least someone said the truth at last.

4. ‘BUSINESS ADVISOR’

And here is a brief note about my impression of Karen Faye’s passionate statements which were made at approximately the same time when Johnnie Roberts wrote his series – in December 2010 (sorry for me being so late with my studies). Here are some excerpts from Karen Faye’s message:

  • …there is NOTHING to celebrate about this record. It’s a product of greed, manipulation, corruption and selfishness, and it’s basically just the continuation of the bullshit that was This Is It. Michael is DEAD, that is the ONLY reason this album exists. How can it be something to celebrate? HE is not here anymore so HE did not release this album. This is a Sony album, not a Michael Jackson one, and more than that, it’s a slap in the face and an insult both to everything he stood for, as well as to those of us that see this for what it really is.
  • Michael’s legacy does not stand and fall with this album; nor will it stand and fall with any future Sony releases. His legacy was created (and secured) BY HIM, decades ago. DECADES. His songs are timeless, he’s Michael Jackson for God’s sake. His philanthropy, his human rights work, his donations…they’re all there, and they are set in stone. Any posthumous releases of any of “his” works (*cough*JasonMalachi*coughs*) will not change that. In any direction.
  • This is not my intention, but to be honest, this isn’t even a matter of “maybe” to me. We don’t have to guess how he’s feel about Sony getting the hands on these recordings because HE TOLD US!
  •  He shared his talent with us for forty years. It is naïve, and, to be honest, disrespectful to everything he achieved and gave us during those four decades to think that all of it would just disappear because we don’t keep buying whatever is put out there and that has his name on it. HE did not release this album, so refraining from buying it will not hurt HIM. http://www.twitlonger.com/show/7j7ufk

No, I am afraid it will hurt Michael very much, as the money stream to pay the debts will be much narrower and much slower.

Karen’s feelings are understandable. Michael is dead and nothing matters to her now. All she wants is preserving Michael’s legacy in its original form, just the way he left it. This I understand perfectly well… but what about the debts?

If “This is It” documentary and “Michael” album projects were no good and fell so terribly short of her expectations, why doesn’t she suggest the Estate something better in order to be able to pay off those loans and the interest on them? And the ideas should not necessarily involve Sony if she still hates them so much, but other companies, which the Estate will surely be willing to consider.

Surely Karen does not want Michael’s children to take care of those debts when they grow up? I mean not only Michael’s children who will grow up, but the debts which will grow too? Does she want the children to live under that press and handle this huge problem in the future?

She doesn’t?  Then suggestions please!

87 Comments leave one →
  1. shellywebstere permalink
    April 10, 2012 6:45 pm

    Rasta Pasta Posted: Nov 25 2004, 10:19 AM at MJJF

    i just saw this on the KOP posted by Midas57 and thought it an interesting read here:

    XtraJet executive Jeffrey Borer (who is now being sued by Michael), is the son of a gay porn distributor Stan Loeb, who is also an acquaintance of Marc Schaffel’s.
    Quote:
    ——————————————————————————–
    The sentiments were echoed by several other producers and directors in the industry, most of whom did not want their names used in this story. One guy who wasn’t afraid to be identified, however, is one of the industry’s most influential figures, distributor Stan Loeb.

    Loeb was recently honored by the Adult Video News with the porn industry’s equivalent of a Lifetime Achievement Oscar. “Loeb is one of the most powerful distributors around,” says AVN’s gay/bi managing editor Jeremy Spencer. “We honored him last year with a special award for keeping gay stuff from falling into the bargain bin. He can still get $60 for a videotape, unlike the straight stuff. And he’s a straight guy himself, which is unusual in this business. Very cool, very smart. A lot of companies want [Loeb’s firm] Paladin Video as their distributor. He has a really good reputation in the industry.”

    Loeb himself says he has a long association with Schaffel and his films. “Fred Schaffel used to find a lot of talent for a lot of people in the industry. How he found them, I don’t know. I guess some people just have an eye, especially in the gay industry. He could go into a restaurant or a nightclub, and could spot a guy who could be good in films,” Loeb says, speaking from his Las Vegas office.

    “Fred was known for finding talent, and he did it very, very well. And the stuff he used to do was really excellent. But it’s a shame what he’s done to himself,” Loeb says. Schaffel’s first film, Cocktales, and its star, Rex Chandler, were both hits in the industry and showed that Schaffel had a lot of promise. But over the years, Loeb says, the quality of Schaffel’s work has declined. Loeb thinks it’s because the director has had less and less to do with actual filming and attaches his name to projects merely to market them.

    Loeb says he refuses to take any new titles from Schaffel. “We have three of his videos [for sale on the Paladin Video catalog] that someone else is selling for a third of the price we pay for them. But as I said, you learn your lessons and move on.”

    Despite his feelings about Schaffel, however, the two still occasionally talk. And Loeb says he was stunned last August when Schaffel called one day and said he was going to work for Michael Jackson. “Why? You got me. He said they were very good friends, and that Michael had hired him for a job.” Another time, Loeb says, Schaffel claimed that he and Jackson had been childhood friends. Loeb said he doubted Schaffel’s story. But in November, he received an even more startling call.

    “One day Fred called and said he knew someone who was unhappy chartering flights,” Loeb says. “He knew that my son has a chartering business, and he asked if I would talk to his unhappy friend. Then, he put Michael Jackson on the phone. They were driving around in Michael’s limousine. My son ended up flying some of Michael’s people around. That confirmed for me that Fred was really working for him.” Loeb’s son, Jeff Borer, acknowledged that his firm, Xtra Jet in Santa Monica, got work flying some of Jackson’s people through Schaffel.
    ——————————————————————————–

    Everything You Wanted (And Didn’t Want) To Know
    About Michael Jackson & Marc Schaffel’s Relationship [The Jackson Jive (NewTimesLA.com; July 18, 2002)]

    http://www.dallasobserver.com/issues/2002-…7-25/music.html

    http://community.mjeol.com/index.php?/topic/1856-schaffel-loeb-xtra-jet-scandal/

  2. March 19, 2012 1:39 am

    “Murray’s CPR was an attempt to push MJ’s body to metabolize more propofol and consequently to reduce the concentration of propofol in Michael’s body. No doubt, as you both wrote, that Murray wanted to get rid of some propofol.”

    MOA, thank you for confirming this important fact. It is worth mentioning that it is not only your or my opinion – I know that you also contacted Dr. Shafer and asked him if we could understand Murray’s CPR as an attempt to push MJ’s body to metabolize more propofol and consequently reduce its concentration in the body.

    And Dr. Shafer answered you that it was possible to understand it that way! He said:

    “The motivation behind CPR is to deliver oxygen to tissues. You are correct, if oxygen were being delivered to tissues, then propofol would also be delivered to tissues, and there would be additional propofol metabolism as a result.”

    He said that it would be true only for some time after breathing stopped. But nevertheless it does mean that Murray could be doing his totally unprofessional CPR in order to maximize the level of oxygen in the body tissues and simultaneously minimize the level of propofol there, even if he knew that Michael’s brain was already dead.

  3. March 17, 2012 2:50 am

    @VMJ and @Kaarin, about Murray’s CPR,

    As we know, the elimination of propofol happens mostly in the liver (60%) and in the kidneys (40%) in the human body. The lungs play an insignificant part in this matter. In both liver and kidneys the elimination occurs via the glucuronidation.

    We also know that the heart pumps the blood in the body. It brings the propofol to liver and kidnys’ cells where the glucuronidation occurs.

    So Murray’s CPR was an attempt to push MJ’s body to metabolize more propofol and consequently to reduce the concentration of propofol in Michael’s body. No doubt, as you both wrote, that Murray wanted to get rid of some propofol.

  4. March 13, 2012 1:52 am

    “It’s close to 200 pages, so it might take a bit longer than I thought, but I’ll also ask the opinion of a specialist on the parts that might surpass my expertise. This person has been working with corporation contracts for 17 years, so whatever I come back with can be trusted 100%.”

    Mona, for your and everyone’s convenience I’ve turned the text of the “contract” into a separate post (and also into a page found in the main menu), so you don’t have to read all the 200 pages of Joe Jackson’s suit – at least at the moment.

    I hear that Joe Jackson’s suit was dismissed by the judge on the grounds that he should have joined the suit filed by Katherine. “The judge said the law does not favor multiple suits by individual heirs. She said that to allow Joe Jackson’s suit against AEG Live to go forward would “allow the heirs of a decedent to file as many suits as there are heirs.” http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Entertainment/20120222/joe-jackson-dismisses-AEG-live-120222/

    The reason many be correct of course, but still AEG won a major victory – Joe Jackson’s suit was much better prepared than Katherine’s. Out of the two AEG was more wary of Joe Jackson’s suit and in order to dismiss his and give preference to hers they argued that he “was not a legitimate heir to his son’s fortune.”

    Now the AEG people are jubilant: “AEG Live attorney Marvin Putnam called the ruling a major victory for the entertainment giant.” Unfortunately, it is.

    However our analysis should go on independently of all that. I’ll be happy if Mona and her expert also join me!

  5. Mona permalink
    March 13, 2012 12:12 am

    Thank you, I’ll make a print of it, it would be easier to read and take notes. It’s close to 200 pages, so it might take a bit longer than I thought, but I’ll also ask the opinion of a specialist on the parts that might surpass my expertise. This person has been working with corporation contracts for 17 years, so whatever I come back with can be trusted 100%.

  6. March 12, 2012 9:34 pm

    “Could you please send me a link to the contract as a whole and whatever other documentation you might have on this?”

    Mona, here is a link to the amended version of Joseph Jackson’s suit against AEG which contains the document:

    On pages 43-70 you will find the full AEG contract with attachments to it. There are many other interesting documents in this package – for example, Conrad Murray’s correspondence with AEG people (beginning with page 71), his expenses allegedly covered by AEG (page 76), the search warrant of Murray’s premises dated August 7, 2009 (only 7th of August!) and Murray’s contract with AEG (p.119 and p.137).

    Unfortunately I haven’t got a Word variant of it.

    I will also try to make a special page in this blog with screenshots of the contract for everyone to study, or probably make a post with the text only and will be happy if everyone who is familiar with this type of documents will share their opinion about them.

    Mona, Susan and Ivy, you are very much welcome to discuss the whole thing.

  7. March 12, 2012 2:46 pm

    “His CPR was a sham and having had training in cardiology he knew that. Dying does not stop all biological functions at once. He practically forced the ER physicians to extraordinary measures to revive the heart, hoping that any residual propofol be flushed out.”

    Kaarin, you cannot imagine how important your note is. Propofol evaporates from the body easily, but only as long as the heart is beating and blood is circulating in the body. Murray wanted to keep that process active through CPR – this way the heart would contract and blood would keep circulating. So what everyone thought to be his method of reviving Michael was actually something totally different – Murray knew that Michael had been dead for quite a time, but he needed the heart beat artificially to make propofol leave the body! Even in case the brain was already dead.

    Several doctors were surprised why Murray was making CPR at all (Michael needed oxygen, while his heart was okay) and why it was done in such an unprofessional way (on the bed).

    The answer is – because Murray didn’t want to revive him. He just wanted propofol to leave the system!

    This is why he insisted on all those resuscitation methods when they arrived at the hospital! It was absolutely useless at that stage, but he needed it to hide the traces of propofol!

    Considering that some propofol left Michael’s system through all these artificial methods, we can safely assume that Michael received that night much more than the 2063 mgs, the traces of which were actually found.

  8. Mona permalink
    March 12, 2012 2:04 am

    VMJ, I’ve seen your invitation to look at the ‘contract’ just now, but I’d be happy to do that and give you and the readers my honest opinion. Could you please send me a link to the contract as a whole and whatever other documentation you might have on this? I’ll try to take care of it this week, however I cannot promise, as i also want to read all the previous articles regarding AEG so that I don’t write anything redundant.
    Thank you for trusting me with this, i’d love to bring my contribution to uncovering the truth about a wonderful artist and humanitarian gone too soon.

    L.O.V.E.

  9. March 11, 2012 8:10 pm

    The result in the solution of the conflicts in this shady affair will depend on on decency, will there be any or not.So far it does not look good, NBC will again reward Murray for killing Michael. This info from Mona´s post, I dont know from what country.
    This will have little effect on those who followed Murray´s trial. Dr. Shafer demonstrated without doubt that Michael had been given at least 2063.mgs..or more if the propofol content in the bottle remining+the urine discarded are taken into account. Haters believe what they believe not because of truth, but what is in themselves.
    It does not surprise mr that Murray delayed the 911 call. His CPR was a sham and having had training in cardiology he knew that.
    Dying does not stop all biological functions at once. So once at the ER he changed the tune and practically forced the ER physicians to extraordinary measures to revive the heart, hoping that any residual propofol be flushed out. If by a miracle they had succeeded Michael would have been a vegetable depending on oxygenation by intubation.
    The Murray documentary is a bad joke at best.He is laughable in his theatricality, fake sentimentality, the visit by the Holy Ghost,and the angry waving of arms over the 911 not being called.

    As a P.S. to all this,AEG being or acting as `attorney in fact´´and paying Murray should at least have asked for the Informed Consent signed by Michael. This is always necessary when a proceedure or medication with some risk is given. It is not the same as Michael signing a contract with Murray.

  10. March 10, 2012 11:16 am

    “I believe they are becoming “attorney-in-fact of the Artist’s company” and not Michael Jackson. Again all their reach and control is to limited to MJ Co LLC and what it owns. Details are important “

    Ivy, yes, details are important. So please do not forget that the contract refers to both the Artist’s company and/or the Artist as the responsible parties (while the Promissory Note speaks only of the Artist’s company). It is one of those innumerable discrepancies between different parts of the AEG deal which give a reason for thinking that it was not quite valid. However, valid or not, point 16.3 of their contract says the following about Artistco (MJ Company LLC) and Artist (MJ the individual) and a lien (one of its meanings is “the possibility to arrest the assets of the other party”):

    “To secure the faithful performance of Artistco of Artistco’s and Artist’s obligations under this Agreement (including to repay the Advances), Artistco hereby grants Promoter a lien in all Artistco’s right, title and interest in, to, and under the following properties, assets and rights, wherever located, whether now owned or hereafter acquired or arising, and all proceeds and products thereof (all of the same being hereinafter referred to collectively as, the “Collateral”): contract rights or right to the payment of money in which Artisco and /or Artist has an interest, insurance claims and proceeds, commercial tort claims, securities and all other investmenet property, and all general intangibles (including all accounts receivable and payment intangibles). Artistco shall reasonably cooperate with Promoter in its efforts to perfect such security Interest”.

    “Also the good thing about being in 2012 is that we have new information that we can add and make corrections. Yes recently we learned that Tohme had 2 Power of attorneys but we also learned that Michael had cancelled his power of attorney’s in April 2009. So Tohme was no longer a threat in regards to fraudulent schemes including transferring Michael’s assets and/or signing up Michael for never ending concerts.”

    We are discussing the AEG contract and not the drastic measures Michael took to save the situation (like Tohme’s dismissal and cancelling the Powers of Attorney). I’ve noted it already that the contract papers should be regarded only as a kind of evidence of the intentions the AEG and Tohme had towards Michael Jackson. In life, especially with Branca handling this business, everything could have turned out totally differently.

    “Did you notice that Promoter has the right to unilaterally prolong the term AT THEIR DESIRE ”
    — I guess we are reading it differently. My understanding is that they have the right to extend the date UNTIL one hundred percent (100%) advances are recouped. In my opinion it’s an conditional extension ability.

    This is why I said the point called “Term” needed a full post, and not just a comment. Taken separately one sentence can mean that they had the right to extend it unilaterally until 100% of the advances was paid. But AEG’s papers are made in such a way that one thing contradicts the other and numerous points allow opposite interpretation. For example, the sentence you referred to is followed by a sentence which allows a different interpretation of the same thing:

    “Artistco and Promoter shall have all of their respective rights and obligations under this Agreement with respect to any mutually approved Shows that have been scheduled prior to the Expiration Date and are to be performed after the Expiration Date as the result of Promoter’s decision to extend the Term regardless of whether or not Promoter recoups one hundred percent of the Advances prior to the completion of such Shows.”

    “It even includes that it can end earlier than that and that artist can do a “buy out” meaning pay the remaining advance balance and not do the concerts.”

    This is a highly negative point! What it essentially says is that the Promoter has the right to unilaterally terminate the contract before the expiration date whenever they want to! They terminate it, and Michael is forced to pay all the advances back without making concerts and having a possibility to earn money!

    And as regards the Buy-out notice it means that the Artist could be free if he repaid the advances but only after he performed all the shows, including the newly added ones:

    “upon receipt of such Buy-Out Notice, the Term shall then end on the later of (a) the date of Promoter’s receipt of the Buy-out Notice, or (b) the completion of any mutually-approved Shows previously scheduled (such later date being refined to as the “New Expiration Date”), but only so long as Artistco pays to Promoter an amount equivalent to any unrecouped portion of the Advances”

    They estimated Michael to earn $2 Million per concert (Murray restitution number). So it seems like he could have paid advances + production costs by doing 20 shows. So I don’t think he would be slaved for life.

    I regard it as the Estate’s not too far-sighted approach to the matter. They wanted the restitution to be big and didn’t focus on the numerous obstacles hindering Michael in making money under this ‘contract’. By saying that MJ could earn that much they practically said that the contract was valid, with which I categorically don’t agree. Fortunately they dropped that restitution altogether. Probably they understood the mistake made.

    P.S. Must be running now. We have a rally.

  11. Ivy permalink
    March 10, 2012 10:12 am

    I believe they are becoming “attorney-in-fact of the Artist’s company” and not Michael Jackson. Again all their reach and control is to limited to MJ Co LLC and what it owns.

    Details are important. Also the good thing about being in 2012 is that we have new information that we can add and make corrections. Yes recently we learned that Tohme had 2 Power of attorneys but we also learned that Michael had cancelled his power of attorney’s in April 2009. So Tohme was no longer a threat in regards to fraudulent schemes including transferring Michael’s assets and/or signing up Michael for never ending concerts.

    “Did you notice that Promoter has the right to unilaterally prolong the term AT THEIR DESIRE ”

    — I guess we are reading it differently. My understanding is that they have the right to extend the date UNTIL one hundred percent (100%) advances are recouped. In my opinion it’s an conditional extension ability. It even includes that it can end earlier than that and that artist can do a “buy out” meaning pay the remaining advance balance and not do the concerts. They estimated Michael to earn $2 Million per concert (Murray restitution number). So it seems like he could have paid advances + production costs by doing 20 shows. So I don’t think he would be slaved for life.

    As for the contract I actually do agree that it’s not a favorable contract for Michael for things such as making him pay all the costs , delayed payments to him etc. but also at the same time I don’t think it was to the point of making him work with no end in sight or would put him on the street with no assets.

  12. March 9, 2012 10:09 pm

    “Did AEG want to put Michael into slavery for the rest of his life? – vmj ”
    — Why would Michael be in slavery for the rest of his life? – ivy

    Ivy, to answer your question I need to write a new post about point 14 of the Definitions attachment to AEG’s contract (the attachment is not signed by either of the parties). Point 14 is called “TERM”.

    I will retype it here with practically no comment for everyone’s individual scrutiny first (will just put some words in bold type):

    14. “Term” means the execution date through December 31, 2011, or the conclusion of a Worldwide touring cycle which includes Shows throughout the major touring territories of the World as mutually selected by Artisco and Promoter, whichever occurs later (“Expiration Date”), provided however, Promoter shall have the right , in its sole discretion, but not the obligation, to (a) extend the Term beyond the Expiration Date by written notice (a) until such time as Promoter recoups one hundred percent (100%) of the Advances; or (b) end the Term prior to the Expiration Date, in which event the Term shall be defined to and on the date(s) selected by Promoter, notwithstanding the Expiration Date.

    To exercise its right to extend the term under the foregoing provision, Promoter must give written notice of its desire to extend the term prior to December 31, 2011. For the avoidance of doubt, Artistco and Promoter shall have all of their respective rights and obligations under this Agreement with respect to any mutually approved Shows that have been scheduled prior to the Expiration Date and are to be performed after the Expiration Date as the result of Promoter’s decision to extend the Term regardless of whether or not Promoter recoups one hundred percent of the Advances prior to the completion of such Shows.

    Notwithstanding any of the foregoing, in the event the Term is extended by the provisions of the paragraph beyond December 31, 2011, Artistco shall have the right to end the Term on the New Expiration Date (defined below) by giving Promoter written notice by facsimile transmission (the “Buy-Out Notice”) of Artistco’s desire to end the Term on the New Expiration Date, which Buy-Out Notice may be given on December 31, 2011, or any date thereafter, and upon receipt of such Buy-Out Notice, the Term shall then end on the later of (a) the date of Promoter’s receipt of the Buy-out Notice, or (b) the completion of any mutually-approved Shows previously scheduled (such later date being refined to as the “New Expiration Date”), but only so long as Artistco pays to Promoter an amount equivalent to any unrecouped portion of the Advances as of such New Expiration Date by no later than ten (10) business days from … (the last line is missing).

    Did you notice any rights belonging to the Artist? (I didn’t)

    And how do you like the “BUY-OUT NOTICE”? Nice wording, isn’t it?

    Did you notice that Promoter has the right to unilaterally prolong the term AT THEIR DESIRE (by just notifying the other side?)

    Did you see that they can notify the Artistco of their “desire” PRIOR TO December 31, 2011, but Artistco has the right to sumbit the “Buy-Out Notice” only ON December 31, 2011?

    And the Artist will be released of his obligations only after he completes all the shows “mutually approved” and “previously scheduled” by ARTISTCO AND AEG?

    And who is Artistco by the way?

    Michael Jackson or Tohme who is deciding everything for him?

    Could the shows “previously scheduled” mean that Artisco approved another 50 shows after the AEG’s “desire to prolong” expressed PRIOR TO Dec.31, but before the Artist’s “Buy-Out Notice” sent ON Dec.31?

    So that the Artist has to complete the new package of some 50 shows even after December 31, 2011?

    And only THEN he will be free, and this will be called a NEW EXPIRATION DATE?

    If he is ALIVE of course by that time?

    And he cannot get his freedom before the New Expiration Date EVEN if he repays all the advances back?

    Because “..shows that have been scheduled prior to the Expiration Date and are to be performed after the Expiration Date as the result of Promoter’s decision to extend the Term regardless of whether or not Promoter recoups one hundred percent of the Advances prior to the completion of such Shows?

    And the territories for such shows will be again selected by Artistco and Promoter (and not the Artist)?

    But it will be his company which will bear all costs for transporting the equipment, travel and accommodation of the staff, etc. because all “rights and obligations” will remain the same for the period of January, 2009 up to December 31, 2011 and an indefinite period after that?

  13. March 9, 2012 9:06 pm

    “But if it protects the catalog so well from anyone, why was all this fierce campaigning against Sony then?”
    — My understanding and please correct me if I’m wrong, It protects the catalog from bankruptcy and third-party creditors but not from defaulting on the loan payments. So although Michael was highly unlikely to lose his catalog for a $40M debt to AEG, he could have lost it due to non-payment of the loans. Michael’s “they are after my catalog” statement was based on the belief that they were creating accusations about him to hurt his income capabilities so that he would default on the loans and Sony would get the first dibs to purchase his half.

    I think you are right in saying that it protects the catalog from bankruptcy and third-party creditors but not from defaulting on the loan payments. So Michael could lose the catalog due to non-payment of the loans – but lose to whom? I think only to the bank and not Sony or AEG as his “50% interest was pledged as security for a loan issued by Barclays Capital” according to the Estate’s report.

    As far as I know if the loan is not repaid the bank gets the pledged assets, but doesn’t usually keep them as this is side business to them. Sony will be the first to stand in the line to buy them in addition to their own 50% interest and AEG would be demanding at least part of them (free?) as a compensation for their losses. AEG by then would have been the attorney-in-fact for Michael Jackson, who could fully act on his behalf.

    I remember reading somewhere (do not recall the details) that Sony had a chance to buy Michael’s share but did not use its right, but helped Michael instead. So who is left standing next in the line?

  14. March 9, 2012 6:16 pm

    “let us not forget that artists are not obliged to put in their money in the show at all because if they do, what will they need producers for?”
    — Actually I wouldn’t say “at all”, because you would see different cost sharing according to the artist’s popularity and demand. Even for example the Immortal tour is a 50-50 cost sharing between MJ Estate and Cirque.

    Ivy, the Immortal project is different – Cirque du Soleil is a production company which could do without the Estate and then the Estate would receive only royalties for the music rights. But the Estate invested their money in order to share the profit and the profit might be huge here, so their decision was absolutely correct.

    But when a single artist (like Barbara Streisand for example) makes a show she is not obliged to invest her own money into it. Each is doing his own job – she sings, the producer puts in money and arranges the whole thing. Otherwise all singers would be producing their shows themselves or arranging them through agents who would order the arenas, take care of the tickets, advertising, etc. There might be variations here, but generally producers do put in their money, don’t they?

    If the words “at all” are not too arrurate I can withdraw them as I myself said in my posts that there should have been a certain agreed budget between Michael and AEG and if it was exceeded due to the artist’s “ideas” he would be the one to pay for them. The producer is not responsible for every artist’s ‘whim’ as they also have their limits.

    But in this case ALL production costs were Michael’s responsibility! AEG was acting as a kind of a bank which provides the money and does its own accounting – while Michael was supposed to pay for everything they spent. He was supposed to check their expenses later, but was there a way to check up whether they quoted the best price for each service and found the best subcontractors? What if they charged him double for something which cost twice as little?

    When we want to buy something we prefer to buy it ourselves, because our “agent” can go to the most expensive shop and make a purchase at an unnecessarily high price (at our expense!). However we won’t mind it if our partner buys something expensive but covers his expenses himself, right? And we won’t mind it either if we share the expenses, because the fact that he is also paying makes us sure that our partner looked for the best combination of quality and price, right?

    The problem with AEG contract is that Michael most probably did not know (at least initially) that he was to bear responsibility for all production costs. This becomes clear to us from the discrepancies between the contract and attachments to it. The production costs are enumerated in the attachment only, which is not even signed by either of the parties. The contract on the other hand is rather vague as regards who is to pay for production.

    * * *
    Those production costs were also connected to the money each party was to receive. Roughly speaking AEG was to receive a fixed per cent of the gross money collected minus their small expenses, while Michael was to receive what remained after 1) AEG deducted the money due to them 2) the production costs were deducted from profit and returned to AEG. Michael was probably to receive not even the whole of what remained after all those deductions, but only 90% of it (the rest would go to AEG again).

    Firstly, the fact that AEG deducted their percent from the revenue collected from tickets made them interested in selling a bigger number of shows, because their share only increased after collecting a bigger amount of money, while Michael’s share decreased after that (the production costs for a bigger number of shows grow considering the salary of the whole staff, their accommodation, taxes, travel expenses, etc.).

    Secondly, AEG were interested in boosting the production expenses. The more they spent the less Michael ultimately received, while the amount of the production expenses per ce did not really matter to AEG – all production expenses were to be returned to them by Michael in full anyway.

    Wasn’t it much more fair to 1) share the production expenses and 2) deduct production expenses from all money collected and only then divide the profit as all normal people do?

    Since the above crooked division of profit becomes clear only after you read the attachments to the AEG contract I think it was something Michael either never saw, or saw much later. The Definitions attachment where the whole thing is stipulated is not signed by either of the parties.

  15. March 9, 2012 5:48 pm

    “On the other hand, why is it only the catalog that everyone is focusing their attention on? ”
    — Because the main concern or misconception of the fans is that if Michael didn’t perform and cancelled the deal, AEG could have gotten his catalog. It’s important to correct that misconception if we have been mistaken.

    Ivy, my claim that Michael could lose his catalog is not a “misconception”. What I asserted and continue to assert is that AEG’s various contract papers are structured in such a way that at any time of a default they could lay their hands on all belongings of Michael’s company LLC. It didn’t have anything at the time – $5,5mln. listed there looks like the sum later returned to it by Tohme but apart from that it was zero, I guess.

    But even if the company had a zero on its accounts in case of a default AEG was becoming Michael’s attorney-in-fact with huge rights to acquire his other property. In fact the “advances” were for a sum bigger than $40mln. and this is what they wanted back (most probably with compensation of their damages, interest, loss of profit, etc. plus the fees of the attorneys as the Promissory Note said). It could have been a huge trial of the century with lots and lots of millions involved. To prove whether Michael could or could not lose his catalog as a result of that we need a huge team of lawyers to look into this matter and make a sort of a reconstruction of possible events.

    However the first assignment of these lawyers would be to check the validity of the AEG contract at all. In my opinion the contract was not valid, and that is why in reality AEG could not acquire the catalog (this is what I reassured my readers of). So all we can analyze are the intentions of AEG – after all they consider their contract valid, so their papers are worth analyzing as they show the train of thought of these people.

    Considering that Tohme was regarded as the manager of MJ’s company LLC (all confirmations were to be sent through or by him) and that he obtained two Powers of Attorney from Michael (as we learned just recently) but was actually working for AEG, we absolutely cannot rule out that he wouldn’t have devised a fraudulent scheme to reconsider the terms under which the catalog was kept in those trusts.

    I don’t know what Tohme was up to but all this dirty mess around Michael proves that there was some game at play. The irregularities we see in the AEG papers are not made just for nothing – there must be a reason for them. It would be best if AEG and Tohme themselves told us what they were up to, but in case they do not, we will have to analyze the situation ourselves. If it wasn’t his catalog it could be ruining Michael altogether and making him work for them until the end of his life, and this is why I think we should not necessarily focus on the catalog only.

    You seem to be analyzing the situation as if the papers and people around Michael were absolutely clean – which is the worst misconception of all! The validity and correctness of AEG papers leave much to be desired. Tohme was supposed to be working in Michael’s interests as he was his manager, but the contract says his services were to be paid for by AEG (!) – so who did he work for then? Later, in the attachment to contract, the AEG corrected this point by placing all production costs on Michael’s shoulders (which is also a fraud as the contract had different stipulations for this matter). The production costs included Tohme’s salary, so by this single move Tohme suddenly began “working” for Michael again.

    The whole thing is a complete mess, which could be created only intentionally. I repeat, only intentionally and in such dirty waters it was easy matter for Tohme to do some dirty business behind Michael’s back and probably even reconsider the terms under which the catalog was kept by those trusts. Remember that he had those Powers of Attorney….

    To make my position clearer to you I will repeat that since I consider the contract invalid, Michael’s catalog was not in danger – but their contract (even if it is invalid) does show their intentions, and there are strong signs that their intentions were far from honest.

  16. Ivy permalink
    March 9, 2012 10:13 am

    “On the other hand, why is it only the catalog that everyone is focusing their attention on? ”

    — Because the main concern or misconception of the fans is that if Michael didn’t perform and cancelled the deal, AEG could have gotten his catalog. It’s important to correct that misconception if we have been mistaken.

    “let us not forget that artists are not obliged to put in their money in the show at all because if they do, what will they need producers for?”

    — Actually I wouldn’t say “at all”, because you would see different cost sharing according to the artist’s popularity and demand. Even for example the Immortal tour is a 50-50 cost sharing between MJ Estate and Cirque.

    “Did AEG want to put Michael into slavery for the rest of his life ”

    — Why would Michael be in slavery for the rest of his life? The recent probate documents show $5.8M income for MJ Co LLC, Tohme lawsuit showed that he was able to put aside $5.5 M from royalty payments for a house. So it’s not like Michael had no income, it seems like he could have paid a $40M debt over a few years from the money he received from intellectual rights.

    “But if it protects the catalog so well from anyone, why was all this fierce campaigning against Sony then?”

    — My understanding and please correct me if I’m wrong, It protects the catalog from bankruptcy and third-party creditors but not from defaulting on the loan payments. So although Michael was highly unlikely to lose his catalog for a $40M debt to AEG, he could have lost it due to non-payment of the loans. Michael’s “they are after my catalog” statement was based on the belief that they were creating accusations about him to hurt his income capabilities so that he would default on the loans and Sony would get the first dibs to purchase his half.

  17. March 9, 2012 12:49 am

    “In another article it talks about Branca approaching Phillips after the O2 announcements, saying he would give anything to be involved – something that Phillips rejected at the time.”

    BG, dear me! How can we believe anything Phillips says after that totally fraudulent contract of theirs?

    And what right does Randy Phillips have not to allow Michael Jackson to hire an attorney of his own?

    He said it himself that he was worried that they were sharing one lawyer! So he should have been interested in Michael having a lawyer by his side then (and certainly not “reject” him)! Each pays for his own lawyer, so how could Phillips prevent Michael from hiring him?

    “apart from one media reporter, there has been a complete carte blanche awarded to Branca by the media and it seems there always has been. That’s something that has not been afforded to anyone else, especially not to Branca’s sometime client – Michael.”

    Let us not consider the fact that the media is not trashing Branca as the evidence of his “guilt”. All it might be the evidence of is that the media is wary of telling lies about one of the best lawyers – it might turn out to be too costly for them. However they will not be wary of telling the truth about him (if their stories were true). So if they have nothing to say, then probably there is simply nothing to say.

  18. March 9, 2012 12:34 am

    “Lyton Guest is right that the catalogs (and assets) are divided and put into trusts to protect them from creditors.”

    Ivy, I’ve looked up what the Estate’s report says about Michael’s ATV share. Here it is:

    Sony/ATV. Michael had also pledged his fifty percent interest in Sony/ATV as security for a loan issued by Barclays Capital***. The Executors successfully negotiated with UBS to refinance the loan secured by the Estate’s interest in Sony/ATV. The negotiations resulted in an amended agreement with Sony to the benefit of the Estate, and a new loan [from a bank [?] at a substantially lower interest rate for the Estate, which is locked in for the period of the loan.

    ***The loan is also administered and serviced through two bankruptcy remote trusts which Michael Jackson established in connection with his financing transactions. Michael Jackson’s interest in Sony/ATV is owned by a Delaware statutory trust (“Trust II”). Trust II is intended to be only a security device. The beneficial owner of Trust II is another Delaware statutory Trust (“Trust III”). The Trustee of Trust II is Wells Fargo Delaware Trust Company. The Estate is the sole beneficiary of Trust III.”

    I was not sure how a trust is operating and looked it up. Trusts date back to the times when knights left their valuables to someone “in trust” so that these people would take care of their heirs in case they do not return from a battle. I wondered what guarantees trusts provide? One site says that the guarantees are uncertain:

    “You considered establishing a Trust and have some of your assets transferred to it in order to secure yourself, but the fees are huge, and the benefits quite uncertain.” http://freedomfromtaxes.com/AssetProtection/

    Here is an article which says that only one type of a trust provides a full guarantee against creditors and only in case it is properly worded:

    “Is Property in a Trust Safe From Bankruptcy?
    By Mary Frazier, eHow Contributor | updated May 29, 2011

    There are many different types of trusts, and whether trust property has protection from bankruptcy depends on the type of trust. The broad category types of trusts that have issues with bankruptcy are revocable and irrevocable trusts.

    Revocable Grantor Trust
    When a grantor establishes a revocable trust he creates a taxable entity and places assets in the trust. A revocable trust grantor has the right to amend, modify or revoke the trust at any time. Because of this, the trust grantor by definition is the owner of the trust assets, and owns the trust property from a legal and tax standpoint. Since the revocable trust grantor owns the trust assets, the trust property has no protection from bankruptcy. For example, a person cannot place $2 million in a revocable trust, file bankruptcy and expect that the assets in trust are bankruptcy protected.

    Irrevocable Grantor Trust
    When a person places assets in trust and creates a trust agreement that is irrevocable, the person as the trust grantor effectively gives up control of the trust assets. The trust grantor can no longer modify, amend or revoke the trust assets. Some trust grantors create irrevocable trusts, where the grantor is the trust beneficiary that receives a benefit from the trust for his lifetime. If an irrevocable grantor trust structure is proper, it is possible to afford bankruptcy protection. However, this type of trust is complicated to create and difficult to enforce creditor protection. A person with creditor issues cannot create an irrevocable grantor trust, file bankruptcy and expect the assets to be safe.

    Irrevocable Beneficiary Trust
    A trust created by a trust grantor for the benefit of another person typically has protection against bankruptcy of the grantor and the trust beneficiary. The grantor no longer owns the property and the trust beneficiary never owns the trust property. A trust beneficiary has a benefit of some type from the trust, such as receiving trust net income for his lifetime. Proper creation of an irrevocable trust protects the trust assets from beneficiary bankruptcy.

    Spendthrift Trust Language
    In order for any trust to have proper protection against bankruptcy, the trust agreement must contain specific verbiage known as spendthrift language. Spendthrift language varies by legal drafter, but the basic components state that trust assets cannot be pledged, assigned or alienated by a beneficiary or his creditors. This language is critical in the trust agreement, since it prevents bankruptcy creditors from attaching trust assets to settle beneficiary debt. http://www.ehow.com/info_8507634_property-trust-safe-bankruptcy.html

    The Estate says that Trust III is the beneficial owner of Trust II, so the way I understand it Trust II “created another trust for the benefit of another person” [MJ] – and this is how Trust III came into being. So if it is “properly created” and has “spendthrift language”, then it does protect the catalog well, which is good.

    But if it protects the catalog so well from anyone, why was all this fierce campaigning against Sony then?

  19. March 8, 2012 11:17 pm

    “And Lyton Guest is right that the catalogs (and assets) are divided and put into trusts to protect them from creditors.”

    Ivy, it is a legal issue, so I cannot pass any judgment on that. However is it possible to obtain assets from a trust through a lawsuit?

    On the other hand, why is it only the catalog that everyone is focusing their attention on? What we should look at is the reason why the “contract” with AEG was made in such a way that it was totally unclear who, for example, would pay the production expenses – the contract implied AEG and the Definitions (listed in a separate attachment) stated that they were Michael’s responsibility! Considering the amount of those production expenses the matter was crucial for Michael! And let us not forget that artists are not obliged to put in their money in the show at all because if they do, what will they need producers for?

    Another question:

    Why did AEG’s Promissory Note state that repayment of the advances was to be in the distant future, but some seemingly minor point of the same Note suddenly said that in case some mysterious monthly repayment of the advance was not paid or delayed (I say mysterious, because there was no schedule of payments and no talk about any monthly repayments at all!) – why was Michael was to pay the WHOLE sum of the advances at once? I mean why such draconian measures?

    The contract in general is made in such a way that one might think it is not a contract, but an ultimatum. Add to it the facts of fraud, discrepancies between different documents and a grave suspicion in forgery and you have a complete picture of a huge set up.

    The question is why? Why did they do it that way? If it wasn’t the catalog (which was so well protected that even Sony could not evidently obtain it, right?), then what was the reason?

    Did AEG want to put Michael into slavery for the rest of his life and does this reason sound better than their desire to get his catalog?

  20. Ivy permalink
    March 8, 2012 10:14 pm

    Helena,

    As you know I am one of the people that believes Michael’s catalogs was never collateral. Although we cannot list what MJ Co LLC owns, we can show the entities that owns Sony/ATV and Mijac and it’s not MJ Co LLC. I’ll do it as soon as I can – and post a link to it- by using 2006 Prescient lawsuit (lawsuit about 2006 refinancing of the loans) as well as recent probate fillings. It will show the ownership structure of the catalogs from 2006 to this date. And Lyton Guest is right that the catalogs (and assets) are divided and put into trusts to protect them from creditors. You’ll see that in the Prescient lawsuit , the 2006/2007 formed New Horizon Trusts will be referred as “bankruptcy remote structure”.

  21. March 8, 2012 10:00 pm

    It seems everyone who ever had anything to do with Michael (except maybe his children) has been questioned, investigated, criticized and slammed by the press and fans alike. The author of The Wrap articles seems to be the only reporter in the history of reporting anything to do with Michael who has ever attempted to ask and answer some questions about the Michael/Branca relationship. That is more than a little odd, especially when you consider Michael did fire Branca and it does not appear that it was actually Michael who invited Branca back into his life at the end. That one meeting between Branca and Michael before he died, which took place at the Staples Centre during rehearsals, accomplished an awful lot. Branca has since continued to work with AEG and he’s reinstated Sony into dealings involving MJ’s catalogs, both catalogs, for years to come. He has also made a lot of money for himself and his firm.

    I’m not saying Branca hasn’t done a good job of hiring attorneys and accountants, using his own firm’s resources and making deals – we hear a lot about these things. Michael’s “brand” continues to make money for everyone connected to his estate in death as Michael did in life. Branca was with Michael in good times, there’s no denying that and Branca has received praise, sometimes over and above Michael himself, for those good times, but Branca was also there during the worst of times, there’s no denying that either, but for those worst of times the media blames Michael, totally and always, for every reason under the sun.

    The Michael/Branca relationship does pose questions and I don’t think we have all the answers and the reason is because apart from one media reporter, there has been a complete carte blanche awarded to Branca by the media and it seems there always has been. That’s something that has not been afforded to anyone else, especially not to Branca’s sometime client – Michael. Every aspect of Michael’s life and death has been discussed and dissected to the nth degree in the media but apart from The Wrap, the media, from TMZ to the New York Times, and others, have been outstanding about this one aspect of Michael Jackson’s life, outstanding in maintaining a complete and utter silence.

  22. March 8, 2012 10:00 pm

    While the author of The Wrap articles does pose questions about John Branca, on the whole the articles are actually complimentary of him.

    It is interesting that the article on the Goldman Sachs deal was updated with more information from Branca’s lawyer, who passed on the information that while the deal would have created a larger entity that increased the value of Michael’s interests, Michael eventually rejected the deal primarily based on Branca’s advice, which was that Michael would be giving up too much control. While the documents reveal that Branca did indeed work on the proposal and that he did remind those involved of his own interest in Sony/ATV, the documents don’t show that Branca was involved in any underhanded dealings, only that he was involved.

    It’s also interesting that the article says Branca was fired before the deal collapsed. A lot was happening around that time. The article praises Branca’s involvement in Michael’s purchase of the ATV catalog and subsequently the forming of the partnership with Sony/ATV that increased the value of Michael’s interests, but it has to be said that at the same time the Sony/ATV deal also saw Michael giving up control of 100% ownership of the ATV catalog to Sony, which is similar, if not the same, to what the Goldman Sachs deal proposed. Both required Michael giving up a measure of control over the catalogs he owned outright. For that reason, I don’t think you can look at one deal as being completely brilliant and the other as being completely bad, unless you were Sony perhaps.

    In another article it talks about Branca approaching Phillips after the O2 announcements, saying he would give anything to be involved – something that Phillips rejected at the time. Phillips later had a change of heart and supported Branca’s involvement, which Frank Dileo admits he arranged. The article mentions Dileo had to “smooth the way” for Branca’s re-entry into Michael’s “circle.” Lots of questions there. Why would Branca want to be involved after years of no involvement? Why would he approach Phillips rather than Michael? Why did Phillips initially reject and then support Branca’s involvement? (Phillips has answered that question himself in The Wrap article.) Why did Dileo want and support Branca’s involvement and why was it necessary for Dileo to have to “smooth the way” for Branca’s re-entry into Michael’s “circle” which took place eight days before Michael died?

  23. March 7, 2012 1:59 am

    Finally back to the flaky contracts that lie at the core of the matter .
    You see the letters LLC after just about anything you have to deal with.
    I have often wondered how limited they really are.I don´t think Murray and his Vascular whatever he owned had these letters. But there is in fact something corresponding to this in medicine.Susanne´s post here on 3.6 2012 alerted me to to some no-contracts.And I am 100% sure Murray was familiar with that from his training in cardiology.I´ll post under:Someone to monitor me.

  24. March 7, 2012 1:05 am

    Sorry, this sentence should of course read as: “So if you own a business you – in the event of a loss – would not want that amount to exceed the cost of the business and the assets within that business.”

  25. March 6, 2012 11:20 pm

    Helena, the elections note was funny, although I guess the situation in Russia is anything but…

    Yes, Mona, it is anything but funny. Let us keep our fingers crossed.

    As far as my corporate experience is concerned, I have no legal expertise in the matter, but I did see some contracts in this 7 year period and was directly responsible for some and I can tell you this, for sure: 1) Every detail is thoroughly checked even for minor details or very small deals. I couldn’t stress this any stronger: NO MISTAKES ARE MADE ON THE PART OF THE COMPANY. 2) Again for a big company, you can never have the same lawyer as the party you are doing business with. NEVER. You just have no idea how serious these big corporations are when it comes to conflicts of interest.
    So these being said, there is no question in my mind as to who’s who in this story. That letter was not a contract, not by any means and AEG knows that. They know the letter poses for something else and it’s faulty from every point of view. So unless some other document appeared in the meantime, a real contract, with real signatures on every page, they really don’t have a case and just their trying so hard to keep it a secret says a lot about the way they conducted business with Michael.

    Mona, thank you for the great addition (this was the short of your comment). Since you were responsible for contracts too, I invite you to discuss the AEG papers together and in further detail. In spite of a lot already said about it, there are lots and lots of points which still need to be covered.

  26. March 6, 2012 10:50 pm

    Exhibit 3, Promissory Note for $6.2 million – Paragraph marked Security Agreement: First notice that this paragraph in bold letters says “Collateral owned by Artistco only” – “Artist is NOT pledging any collateral”. This is the same as the 16.3 Security paragraph other than this Exhibit uses the terminology “assigns to AEG” rather that the word “lien”. Assigns means transfers in legal jargon. It also states Artistco has given AEG attorney-in-fact approval to the different measures AEG can use to collect the defaulted collateral and furnish Artistco amended (updated) documents of balance due. This related to AEG’s internal documents like signing over Artistco’s paychecks back to AEG or terminating the lease on the London home, etc.

    Properties refer to Michael Jackson Co. LLC / Delaware. The AEG contract only states Michael Jackson Co., LLC is being used as collateral within this contract. Artist (MJ) is not pledging any collateral. That means AEG could NOT pursue the Mijac or Sony/ATV catalogues or other assets owned by Michael. If for instance, Michael defaulted on his AEG loans, AEG would have to go to court to file a lien against Michael Jackson Co. LLC. The court would determine how much money was available in that company only and if full payment was not available immediately, the court would establish garnishments against Michael Jackson Co. LLC until the full amount was paid back to AEG. The court would also have AEG prove the exact amount of monies MJ owned to them. A court would not have any authority to sell or use one of Michael’s companies to pay AEG as the contract only called out for Michael Jackson Co. LLC as the collateral.

    Susan, your comment is extremely interesting and needs to be discussed in detail. I’ll try to make it as brief as I can. You argue that AEG under no condition could receive Michael’s catalog. I am not so sure of it even though the Michael Jackson Company LLC did not have the catalog among its assets. (Leslie’s blog says the company, set up in 2006, did own some intellectual property, but we do not know which one).

    1) The first factor to remember is that the AEG “contract” and all its attachments should be studied as a complex, and not separately, because the specifics of their “business” with Michael was that one paper contradicted another. So it is top important to understand that though the Promissory Note was for $6,2mln. only, the “contract” refers to advances in general. And the advances included production advances as well!!! The Estate said in their 2nd report that the debt was to the tune of over $40 mln. It is a huge sum which was to be returned by Michael practically at first notice.

    2) The contract mentions the Collateral only in point 16.3 titled “Security”. The point says the following about Artistco (MJ Company LLC) and Artist (MJ the individual) and a lien (one of its meanings is “the possibility to arrest the assets of the other party”):

    “To secure the faithful performance of Artistco of Artistco’s and Artist’s obligations under this Agreement (including to repay the Advances), Artistco hereby grants Promoter a lien in all Artistco’s right, title and interest in, to, and under the following properties, assets and rights, wherever located, whether now owned or hereafter acquired or arising, and all proceeds and products thereof (all of the same being hereinafter referred to collectively as, the “Collateral”): contract rights or right to the payment of money in which Artisco and /or Artist has an interest, insurance claims and proceeds, commercial tort claims, securities and all other investmenet propery, and all general intangibles (including all accounts receivable and payment intangibles). Artistco shall reasonably cooperate with Promoter in its efforts to perfect such security Interest”.

    Please note that:
    now Advances mean ALL advances ($40mln)
    – the wording stipulates a possibility that the Artistco will acquire something in the future and this new acquisition will also be subject to the above contract point
    – but what is even most important, the AEG contract refers not only to the MJ Company LLC (Artistco) but to Michael Jackson as an individual by mentioning “and/or Artist” as a responsible party (while the Promissory note says he is not).

    If the assets of MJ Company LLC were not enough (and they were absolutely not!) to cover those #40mln. and if Michael did not have a Limited Liability insurance which would protect him from bearing personal responsibility for those debts, he was to answer for those debts by his OTHER ASSETS. This would have required selling the catalog or the AEG attorney in fact probably demanding such a sale “in order to cover the advances”.

    I was not sure whether the status of LLC (Limited Liability corporations) allowed such a situation due to the word “limited” in it, but below is a video which explains that it is possible. From the video we learn that if the loss exceeds the assets of the LLC business the owner may lose all his other assets (and that is why they offer their insurance):

    “Limited liability insurance covers a business property in the event that a lawsuit is filed against the business. Protect a business from losing everything by purchasing tax deductible limited liability insurance with tips from an insurance broker in this video on insurance. http://www.ehow.com/video_4757100_what-limited-liability-insurance.html

    Its rough text:

    “LLC would typically limit the liability of the owners of that business to the property that is owned by the business. So if you own a business of your own – in the event of a loss – you would not want that amount to exceed the cost of the business and the assets within that business. You wouldn’t want your home, personal property, etc. to be attached to that business and that is why a lot of people go with the Limited Liability Corporations. Now obtaining a Limited Liability Insurance would provide you coverage of the specific business things that I mentioned before through the business. That would provide you any type of loss that’d occur through the business, so if you have assets, if you have property, in any major catastrophic loss this insurance will be able to cover the business, so that you don’t lose everything you’ve put into it over the years”.

    Mind you that the above information is coming only as an addition to what we have learned from point 16.3 (mentioning MJ as an individual). I’ll repeat that while the Promissory note speaks of the LLC company (which does not make the owner immune against losing everything either, as we see), the contract names Michael Jackson the individual as a responsible party too.

    Who can guarantee that Michael would not have faced a forcible sale of his catalog to repay the $40mln. losses to AEG?

  27. March 6, 2012 9:34 pm

    http://mjandjustice4some.blogspot.com/2010/07/john-branca-2003-2006.html

    My big respect to mjandjustice4some for the thorough analysis of Branca’s work for Michael. Besides showing that Branca is absolutely not the bad guy it will be very helpful in further research. Great job.

  28. March 6, 2012 4:03 pm

    Enough is enough. I have seen blogs everywhere that maintain that John Branca was fired by Michael Jackson, never to be rehired again. Had any one of them bothered to delve deeper than their “one-source-research”, they would realize that John Branca was both fired and rehired by Michael Jackson in 2003, and worked for him until 2006. This blog covers the timeline of 2003 through 2006, and the professional relationship between Jackson and Branca.

    I am only going to cover the firing of John Branca in a limited manner in this blog, because it would be repetitive. My other blog with regard to Branca’s firing by MJ is here. In that blog, it is already established that Michael Jackson began to have doubts about John Branca’s loyalty and believed that Branca may have been funneling MJ’s money into offshore accounts. Jackson fired Branca and replaced him with Las Vegas attorney, David LeGrand. The infamous letter that has circulated the Internet thousands of times dated February, 2003, can be seen here. In the letter Jackson asks Branca for “all of my files, records, documents, accounts for myself and all companies I own or control which may be in your possession. You are to deliver the originals of all such documents to Mr. LeGrand immediately. He will arrange copies to be returned to you.”

    After the investigation, Michael must have realized that John Branca did not embezzle any money, because in November of 2003, Branca was once again Michael Jackson’s attorney. In November of 2003, Neverland was raided by the Santa Barbara Police Department. On November 19, 2003 a New York Times article regarding the raid stated that “John Branca, Mr. Jackson’s lawyer, did not return a phone call seeking comment.”

    On December 25, 2003, Michael Jackson did an interview with Ed Bradley on 60 Minutes, to deny the molestation charges against him. There was a lot of drama that ensued over this interview. CBS refused to air the special “Michael Jackson’s Number Ones” until there was a public denial of the charges by Jackson. This was when an offer was made to CBS to do an interview with Ed Bradley. Dieter Wiesner took the credit for contacting and making the deal with 60 minutes, but an MTV article dated January 4, 2004, states that “lawyer John Branca and…Charles Koppelman negotiated the interview with CBS in exchange for the network putting Jackson’s ‘Michael Jackson’s Number Ones’ back on its programming schedule.” Roger Friedman’s article dated December 31, 2003, states that the Bradley interview emanated from MJ’s advisors, John Branca and Charles Koppelman. Part 1 of the 60 minutes video can be seen below. There are several parts to the interview, part 2,part 3 and the transcript. Although it breaks my heart to hear Michael talk about this ordeal, it was imperative that Michael’s side of the story was heard. According to several sources, John Branca negotiated this deal with CBS, in late 2003

    So it is safe to believe that Branca was working for Michael Jackson in 2003, only months after he had been fired. In January of 2004, a group of Michael’s advisors met at the Beverly Hills Hotel to plan their strategy for their employer and show their support through solidarity. Michael’s senior advisor at the time, Charles Koppelman, stated that “it so happened that we were all in the same place, and thought it would be great to sit down together.” This same article reported that despite the rumors, “John Branca, one of the singer’s business attorneys, stated ‘Michael is in charge.'” Below is a picture of that meeting. Branca can been seen at the table, on the left.

    In April, 2004, the Los Angeles Times wrote an article which I could only access when I paid for it. However, this article was written when Michael was gearing up for the trial. Many were counting on the downfall of Michael Jackson, as most of us realize now. Yet, the LA Times states that “Jackson’s longtime attorney, John Branca says it would be a mistake to count him out. Michael was counted out once before, when the Jackson Five lost popularity and came back bigger than ever, Branca said. Michael speaks to a worldwide audience like no other artist in history.”

    In October of 2004, the New York Post stated that “the role of Jackson’s long time lawyer, John Branca, have been greatly diminished to make way for Brian Oxman and Thomas Messereau.” We have to take this statement with a grain of salt. First, the source is the NY Post. Secondly, the statement is ridiculous. John Branca is an entertainment attorney, not a criminal defense lawyer. Branca’s specialty is entertainment law and publishing rights. Oxman and Mesereau were brought in for Michael’s criminal defense, and therefore did not diminish Branca’s role as Michael’s entertainment lawyer. However, the Post does maintain that Branca was employed with Michael Jackson as of Oct. 2004.

    Logic would tell us that since Branca covers the entertainment legalities of Michael’s life, we would not hear a lot about him in early 2005, while the molestation trial was going on. Most of the articles are exploitative in nature regarding Michael Jackson in early 2005. There are few that are objective. A Times Online article maintains that Branca was advising Michael Jackson in early June of 2005 regarding the ATV catalog. The article states that Michael “is being advised in the matter by John Branca, a well-known music industry lawyer, and Charles Koppelman..

    After Michael’s acquittal in 2005, he was sued by the scam artists, Prescient. The financial group Prescient claimed that they helped Michael to find a way to refinance his loans and sued him for $48 million; the claim turned out to be false. Newsday, dated July of 2005, stated that “John Branca, a lawyer representing Jackson, could not be reached for comment.” In December 2005, while Michael was in Bahrain, refinancing occurred again, and the Daily News reports that John Branca Michael’s attorney, could not be reached for comment.

    And so we arrive at the beginning of 2006. At this point, we have established that Branca was fired in early 2003, and rehired in late 2003, and worked for Michael Jackson until the end of 2005. Since it is late and early 2006 is complicated with regard to the Jackson/Branca working relationship, I will continue this tomorrow.

    There are a lot of blogs and articles that seem reliable, but they are not. Again, I urge MJ fans to
    dig deep before passing judgement on Michael Jackson’s business partners and friends.

    http://mjandjustice4some.blogspot.com/2010/07/john-branca-2003-2006.html

  29. March 6, 2012 3:57 pm

    Before I move on to 2006, I would like to mention something that I did not add to the previous blog, Branca, 2003-2006. I want to go back to the beginning of 2003.

    Michael claimed in a 2007 lawsuit against Wiesner that he was under the influence of prescription drugs at the time that he handed control of some of his business affairs to Dieter Wiesner in early 2003. See video above.

    Wiesner was in control of MJ’s financial affairs in January, 2003, while Michael claims he was under the influence of prescription drugs. This was the time period that Branca was fired. Branca was fired in February, 2003 because Michael suspected that Branca was embezzling funds into offshore accounts.

    Michael trusted Wiesner when he whispered into Jackson’s ear that Branca was embezzling funds from him. However, after Michael’s attorney (LeGrand) found that there was no evidence against Branca, Michael rehired him in October of 2003.

    Let’s not forget that before the upcoming trial between Jackson and Wiesner, Wiesner’s attorney Howard King released audio taped conversations in which Jackson was accused of making defamatory remarks against Jews. Wiesner was no friend to Michael Jackson.

    In the end, Michael realized that it was not Branca who had been disloyal to his employer, but it was Wiesner. Wiesner et al. could not account for a $965,000 deficit in Michael’s bank account

    Now we can move on to 2006, and detail the relationship between Michael and Branca

    http://mjandjustice4some.blogspot.com/2010/07/branca-returns-wiesner-departs.html

  30. March 6, 2012 3:55 pm

    About Branca

    Branca 2005-2006

    I want to discuss the refinancing of Michael’s loans in 2005, which helps us to understand and transition into 2006. “Jackson, who was then awaiting trial on criminal child molestation charges, authorized his advisors to negotiate a solution that would have erased his debts and provided him with income of about $10 million a year…As part of the agreement, Sony Corp. would have purchased half the singer’s interest in the Sony/ATV catalog for $200 to $250 million. But at the last minute, Jackson balked at the deal…Over the objections of Jackson’s advisors, Bank of America then sold the loans to Fortress.” Source is here. Instead, B of A sold the loan to Fortress Investment Group. An article detailing this can be found here.

    My personal opinion is that Bank of America was worried. First, during the trial, a forensic accountant testified under oath that Jackson had “an ongoing cash crisis”, because he had $415 million in liabilities and was spending $20-30 million above and beyond what he was making annually. Secondly and more probably, Bank of America was betting that Michael Jackson would be convicted, and Bank of America would be left holding the note.

    Many will say that of course Michael balked at this deal. Michael did not want to give up part of his share of the Sony ATV catalog. However, consider this: according to a Roger Friedman report, “Branca –who was the architect of Jackson’s Beatles purchase in the 1980’s–has a 5% stake in the Sony catalog. Experts tell me that his percentage is tied to Jackson’s, whatever happens.” Reports state that Branca was making in the vicinity of $20 million from the proceeds of his 5% (some state 2.5%) of the ATV. So why would Branca conspire with Sony to take the ATV catalog away from Jackson, when clearly this would have been a huge financial loss for Branca? It simply makes no sense

    Before we move on, I must admit that there is not a lot of information out there regarding John Branca’s employment with Michael Jackson in early 2006. I have often relied on gossip columnist Roger Friedman. If anyone should hold a PhD in Michael Jackson, it is Friedman. I usually do not always agree with Friedman’s assessment of Michael Jackson the human being, but Friedman’s timeline is extremely helpful in understanding Jackson’s complex business deals and partnerships.

    However, Friedman is not infallible with regard to Michael Jackson. In an April 15, 2005 report, Friedman states that Jackson was offered a deal to sell part of his stake in the ATV catalog, and that Michael is being advised by what he calls Jackson’s “permanent government, not the many shady characters coming and going over the years. This ‘government’ includes Charles Koppelman, John Branca, Al Malnik and Jane Heller.” This information, is partially true. Heller, according to the prior report by Friedman in this blog, was not involved in the deal. In addition, Friedman also states in the same report that Branca is his “former attorney” and that Michael considers Branca to be conspiring against him to take away the ATV catalog. Friedman essentially states that Branca is and is not Michael Jackson’s attorney in the same report.

    It is also thoroughly understandable that Michael felt that there were those conspiring to take away his ownership of the ATV catalog. Michael was surrounded by vultures his entire life, as we all know. At this time period, Jackson was backed into a financial corner and emotionally drained from the stress of the 2005 trial. We know that he was in financial straits because Bank of America sold the loans to Fortress. If Michael had had any leverage, Bank of America would have negotiated with Jackson. However, as I stated above, it would make no sense for Branca to conspire to allow the ATV catalog to go into default. Branca could have taken a considerable financial loss if anyone was allowed to take control of his 5% interest

    By 2006, Michael was once again refinancing his loans. This time, Michael acquiesced and agreed to a contract to give Sony the option to buy 25% of the ATV catalog in the future. The refinancing would pay off a $272 million loan to Fortress, and would give Jackson some spending money. Jackson was assisted in the deal by Ahmed Al Khan, an attorney for Prince Abdullah. Of course, we all know that after the trial, Michael left for Bahrain and was residing with Prince Abdullah.

    As I stated above, there is not a lot of information regarding John Branca’s employment with Michael Jackson in 2006. However, when the Joe Jackson petitioned the court to remove Branca as an executor, his attorney Brian Oxman freely admitted Branca worked for Jackson until 2006. Joe Jackson claimed that Branca had been fired by Michael for embezzlement of funds in 2006. Joe Jackson and Oxman apparently had their dates confused, as we know that Branca was fired and rehired in 2003 after Michael realized Branca was truthful and fair. There is no evidence that John Branca was fired in 2006.

    Branca states that by 2006, Michael was listening to an increasingly odd set of advisers who Branca feared did not have the singer’s best interests at heart. “He was surrounded and I had to resign. He (Jackson) did not ask me to stay. I resigned amicably.” In 2006, after MJ fired other attorneys, reporters contacted Branca, and he maintained that he had left MJ’s employ in april of 2006. For 26 years, Branca never left of his own accord until 2006. Branca’s decision to resign is indicative of just how dangerous those who had surrounded Michael had become, and Branca knew it. Branca sold his 5% of the ATV back to Michael, and left amicably.

    Branca obviously felt there was some kind of threat in order for him to make the decision to leave Michael Jackson. Michael, clearly had been surrounded by those who did not have his best interests at heart before, like in 2003 with Wiesner, Konitzer and Schaffel. But Branca stayed by Michael’s side. Yet for the first time in 26 years, Branca left Michael’s side.

    WHY? And just who were these people who Branca was afraid of? Branca’s instinct was
    right…just look at Peter Lopez.

    http://mjandjustice4some.blogspot.com/2010/07/branca-2005-2006.html

  31. Susanne permalink*
    March 6, 2012 11:59 am

    @Susan62509:
    That’s important information and I absolutely agree with you.

    @kaarin22:
    I also agree. Especially since the trial I am totally convinced that Michael never would have allowed Murray’s “treatment” if Murray had been honest to him about the dangers. Dr. Treacy told in an interview that Michael rejected the use of propofol in his clinic in Ireland because there was no anesthiologist available. The only reason why Michael later allowed Murray to use propofol in this way must have been that Murray assured him that he is capable of doing this and that there is no danger. He convinced Michael that he can trust him, that he knows what he does and that Michael will be safe. That’s criminal, and there cannot be so many criminal doctors acting like this.

  32. March 6, 2012 3:22 am

    There was no camera in the bedroom where Murray was doing his doctoring MURRAY was the murder weapon. He was so careless,took risks that no other
    doctor would have taken.It is not true that there would have been a line-up of doctors taking over had he left.Just maybe an anesthetist would ,and then gone ahead with great precaution.That would still have been malpractice, but Michael may have survived.There are many medically legal and correct ways to treat insomnia.More time would have been needed ,but a Dr. acting correctly would have made this clear to start with.I really wonder about the AEG people who knew what Murray was up to didn´t, or pretended not to see the danger.They had constructed the contract to be a win-win situation for them. Or how come these savvy business people were so impressed by Murrays big ego?
    The way the insurances were set up indicates they had some fears hoping it would be called an accident if what they feared happened.
    And it being so big, maybe he really belongs on a psych ward. At least it must be made sure that he never practices medicine again.

  33. Susan62509 permalink
    March 5, 2012 9:57 pm

    Tamarafearless:

    The Estate is funding 50% of the Immortal Tour and Cirque is funding the other 50%. A good business person does NOT offer other people to fund their projects when they have the money to do so themselves. Why give someone else a percentage of your profits? This creates MORE money for MJ3 by having only the Estate and Cirque involved. AEG is NOT part of the Immortal Tour.

    There is an accounting firm hired by the Estate . The accounting firm puts together a report (2 reports issued since June 2009) to account for all monies within the Estate. A copy of the report is provided to the probate judge, published in the media and a copy given to the California Attorney General to monitor for tax purposes. An audit can be requested by the judge or Attorney General at any time. If the audit does not balance, the accounting firm will be questioned and this could also lead to the removal of Branca and McClain as executors. Branca and McClain would never gamble losing their positions as executors.

    There is an Estate sponsored MJ museum being built in Las Vegas to open March 2013 at the Mandalay Bay. The public auctions of MJ’s things are not Estate sponsored. Those are people who are selling their own personal possessions they had to auction houses.

    Does anyone really think MJ and Conrad Murray had a security camera in that room to record what they were doing? In the preliminary hearings one detective stated the only camera upstairs was located at the top of the stairwell facing down the hall. There were 4 security guards at MJ house 24 hours a day, which was revealed during the criminal case trial.

    Conrad Murray is a sociopath with an enormous ego. He’s not going to sit in jail for 2 years and take the fall for someone else. If it was planned to kill MJ, it would have been planned perfectly and the crime scene wouldn’t have been botched up.

    Many fans are living in the past when it comes to MJ and Sony. Sony continually gets blamed for what Tommy Mattola did. Mattola was fired 2 weeks after his fiasco with MJ. In 2006 a $300 million loan came due to Fortress. Sony lent the money to MJ. In 2008, the loan was due again,this time at $400 million. Sony had to option to purchase MJ’s share of the ATV catalogue. Sony decided not to purchase it but extended the loan due date to 2011. In 2010, MJ’s estate negotiated with Sony to lower the loan interest rate and extend the loan due date again. Sony offers MJ’s estate $250 million in advance & extends ATV loan to 2017 with stipulations having 10 recordings up to 2017 with the Estate receiving the highest royalty rate in history. Sony is not the bad guy !!

  34. Susan62509 permalink
    March 5, 2012 7:03 pm

    16.3 Security – This states that Artistco/Artist has given permission to AEG to file a lien against Artistco if there is a failure in performance or paying back collateral. AEG has putting in writing that a lien will be filed against Artistco for the advanced money they provided prior and during the 02 tour. AEG lists the different approaches they are entitled to collect via a lien, but ultimately a court would decide which approach(s) could be used.

    Exhibit 3, Promissory Note for $6.2 million – Paragraph marked Security Agreement: First notice that this paragraph in bold letters says “Collateral owned by Artistco only” – “Artist is NOT pledging any collateral”. This is the same as the 16.3 Security paragraph other than this Exhibit uses the terminology “assigns to AEG” rather that the word “lien”. Assigns means transfers in legal jargon. It also states Artistco has given AEG attorney-in-fact approval to the different measures AEG can use to collect the defaulted collateral and furnish Artistco amended (updated) documents of balance due. This related to AEG’s internal documents like signing over Artistco’s paychecks back to AEG or terminating the lease on the London home, etc.

    Properties refer to Michael Jackson Co. LLC / Delaware. The AEG contract only states Michael Jackson Co., LLC is being used as collateral within this contract. Artist (MJ) is not pledging any collateral. That means AEG could NOT pursue the Mijac or Sony/ATV catalogues or other assets owned by Michael. If for instance, Michael defaulted on his AEG loans, AEG would have to go to court to file a lien against Michael Jackson Co. LLC. The court would determine how much money was available in that company only and if full payment was not available immediately, the court would establish garnishments against Michael Jackson Co. LLC until the full amount was paid back to AEG. The court would also have AEG prove the exact amount of monies MJ owned to them. A court would not have any authority to sell or use one of Michael’s companies to pay AEG as the contract only called out for Michael Jackson Co. LLC as the collateral.

  35. March 5, 2012 2:02 am

    Just as VMJ says it was the likelyhood of further defaults that so inspired Tom Barrack.

  36. March 5, 2012 1:56 am

    “Remember that recording from Michael where he was talking about someone (I Think it was Thome) Michael was saying how he doesn’t like this person and how he blocks Michael from his Business affairs and that he wants him out!”

    @Truth, here is an article Erin Jacobs posted on michaeljackson forum: http://www.michaeljackson.com/uk/node/376383 It refers to that conversation with June Gatlin about Tohme and provides interesting details about AEG.

    the LA Sentinel
    VOL LXXV NO 43
    Thursday, Oct. 22-28, 2009

    Oct 28, 2009 at 05:16 PM

    Michael’s Murky Murder Mystery?
    Written by Dr. Firpo W. Carr, (Columnist), on 09-24-2009

    “They’re trying to kill me”
    Though the media hype has died down around the controversial and mysterious death of Michael Jackson, millions of fans from around the world are still keenly interested in how, why, and who was behind it. Interestingly, if there are indeed shady figures involved-and more than a few, including family members, are convinced of this-these suspects perhaps have overlooked the fact that Michael has scores of admirers in law enforcement agencies spanning the globe. A few of Michael’s law enforcement friends, as well as amateur would-be detectives, have contacted me with what they consider to be damning evidence showing that Michael was murdered. La Toya Jackson, Michael’s older sister, shared her own thoughts on the matter with Barbara Walters in a 20/20 interview that aired September 11, 2009.

    La Toya Talks & Tells: “I knew Michael was surrounded by people that positioned themselves in his life,” says La Toya, “positioned themselves to control and take advantage of him. And that’s what bothered me more than anything else because I knew something terrible would happen at the end,” she told Walters. That’s not all. La Toya comes right out and says: “Not to mention the fact that Michael constantly told me, ‘La Toya …if I die…they’re going to murder me, they’re going to kill me.'” La Toya further reveals in guarded language: “I don’t know exactly who. I think there are more players involved than we know. This is just my opinion. This is what I feel. I know what Michael was afraid of … he was afraid of his life. He would say, ‘I’m afraid of my life. I’m afraid they’re going to assassinate me. I’m afraid they’re going to kill me.'”

    Declaration to Dick: Famed activist Dick Gregory called me several weeks ago and revealed that Michael Jackson told him that “they (presumably Michael’s business associates) are trying to kill me.”

    When Michael Called Carr: Way back in 2004 during his trial Michael Jackson called me and said that prosecutors knew that he was innocent of child molestation charges, but pursued this strategy to wrest control of his music catalogue from him. “They’re after my Beatles’ catalogue,” he complained. “They just want my music …I would never hurt a child, and they know that.” I reassured him that I was convinced of his innocence. “I love you,” he responded. I pretended not to hear him. So, he said it again. “I love you.” I tried to change the subject by returning to my firm belief in his innocence. It didn’t work. “I love you,” he said for a third time. I finally acquiesced and said, “I love you too Michael,” to which he immediately responded most sincerely, “I love you more.”

    Tormented by Tohme: Michael Jackson was none too pleased with Dr. Tohme Tohme, who is the former brother-in-law of Randy Phillips, CEO of AEG, the company that was sponsoring Michael’s tours. In a telephone conversation with and recorded by confidante June Gatlin in September 2008 (apparently Michael wasn’t aware he was being recorded), the King of Pop complained about tactics used by Tohme. Several times after having me on his show to talk about Michael’s death Geraldo Rivera actually aired the conversation between Michael and Gatlin on August 31, 2009.

    Michael: Last time we spoke, you told me to check on Dr. Tohme and I did a complete checking. This guy, he just…he just has ways about him that looks like he’s…see what he’s done? He’s built this divide between me and my representatives and I don’t talk to my lawyer, my accountant. I talk to him and he talks to them.
    Gatlin: That’s not good.
    Michael: I know it’s not good. I don’t like it. I wanna get somebody in there with him that I know and trust. I don’t’ know what’s in my accounts. I don’t’ know.
    Gatlin: Oh! That’s not good Michael!
    Michael: I know it’s not good.
    Gatlin: You can’t allow somebody to just be in total control of your life.
    Michael: I totally agree with that. That’s why I’m calling you.

    Many of Michael’s fans are wondering why the other networks aren’t highlighting the fact that Michael was not content-to understate it-with AEG representative Dr. Tohme Tohme. They’re wondering why AEG didn’t come out criticizing Dr. Conrad Murray, and why AEG allegedly took out drug overdose insurance on Michael.

    Suspicious Sony & AEG Guilty?: The following are direct communications from well informed, well placed Michael Jackson fans: “I wanted to share with you some of the information about AEG that I have uncovered.

    According to their website, AEG Teleworks (an affiliate of AEG) handles production, post-production, off-site production, and telecast services for ABC, CBS, and NBC. This is probably the reason why when anyone states that they believe Michael was murdered or that AEG was conducting shady business, their assertions seem to fall on deaf ears. I have not seen any of the mainstream media outlets besides ABC promoting Barbara Walters’ interview with LaToya that is scheduled to air tonight (although it has been known for weeks now that the interview was scheduled to air on September 11th). That’s mighty strange considering that anyone who claims Michael was an addict or a ‘tortured soul’ or ‘begged’ for drugs gets unlimited airtime. I just wanted to share this information with you. If you are interested in any of the other information that I have uncovered, I would be happy to share that with you as well. Thank you so much for speaking up on Michael’s behalf….Please let Michael’s family know that they are not fighting this battle by themselves, and that the Body of Christ is covering them in prayer. God bless you!!”

    Another informative fan wrote: “If you click on the link that I have posted at the bottom of this message, it will take you to the webpage for Bounce Event Marketing (another affiliate of AEG). One of their specialties is ‘high-end music industry events,’ and SONY is one of their many clients. So, even though Sony paid millions of dollars for Michael’s rehearsal footage for the purposes of turning it into a movie, AEG will still be getting paid indirectly through Bounce Event Marketing. They have their hands in just about everything, don’t they?”

    Yet another fan reveals that Dr. Tohme is a close personal friend of Tom Barack, chairman of Colony Capital, the company that now owns Neverland; and that Frank Dileo, Michael’s former manager, was on the board of Sony Records.

    As stories develop rest assured that, God willing, these will be reflected in my column. Why am I doing it? Because of a legal and moral pact between Michael and me. Peace and blessings. Amen.

    http://www.lasentinel.net/Michael-s-Murky-Murder-Mystery.html

  37. Truth Prevail permalink
    March 5, 2012 1:43 am

    @lynande51

    Thanks for that video and the info :)

  38. March 5, 2012 1:40 am

    Moneytizing the Celebrity Meltdown, a leading principle for the success of Tom Barrack,the one who “bailed out ” Michael from Neverland foreclosure.This after he got a call from his friend, Thome-Thome, a compatriot Lebanese-American.T.B. always drawn to the distressed.He soon
    appeared at Michael´s in his L.V. home and seeing the Sony/ATV catalogue on
    the table between them caught on. T.B. is the 3:rd largest private
    equity fund in the world, a multi billionaire. TT knew him and did not need to look around.TT still charged MJJ 2.7 million as a finders fee.
    A few weeks after Michaels death TT bought a 5 mlj home.
    Press the address given by LunaJo below for more info.Thank you LunaJO.

  39. March 5, 2012 1:26 am

    @appleh,

    It’s someone named James Birchey who allegedly did it. He said he only took the Cascio track and it’s going to trial next year.

    James‏@Birchey

    @damienshields well apparently my IP requested 49,000 downloads, guess the only 12 songs Sony listed on a printout? funny heh

    En réponse à Damien Shields

    19:25 – 26 Août 11via web · DétailsRépondre
    Retweeter

    Favori

    26 Août James‏@Birchey

    @damienshields back on bail sept 12th, think they questioning me again, will be interesting to see what they say

    En réponse à Damien Shields

    26 Août James‏@Birchey

    Me to sony “Sony you’re severs are open, thousands of people are getting music from them”…………1 month later……servers still open

    James‏@BircheyRépondre
    Retweeter

    Favori
    ·Ouvrir

    @denirouk No they taking me to court, I am being accused of something I never did, scare tactics wont work, its ridiculas :P

    https://twitter.com/#%21/Birchey

  40. March 5, 2012 1:24 am

    In AEG contract Michael pledged everything that “Michael Jackson Company LLC” owns. As a common misconception most of the fans assume that “Michael Jackson Company LLC” owns all of Michael’s assets and therefore everything Michael owned was on the line if he cancelled. It doesn’t. Michael’s assets were divided around 30 different legal entities. The main assets such as Sony / ATV was owned by “MJ ATV Publishing Trust”, Mijac was owned by “MJ Publishing LLC” and Neverland was owned by “Sycamore Valley Ranch LLC”. In other words Michael didn’t put his main assets as collateral in AEG contract.’

    Luna, the above may be perfectly true. But the point I am making is that as a result of a possible default in repayment of the advances (which included production costs and were to the tune of around $40 mln.) AEG was becoming Michael Jackson’s ATTORNEY IN FACT and received under the promissory note full rights to ACT ON MICHAEL’S BEHALF IN ALL FUTURE TRANSACTIONS.

    It is the same as receiving from someone a full Power of Attorney which allows a person to represent another person in all his future deals – in MJ’s case connected not only with MJ Company LLC, but everything else including the catalog.

    Moreover, it was Tohme Tohme who was a defacto manager of Michael Jackson Company LLC, as that AEG’s letter they pass for a contract was addressed to him, and not Jackson. And with Tohme’s talents for forging signatures and making various deals behind Michael’s back, we can be sure that the necessary papers would have been signed, and all Michael’s assets would have been passed over to MJ Company LLC in the same miraculous way 10 shows turned under his guidance into 50 shows overnight.

    Now I hear the MJ Company LLC is the main MJ’s company owning all or most of MJ’s assets. Could those papers be in the making already during Tohme’s time? The 1st report by the Estate clearly said that they could not get the papers from former Michael’s managers and had to wait for them too long (several months). Why?

  41. lynande51 permalink
    March 5, 2012 1:21 am

    tamarafear do you mean Sir Phillip Green the british billionaire? If so I just looked him up and the onlyconnection that I could find was to a dinner party that Mohammed Al Fayed went to and took Michael along. I think he is just that someone who was once in the same building or attended the same event as Michael.

  42. Mona permalink
    March 5, 2012 1:19 am

    Helena, your last comment is so beautiful I almost burst into tears. It’s so great that you see what you are doing as a divine duty and you are so humble in your quest. I think the most important thing is that we hold together and stick to our belief no matter what. Michael was innocent and he acted as a misunderstood child up until the end, never losing his innocence.There’s nothing to be ashamed of, truth will prevail, I’m sure of it, Michael’s true legacy will live on. He had so many words of wisdom, the world would be such a warm kind place if we could all just apply what he said… well, I guess that just goes against human nature, but we most never lose hope.

    “Nothing’s real, all is possible
    If God is on my side”.

    So true…

  43. March 5, 2012 12:46 am

    Tut!tut!!tut!!! Vindicatemj!why did you think it was necessary to respond to my and my other aggrieved Fans of MJ legitimate questions and observations the way you did? What gives you the impressions that those of us who raise legitimate questions as regards to the way things had panned out since MJ’s passings, and that when we opine negative comments towards Branca/Mclain, were either agents of AEG or MJ’s shameful family members spokes people?

    Here we go again. I’ve specially looked up my answer to you, Tamarafearless, and I didn’t notice there anything of what you are accusing me here. My perception has probably hardened though as for the past two and a half years I was attacked, accused, betrayed, impersonated and smeared. This turned me into a soldier with no more rose petals promised here.

    i guess your aim/objectives was encentially as regards his travails,and the numerous injustices he had endured in the hands of his accusers and the corrupt judicial system in America especially if you are a successful balck man/woman.

    Yes, the goal was and still is to correct the numerous injustices Michael Jackson had to face. And I am not a successful black woman in corrupt America, I am a successful white woman in corrupt Russia. And despite all outward differences I begin to realize now that it is not that much different.

    Your analysis on the contract or lack of agreement MJ had with AEG,help open at least my eyes about the shady conduct of Philip Green and especially Thome.Philip Greens shameful conduct and the lies he told as regards MJ agreeing to do the 50 shows, robbed me in a bad way.There are so many questions that seriously needs answers.Thome had roped MJ into a slave like arrangement with AEG, that would left MJ worse off financially if he had embarked on the tour.

    I am glad that this site has opened your eyes on AEG and Tohme, and their shameful plans against Michael, but by Philip Green you probably mean Randy Phillips (AEG CEO) or Philip Anschutz (AEG’s owner), right?

    Branca/Mclain should properly investigate Thome. Thome trying to secretly sell off MJ art collection without the permission of the excecutors, only confirms my suspicion that Thome has a lot of things cash/personal assets of MJ in his possession.

    The suit filed by the Estate against Tohme will surely uncover at least part of the truth about this man. At least I hope so.

    I will continue to highlight the fact that the police CLAIMED the surveliance tape that linked to MJ’s bedroom that would have told us all what really happened June 24/25th 2009, was accidentally erased.INDEED.

    By now I am not surprised by anything that happens around Michael. This “accidental erasing” is just a fraction of the whole bad circus we see. For all we know, since MJ’s residence was not even guarded by anyone, Tohme or anyone could have visited it (on numerous occasions too) and done whatever they liked there. Yes, that “accidental erasing” was very unfortunate indeed.

    Do not give the impression you know or love MJ more than we do, just like we do not claim to know or love MJ more than you guys do.

    I never claimed that I love Michael more than you do. In fact I am even ashamed not to have been among Michael’s supporters before. I discovered Michael as a fantastic human being only after his death, and since that time have not had a moment of quiet. My case regarding Michael is not only love or love solely for him – it is love of God in the first place and for some reason I cannot disobey what I feel HE wants me to do. This is the main reason for this blog.

    We are not the enemy here. We are 100% in support of your efforts in trying to spread the truth about MJ despite the obstacles placed before you.Try to understand the analysis our our arguements.

    Tamara, I absolutely don’t regard you as an enemy. Moreover I don’t regard anyone as an enemy though I probably should. Any human being can change in my opinion if he makes a conscious attempt to do so – so it is probably my own idealism which is my worst enemy.

    if you have answers to them,inform us right away,without being sarcastic or downright dismissive of our area of concerns. We do not have the answers thats why we log on to sites like yours for answers to our questions.We are 1000% pro MJ. Believe me i cannot print out loub what i would do to people like Murray, Green,Thome,Chandler,Jason,Garvin, Diamond, Bashir,Levin of TMZ,BilL’O’Riley ETC.Let just say they all will not be alive.

    No, let them be alive please. They should be alive at least for the reason that one day they should be able to answer for everything they did to Michael. And probably tell us the truth why they were doing it. It is the TRUTH that we need most. Michael was innocent and we have nothing to fear when studying “facts” about him, so being pro Michael is actually being pro Truth in the first place.

    It is a paradox but too much defensive love for him may stand in the way of the truth and can sometimes do more harm than good. I think that all that campaigning against Sony is an example of such love. All I tried to do was express my opinion on the above, and there is no need to take offence when there was no offence meant.

    I am trying to learn from Michael, and am truly in awe that he managed to remain gentle and loving in spite of all the hate he endured. He was a saint while I am not. Please excuse me if I am such a poor student.

  44. shelly permalink
    March 5, 2012 12:33 am

    I read all the Deutsch articles but I was wondering if you found other documents about that.

  45. LunaJo permalink
    March 5, 2012 12:24 am

    Just the posts by Ivy, about the whole Tohme/ Estate lawsuit:

    http://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/threads/121500-MJ-Estate-sues-Tohme-Tohme-Tohme-countersues-Tohme-s-complaint-pg-14

  46. LunaJo permalink
    March 5, 2012 12:14 am

    Someone just send me this:

    In AEG contract Michael pledged everything that “Michael Jackson Company LLC” owns.
    As a common misconception most of the fans assume that “Michael Jackson Company LLC” owns all of Michael’s assets and therefore everything Michael owned was on the line if he cancelled.
    It doesn’t.
    Michael’s assets were divided around 30 different legal entities.
    The main assets such as Sony / ATV was owned by “MJ ATV Publishing Trust”, Mijac was owned by “MJ Publishing LLC” and Neverland was owned by “Sycamore Valley Ranch LLC”.
    In other words Michael didn’t put his main assets as collateral in AEG contract.

    Further more this person found that Jermaine and Tohme met for the first time in March 2008 (Source: the book Jermaine wrote). So there’s no way Tohme was hired as a manager in January 2008.

    Waht does all of this mean? And why is it Jermaine everytime?

  47. appleh permalink
    March 5, 2012 12:06 am

    Hi vindicate !

    who do you think is behind stealing the back catalog and fighting a war against Michael Jackson ?

  48. March 5, 2012 12:05 am

    It is a pity that so many,if not most,of Michaels belonginging will be sold.At leat some personal belongings should be kept for his children.
    Most of all the painting,”The Book” should be theirs. All of us whose parents have passed away cherish some objects from the home they shared with their parent(s)or that was closely connected to them,

  49. lynande51 permalink
    March 4, 2012 11:31 pm

    Thank you Lynande.

    I just read that article, but why Malnik testified (if he really said it, coming from Michelle Caruso we don’t know if it’s true) that he agrred with the 300000 reimbursement.

    Don’t get me wrong, I don’t believe MJ paid someone in South America, it’s just that I don’t understand the whole story.

    Shelly that is because you are reading the Michelle Caruso article. I have more than a dozen from the Associated Press/ Linda Deutsch that explains it much better. Is Michell Caruso with the New York Daily News? I think that is considereda tablid for the most part. They like to add a liitle bit to a story to make it sound the way they want. I think once I get done with my Schaffel story you will understand better because I will include the testmony that is relevent and some article that discuss Marc Schaffel being fired on November 14th 2001 from the What More Can I Give project. He claimed that he owns the rights to that song and that video which I am not sure can happen but who know once I show you a couple of court documents that contain information from what was found in Rudy’s safe deposit box.

  50. March 4, 2012 11:03 pm

    http://www.mjjunderground.com/2012/03/04/michael-jacksons-back-catalogue-has-been-stolen/

    MJNA STAFF MARCH 4, 2012 1
    (Mail Online) – Sony music suffered its second major security breach in a year, with thieves targeting songs and unreleased material by Michael Jackson.
    It’s alleged they downloaded more than 50,000 music files, worth £160million, in the biggest ever cyber attack on a music company.
    The news comes just a year after Sony paid £250million for the seven-year rights to the songs following Michael’s death.
    The contract with Jackson’s estate also allowed them to release 10 new albums, including material from studio sessions produced during the making of some of the star’s biggest albums.
    In April the details of 77million gamers were stolen after Sony’s Playstation Network was hacked. The breach cost Sony £106million and hugely damaged their reputation.
    The attack on the Jackson files occurred shortly afterwards but has not been revealed until now.
    The hack was discovered during routine monitoring of social networking sites, Jackson fan sites and hacking forums.
    A source close to the company said: ‘Everything Sony purchased from the Michael Jackson estate was compromised.
    ‘It caused them to check their systems and they found the breach. There was a degree of sophistication.
    ‘Sony identified the weakness and plugged the gap.’

    I need to say one thing on the above. We are witnessing the continuation of war against Michael Jackson . The fact that Sony has also become a target in this war is the best proof that Sony is on Michael’s side.

    Just look at AEG – these people walked out on Michael, threatened to “pull the plug”, made “riot acts” against him, were rude to him at rehearsals in front of other people, by some miracle made a footage of the rehearsals (accidentally shot by two cameras), then sold the footage (which probably never belonged to them in the first place) at a huge price, then had profit from running the documentary – but in spite all this they alive and kicking and nothing happens to them! And not a single word of disapproval is being heard!

    But when it comes to Sony – which first paid $60mln. for the footage and then $250 mln. of its own money for the songs – is constantly attacked, hacked and trashed at every corner same as Michael was!

    Do you believe it to be a coincidence?

    I DO NOT BELIEVE IN SUCH COINCIDENCES!

    So what other proof do you need to show you that IT WASN’T SONY?

  51. LunaJo permalink
    March 4, 2012 10:22 pm

    Kaarin22 Very impressive and true words, I believe. The lawsuit was handled in court in London. Maybe because the headquarters were in the UK? Guy Holmes was appointed as CEO. I read Michael quit the record deal because he had a dispute with Holmes. I think it was just one lawsuit, but it was finally settled in 2008.

  52. March 4, 2012 8:49 pm

    LunaJo, you mention the prince/king of Bahrain a few times.I remember distinctly reading a post re a lawsuit involving him and Michael Jackson in London.What impressed me was the judges words:You have taken advantage of a vulnerable man.-This was some time ago and I cannot locate it anymore.So how many lawsuits did this man raise against Michael?For the same moneys twice in different countries?Is that possible?

  53. shelly permalink
    March 4, 2012 8:45 pm

    Thank you Lynande.

    I just read that article, but why Malnik testified (if he really said it, coming from Michelle Caruso we don’t know if it’s true) that he agrred with the 300000 reimbursement.

    Don’t get me wrong, I don’t believe MJ paid someone in South America, it’s just that I don’t understand the whole story.

  54. lynande51 permalink
    March 4, 2012 8:23 pm

    @truth Prevail
    Here is the link to that video. There may be more to the tapes than what is heard in this clip because June Gatlin has her own you tube channel.

  55. lynande51 permalink
    March 4, 2012 6:28 pm

    @Shelly
    Here is the link to Al Malniks website and he talks about Michael’s private life. The part about him paying Michael’s bail is close to the end of this page.It is either on this page or the other Michael Jackson page where he talks about Michael writing two songs at one time by walking up one side of his stairs and down the other. He says it was fascinating to watch. He talks a little bit about how when the Bashir problem came up and the accusations came out he had managed to get Michael back on the right financial track.

    http://almalnik.com/friends-private-life-michael-jackson.html

    Then if you want to know about Extra Jet and Marc Schaffel selling that tape to the tabloids just read Rudy Provencio and Cynthia Montgomery’s testimony. They were both brought in by the prosecution to testify that the “unindicted co conspirators planned on sending the Arvizo family to Brazil. There is a lot of information in those testimonies that people don’t read because they just read ones with the Arvizo’s and no one elses.

  56. Truth Prevail permalink
    March 4, 2012 6:24 pm

    Remember that recording from Michael where he was talking about someone (I Think it was Thome) Michael was saying how he doesn’t like this person and how he blocks Michael from his Business affairs and that he wants him out!

  57. Tamarafearless permalink
    March 4, 2012 5:13 pm

    Tut!tut!!tut!!! Vindicatemj!why did you think it was necessary to respond to my and my other aggrieved Fans of MJ legitimate questions and observations the way you did?What gives you the impressions that those of us who raise legitimate questions as regards to the way things had panned out since MJ’s passings, and that when we opine negative comments towards Branca/Mclain, were either agents of AEG or MJ’s shameful family members spokes people?
    I stumbled on your website 20009 .My first impression was to heave a huge sigh of relief.I said to myself finally i had found a web site that was not anti-MJ ,at that time, i used to log on to well known MJ bashing sites TMZ, the worst of them all TOpIX etc. I spiritedly defended MJ on the sites, but it was useless because i later came to the conclusion that those who owned the site were MJ haters.I stopped logging into the sites to preserve my sanity.Your site on the other hand, was a breath of fresh air.
    i guess your aim/objectives was encentially as regards his travails,and the numerous injustices he had endured in the hands of his accusers and the corrupt judicial system in America especially if you are a successful balck man/woman.
    Your site has become a daily tonic for me to catch up on those cases i was aware of, and those i must admit never knew occurred. Your sacrifice, alongside with other dedicated members of your crew in trying to highlight/expose to the unfortunately gullible public about the innocence of MJ as regards the numerous false allegations,should not be questioned, but commended.
    Your analysis on the contract or lack of agreement MJ had with AEG,help open at least my eyes about the shady conduct of Philip Green and especially Thome.Philip Greens shameful conduct and the lies he told as regards MJ agreeing to do the 50 shows, robbed me in a bad way.There are so many questions that seriously needs answers.Thome had roped MJ into a slave like arrangement with AEG, that would left MJ worse off financially if he had embarked on the tour.Thome had without MJ’s knowledge traded off his prized assets to AEG to as they claimed they would be able to recoup back whatever they had expended on MJ in case he did not perform.
    Branca/Mclain should properlly investigate Thome.It was alledged Thome took control of MJ’s businesses/ bank accounts due to the fact that he was his manager.They should accertain during the period Thome ran MJ’s businesses, how much MJ had in his account.Thome withdrew money from MJ’s account, there should be record at the bank to show proof how much money was withdrawn and who withdrew the money. If it was Thome, he should be able to explain with receits to prove his claims as to why he withdrew the said amount and what they were used for.
    The deal he reached on MJ’s behalf to save Neverland as we now know was not in MJ best interest.Thome made MJ believe that there was no more money to force him to enter deals that were favourable to Thome and not MJ.Please tell me who is this Barrak person.
    Thome trying to secretly sell off MJ art collection without the permission of the excecutors, only confirms my suspicion that Thome has a lot of things cash/personal assets of MJ in his possession.Thome delibrately ran MJ financially aground,hoping to force him to hand over the beatles catelogue and even his rights to his own songs to pay off his debts Thome helped to create. MJ finally discovered his dishonesty and fired him.Do you really believe Thome would go that easily?Thome had a lot to lose financially.The security guard that Thome hired when he fired those who were close to MJ, should also be investigated.Somebody would know/saw something, especially as it regards Thome.I heard Jermaine introduced Thome to MJ?Go figure.
    I will continue to highlight the fact that the police CLAIMED the surveliance tape that linked to MJ’s bedroom that would have told us all what really happened June 24/25th 2009, was accidentally erased.INDEED.
    Do not give the impression you know or love MJ more than we do, just like we do not claim to know or love MJ more than you guys do.We are not the enemy here.We are 100% in support of your efforts in trying to spread the truth about MJ despite the obstacles placed before you.Try to understand the analysis our our arguements,if you have answers to them,inform us right away,without being sarcastic or downright dismissive of our area of concerns. We do not have the answers thats why we log on to sites like yours for answers to our questions.We are 1000% pro MJ.Believe me i cannot print out loub what i would do to people like Murray, Green,Thome,Chandler,Jason,Garvin, Diamond, Bashir,Levin of TMZ,BilL’O’Riley ETC.Let just say they all will not be alive.
    Keep up the good work. Cheers.

  58. LunaJo permalink
    March 4, 2012 4:30 pm

    Thank you so much for this! I think it’s so important to have people with real life experience who know what they are talking about on this matter.
    It makes the picture however we already have only more grim than it was. But the truth can be ugly and we should not close our eyes for it.

  59. Mona permalink
    March 4, 2012 3:31 pm

    Helena, the elections note was funny, although I guess the situation in Russia is anything but… I guess I know what you mean by it, as I’ve seen some things on the news. I’m keeping my fingers crossed for you guys.

    As far as my corporate experience is concerned, I have no legal expertise in the matter, but I did see some contracts in this 7 year period and was directly responsible for some and I can tell you this, for sure:

    1. There is a standard for company contracts. I don’t know how other smaller companies do this, but for a big, important, worldwide known company like the one I was working for, they cannot afford any mistakes, they cannot afford any lawsuits that would result in any damage to their image. Every detail is thoroughly checked even for minor details or very small deals. I couldn’t stress this any stronger: NO MISTAKES ARE MADE ON THE PART OF THE COMPANY.

    2. Again for a big company, you can never have the same lawyer as the party you are doing business with. NEVER. As long as there are different interests, as very well pointed out by VMJ, one person cannot represent both parties and act in the best interest of both. Unless… there is a hidden agenda. There is always a fear of conflicts of interest. You just have no idea how serious these big corporations are when it comes to conflicts of interest. They don’t leave anything to chance, because lawsuits against themselves are the last thing they need. Each year absolutely every employee has to sign a ‘Conflict of Interest Disclosure Agreement’, just so that anything, even the smallest potential conflicting situation is eliminated from withing the corporation. And this goes as far as having to report any sort of relationship inside the company (romantic or friendship) or outside the company (any kind of business deals or relationships third parties to the company).

    So these being said, there is no question in my mind as to who’s who in this story. That letter was not a contract, not by any means and AEG knows that. They know the letter poses for something else and it’s faulty from every point of view. So unless some other document appeared in the meantime, a real contract, with real signatures on every page, they really don’t have a case and just their trying so hard to keep it a secret says a lot about the way they conducted business with Michael.

  60. LunaJo permalink
    March 4, 2012 3:04 pm

    Quote: “I think the date that Frank would have been hired back would have been just before Thome was fired on May 5th 2009. I found some articles about the lawsuit with Prince Abdullah and they don’t mention that Joel Katz is his lawyer and that suit was settled just before Michael was to board a plane to go to court in London.”

    I read about Dileo being hired back around that May 5th, but remember the recent lawsuit against Tohme claiming he was fired at the end of March? And remember Dileo siging contracts on behalf of Michael in November 2008? (Allgood concerts)
    It was back in 2005 they mention Joel Katz as the lawyer for prince Abdullah. So I don’t know if that was still the case in 2008. In an article in 2006 roger Friedman says:

    “Indeed, the Web site for Jackson’s putative record label, Two Seas, seems to have vanished from the web. Its URL now directs to a German fan club.

    I do not know what happened to the kid who sent out a statement to a bunch of journalists on April 23 claiming that Jackson was working with 50 Cent and planning a new album as well.
    You’ll notice this column was the only one that didn’t report that “news” because when we asked Two Seas intern “Teddy Blass” for a number, it turned out to be a fax number at Sony’s Los Angeles offices.”

  61. March 4, 2012 2:39 pm

    “It was loaned to him from AL Malnik he says so on his website.”

    “The most interesting part about that is that it was Marc Schaffel that tried to sell that tape to the tabloids.”

    Do you have a link for that?

  62. March 4, 2012 2:35 pm

    “I’ve worked for an American corporation just as big as AEG for 7 years and these things just don’t happen (unless there are ulterior motives, of course). To me there is no question that AEG were trying to get him at the expense of anything, even his life.”

    Mona, thank you very much for your comment. Since you are familiar with how normal business is done it seems we have a lot to talk about. Please keep reading while I need to go to the elections here trying to prevent a disaster. I hope to be back in a few hours and be available for talk.

  63. Mona permalink
    March 4, 2012 1:30 pm

    “Only full Michael’s vindication will able to restore Michael’s legacy in its real shine! And therefore Michael’s future is fully in the hands of his supporters now. Provide facts of his innocence on every public forum possible, refute lies about him in comments to articles, do not allow his numerous detractors make new slanderous videos about him, restore the truth about the man he was – and then his name and music will return to the world in the brightest shine!
    Sony and the Estate are doing their part of the job to restore Michael’s legacy – and we have our job to do. Neither of us are guaranteed from mistakes, so let us not find fault with each other. Help and do your best for Michael instead.”

    Helena, what you wrote is beautiful and exactly the way we should each do our small part for this wonderful man who was so misunderstood. What’s more, I feel we should all carry on his legacy also as a humanitarian and put love at the heart of all our actions.

    I believe that’s what he would have wanted to leave behind, apart from his great music – it was an idea he believed in to the end of his life, despite everything that happened to him.

    We should all honor him in this way too!

    L.O.V.E.

  64. Mona permalink
    March 4, 2012 1:19 pm

    I’ve been reading on Michael’s business with AEG/ Tohme/ Katz, etc. for the past few days (several articles posted on the site also by VMJ). I didn’t want to post anything before I got a clearer picture of what was actually going on there. However, I’m sad to say that the more I read the murkier the waters get… As one of the readers said, it is a web and you never know who to trust. I have to congratulate Helena for her excellent detective work done on this subject, she deserves all the praise for what she is doing at the expense of her personal life.
    I just wanted to draw a very simple summary of my own from what I’ve read so far about AEG:

    – drafting a letter of intent that would pose as contract later on
    – preventing Katherine Jackson from seeing the ‘contract’
    – doing their best to prevent the concerts from happening, as they had a hidden agenda from the very start
    – imposing a certain fee for someone who was posing as Michael’s staff (Thome)
    – having a single lawyer for all parties
    – accepting (rather asking for) faxed signatures from representatives instead of real face to face signatures from Michael

    I’ve worked for an American corporation just as big as AEG for 7 years and these things just don’t happen (unless there are ulterior motives, of course). To me there is no question that AEG were trying to get him at the expense of anything, even his life. All of the points I’ve marked above are just outrageous, they seem to be some kind of a bad movie rather than something to do with reality. That’s why I think a seasoned artist like MJ rather wasn’t shown all the parts of the ‘contract’ and his signature was attached later on OR others were signing for him without his knowledge. Otherwise I don’t think a man who had so much experience in this field and managed to make hundreds of millions of dollars in the past would have signed anything like that, even a letter of intent. He was just too smart for that. Unfortunately… that would be very difficult to prove.

    As far as Branca and Dileo are concerned… I feel like I don’t trust anyone anymore to be fair towards Michael, at least not the people who have money and fame to gain from it. I just hope whatever their intentions may be, the outcome is positive for Michael’s legacy.
    That’s all that matters in the end.

    Love

  65. March 4, 2012 1:09 pm

    Then when that case goes to trial he claims that the money he “loaned” Michael in November of 2003 went to some mysterious Mr. X in Argentina. He said that it was for a secret payment to a Ruby and David Martinez a local woman and her son that had been moved to Argentina before the raid on Neverland. Ruby is at the ranch the day that it was searched because you can hear the Chef say to the deputies that it is only him and Ruby in the house.

    Lynande, what a wealth of information it is! I especially liked this piece about a certain Ruby who was supposedly sent away to Argentina (as a “molestation victim”?) but was actually at the ranch when the police raid was made! And this lie was told by Schaffel only to explain where the money had gone and why it disappeared?

    What incredible opportunities those molestation allegations opened for all kind of swindlers around Michael! They embezzle millions and when someone asks where the money is, they simply say they took cash in a suitcase to pay off some unnamed “victim”!

    This is probably why Michael attracted so many crooks – in the media environment created around Michael’s name it was no problem at all to steal millions from him and then press the right buttons with the media and public, whitewashing themselves at the expense of more dirt for Michael.

    I’m not surprised that he was “paranoid” as some people say. It wasn’t paranoia at all - it was his total frustration with what was going on around him and he was right in his suspicions from beginning to end!

    P.S. Lynande, I suggest you make a post out of it. Only please make some introduction to those suits for us to know what it was about and that will be it. We cannot leave this precious information somewhere in the comments only.

  66. March 4, 2012 12:26 pm

    “Remember also Michael went public and said the Tommy Mottola (Head of Sony at the time) was very devilish and a racist to go public and accuse someone about something like that sounds serious and i doubt Michael would say stuff like that about Sony if he was just curious that they might be behind plotting against him no. The way Michael went about it seemed like coming from someone who was SURE they were plotting against him. Which they did like sabotaging his Invincible album cancelling music videos etc. plus its been known that Sony have been trying to get the ATV Catalog from Michael for ages Michael also feared for his life because of it.”

    @Truth, yes, I remember that situation with Mottola. Whatever it was Mottola was fired by Sony, and this means they changed their ways. So it isn’t right to put an equation mark between Sony of Mottola’s time and a later version of Sony.

    You could compare the situation with Randy Phillips and AEG. If they had fired Randy immediately after Michael’s death they would have sent a signal to the public that they themselves were disgusted with the way he treated Michael. But they did not and he is still AEG’s CEO.

    Michael did not know where the main danger was coming from. Who could ever think that his harassment could be stemming from some ped-le sympathizers’ circles??? It was a well planned campaign which didn’t even need much organizing effort. Since these people are everywhere – Hollywood in the first place – and many of them in the position of power too, it was no problem to orchestrate all that music around Michael.

    There was absolutely no way for Michael to know who his real harassers are. NO WAY! Many years after those events we are only making first steps in finding out the truth. Michael was naturally frustrated with the disastrous effects of the allegations and wanted more investment into the publicity campaign for his new album, but he didn’t realize that no amount of money could undo the effect of lies still raging in the media. It was a no-win situation – both for Michael and his sponsors.

    Only full Michael’s vindication will able to restore Michael’s legacy in its real shine! And therefore Michael’s future is fully in the hands of his supporters now. Provide facts of his innocence on every public forum possible, refute lies about him in comments to articles, do not allow his numerous detractors make new slanderous videos about him, restore the truth about the man he was – and then his name and music will return to the world in the brightest shine!

    Sony and the Estate are doing their part of the job to restore Michael’s legacy – and we have our job to do. Neither of us are guaranteed from mistakes, so let us not find fault with each other. Help and do your best for Michael instead.

  67. lynande51 permalink
    March 4, 2012 6:05 am

    I think the date that Frank would have been hired back would have been just before Thome was fired on May 5th 2009. I found some articles about the lawsuit with Prince Abdullah and they don’t mention that Joel Katz is his lawyer and that suit was settled just before Michael was to board a plane to go to court in London.

    What is interesting is some of the articles go over what some of the lawsuits claims were. One of them was that Prince Abdullah wired money to an account in April of 2005 at the request of an assistant of Michael’s. The assistant it turned out was Grace Rwaramba the Nanny and it was to be for utilities at Neverland. $35,000 went into Graces bank account and the amount claimed by Prince Abdullah was 619000 British pounds. She was going to be called as a witness in that lawsuit.

    The other claim was that Prince Abdullah said that Michael was in his recording studio the day after his acquittal working on this album that he was going to do for 2Seas. Well as we all know that is not even possible because Michael was actually hospitalized for several days following the trial.

    Some of the things that go on in some of those lawsuits amaze me. Take for instance that whole Jackson Secret Vault that Howard Mann and Katherine had going on. One of the things that they were trying to do was release footage and they were in partnership with Marc Schaffel who was part of the problem that Michael had to get money for in April of 2005.

    Schaffel as part of his lawsuit petitioned the court for a lien on Neverland so that he would get it if he won the legal case. That petition was denied by Judge Jaqueline Connor in LA county.

    But that money had something to do with Brian Oxman getting fired would be my guess. He did something in another case that Mesereau had been working very hard against and it had something to do with that money and getting a different bailbondsmen to carry the bail. One that was a personal friend of his so why the switch?

    Schaffel was also the one that was the informant for Roger Friedman that is obvious. He was telling him about what happened with Janet Arvizo (that was in his own best interest because was unindicted co conspirator number five) and put him in touch with Frank and Vinnie. So if Frank is looking for who told him that he did not want to testify for him he should look no farther than Schaffel because the police had tons of tapes from both Debbie Rowe and Rudy Provencio talking to Frank, Vinnie and Schaffel.

    Then when that case goes to trial he claims that the money he “loaned” Michael in November of 2003 went to some mysterious Mr. X in Argentina. He said that it was for a secret payment to a Ruby and David Martinez a local woman and her son that had been moved to Argentina before the raid on Neverland. Ruby is at the ranch the day that it was searched because you can hear the Chef say to the deputies that it is only him and Ruby in the house.

    That was just a small part of his smear campaign against Michael. The $300,000 was for the 10% down that was required for Michael’s $3,000,000 bail. It was loaned to him from AL Malnik he says so on his website. That is why he and Allan Whitman testified that they had approved the loan.

    Schaffel really played that jury for fools when he made up that story and it almost worked. I say almost because when the jury came back in favor of Schaffle for $900,000 and went on record that the decision was based on that information Michael’s defense team petitioned the court to over rule that jury verdict. The Judge had given a specific instruction not to allow that statement to bear any weight in their decision because it was a private matter.

    I think the best part of that whole story was that he went to Brazil and got the money out of a safe so he had no record of it. The only part he had in it was when Al Malnik wired the money he went to the bank and got cash for the bail and delivered it to Las Vegas.

    Then he and his friend Cynthia Montgomery arrange a plane ride for Michael back to Santa Barbara to surrender himself at which time one of them also arranged for it to be video taped. Mark Geragos and Michael sued Extra Jet and that was not settled until after Michael’s death I think. The most interesting part about that is that it was Marc Schaffel that tried to sell that tape to the tabloids. Hence why he was fired as soon as they found out who had arranged all that.

    That isn’t all that Schaffel did though, in 2001 when he was fired he backdated a bunch of checks on the Neverland Valley Entertainment account so “he wouldn’t get caught holding the bag” he said. Well according to Rudy they worked for months on getting all of the receipts together and filing them and in the mean time Schaffel bought a new house with Michael’s money.

    Rudy said that Neverland Valley never stopped operating which makes me question exactly what does it mean if you are fired from a partnership with someone. Doesn’t that mean that if they still draw a salary and pay themselves out of that account that they are in fact embezzeling money from a company account. He got away with it to until his house was searched in 2004 because Rudy got nervous and gave the cops a bunch of documents that Shaffel had told him to keep in a safe deposit box in his name. It is also interesting that Marc Schaffel and Deiter Weizner had the same attorney for their lawuits Mr Howard King.

    I think I have just barely touched on the treachery of F. Marc Schaffel and it amazes me that Katherine is having anything to do with him let alone rely on him to provide anything to her. It looks like this whole family could use lessons in who to trust in business.

    As far as I can see I think Thome is one of the most crooked of the crooks. For one why does that man go around claiming to be a Doctor when he isn’t? Why does he fire anyone that can stop him and isolate Michael? Then I found a video that has Thome in front of the one painting that Michael ever sat for “The Book” by Brett Livingstone Strong. How did he get that painting when it was just supposed to have been auctioned off by some toy manufaturer in Kings Point New York?

    I know this because I saw it for sale on Ebay. How much of Michael’s artwork has he tried to auction off behind his back and before the Estate knew anything about it? I still think that man was at Michael’s house the day he died at some point but I wonder just what point he was there? I also fully believe that when Michael said that his Doctors were saying that the Propofol was safe he was referring to Thome because that is what he always called him.

    http://michaeljacksonchitchat.com/michael-jackson-portrait-to-be-sold-on-ebay/

  68. March 4, 2012 5:20 am

    It is late,so I`ll be brief. This case,this hanky-panky (also means something not right.something that will not stand up to light) is rotten at the core. The mafia is allegedly involved with the US health system,it is only natural that they milk the musik industry.What has
    happenened is criminal.

  69. Truth Prevail permalink
    March 4, 2012 12:53 am

    @VindicateMJ

    “I’ve been thinking a lot about Michael’s attitude towards Sony. And have also read some accounts (by Frank Dileo, for example) who said that Michael a little “overdid” it as regards them. There were reasons for it.”

    Remember also Michael went public and said the Tommy Mottola (Head of Sony at the time) was very devilish and a racist to go public and accuse someone about something like that sounds serious and i doubt Michael would say stuff like that about Sony if he was just curious that they might be behind plotting against him no. The way Michael went about it seemed like coming from someone who was SURE they were plotting against him. Which they did like sabotaging his Invincible album cancelling music videos etc. plus its been known that Sony have been trying to get the ATV Catalog from Michael for ages Michael also feared for his life because of it.

    Jermaine also talked about Michael and Sony while being interviewed by Charles Thomson (you can catch the recording on YouTube on Charles Thomson’s official Channel) Jermaine talked about how they were raised not to call someone Devlish/Devil or a racist. And to have Michael call Mottola that would only be if Michael was certain of this guys motives and what this guy was really about.

  70. LunaJo permalink
    March 3, 2012 11:40 pm

    In my series What DID happen to MJ after the trial I now entered the Two Seas chapter in Michael’s life. So that’s when I discovered this. Mesereau and Raymone Bain were also there. It said in articles from January 2005 Jermaine was the one who supposedly was going to record an album for Two Seas. And they were going to release a charity song for the victims of the Asain tsunami (2004). I haven’t uploaded that part yet, but keep an eye on it. I think it’s part 11.
    Also if Jermaine co-owned Two Seas was he also part of the lawsuit in 2008? And why was this mentioned in the so called “contract”? I thought there had been a settlement from the side of prince Abdullah before the end of 2008.
    And remember it was also Jermaine who brought in Tohme.

    Do you have any date as to when Dileo was hired back? I know Dileo said he and Michael had always kept in touch since the trial 2004/2005.

    And in 2004 it was Charles Koppleman who denied Michael having any financial problems what so ever. So when did the actual problems start, why and when was it too much? Seems this can all be redirected back to 2005, after the trial.

  71. March 3, 2012 11:18 pm

    “More strangely, Lopez was working on the MJ Opus (Kraken) and was still negotiating this on June 25th 2009.”

    Luna, how every interesting. So Tohme ousted Peter Lopez (as he ousted everyone else) from handling the AEG contract but allowed them to be in contact over other projects. So it wasn’t Michael’s idea to fire Lopez – otherwise he would have fired him from everything else too. It was definitely Tohme’s doing who didn’t want any lawyers besides Katz in the AEG project. Very interesting.

    About Joel Katz: supposedly he also represented the Bahreini Prince in 2005, when they were all in London (Oct). And since Two Seas is also mentioned in the “contract”, that seems odd.

    Oh, it is just the missing link we needed! If you remember out of the $6,2 mln.advance paid to Michael under the Promissory Note the sum of $3mln. was to be immediately transferred to the 2 Seas Records Company. I was wondering all along why they gave the money but restricted Michael in its usage but setting various conditions like paying millions to the Prince of Bahrein, for example (generally it is no one’s business how a person spends his money). Now I see why! Katz was representing his interests too!

    So this is what Tohme did! He fired Lopez and instead of an honest lawyer he imposed on Michael the lawyer who represented Tohme, AEG and the Prince of Bahrein. Michael probably never knew that Katz was working for a crowd of people under this contract. If Michael did not know a thing about Tohme, how could he know anything about his lawyer?

    What a mess… But all these beautiful connections between Tohme-Prince of Bahrein-Katz-AEG can indeed make the contract void (even if the signature is found valid). Only Katherine needs superlawyers for the case and not those guys who filed this suit for her. Frankly, I don’t believe they are very capable people as they overlooked almost everything of what we’ve discussed here.

    Back in January 2005 Jermaine Jackson and the Bahreini prince had a press conference about launching their new music label Two Seas… What do you think about that?

    I didn’t know that. It seems that Jermaine had a knack for starting projects which were later used to ruin Michael. All it says to me is that Jermaine easily trusts wrong people and that he was most probably under the influence of his newly acquired Islam friends who outwitted him in his projects. I don’t have anything against muslims – he simply didn’t meet the right kind of people and is not business savvy himself.

    Let us not forget that the education all of them received was minimal. Michael made up for it by his inquisiveness and hard work, but even he made spelling mistakes till the end of his life.

    P.S. By the way, are you sure that Katz also represented the prince of Bahrein? Could you give any links, please? I don’t doubt it as it fits into the picture perfectly, but would like to have a source for it, if possible.

  72. LunaJo permalink
    March 3, 2012 10:36 pm

    I’m not a “Branca-hater”; in fact I do believe Branca had/has the best intentions. Just so you know.
    About Lopez: Wasn’t the date on the “contract” January 26th 2009? Because Lopez was with Michael on February 27th, shopping with Audigier, if you remember. More strangely, Lopez was working on the MJ Opus (Kraken) and was still negotiating this on June 25th 2009.

    “Kraken reached out to Jackson last year through the singer’s attorney Peter Lopez. “We wanted to tell the behind-the-scenes story of Michael Jackson the entertainer,” Fowler says. The plan was to include Jackson’s concerts at London’s O2 arena, which were set to start in July.
    While Jackson was in rehearsals, he invited Kraken executives to his house in Los Angeles. When Fowler mentioned they were working on a Disney Opus, Jackson reacted “like a boy in a sweet shop. He asked if he could contribute and get a copy.”
    Lopez says Jackson was impressed by the Opuses’ “sense of grandeur” and “expressed a definite desire to get on board.” But Lopez and Kraken were still in negotiations when Jackson died June 25, which required the company to seek approval from his estate – and amend its strategy.”

    Like you agreed: it’s a web. But thank you for all the effort to make some sense out all of this. I sometimes pick up on things and don’t always know the details, so it’s always better to have more minds thinking about it and researching.

    About Joel Katz: supposedly he also represented the Bahreini Prince in 2005, when tehy were all in London (Oct). And since Two Seas is also mentioned in the “contract”, that seems odd.
    Back in January 2005 Jermaine Jackson and the Bahreini prince had a pressconference about launching their new musiclabel Two Seas… What do you think about that?

  73. March 3, 2012 10:00 pm

    “The reason I think the way I do about the estate is because i mean like Randy Jackson said that when they were putting the “Michael” album together they never let a family member get close or come to the studio so much hiding they were doing and the fact a lot of the songs on the “Michael” album doesn’t feel like Michael on it.”

    Truthprevail, I have no chance to follow all the events taking place in the net and see only now that a scandal is raging again over those Cascio songs. I don’t know what to think of it. The Cascios are the people I trust very much indeed and if we don’t trust them, then I don’t know whom to trust at all.

    But the songs people doubt do sound different. On the other hand I still love them very much, and they are still Michael’s songs – even if someone else sang them. They should simply be put into a different category of songs – composed but not sung by MJ. But again it would be a big blow for me if I found that the Cascios told a lie.

    BUT EVEN DESPITE ALL THIS NEW MICHAEL’S SONGS SHOULD BE RELEASED! I personally am dying to listen to them. “Michael” has been my favorite album for the past year. I want to know how he felt and thought in the later years of his life and what we were devoid of due to the ruthless harassement which almost silenced him.

    And THE DEBTS SHOULD BE PAID TOO BY INITIATING NEW PROJECTS! Only the Estate should probably be in a closer contact with Michael’s fan communities to see what they suggest in this respect. And people like Joe Vogel for example, who are unrivalled experts on Michael’s music, should also be able to give advice.

    Michael’s future life should be a PEOPLE’S PROJECT. And the family should be contacted but no more than MJ’s fans, I am afraid, as they knew of him probably less than an average fan.

    “and as far as AEG and Sony well i think we all knew how Michael felt about Sony”

    I’ve been thinking a lot about Michael’s attitude towards Sony. And have also read some accounts (by Frank Dileo, for example) who said that Michael a little “overdid” it as regards them. There were reasons for it. Michael knew that someone was after him, his catalog and his life in the long run. But he could not place where the danger was coming from. Like all the rest of us he was amazed by the wave of hatred towards him but there was no way for him to know why all this craziness was taking place in his life. He probably took it out on Sony because they were closest to him and definitely gave him a thousand reasons to be dissatisfied with.

    But there are also reports that in 2003 he made up with Sony, which was again followed by some turbulent relationship – projects devised, cancelled, him going, coming again, etc. But from all we have seen for the past two years it wasn’t Sony who orchestrated all that harassment against Michael. They even tried to help him on various occasions, but were frustrated when they invested money into something new and then on the eve of releasing the project suddenly a new scandal would break out.

    As a result of that their relations turned into a sort of a love-hate relationship for both sides, but still they were inseparable. They had common business and a common goal, and even after Michael’s death it was Sony who paid the biggest price for the footage – to AEG by the way, though anyone else could have outbid them if they wanted to. I mean the footage could have been sold to anyone who offered a better price. But the best price was offered evidently by Sony. I think so not because I indefinitely believe Sony, but because AEG wouldn’t have lost a chance of a better deal.

    In short AEG is a totally different thing from Sony. They should NOT be mixed up and put into one pile. Their role in Michael’s life was totally, I repeat, totally different.

  74. Truth Prevail permalink
    March 3, 2012 8:52 pm

    The reason I think the way I do about the estate is because i mean like Randy Jackson said that when they were putting the “Michael” album together they never let a family member get close or come to the studio so much hiding they were doing and the fact a lot of the songs on the “Michael” album doesn’t feel like Michael on it.

    and as far as AEG and Sony well i think we all knew how Michael felt about Sony. AEG and tohme are defo up to something.

  75. March 3, 2012 7:27 pm

    “I understand how Karen feels and she is right when she says stuff about the “This Is It” and other things the movie she is right there are lots of parts they did not include in This Is It covering up i should say! and when she says its continuing the same B.S. she means it was motivated by money guys like ortega and AEG Sony all released it because of money exploiting MJ I doubt MJ would have released “This Is It” Or “Michael” the way they released it all these companies are selfish they wanted to cash in on MJ’s death”

    I understand how Karen feels too, but throwing everyone into one pile is not constructive for learning the truth. It is simply impossible to find the truth if you think that “everyone is in it” and the guilt of one person is equal to the guilt of everyone else. Saying that it was the worldwide conspiracy of greedy corporations is the easiest thing to say, only it does not take us anywhere.

    If it is a knot it should patiently untied with some loose threads put aside first.

  76. March 3, 2012 7:13 pm

    Tell me how do you know MJ was in debt to the tune of 300million dollars? Were there facts or as usual the media hyped the figures to smear MJ.

    And how much was his debt according to your information? Let us look at your figures and where they come from. My information comes the official Estate reports and the last time I checked it said that the initial figure was very big.

    Even if the figures were correct, how are we sure that his criminally minded business partners , with the help of his lawyers did not cook the figures to their advantage?

    No, we cannot be sure of it. All I know is that I have read two reports for different periods by the Estate to the judge overseeing their activities and if they lied there their lies would have been long uncovered (or they will have to eventually answer for them, if any). The Estate specified all their expenses and profit and how much was paid for every service rendered. If someone is interested they can go and check up these people’s bills.

    Tell me how much has MJ realised since his passing? Do you know? Or you just rely on what Branca/Mclain tell you?

    Not ready to give you the numbers at the moment. This is a separate job and I am not planning to go into that at the moment. You, on the other hand, seem to look more informed on this issue, so please tell us your figures.

    Has’nt the money realised so far be enough to write off the so called debt?

    No, it hasn’t.

    Who is there to ensure that MJ’s kids are not been ripped off by Branca /Mclain of what rightfully belongs to them.

    Probably the judge? Or some financial bodies which are checking up the Estate reports? You know your system better, so you tell us who checks up on the work of the Estate Executors?

    Tell me, who is funding the IMMORTAL TOUR? I heard the estate is funding 50% of the tour. Why is that? Why couldn’t Branca/Mclain persuade private coys or individuals to fund the tour?

    Probably because if they involve some private coys these people will receive a huge amount of money for their services and on a long-term basis too? And the way the Executors planned it half the money is guaranteed to stay with the Estate. Frankly, when I involve myself on some projects I also prefer to be my own master.

    Why are MJ’s personal belongings still been autioned off% Why can’t these items be collected and accessed and stored away so that there is the plan to build a musuem where they can open one day to display for the fans just like they do with Elvis at graceland.

    Rome was not built in a day. It seems that the Estate is kept busy with a lot of lawsuits and has to work in various directions simultaneously. I hope they will keep as much of Michael’s belongings as it is possible. A museum is a must.

    Frank delio would have told us what happened during the last days.How conveneint that he had to die.I guess some people did not want their secrets exposed.The fact that the survelliance tape the police took away from MJ’s home that could have explained to us all what happened to MJ, was according to them accidentally erased,CRAP!!!.MJ had began to take control, i guess some people did not like that fact.Thome Thome should be questioned. The security guards at the house are suspects also. Some body may have known or seen something.It’s fool hardy of us to think Murray is the sole suspect. He was a means to an end.MJ TRUSTED people and that trust tragically cost him his life.

    Agree. Murray is not the only one, and I have always said it from day one. The only problem is to find who these people are and not just blame everyone around.

    MJ’s kids should know the TRUTH about what happened to their dad. They are the ones that wiil help us get the justice MJ trully deserves. To counter people like Diamond, they need to know the facts. There are millions out there who belive the lies.

    Okay, but for the kids to know the truth someone should uncover it first. We are trying to do our best at the expense of sleep, free time and everything else in life. If you could help, it would be appreciated. But not just slogans – real work, please!

  77. March 3, 2012 6:40 pm

    “i would advice you to try to understand the reasonings of those who STILL do not believe MJ’s death was drug related. The terms of the AEG so called contract with MJ reveals to us the dishonesty of those involved in the deal. Thome should be investigated further.”

    Tamarafearless, I am a little surprised that you are saying this to me. As far as I know I was the only one who analyzed the AEG contract in minute detail (besides Allforlove blog which had a more general look) and revealed all the dishonesty of it. It seems we’ve come the full circle here and you are telling me what I’ve been telling others all along. And of course Tohme and AEG should be investigated further!

    “Why do you praise Branca/ Mclain?”

    I do not praise Branca the individual and especially Mclain of whom I know nothing. I do what I always do – analyse the situation the way I analysed all other circumstances around Michael. One of the primary ways to see what’s what is to look at the interests of various groups of people and the result of their work. (You will know the tree by its fruit). Anyone can say anything about himself and how excellent his attitude towards Michael is, but if they do not prove it with their deeds these words will remain just rattling in the air and nothing else.

    When I look at what John Branca is doing I see that he is consistently working on making Michael’s estate debt free and successful. Some projects are better, some are worse but the general tread is very much there – he is doing A LOT OF GOOD to what Michael has left behind, both in terms of generating money and good publicity for Michael.

    We can dispute over some of the choices he and his people, advisors, etc. have made – for ex. in respect of “Michael” album – but he is also a human being and his decisions may be not always impeccable, like with the rest of us. So what?

    If we compare his contribution to Michael’s legacy with the contribution of those “fans” who consistently seed mistrust towards the Estate which is at least trying to do something for Michael now, I whole-heartedly side with the Estate. You never know who those “fans” are working for… maybe even AEG whose sole interest was and still is to ruin Michael and bury him forever. Despite all Randy Phillips’ sweet praise for Michael Jackson.

    And please remember – I don’t listen to what people say. All I look at is their deeds.

  78. Truth Prevail permalink
    March 3, 2012 5:53 pm

    I understand how Karen feels and she is right when she says stuff about the “This Is It” and other things the movie she is right there are lots of parts they did not include in This Is It covering up i should say! and when she says its continuing the same B.S. she means it was motivated by money guys like ortega and AEG Sony all released it because of money exploiting MJ I doubt MJ would have released “This Is It” Or “Michael” the way they released it all these companies are selfish they wanted to cash in on MJ’s death they are not releasing anything with Michael in mind its all released based on greed and how they are going to benefit from it same goes for the Michael album.

    There so many unanswered questions about the day when MJ passed it does not feel complete.

    Murray isn’t the only one! There NEVER is when big loads of cash and Suites are involved!

  79. March 3, 2012 5:19 pm

    It seems to me that anyone who has it in for John Branca and the guys at the Estate has been listening to the nutcase ramblings of the family Jackson for too long, particularly “sister” La Toilet…. oops I mean, La Toya and Joe!!!! They’re as bad being vultures as Thome, Randy Phillips, et al!!!

  80. March 3, 2012 5:04 pm

    Now that I am catching up with news on this subject I’ve been told about Charles Thomson is trashing the Estate for the Cascio songs and general disrespect to Michael’s legacy. Well, I cannot advise Charles on music matters but hope that MJ’s finances are also a matter of concern for him as for all of us who support Michael’s interests.

    If Charles thinks that the Estate is doing such a lousy job of setting things right for Michael Jackson, why doesn’t he give his own advice to the Estate on the best way to handle Michael’s legacy AND promote the sales of his records? Probably Charles knows better ways of handling this business, so why doesn’t he cooperate with the Estate instead of trashing them?

    SUGGESTIONS, PLEASE!

  81. Tamarafearless permalink
    March 3, 2012 4:48 pm

    While i once again commend you for your dedication in letting us know about the truth about MJ, and the great injustices he faced, i would advice you to try to understand the reasonings of those who STILL do not believe MJ’s death was drug related.
    The terms of the AEG so called contract with MJ reveals to us the dishonesty of those involved in the deal. Thome should be investigated further.What other things money or other personal belongings of MJ is in his posseession?
    Why do you praise Branca/ Mclain? As far as i am concerned, they’ve done nothing for us to praise them. Tell me how do you know MJ was in debt to the tune of 300million dollars? Were there facts or as usual the media hyped the figures to smear MJ.Even if the figures were correct, how are we sure that his criminally minded business partners , with the help of his lawyers did not cook the figures to their advantage?
    Tell me how much has MJ realised since his passing? Do you know?Or you just rely on what Branca/Mclain tell you? Has’nt the money realised so far be enough to write off the so called debt?Who is there to ensure that MJ’s kids are not been ripped off by Branca /Mclain of what rightfully belongs to them.
    Tell me, who is funding the IMMORTAL TOUR?I heard the estate is funding 50% of the tour.Why is that? Why couldn’t Branca/Mclain persuade private coys or individuals to fund the tour?Why are they spending the money that had been realised since MJ’s passing meant to go to the kids trust fund be spent with no proper records as to how the money is been spent.They do not deserve the 10% they are presently receiving.
    Why are MJ’s personal belongings still been autioned off%Why can’t these items be collected and accessed and stored away so that there is the plan to build a musuem where they can open one day to display for the fans just like they do with Elvis at graceland.
    Frank delio would have told us what happened during the last days.How conveneint that he had to die.I guess some people did not want their secrets exposed.The fact that the survelliance tape the police took away from MJ’s home that could have explained to us all what happened to MJ, was according to them accidentally erased,CRAP!!!.MJ had began to take control, i guess some people did not like that fact.Thome Thome should be questioned. The security guards at the house are suspects also. Some body may have known or seen something.It’s fool hardy of us to think Murray is the sole suspect. He was a means to an end.MJ TRUSTED people and that trust tragically cost him his life.
    MJ’s kids should know the TRUTH about what happened to their dad.They are the ones that wiil help us get the justice MJ trully deserves. To counter people like Diamond, they need to know the facts. There are millions out there who belive the lies.

  82. March 3, 2012 4:14 pm

    Here is one of the articles mentioning Peter Lopez’s dismissal: http://lowlynewshound.blogspot.com/2009_02_01_archive.html It was posted on February 28, 2009 by someone who is no friend to MJ. From the approximate date when this person learned of the dismissal we can conclude that it actually came after signing the contract sometime in January 2009 – only saying that Michael “signed a contract with AEG in January” would be a very grave mistake indeed!

    What Michael signed and in his individual capacity as an artist only (who was no main party to the contract) was a LETTER OF INTENT and the promissory note (as a prelude to the contract) under which he received some advance money. There was no formal contract at the time and Peter Lopez could have pointed it out to the other side until February 2009, when he was eventually dismissed not to stand in the way.

    Ever since then Peter Lopez had nothing to do with that “contract” and most probably Michael never signed it as the head of the company, which explains why his forged signature eventually appeared on the AEG papers (which cannot be considered a contract because it is actually a letter addressed to Tohme!)

    At some point (evidently very late) in time, when Tohme was finally dismissed, Michael must have realized that the papers were all wrong and this was when Arnold Klein noticed that Michael was “not himself” in the final three weeks of his life. He was in very much worry, and this is why he wanted Branca to handle his business. Branca would have surely sorted it out!

    I may be imagining things but hiring Branca could have sped up the course of events. Those who were plotting against Michael had very little time left. And considering this factor the underlying idea of the title “A Superlawyer Returns, a Pop Icon Dies” may be not that far from the truth.

    P.S. By the way I expected attacks against Branca long time ago, only I didn’t know that they had already taken place as I am catching up with the news only now.

  83. March 3, 2012 3:40 pm

    Joel Katz was not only the attorney for AEG/ Anschutz, but also Sony and Clear Channel Entertainment. Live Nation is a spinn-off from Clear Channel. Branca has done some concertdeals for Live Nation. In Feb. 2009 Live Nation and Ticketmaster were going to merge, which got big protests. Ticketmaster agreed to license it’s software to…Anschutz Entertainment Group, AEG.

    Luna, first of all I apologize for the numerous grammar mistakes in my post – I was in very much hurry as I learned the news only yesterday and practically posted a rough copy of it. Now I have amended it a bit, so hopefully it has become more comprehensible.

    Now a word about what you’ve said. Katz may have a hundred other clients besides Michael and AEG, only the worst conflict of interests arises when the lawyer represents his clients on both sides of the contract, and the AEG contract is exactly this case.

    A lawyer is supposed to be acting in the best interests of the party he is representing. And if the contract had been between Michael and Sony, and he would be representing both of them, then we would be talking of a conflict of interests between Michael and Sony. BUT Katz represented Michael and AEG and was supposed to be working in the best interests of BOTH of them which is totally impossible! This is a TRUE conflict of interests which may indeed make the contract void!

    Dennis Hawk was the attorney for Tohme and don’t forget Michael had Peter Lopez. Lopez and Hawk were both invovled in the negotiatons with AEG. Tohme was the one who got Tom Barrack involved concerning neverland. Later it was reveiled Barrack was one of the persons who had an interest in bying the ATV catalogue. It’s a big web!

    As far as I know Peter Lopez was involved in the negotiations at an early stage but was fired exactly before the contract was signed. He didn’t take part in the signing process for sure and the date of his dismissal is telling half the story. After Lopez all Michael’s business affairs were handled by Tohme.

    If I find the source where I took the date of Lopez’s dismissal from I’ll post it here.

    It is a big web indeed, and to disentangle it we need to look at the interests various people had. And looking at the interests I doubt that John Branca is part of it.

    The reason is obvious – those people wanted to ruin Michael and Branca is doing the opposite. He is restoring both Michael’s name and the well-being of his family. This is all the proof we need. Criminals in finance do not do their best to ruin their partner first and then do their best to restore his fortunes.

    Unless they have a sudden change of heart of course. Only I don’t believe that such miracles are possible.

  84. LunaJo permalink
    March 3, 2012 2:42 pm

    Joel Katz was not only the attorney for AEG/ Anschutz, but also Sony and Clear Channel Entertainment. Live Nation is a spinn-off from Clear Channel. Branca has done some concertdeals for Live Nation. In Feb. 2009 Live Nation and Ticketmaster were going to merge, which got big protests. Ticketmaster agreed to license it’s software to…Anschutz Entertainment Group, AEG. Dennis Hawk was the attorney for Tohme and don’t forget Michael had Peter Lopez. Lopez and Hawk were both invovled in the negotiatons with AEG. Tohme was the one who got Tom Barrack involved concerning neverland. Later it was reveiled Barrack was one of the persons who had an interest in bying the ATV catalogue. It’s a big web!

  85. lynande51 permalink
    March 3, 2012 6:35 am

    I don’t have a single suggestion for us or for Karen Faye.I do have a question though about AEG taking “legal and or other action”. What other action were they talking about? Other sounds omminous to me. And let’s never forget that Thome was the one that put this in action.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,119 other followers

%d bloggers like this: