Skip to content

Michael Jackson’s agreement with AEG was NOT FINAL. We can RELAX now. part 5

April 14, 2011

Part 5 and Postcript

Speaking about the AEG ‘contract’ one of the readers said to me that “the one you posted was NOT the final version”.

I both agreed and disagreed. Agreed because the papers available to the AEG officials can hardly be called the final or even any contract at all – and disagreed because these papers are indeed final in a sense that this is all Randy Phillips had from Michael Jackson even despite Dr. Tohme and attorney Dennis Hawk ardently working against him behind his back.

Earlier I said that the so-called AEG contract looked like a mere cut-and-paste job where some of the most horrendous pages were inserted into the inside of the letter to Tohme after Michael Jackson had signed its last page (on his own behalf, as the Artist only).

The reason why AEG did this cut-and-paste job was most probably Michael’s refusal to accept their terms and their consequent need to bring together the text of the Promissory Note/ Inducement Letter signed by Michael at another point in time and the only other signed document they had from him (letter to Tohme) in order to reach at least some semblance of a final contract they allegedly had with Michael Jackson.

I will not go over the many reasons why I think their ‘contract’ is a cut-and-paste job (you can read it in previous parts) – all I want to do now is bring out into the open another major contradiction which is related exactly to whether this ‘contract’ is considered final or not.

As is always with AEG papers my discovery was made in a place where I least expected it – in Miscellaneous clause.

What is a Miscellaneous clause?  It is the least important and the most casual of all clauses in a contract as this is a place to store all those small bits and pieces which didn’t fit into the essential clauses of the contract – for example, the number of its copies, the languages it was made in, the equal power of each copy or translation and other necessary but not too important things of the same kind.

Since we know by now that AEG has a very bad habit of concealing the most crucial terms of their agreements in places which are least suitable for them, you probably half-expect now to discover in this clause something extremely important, don’t you? And you are absolutely right in your expectations.

Only two pages prior to the last page of their ‘contract’ which is expressing a wish that the definitive agreement is still to be negotiated,  AEG’s version of Miscellaneous says … you can’t imagine what … it says that this agreement is final and may not be modified or amended except by writing!

What it means is that the middle pages of the AEG paper say that the contract is final and fully agreed on  – while the last page of it hopes that the definitive agreement is still to be made and negotiated “expeditiously and in good faith”.

Amazing, isn’t it? However when someone does a cut-and-paste job such unpleasant discrepancies can occur and are not surprising at all….

On the other hand this discrepancy may not be accidental and may be left there on purpose. Realizing that the last page of their ‘contract’ looks terribly inconclusive AEG crammed the inside pages of it with all sorts of legal demagogue aiming to compensate for all the deficiencies the first and last pages of the letter to Tohme are suffering from.

Last page of the Letter of Intent with a genuine signature of Michael Jackson as the Artist and a fake one for Michael as head of his company

We must understand how difficult a task of these swindlers was. In the absence of a genuine final agreement from the Artist and in order to come up with something more or less credible these crooks needed to tie together the crucial Promissory Note and Inducement Letter and the ordinary Letter of Intent addressed to Tohme – which was most probably the only other signed document they had from Michael Jackson.

But a big problem with the Letter of intent was that it inappropriately closed with “Very truly yours” and this demanded a corresponding opening – so they had no other choice but insert that shabby first page into their ‘contract’ too, though it was awkwardly addressed to “Dear Dr. Tohme” and didn’t even minimally look like a contract.

In fact it isn’t even called a contract but simply states its main subject – Michael Jackson.

The first page of their Letter of Intent sent "For the attention of Dr. Tohme" and addressed to "Dear Dr. Tohme Tohme"

However a good point for the crooks was that the letter carried a date (January 26, 2009) and had at least one Michael’s signature on it (for the Artist only) – so this was at least something they could start with….

The date of that letter was incorporated into the text of the Promissory Note and Inducement Letter which were then presented to Michael as the only condition on which he could get his advances. And when Michael finally signed those papers they happily attached them to the Letter of Intent most probably throwing away its inside and replacing it with a new content – but thus trapping themselves and making this version of their ‘contract’ the only one they can have in principle as all their papers are now forcefully revolving around one date only, which is January 26, 2009.

Inducement Letter carries Michaels signature but has no date. The only thing it does it referring to the date of their "contract" (click on the image to enlarge)

Even if some madman says now that AEG has a beautiful final version of the contract its date should by all means come after the Letter of Intent of January 26, 2009 – but since they have already incorporated this date into their Promissory Note and Inducement Letter, they have fallen into their own trap and cannot say they have anything different from the compilation version they are presenting to us now.

However the shoddiness of all this paperwork was evidenly worrying AEG – so to compensate for the inconclusiveness, indefiniteness and fraudulence of their ‘contract’ (the last page of which carries a forged signature of Michael Jackson as a head of his company) they had to fortify the inside of their ‘contract’ by saying in their Miscellaneous clause that the contract was  final after all…

This won’t do for a court of law of course, but would probably be enough to intimidate and frighten the Artist into thinking that they somehow managed to forge a definitive contract and he will not be able to get away from its terms now…

Let us have a closer look at the Miscellaneous clause which has the audacity to claim that this cut-and-paste paperwork is final.  All of it is extremely interesting as in contrast to usual Miscellaneous not-too-much meaningful  clauses the information contained here is absolutely formidable.

Firstly, it is the only place in the ‘contract’ which refers to the Collateral put up by the Artist as security for Artistco performing its obligations, including repayment of the advances received by the Artist.

The Collateral described in this clause is far more all-inclusive than the one specified in the Promissory Note – now AEG’s greed is such that they want to lay their hands on everything the Artist ever had and will ever have, no matter where it is located and whether owned at present or only in the future – see point 16.3 “Security”:

The formidable MISCELLANEOUS clause in AEGs "contract" with the Artist

If after reading this information anyone dares tell me that the Collateral demanded by AEG is anything similar to what Sony ever did or wanted to do to Michael Jackson, they should be ready for extremely harsh treatment from me as I am no longer prepared to put up with haters’ mantras which focus on the “horrible Sony of 2002” but completely disregard the monstrous AEG of 2009.

Let me remind you that Sony had an option to peacefully obtain 25% of Michael’s share in the Beatles catalog under an agreement with Michael for their help in restructuring his debt,  but up till now they have not exercised this right – while what AEG was planning to do to Michael was not only getting the full share of his catalog but stripping him naked and sending him to a plantation to work for them in unbearable conditions for many years to come:

  • 16.3  Security. 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 of 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 rights to the payment of money in which Artistco and/or Artist has an interest, insurance claims and proceeds, commercial tort claims, securities and all other investment 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.

Michael Jackson’s company is to “reasonably cooperate” with these gangsters so that they “perfect” the above conditions to enable them to obtain the gigantic Michael’s collateral?

And they have the nerve to say it?!

Let me pass over to the rest of the points in this Miscellaneous clause or I might strangle these monstrous AEG guys or anyone supporting them with my own hands now….

The dreadful Miscellaneous clause also contains a Confidentiality point denying the parties the right to disclose terms of this ‘agreement’ to anyone except the judge (the point which initially prevented Katherine Jackson from seeing this monstrosity):

16.2. Confidentiality. … The material terms of this Agreement shall be kept confidential except to the extent necessary to enforce the terms hereof or as required to comply with the law (such as for example, pursuant to a court order, or where a party must disclose such information to a tax advisor ro accountant for purposes of preparing tax returns or financial statements).

“Miscellaneous” also tells us of conditions on which advances and even Initial advances are to be given to the Artist. The Promissory Note, by the way, did not set any conditions for the Initial advances – on the contrary, it was full of pleasantries and friendly invitations to take their money at no interest at all and for some 14 months too. However now that the Promissory Note is signed, this ‘contract’ is suddenly making tough demands on the Artist as an indispensable condition for obtaining the advances:

The Miscellaneous clause continued - conditions for the advances to the Artist

These conditions include not only the obligation of the Artist to agree to their tour itinerary, and to all Promoters’ activities including their calculation of the Production costs to be borne by the Artist, but also the need to obtain a cancellation insurance to cover the Production costs of the Artist (the proceeds of which will go to AEG) as well as a condition that the Promoter obtains a cancellation insurance in their favor to cover the risk of loss of their Pool expenses – as if it were the Artist’s business whether AEG obtains this cancellation insurance or not!

The clause also obliges the Artist to pay to 2 Seas Records LLC. whatever they ask of him (even if it is the sum equivalent to his advances) or otherwise he will not see the Initial Advances at all:

16.4.2 …Promoter shall have no obligation to pay the Initial Advance until such time as Artistco delivers to Promoter evidence satisfactory to Promoter that the dispute with 2 Seas Records LLC has been settled and that Artistco has either paid the amounts owing to 2 Seas Records LLC under such settlement agreement or will pay such amounts (including by permitting some or all of the Initial Advance to be paid to 2 Seas Records LLC).

AEG’s dragon version of a Miscellaneous clause also contains a very important “Severability” point which means that if the court finds one point of this ‘contract’ invalid the rest will still remain enforceable. The dictionary defines Severability as:

  • A clause in a contract that allows for the terms of the contract to be independent of one another, so that if a term in the contract is deemed unenforceable by a court, the contract as a whole will not be deemed unenforceable. If there were no severability clause in a contract, a whole contract could be deemed unenforceable because of one unenforceable term.

It is also in the Miscellaneous clause that AEG says that all approvals and consents “in respect of this Agreement” will be considered duly given if they are sent by fax  – which enables our dear Dr. Tohme to send whatever he likes to AEG and it will become binding on the Artist…

It is “Miscellaneous” again which provides the Addresses of all those to whom all notices and approvals are to be sent – who in this case is only Dr. Tohme and nobody else but Dr. Tohme (plus Dennis J. Hawk, Esq. who is working for Dr. Tohme too).

Everything is to be sent to Dr.Tohme only (and Dennis J.Hawk). Michael Jackson is not even mentioned in these addresses!

Michael Jackson is not even mentioned in those addresses. No, the only star shining in AEG’s sky is dear Dr. Tohme Tohme who, despite being a legal nobody to this ‘agreement’, is the one who will receive and send all approvals and consents on behalf of Michael Jackson. And all photocopies of Michael’s signatures will be considered as valid as originals under this “contract” of theirs too…

But let us get back to the first point of the Miscellaneous clause. And the first point of it brings us to the matter we started here with – the question whether this  ‘contract’ is final or not.

This point is called “Integrated agreement” and since this definition is somewhat of a mystery to us, let us see what the dictionary says about it:

  • “In contract law, an integration clause, or merger clause is a term in the language of the contract that declares it to be the complete and final agreement between the parties. It is often placed at or towards the end of the contract.”
  • “An agreement is integrated when the parties adopt the writing or writings as the final and complete expression of the agreement.” http://www.answers.com/topic/integrated-agreement

So a mere inclusion of this clause into the contract points to AEG’s desire to create the impression that the agreement is final?  Let us go on with the interpretation of this intergration clause and see what the dictionary says about the force of it.

The follow-up text makes it clear that the ‘integration clause” is now specified mostly for effect as it does not preclude the parties from having other agreements besides those guarded by this clause:

  • In the United States, the existence of such a term is normally not conclusive proof that no varied or additional conditions exist with respect to the performance of the contract beyond those that are in the writing but instead is simply evidence of that fact.
  • A contract that has such a clause may be deemed an integrated contract, and any previous negotiations in which the parties to the contract had considered different terms will be deemed superseded by the final writing. However, many modern cases have found merger clauses to be only a rebuttable presumption. http://www.answers.com/topic/integration-clause

Aha, so despite all its ‘finality’ many court cases now regard an integrated agreement clause as something which is a presumption only (and not an undisputed obligaiton) which can be even rebutted?  This is a very nice piece of information we should keep in mind in case we need to rebut those who tell us that this clause could make the contract final and binding on Michael Jackson and force him into the slavery terms planned for him by AEG.

However, AEG is doing its best to present an ‘integrated agreement’ clause as a clause which can make the contract final and binding upon the Artist.

It is trying to intimidate the Artist and make him think that all this cut-and-paste mess – which starts as a letter, closes as a letter, and cites all these absolutely dreadful conditions in between – is actually a final contract which may not be modified or amended except by a written consent of the party “to be bound” by such consent.

Please note that AEG includes in its wording all attachments (Exhibits) but never bothers to specify which ones they are (though it is standard practice to enumerate them giving all the necessary details),  thus explaining to us that no matter what Exhibits are attached to this ‘contract’ all of them will be still fine, agreed and obligatory for the Artist even if they add a hundred of them and the Artist never sees them:

16. Miscellaneous.

 16.1 Integrated Agreement. This Agreement, with its Exhibits, is intended by the parties to be the complete and final expression of their agreement, and is specifically intended to be an integrated contract with respect to the matters affected herein. Each party agrees that any prior negotiations, statements, representations or agreements with respect to the subject matter herein are merged in and superseded by this Agreement, and that such party has not relied on any representation or promise, oral or otherwise, which is not set forth in this Agreement. This Agreement may not be modified or amended except by a writing signed by the party to be bound.

You’ve probably noticed that AEG is playing with words in this clause as one and the same word is used here in two meanings – Agreement (with a capital letter) means a “contract” while the same word without a capital letter means the Artist’s consent to the terms stated ‘herein’ and his final acceptance of them.

Thus the sentence which you previously thought contained just a simple repetition of ‘Agreement of agreement’:

  • “This Agreement, with its Exhibits, is intended by the parties to be the complete and final expression of their agreement …to the matters affected herein”

should actually read as a ‘Contract expressing the final acceptance of’:

  • “This Contract, with its Exhibits, is intended by the parties to be complete and final expression of their acceptance of the terms contained “herein”.

16.1 "INTEGRATED AGREEMENT" within the Miscellaneous clause

The only word which adds a little doubt to the finality of what is happening here is the word “intended” which points to the intentions of the parties only – but you will probably agree that if the intentions are presented as the “final expression of the agreement” finding out whether it is an intention only or the final agreement already is no easy task which can be probably resolved only in arbitration.

After reading about all these ‘final’ agreements in the Miscellaneous clause (which may be rebutted in court though) it is extremely interesting to compare them with the first page of Randy Phillips’s letter to Tohme and refresh in our memory his earlier expectations that “Artistco and Promoter shall reasonably cooperate with each other in an effort to arrive at mutually approved itineraries…” or that “the parties shall attempt in good faith to agree upon the number of Shows that need to be scheduled…”.

The last page of Randy Phillips’s letter to Tohme is also making a dramatic contrast with all this finality inside the Miscellaneous clause as the sentence under which Michael Jackson actually put his signature expressed a strong desire on the part of AEG to still negotiate the definitive agreement expeditiously and in good faith”.

And if – in addition to all these inconsistencies – you further recall that the last page of this compilation effort was signed by Michael Jackson as an Artist only and not as the head of Michael Jackson Company, LLC and that his signature there is most probably forgedyou will understand that calling all this compilation work final, integral, made “in good faith” and with clean hands too will be a very grave exaggeration indeed.

Recently I’ve come across a wealth of legal advice from attorney Ivan Hoffman whose main business lies in the field of Entertainment and Publishing Law.

Since I initially assumed (in part 1) that this ‘contract’ was a letter of intent only and have now come a full circle by bringing up this matter again, let us see what Ivan Hoffman says about the validity of this kind of document, should the court also regarded as a letter of intent:

  • “In order to be a valid and enforceable agreement, a document must contain certain essential legal provisions and must not leave either undecided or to be determined at some time in the future any aspect of such essential legal provisions. [this reminder should be sent to AEG so that they don’t forget to make their future contracts clear, definitive and conclusive].
  • If these essential elements are not present, then the document is not a binding one and is often referred to by courts as an “agreement to agree” or a letter of intent, both of which are not enforceable as contracts. [agreement to agree? Isn’t it interesting that we have the same wording in the Miscellaneous clause?]
  • …the letter of intent is essentially a legally worthless document. [great!]
  • It is not clear to me the reason any party would ever bother to create such a document and yet I have seen it used on many occasions. [for some tricksters it is a way to safeguard themselves – in case no final agreement is signed they can meddle with the text of the letter of intent and turn it into a ‘final’ contract].
  • However, sometimes one of the parties prepares a document believing it to be a valid and enforceable agreement only to find, after expensive litigation, that it was not a binding agreement at all but merely a non-binding, non-enforceable agreement to agree, or letter of intent”.

So another definition of a letter of intent is “agreement to agree”? But didn’t we see exactly the same wording in our “integrated agreement” clause which also spoke of the “Agreement intended by the parties to be their final agreement”? Which is by the way was only intended by the parties but not really made?

Then what other proof do we need to show that what we are looking at – even after all the adjustments made to it by AEG – is nothing by a Letter of Intent only?

To demonstrate the difference between a contract and a letter of intent Ivan Hoffman describes a dispute which arose from the parties’ wrong interpretation of a letter of intent as the final contract. Since it is very close to what we have in AEG’s case it is an interesting read:

“In Richie Co. LLP vs. Lyndon Insurance Group, Inc., a federal case, … the Court was called upon to decide if a document was a binding obligation or merely an unbinding letter of intent, agreement to agree.  Although the case dealt with an interpretation of Minnesota law, the same general principles of contract law are applicable in most states.

The summary of the facts in that case is as follows:  the plaintiff, Richie, had a previously existing contractual relationship with another entity, Mechanical Breakdown Protection, Inc. (“MBPI”) and proposed, on April 16, 1999, in a writing called “letter of agreement,” [AEG’s document isn’t called anything at all] which writing was signed by all parties, an agreement with the defendant Lyndon, that the defendant would pay Richie on terms that were “substantially identical” to the terms in the MBPI agreement. 

The April 16, 1999 writing set forth certain terms regarding payment to Richie, which terms were to be included in a “subsequently-drafted ‘Service Contract Agreement.’”  This “Service Contract Agreement” was to be entered into within 180 days after the defendant acquired a specific company, called FPC.  That event took place on March 6, 2000.  However, the Service Contract Agreement was never entered into.

The plaintiff sued, claiming that the defendant breached the April 16, 1999 “agreement” by failing to enter into that said Service Contract Agreement.  The Court held that the April 16, 1999 “agreement” was not an agreement at all but a non-binding letter of intent and agreement to agree. 

          The Court stated:  A letter creating an agreement to negotiate in good faith in the future is not enforceable where the parties have contemplated that the agreement is not the complete and final agreement governing the transaction at issue.

          The Court stated further:  However, the parties need not agree on every point, but only that the parties’ intent as to fundamental terms be reasonably certain. But where substantial and necessary terms are left open for future negotiation, the purported contract is void.  [in AEG’s case even such basic things as definitions of various terms were not properly clarified or agreed on, and were stated in some God-forsaken Exhibit with no date or signature on it]

The Court discussed a similar case in which certain terms also stated that “the parties shall enter into a definite purchase agreement which shall be drafted by the buyers within 30 days.”  The Court agreed that such “agreement” was not a binding agreement but merely an agreement to agree and that the setting forth of such definitive terms was merely a “summary of negotiations.”

          The Court stated further: That language spoke of future actions and agreements contemplated but not yet completed by the parties, and showed that the letter “was not the complete and final agreement the parties contemplated would govern” but “merely created an agreement to negotiate in good faith.” [we have exactly the same language!]  Such language clearly manifests an intention to do something essential at a later date…thus the document is not a binding contract but merely an unenforceable agreement to agree and a non-binding letter of intent.’  http://www.ivanhoffman.com/letter.html

Though I have never dealt in legal disputes between parties, the above example seems to me very much close to what we have in the AEG cut-and-paste contract with Michael Jackson. Despite the “integrated agreement” clause added to it, all it has is a mere intention of the parties to agree or agreement to agree, while the definitive agreement is still to be negotiated expeditiously and in good faith.

Actually even the wording is repeated almost word for word here, not to mention other parts of this letter where they openly speak of their “attempts” to reach an agreement over some crucial issues in the future…

If the above “agreement” cited by Ivan Hoffman was ruled by the judge as void, then there is a very high chance that the same fate could befall the cut-and-paste AEG “agreement” with Michael Jackson if it ever came to it.  And if Michael Jackson’s signature as a head of his company also turned out to be forged, this would make the contract not only void, but illegal too and many heads – really many heads – might indeed roll off after that…

All of the above gives us a chance to relax at last and say in all honesty that whatever monstrous terms AEG included in their cut-and-paste contract, its terms were not binding on Michael Jackson as this document was simply not valid and Michael never accepted it, never agreed to it and never signed it.

This will enable us to examine the AEG ‘contract’ in future as an abstract idea only and study their dirty plans for Michael Jackson more dispassionately – as a scheme they envisaged but never implemented – with no other emotions involved but disgust and indignation at AEG’s greed, arrogance and no shame at using fraudulent methods in their relationship with a man whose little finger they were not worthy of.

P.S.

I’ve noticed that whenever I mention AEG people reply to me about Sony, so for those who think that these two separate entities are one I am making this postscriptum now.

We know that Michael said “they would kill me for my catalog” and I tend to take his words very seriously.

If the two major suspects are Sony (as everyone screamed aloud only recently) and AEG (about whom nobody is screaming) we should look at who had a better opportunity to do it and who wanted it really badly.

Sony did have an option to buy half of Michael’s share (or another 25% in addition to their 50%) but didn’t exercise this right even when they received this option in 2006-2007, if I remember it right and hasn’t done it up till now either. This absolutely does not show them to be someone who will be going out of their way to get Michael’s catalog.

AEG on the other hand wanted to have Michael’s assets badly, the whole of them and for a mere $6,2 mln., most of which wasn’t even going to Michael ($3mln. was for 2 Seas Records and $1,2 was for renting the house).

In case Michael didn’t pay his first installment in repayment of this advance under the Promissory note he signed with AEG they could immediately demand the rest of the advance back AND/OR exercise their right on the collateral, or all assets of Michael’s company.

There are two questions remaining here:

  •  whether that Promissory note was legitimate or not (but its legitimity does not rule out the intent of it, as you understand)
  • what assets Michael Jackson Company LLC had at the time this Promissory note was signed (this is very important and will require further research).

But you will probably agree that even the above information makes AEG a much bigger suspect in terms of “who wanted Michael’s assets more”.

As to whether AEG could or couldn’t put a lien against those assets this will still have to be analyzed, but my first impression is that they could, otherwise “cross-collateralization” would not be possible at all.

By cross-collateralization I mean that Michael’s main assets were used as collateral twice – for obtaining a loan from the Barclays bank (or initially Bank of America) and as collateral for an advance from AEG.

Sony, by the way, is not even a party to it, so I can’t understand how they come into this collateral business at all.

Financial dictionary says that one and the same asset can be used for obtaining two loans and calls it cross-collateral:

So in the event of default it was both the Bank and AEG who could claim the collateral (again, Sony is not even near any such claim).

Now that my first series of posts about AEG is over I will be focusing on the above problems, the essence of the AEG “contract” with Michael and various opportunities arising from it. The reason why I am studying it is to see the background for Dr. Murray’s crime.

But for the moment AEG can relax – further investigation into their business with Michael Jackson will take time, so I will be giving opportunity to my co-admins to write on other MJ vindication issues in the meantime.

56 Comments leave one →
  1. CassieforMaxwell permalink
    February 22, 2012 7:29 pm

    Fraudean slip I suppose, lol. I meant the Estate Executors. At any rate, this research is priceless. Thanks again.

    Like

  2. February 22, 2012 8:16 am

    “You have done a fabulous job with this contract. It will be much needed when AEG goes to court with and/or against Thome Thome and vice versA.”

    CassieforMaxwell, thank you, but as far as I know it is the Estate Executors who are going to court against Tohme, not AEG.

    AEG’s co-called ‘contract’ with Michael was taking care of Tohme by stipulating his $100,000 salary. In the contract it looked like the money was to be paid by AEG, but the Addendum to the contract says it should be Michael’s responsibility. So AEG seems to be very much at one with Tohme against Michael Jackson, unless of course they decided to sacrifice him in the same way a pawn is sacrificed in a chess game.

    Like

  3. CassieforMaxwell permalink
    February 21, 2012 6:18 pm

    You have done a fabulous job with this contract. It will be much needed when AEG goes to court with and/or against Thome Thome and vice versA. I didn’t know that you were still in the process of dissecting this catastrophy or I would have been right here because this contracr has been a thorn in my side since day one! I did siome work on it myself, but this is major. I appreciate it.

    Like

  4. June 8, 2011 12:07 am

    There are 2 different dates given for the riot act,6/18 and 6/20 2009.
    Michael was visited by AEG reps. + Kenny Ortega and dr murray.They were all grown up people and must have been morons not to undrerstand and know about the enormous strain Michael was under.The most shocking , and the most blatantly malicious attitude was exibited by murray who according to Kenny Ortega said awful things to Michael.He was threatened that the plug will be pulled, and he has to take only meds by dr murray.
    With their conntract against Michael they had started this multi- billion project
    so it was a wiw- win situatiom for them.Their concern for
    Michael was recklessly
    negligent, if not non-existant.The riot act with people exibiting demands,making threats, having a hostile attitude only exacerbated his distress.

    .

    Like

  5. June 7, 2011 1:13 pm

    The meeting at Michaels was 6/20 2009, by 6/29 2009 he was already dead. 29th was his bd in Aug .

    Like

  6. June 7, 2011 1:07 pm

    Reviewed the “contract” ie no contract for 50 shows.There are undobtedly many more savy and well informed people than myself re this gangsta conntract against Michael Jackson.I looked at 1.promissory note,2.Inducement letter,3.ordinary letter by Michael to Thome-Thome and 4. Miscallaneus. Nr 1. being sweet and full of promises…nr4.deadly,and the only where CONTRACT in AEG´s clause is mentioned.?no date,+ thraet to “send MJ to a plantation to work for them”should he default on anything. The documents have no signatures, faxed signatures, and what seems like forged signatures. Just listened to some tapes,;Randy Phillips
    asks Thome -Thome to add more shows.By telephone T-T informs that MJ agreed to 50 shows.
    The meeting at Michaels on 6/29 2009 ,the Riot Act was read,Murray attended, and acc. to Kenny O. doc M. was rude and condescending towards MJ,; Michael was already under unbearable strain and maybe it had taken him some time to fully appriciate the horrific deal
    placed on him via “the contract”.
    Well, he was not sent to any plantation ,as we all know by now.
    A trial has been brought against a doc of dubious character and somehow this heavily indebted doc has an unlimited amount of money at his disposal.The judge agrees to whatever this doc asks for.
    Any connection, maybe? Strange things are happening in this doc´s life,his debts disappear,his lifestyle is stepped up.Asks for complex and frivolously useless medical experiments,maybe even a pig should drink Propofol. Judge agrees to everything.Doc´s rights have to be honored.Agree. What about justice for the man who was killed ans his children and parents? The autopsy results and toxicology are quite clear as to cause of death.Propofol i.v.,they leave no doubt about it.

    Like

  7. May 28, 2011 4:11 pm

    Chris, I don´t really know how come Michael had no one to represent him on Jan 26 meeting. Thome-Thome made appearances (some on you-tube)claiming
    that he was in charge of Michaels business, his personal life and his
    check-books as well, though he didn´t broadcast the last fact.
    He also proclaimed his great love for Michael! A very slick and sly
    character. Michael tried to get rid of him but the guy just wouldn´t
    let go.He appeared at the hospital almost immediately after Michael had died (officially died).To translate from another language:”They
    don´t have clean flour in their sack”.

    Like

  8. Chris permalink
    May 28, 2011 3:43 pm

    @ Kaarin

    He died about 8 months after Michael maybe 6.

    The question is why wasn’t he on the contract in 09?
    1 answer is that he wasn’t representing MJ’s company but another LLC which then makes me ask why wasn’t L Londell MJ lawyer for Michael Jackson Company LLC not there as his attorney. If he couldn’t get there why couldn’t another entertainment lawyer go as council for MJ’s behalf but just not sign on the companies behalf. Peter Lopez could of done that. In both cases I’m guessing Tohme made sure they weren’t there.
    Peter Lopez wasn’t fired until the last week in February 2009…the same time MJ was initially supposed to do 02 announcement.

    Also all AEG big guns were at this meeting on January 26th 09 whilst MJ had no one. Anschutz Leiweke Gongaware and Phillips. Colony Capital had Tohme and his lawyer MJ had nobody ( I don’t believe Tohme had MJ interests at all). Was it neccessary for all of them to go or was it an intimidation tactic to get him to sign.

    Like

  9. May 28, 2011 1:35 pm

    Chris apr.22 2011-“Where was Peter Lopez?”Answer: DEAD. A suspicious suicide.

    Like

  10. Chris permalink
    May 20, 2011 10:53 pm

    @vindicateMJ

    This comment below suggests another contract was made as Joel Katz wasn’t in this agreement unless you think Randy is lying.

    Like

  11. May 5, 2011 9:57 pm

    I found this: http://www.thewrap.com/media/article/michael-jackson-5-return-branca-22424
    I don’t know if you had read it or not?

    Claudia, thank you! No, I haven’t read it and it does give me some ideas. I was particularly impressed by Randy Phillips’s assurances that he “welcomed” Branca, “was anxious” to have him and “was worried that a court might void AEG’s contract” (true!) due to “a conflict of interest” as they were sharing the same lawyer (lie!).

    Didn’t he know from the very start that there was a conflict of interest, so why begin worrying about it several months after signing their so-called contract?

    Look at this pack of lies:

    “Phillips was said to be worried that a court might void AEG’s contract with the singer due to a conflict of interest — Jackson and AEG were sharing the same lawyer, Joel Katz, a well-known music attorney, and his gobal firm Greenburg Taurig.
    “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.”

    Like

  12. claudia permalink
    May 5, 2011 4:19 am

    sorry I forgot anotherthing about the guy “Joel Katz ”

    Frank-DiLeo said:

    I’m on the board of ATV/Sony music. I was put on there by Michael. He put myself on and Joel Katz who was his attorney at the time. That was the guy that he signed a letter of engagement with to bring him on as his counsel. So he wanted us both on the board because we were getting ready to have conversations with ATV/Sony to look into the expenditures and so on and so forth.”
    (http://www.positivelymichael.com/forums/showthread.php?37-Transcript-of-Raffles-van-Exel-interviewing-Frank-DiLeo)

    Like

  13. claudia permalink
    May 5, 2011 4:04 am

    Hi,vindicatemj

    I found this:

    http://www.thewrap.com/media/article/michael-jackson-5-return-branca-22424

    I don’t know if you had read it or not?

    thank you for your blog and all these things for micheal

    sorry my poor english can’t said more.

    Like

  14. Chris permalink
    April 22, 2011 9:10 pm

    @Vindicatemj

    I’m glad you put Geraldo’s video in for one reason. What Geraldo asks is “didn’t Tohme say he would screw MJ?” bloke replies and entire jackson clan.
    If MJ lost all his assets what would of happened to Havenhurst?

    Also in the “contract” doesn’t it say MJ had to pay for the advertising promotions.
    Apparently those posters with the 10 dates were already in the London underground before he announced it.
    So Michael paid for all of these posters with the wrong amount of dates on it yet AEG said they had agreed 31. So, why put out inaccurate posters it’s a waste of money and they will have to do new ones. Well we know why it wasn’t coming out of there pocket.

    Also it cost Michael £1 million ($1,393,728.223 at exchange rate at time of this contract which if you remember Rowe did try and change contract for Michel to pound not dollars)to put the 3 minute ad on ITV. Some may say AEG did this to promote 10 but get so much excitment they would have to add more and thats how they got 50. Only one problem with that it wasn’t shown til sunday 2 days after. Now I’m not saying scrap the ad but…. The 1 million fans had already gone through the roof and as said earlier would fill the 02 conveinently 50 times over then add 11 million people who watched the advert. And you wonder why they mentioned things like “3 year plan” and “100 shows”.

    The thing that stood out to me about Freidman interveiw with Tohme is he talks about moving MJ’s assets but as Julien says Mj didn’t need storage space why did Tohme not put it in one of MJ’s storage facilities? Well MJ said he never gave permission to sell personal items (his car and art collection was part of the exibiion and was going to be auctioned before MJ stopped it).
    Well apparently Tohme approached Julien and Julien said okay but only with Mj’s permission. Now Tohme apparently got MJ’s permission even though MJ says he never did want to sell those items.
    BUT what concerns me more is the fact that he went up to Julien expecting him to do it without MJ’s permission regardless.
    Had he already had success like that in the past?

    It would be interesting to see if MJ’s signature is same on that contract as this one as I assume there must of been some contract between them.

    I believe MJ fired Tohme not for the bloodshed comment but the fact that MJ had caught Tohme selling MJ’s personal assets.

    “It seems it wasn’t easy for Michael to get rid of Tohme Tohme if almost two months after his dismissal he still pretended he was representing Michael…”

    Your forgetting something June Gatlin. MJ was trying to get someone in with Tohme in September 08 how did he hold on for 10 MONTHS?
    Well let me put it this way.
    What would “Geppetto” do without “Pinocchio”?? Murray wasn’t the only puppet.

    @ Susan
    The comment
    “Barrack claims he was a “backer” for MJ for the 02 tour and wasn’t worried about putting the money upfront because it was backed by Neverland.” He/CC was co-promoter.
    But I was hoping you would explain what “backed by Neverland” meant because I don’t want to be jumping to conclusions, maybe it means something different to you than it does to me.

    I don’t think anyone in the fan community trusts Tohme.

    Also if you know as i don’t think any1 does. Michael had no legal council in contract. Where was Peter Lopez?

    Like

  15. April 22, 2011 7:03 pm

    Chris, it took me several hours to read only one article you mentioned:
    http://mjandjustice4some.blogspot.com/2010/09/rhymes-with-snitch-dr-tohme-tohme.html

    It is a very good job from Justiceforsome blog with a lot of links which I diligently followed. I sincerely thank you and Justiceforsome with all this information – it provides a perfect background for further examination of the AEG situation. Now I more or less know who is who in all this mess.

    There is a little problem of course with sources like Patrick Allocco, head of AllGoodEntertainment, on whom we have to rely here – one day he tries to do business with Tohme by sending him (?) a proposal for a tribute concert with the Jackson family and a few days later speaks critically of Tohme in an interview with Geraldo. This way you never know whether to believe him or not.

    But what I like about even such unreliable sources is that you inevitably get some small but important details from their accounts.

    For example, to Roger Friedman Tohme Tohme said Michael was fit to do 50 or even 100 shows:

    “He was charming in our conversation. He said, “If you play it right, you will be the first one to know everything about Michael Jackson.” I said, thanks, I already was. He said that Michael is in great shape and could easily do 50 shows. “He could do a hundred.” http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2009/03/16/actor-political-activist-ron-silver-dies/#2

    But in Geraldo’s interview Patrick Allocco said about Tohme that he was aware of Michael’s “addiction to drugs” (there were no heavy drugs and propofol does not give physical addiction!) and that Tohme allegedly confided in him and made it out flatly that “he felt Michael would not make one day in London”.

    If he felt Michael would not make one day in London why did he sign him for 50 shows then?

    This statement fits very well with my understanding of what Tohme and AEG envisaged for Michael and the shows – their official mantra was that everything was fine but in reality they never wanted those concerts at all – Michael’s successful comeback was not in their plans.

    They were very well off with tickets sold for 50 shows. In case they were cancelled, they would still retain a huge revenue as the majority of Michael’s fans would surely keep the tickets as a memo while secondary tickets (sold for hundreds or thousands) were not refundable at all, plus they had the cancellation insurance paid by MJ, plus his advances paid back too, plus numerous other opportunities like Michael’s assets or rights to everything he earned which arise for them out of their “contract”.

    Geraldo’s video is very tale-telling in this respect – basically they are right when they say that “the preparations were deeply flawed” – only all of them make the crucial mistake of misplacing the blame for it from the organizers onto Michael and focus on Michael’s health instead of focusing on AEG’s negligence. In reality this poor preparation work was most probably the intention of the organizers from the very start – and they just used Michael as a scapegoat on whose shoulders they wanted to place all the blame for the possible failure.

    It was a kind of a vicious circle in which they involved Michael – he didn’t sleep well (and we know it), but if the preparations had gone properly and the shows had been scheduled with at least several days between them (it was no problem to arrange that) and if there had been no crazy race to start them ealier than planned (three weeks before the date in their “contract”) and if hadn’t had to dance and sing for 4 hours at every rehearsal – things would have gone much smoother for him and the outcome would have been absolutely different.

    But they chose to build enormous and unnecessary pressure around Michael which made him nervous and only worsened his problem with sleep so that he needed more medical help – but all he had was ignorant, negligent and obedient Dr. Murray while even the unscrupulous but qualified Dr. Klein was pushed aside.

    It is a little too early to speak about all this – but it seems to me that we are on the right track as small bits and pieces surprisingly fit in.

    Tohme, for example, makes an amazing revelation at one point – he says that Michael danced and sang for 4 hours every day, though “even an athlete won’t be able to do that”. Especially if there was absolutely no need to do it at a rehearsal stage!

    “Tohme said that the insurance company backing AEG insisted the singer undergo a rigorous physical before they signed off on the deal and that he was in top shape. “
    “To be able to perform, the AEG had to get insurance and he had a 4-hour physical by a doctor chosen by the insurance company,” he said. “For a guy to go on and dance for 4 hours, not even an athlete can do that, and he was doing this at rehearsal every day.”
    http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/item_ykvjxAaXt6soydWEGINSxJ/1

    Or Patrick Allocco, for example, says what Tohme real task was:

    “Tohme was charged with one thing – and that’s to bring money into Colony Capital to recover the debt they had on Neverland and that Tohme used AEG as a tool to do that”.

    And how you like the unashamed revelation from Tohme that he fired everyone to control Michael single-handedly:

    “One of the first things Tohme, an avowed music business neophyte, said he did when he took over was to fire many members of Jackson’s staff, including security guards, in order to build a fence around the singer and protect him from nameless others who wanted to control the pop star’s finances http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1615320/michael-jackson-adviser-breaks-silence.jhtml

    Frankly, I was terrified to learn of his plans for the Sony/ATV catalog:

    “He also said he was working to renegotiate the terms of some of Jackson’s main assets, including the singer’s share of the very lucrative Sony-ATV Music Publishing Catalog” http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1615320/michael-jackson-adviser-breaks-silence.jhtml

    And those $5,5 mln. which he returned to the Estate? I thought he did it voluntarily and many readers commended him on his “honesty” (you should read those elated praises for him!) but the text below suggests something different – the money was “recovered” from Tohme by the Estate. Tohme refuted it but I am not prepared to believe a single word of his:

    “Dr. Tohme Tohme responded to an inquiry from The Associated Press about documents in which administrators of the estate said they had recovered $5.5 million and substantial amounts of personal property from an unnamed former financial adviser.
    “It was not recovered,” he said. “I had the money and I gave it to them. It was a secret between Michael and me.”

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/25/michael-jackson-advisor-t_n_244831.html

    The video of Geraldo’s interview I mentioned earlier is full of grave distortions and lack of perspective – and this is understandable as it was made soon after Michael’s death when none of all knew what to think or believe, but if we keep in mind the information we’ve accumulated by now, many of the things they talk of will be seen in a totally different light.

    One day we must discuss it in detail, but at the moment let me point out just one more thing – I thought John Branca was fired but Randy Taraborrelli says that it was Branca who left Michael as he could no longer stand all those shady creatures around him whom he was constantly attracting:

    No wonder that Michael said to Gatlin that he desperately wanted Tohme to be replaced by someone whom he could trust – apparently thinking of Frank Dileo as his personal manager and John Branca as his attorney (so much for the words attributed to Katherine Jackson about John Branca being a “thief” and Michael being “worried about him”). She said that Michael was terrified by Tohme:

    Gatlin says, “He was afraid of who this man is, afraid of whatever this man may be capable of doing… He had taken over Michael’s complete life.” The advisor has handed over the tapes she recorded of phone conversations with Jackson in September 2008 to NBC News in America.

    On the tapes, the King of Pop can be heard telling Gatlin, “This guy, he just… has ways about him… There’s a 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”.

    “I don’t like it. I wanna get somebody in there with him that I know and can trust. I don’t know what’s in my accounts.”

    Gatlin says, “Michael said, ‘He’s (Tohme) mean, he’s trying to keep me and separate me from everybody and everything that I love.”

    Jackson severed ties with Tohme in May (09) after learning his manager had threatened the boss of a California auction house over memorabilia items that were set to go under the hammer.

    After rehiring svengali Frank DiLeo to look after his affairs, Jackson sent a letter to all business associates, in which he insisted, “Dr. Tohme Tohme is no longer authorized to represent me.”

    But, Tohme spoke on behalf of Jackson hours after he died and conducted an interview with NBC two weeks after the tragedy in June (09), when he stated, “I’m still in charge of Michael Jackson’s business until otherwise I am informed not to do so (sic).”

    http://www.contactmusic.com/news.nsf/story/jackson-tapes-put-manager-dr-tohme-tohme-in-the-spotlight_1113819

    It seems it wasn’t easy for Michael to get rid of Tohme Tohme if almost two months after his dismissal he still pretended he was representing Michael…

    Yes, one day we should look into Tohme Tohme in full earnest.

    Like

  16. April 22, 2011 12:14 pm

    I will post this link for the article as it is very well done (Must read Freidman’s article) also read the comment by Tstorm about Tohme’s new home. http://mjandjustice4some.blogspot.com/2010/09/rhymes-with-snitch-dr-tohme-tohme.html

    Chris, I’ve only just started reading the article you’ve recommended, but the very first paragraphs brought me to a discovery which I cannot resist sharing with you and everyone. Here is the story:

    On the anniversary of Michael’s birthday (sorry for the earlier mistake), August 29, 2009 TMZ published a fake letter from Frank Dileo with a forged signature (again!) which Frank Dileo had never seen or known what it was all about.

    Roger Friedman said about it: http://www.showbiz411.com/2009/08/29/20090829tmz-michael-jackson-frank-dileo-patrick-alloco

    “The site has published a letter purportedly from Frank DiLeo, Michael’s manager, instructing anyone who wants to produce a Jackson tribute concert to come through him. The letter bears a scrawled, indeciperable signature and the very funny sentence “Frank Dileo is the’manager of Michael Jackson (deceased)’in life and in death.”

    The problem is, DiLeo tells me it’s not his letter, nor is it his signature. He didn’t write it, and has no idea who some of the people are who are named in the letter including a Fadi Rashed. “I’ve never heard of Fadi Rashed,” says DiLeo, and a Google search doesn’t help either.

    DiLeo immediately called TMZ’s Harvey Levin, but Levin has yet to remove the fake correspondence.

    Who wrote this piece of fiction?

    Well, yours truly received an email post-haste from publicist Ren Gravatt, who represents Patrick Alloco, of AllGood Entertainment in New Jersey. Alloco, in business officially and unofficially with a group that wants a piece of Jackson’s estate, claims to be suing DiLeo over Jackson family concerts that were supposedly to take place in Texas.

    Gravatt was all too quick to send me the TMZ posting with this added information: “This latest expose piece on Frank DiLeo and his partner, Mark Lamicka, spells out the same sort of dubious behavior that has landed Mr. DiLeo and his company in Federal Court with AllGood Entertainment.”

    The only problem with that last assertion, of course, is that DiLeo has never been served, and is not in federal court with AllGood Entertainment.

    Strangely enough, Alloco is still trying to sue everyone connected with Michael Jackson over his alleged concert scheme, even through the singer is dead.

    The theory behind this latest move ‘especially after Gravatt’s email’is that Alloco and his group’including Joseph Jackson, Leonard Rowe, and Tohme Tohme‘may have fabricated the letter to make DiLeo look bad.

    Isn’t it interesting that Tohme Tohme’s name is associated with a forged signature again – this time Frank Dileo’s?

    And that the subject of this slander is the man who could have told us a lot about Tohme (in court) if he suddenly hadn’t been taken gravely ill?

    Roger Friedman says that “DiLeo immediately called TMZ’s Harvey Levin, but Levin has yet to remove the fake correspondence.”
    So TMZ was to immediately remove that fake correspondence?

    Interesting again, because some 8 months after they published it, it is still there together with a slanderous cover story. By today it has already drawn some 717 critical comments many of which are about “leeches” around Michael Jackson (meaning Frank Dileo naturally, as he is the main target of this article).

    Its title is “Beware of People Pushing the MJ Tribute Show” and it is still doing it dirty job against Frank Dileo: http://www.tmz.com/2009/08/29/michael-jackson-tribute-concery-frank-dileo-mark-lamicka/#comments-anchor

    Are you still in doubt that Frank Dileo – one of the key witnesses in the Murray/AEG case – was doomed to be covered with dirt first and then driven to a hospital bed with a heart attack where he was given a double anesthesia after which he cannot wake up? The more I read about the whole thing the less doubt I have…

    Like

  17. Chris permalink
    April 22, 2011 11:38 am

    @ Lynande

    I know my point is why go with AEG when there were more profitable options in the same city? The Randy Phillips chasing mj story is what they would say yet it was Barrack contacting Anshutz that got ball rolling. PPL can say what they want about Michael but there was never a doubt in my mind MJ would sell out his concerts, so why not a bigger venue? As I said b4 u have to assume money being paid is the same but I dont see why wembley ppl wouldn’t cos they needed it as much as he did if not more.

    @ Susan
    I can’t honestly say I know 100% when Branca was hired regarding riot act, this was apparently the timeline from Katherine’s AEG lawsuit. I doubt that info will become public when that kicks off in full but it would probably have different dates to what we already know to make things more confusing.
    Vindicatemj said to you.
    “I know that, that is why I am deeply dissatisfied with the way her lawyers are handling that lawsuit against AEG.”
    The reason Katherine and her lawyers aren’t going all out attack is the same reason Murray’s trial isn’t murder 1. You can’t prove anything without reasonable doubt therefore they risk no justice so they are playing it safe. That’s why I say it needs a federal investigation.
    Can some1 tell me the story of the missing surveilance tape from the night Michael passed? I don’t know the truth of it.

    Like

  18. Susan62509 permalink
    April 22, 2011 2:17 am

    Chris & VindicateMJ:

    Branca was rehired by MJ early June 2009.
    This information comes from Branca’s declaration in the Estate vs Melissa Johnson (HTWF)
    lawsuit.

    MJ got the “riot act” from AEG on June 20, 2009.
    This information comes from Kenny Ortega’s testimony on day 1 of the preliminary hearing.
    *************
    At first I was under the impression Branca was rehired 2 weeks prior to MJ’s death from what I had read until I read his declaration.

    I don’t trust Tohme as far as I can throw him.

    Like

  19. lynande51 permalink
    April 22, 2011 1:20 am

    @ Chris, The one thing I can answer is the reason for the O2 Arena versus Wembley Stadium. AEG owns the O2 arena and not Wembley Stadium. They would nto have had any out of pocket expenses for the venue so to speak because they own it no rent to pay.
    http://aegworldwide.com/facilities/arenas/arenas

    Like

  20. Chris permalink
    April 22, 2011 12:32 am

    @ Susan

    “Colony had its own plan for a MJ comeback, completely different from the AEG plan. Colony wanted MJ to have a permanent residence at a casino in Las Vegas (up to 180 shows a year) or a show like “Love”, the Beatles themed Cirque du Soleil show (20-30 shows a year).”

    I also heard about Las Vegas however I also heard MJ say he didn’t want to end up like Elvis or James Brown and doing this into his latter years.
    This is why I believe Barrack contacted AEG as MJ didnt want that and wasn’t prepard to work like that for 3 years which is ironic and I will explain why.
    In that video I showed in earlier comment it shows Randy Phillips saying he could be in London so long he could register for a British passport. Minimum of 5 years. However he said as a joke; though it’s obvious that MJ was to be there longer than 10 shows.

    Up to 180 shows a year. 50 x 4(Europe Australia America and Japan) = 200 shows. Also Mumbai and Paris have also been mentioned.
    I not sure if I can find it but my dad photocopied an article which said MJ debt blah blah blah but had a interesting point that in the gap between his Endland stints wasn’t gunna be a rest bite at all.
    According to the article he was going to Australia for a leg of the tour as it is summer there when it’s England’s winter. So, a 50 year old MJ was expected to travel round the world with the odd few days off for the best part of 3/4 of the year performing. Impossible.

    That’s not all, again unfortunately the article is no longer visible don’t ask me why it was a statement from the people who made the fancy tickets on their website. Anyway…
    The guy who owned the company said the following..
    “We are honoured we have been chosen to make the tickets for Michael Jacksons World Tour.” This statement was made on the morning MJ died. I’m desperatly looking for the people who made the special tickets and to get in contact with them to see if they can confirm this but I’m strugglling! Susan or any1 any help would be greatfully accepted.

    Also you mentioned the 3 year contract with Celine Dion look at this article.
    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article5854735.ece

    This article is also interesting http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/music/article5854753.ece

    This concert series was Barracks plan just over continents not a residency. I believe MJ wanted to do 10 in each area but when AEG/Barrack saw the reaction they went up to 50. This article says they would add an extra 10 dates to the original 10 but also reveals an important stat.
    “The news comes after nearly a million people registered for tickets – enough to fill the 20,000-capacity O2 arena at the former Millennium Dome 50 times over.”
    http://www.mirror.co.uk/celebs/news/2009/03/06/michael-jackson-adds-10-more-dates-to-comeback-tour-115875-21177334/

    Now we know where the 50 came from.

    And this is something I been wanting to gripe about for ALONG TIME B4 MJ DIED.

    Wembley Stadium is 100’s of millions in debt why did Michael agree to work with AEG who had the 02 arena that held a mere 20,000 fans where as Wembley stadium holds 80,000 plus?
    Well as we found out it was Barrack not MJ who contacted AEG but lets put that aside for a second and assume he thought his 500 million business product was unable to sell out stadiums anymore (like the moron press were saying infact the press said he would struggle to sell out 1 show at 02 LOL).

    Lets do some maths: 20,000 x 10 =200,000 >> This has been reported to make MJ 50 million in 10 shows.
    So lets do same for Wembley. 80,000 x 10 =800,000 >>>Therefore if MJ did 10 shows at Wembley Stadium would of made 200 million in 10 shows (assuming pay is same of course) 4 times more than 02 and also mean 10 shows at Wembley Stadium would make the same as 40 at 02. Susan this isn’t directed at you.
    ANY! who can explain to me this logic I would surely appreciate it. I’m English I big football fan, work quite often next door to Wembley Stadium.

    The people who made the new stadium got heavily critised because it has come with 800 million debt (not sure what it is now but still is in debt) it would of benerfited both parties if they had been partnered together as the FA (people who made stadium) are getting battered to this day because fans are the ones paying off the debt.
    Michael would of easily wiped away some of his/their debt but for some reason Barrack didn’t see it that way. Fool! But yet if he is a fool how is he a business billionaire? (I will give you link next time).

    Susan are you aware that the good friend of MJ’s made a bid for Michaels 50% share of the ATV catalog a month after his death?

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/20/business/20fund.html

    How many times did MJ say he would never sell his catalogue?

    There’s more but that will do for now.

    Like

  21. Chris permalink
    April 21, 2011 10:52 pm

    @ Susan

    LOL we got alot to get through.

    “My guess is an automobile depreciates and his art collection was too personal to sacrifice. Loan companies usually want solid assets that are equal to if not more than the value of the loan amount.”

    I said in my last comment to Vindicatemj look at the article about Tohme on the blog and it has a link to a interview with Tohme.
    Here is a quote from it.

    “We had a certain period of time to empty Neverland last year,” Tohme said. “I was looking for a place for storage, a place to dump a lot of stuff like cars. I called Julien’s and asked if they could do it, come pick it up.” He says an auction could only go through with Jackson’s approval.
    Read it in full and comeback to me what ya think of Tohme’s dealings incredible really.
    I agree that they were maybe to personal to MJ to put as collateral but then again would I want to lose art and cars than an asset that I need to cover my loans? Also the Mijac catalog is obviously personal value to him too.

    “My guess is the “secret stash” that Tohme was holding was part of that loan money from Colony to MJ. MJ had found his dream home in Las Vegas and needed to save for a down payment.”

    Well I don’t know much about this dream home but why not put 5.5 million towards it and pay the rest off like the rest of us have to via mortgage? After all he was supposed to get paid by AEG in installments. The money should be there if deal is done fair. Maybe he wasn’t ready to buy and decided to leave in bank to get interest on it but that still doesn’t explain why did Tohme take so long to give it back after his death. He claims he’s owed money yet says he was an unpaid advisor. (1 of many titles he gives himself).
    Maybe this had somethin to do with it.
    “Tohme purchased a house on July 14 2009 , at the cost of 5.8 Million .”

    http://mjandjustice4some.blogspot.com/2010/09/rhymes-with-snitch-dr-tohme-tohme.html Tstorms comment.
    Was there more in Tohme’s..sorry I meant Mj’s “secret stash”. LOL I couldn’t help myself.

    “I understood the statement “taking control of personal finances” to just be an expression implying how Colony helped MJ with his Fortress loan.”

    Well the reason it struck a cord with me was that I have seen the exact same sentence used to describe Tohme’s managing Mj’s private finances. Maybe you are right I not a big believer in coincidences and theres plenty of them in this case.

    Like

  22. April 21, 2011 9:15 pm

    “There is something interesting that mjandjustice4somesblog pointed out. According to AEG lawsuit MJ had “the riot act” read to him on June 18th less than 24 hours before that MJ had rehired John Branca!
    I believe the same as the blogger that Branca was brought in by MJ to either 1 get back to original agreement of 10 shows and to delay concert start.
    Or 2 to get MJ out of this unfavourable contract and take AEG to court. This is only my belief but when AEG realised MJ brought back Branca I think they knew they were in trouble but before Branca could get into it MJ was dead less than 7 days later. So AEG went from gainning billion dollar assets or 500 million a year on mj to losing that and posiibly done for fraud. Ever heard of cutting your loses?”

    Chris, it seems that you, mjandjustice4some and me are thinking along the same lines.

    I didn’t know about the exact timing of the “riot act” and rehiring Branca but knew he was retained “shortly” before Michael’s death. Now that you mentioned this detail the whole picture is becoming even clearer. Yes, Michael did take action immediately after being confronted with that “riot act” (and it shows to us that Michael wanted to give AEG a fight – so forget all that talk about a suicide) and Branca would have immediately spotted all those “inconsistencies” in the AEG contract papers (probably he did).

    Michael wouldn’t have cancelled the shows of course as he loved his fans too much for that, but he surely expected Branca to set things straight for him while he went on preparing for the shows – reconsider the terms of the “contract” or sign a proper contract with proper terms, as well as look into Michael’s finances, etc.

    And this left AEG with very little time to act. Their whole plan was falling apart – if Branca had sorted things out, the number of concerts could have been reduced, their case could have gone to court and all those frauds behind the contract could have been exposed. They were risking their reputation, future and a lot of money and it was a MOTIVE and a very strong one at that.

    That is why I have already said that AEG should take special care that nothing happens to Branca now, because if some little accident takes place here – like for example, double anesthesia given to Frank Dileo for some reason – it will be just the final touch and AEG will tie a rope around their throat with their own hands.

    We are closely watching that everything should be okay to John Branca, Karen Faye and other key people in this case……

    P.S. And thank you for the article about Tohme. It is too late here to read it now, but tomorrow I surely will.

    Like

  23. Chris permalink
    April 21, 2011 8:32 pm

    @ vindicatemj

    OK where to start.

    “Then AEG could have demanded termination of the contract and their scenario could have been triggered off. In fact this is what Randy Phillips did actually say to Michael – if he didn’t come to the next rehearsal AEG would plug it off.
    So AEG already started acting on their plan…”

    There is something interesting that mjandjustice4somesblog (which i’m using quite a bit of info from as it has been investigating for some time and uses sources and is very much respected in fan community) pointed out.

    According to AEG lawsuit MJ had “the riot act” read to him on June 18th less than 24 hours before that MJ had rehired John Branca!

    Now with all due respect vindicatemj if you could find all these holes in this contract what would Branca do to it?
    I believe the same as the blogger that Branca was brought in by MJ to either 1 get back to original agreement of 10 shows and to delay concert start.
    Or 2 to get MJ out of this unfavourable contract and take AEG to court. This is only my belief but when AEG realised MJ brought back Branca I think they knew they were in trouble but before Branca could get into it MJ was dead less than 7 days later. So AEG went from gainning billion dollar assets or 500 million a year on mj to losing that and posiibly done for fraud. Ever heard of cutting your loses?

    AS for Tohme instead of taking tidbits from the blog I will post this link for the article as it is very well done (Must read Freidman’s article) also read the comment by Tstorm about Tohme’s new home.
    http://mjandjustice4some.blogspot.com/2010/09/rhymes-with-snitch-dr-tohme-tohme.html

    Also regarding Tohme you said that MJ company may of had no assets in it well I can’t be sure and can only speculate but if Tohme was in control of everything MJ couldn’t he move in or out assets of MJ’s into that company? After all he claimed to be director of it.

    “What Barrack saw was not a broken genius, or even a just-off-the-hook child molester, but a serious investment opportunity. “You are talking about a guy who could make $500 million a year if he puts his mind to it,” Barrack said recently. “There are very few individual artists who are multibillion-dollar businesses. And he is one.”

    That is the quote that stands out to me from that article I provided it shows there intent and exactly what he thought of Michael Jackson. A business entity not a human being. Maybe sum1 should of reminded AEG and Colony Capital that yes MJ was big business but he wasn’t A business somewhere they got lost with greed.

    Like

  24. Chris permalink
    April 21, 2011 2:07 pm

    @ Susan
    Lol you and vindicate have said so much I want to respond to but I don’t want to rush responses and make mistakes. I will try answer and ask certain things now in next comments even though I’m in danger of trolling lol.
    I would like to say as I didn’t word it correctly last time.
    I don’t look for murderers as such, I am looking at the behaviour of Tohme Randy Phillips and Tom Barrack and if there is “questionable or suspicious activity” I challenge it and say well why is Randy keeping contract confidential? Why is he telling different stories concerning the same event? What reason has he for this?
    I guess instead of solving a murder as some seem to think they can I ask is there enough questionable activity to warrant a federal investigation into the suspicious activity as we can only find out so much and have to assume the rest. IMO there is.

    Like

  25. Susan62509 permalink
    April 21, 2011 1:49 pm

    Chris:
    I need to make a correction.

    Colony Capital/Barrack paid $22.5 for Neverland and MJ borrowed an additional $12.5 million.

    Barrack claims he was a “backer” for MJ for the 02 tour and wasn’t worried about putting the money upfront because it was backed by Neverland.

    Like

  26. Susan62509 permalink
    April 21, 2011 8:56 am

    Chris:

    I read the link you posted regarding Colony Capital. I understood the statement “taking control of personal finances” to just be an expression implying how Colony helped MJ with his Fortress loan.

    I researched everything I could on Colony Capital/Thomas Barrack in summer of 2009.

    Barrack was being impacted by the recession in the real estate market and took a huge loss in 2008. He needed a way to recoup his losses so he talked with MJ knowing his financial condition & also a way MJ could pay him back.

    I had saved this paragraph below:

    “Colony had its own plan for a MJ comeback, completely different from the AEG plan. Colony wanted MJ to have a permanent residence at a casino in Las Vegas (up to 180 shows a year) or a show like “Love”, the Beatles themed Cirque du Soleil show (20-30 shows a year).”

    In interviews w/Celine Dion (and now on videos) she confirms that MJ came to see her at Caesar’s Palace where she was performing, to discuss the times, days, # of shows, trials and tribulations of performing under a 3 year contract in Las Vegas. This is why MJ was house shopping in Vegas at that time and found his dream home but didn’t have money to purchase it.

    Somehow, someway, during this time plans changed & Barrack introduced Randy Phillips, AEG, to MJ. Whether it was due to the financial outcome, 02 tour paying more or what, I don’t know. Steve Wynn has built 5 mega resorts in Vegas. Barrack, Phillips, MJ, Wynn, later Ortega would meet at Steve’s “Wynn Resort” for lunches & dinners. MJ often took Blanket with him. After AEG got into the picture, Barrack was no longer in the discussions.

    When Cirque de Soleil announced their MJ show last year, I read that Colony Capital held a small part with the Estate in getting this launched. I’m assuming that “small part” was financially.

    I’ve never read nor seen a contract between MJ and Colony.

    Like

  27. Susan62509 permalink
    April 21, 2011 8:29 am

    Chris:
    Not to make each comment too long, I’m dividing them into separate comments.

    Colony Capital/Thomas Barrack. After MJ died, I read everything I could about his finances to figure out why he was in so much debt. I got my information from The Wall Street Journal, Fortune Magazine, Money Magazine, etc. This is a brief outline of what I found:

    Aug 2007 – MJ removed his property from Neverland. Some to be stored & some to be auctioned. Tohme contracted with Julien’s & auction to take place May 2008.

    Oct. 2007 – $23 million loan on Neverland due to Financial title.

    Feb. 20, 2008 – Financial Title served loan default papers w/deadline to pay by Mar. 19, 2008 or Neverland public auction will occur on land, building & rides.

    Mar. 13, 2008 – McMillian had Fortress refiance the Financial loan.

    May 12, 2008 – Public auction cancelled. Jermaine brought in Tohme, Tohme contacted Colony . Colony Capital bought Fortress loan of $23 million. At that time MJ said he discussed with Colony regarding Neverland & other matters to focus on in the future.

    Nov 10, 2008 – MJ & Colony (joint venture) transferred title of Neverland to Sycamore Valley Ranch. Property was sold for $35 million. Colony/Barrack owns the majority of Sycamore and MJ owns a small portion. MJ also asked for a personal loan from Colony during this transaction of around $17 million on top of the sales price of Neverland. I got the $35 million figure off the Santa Barbara Assessors website before they made Neverland/Sycamore private from the public.

    My guess is the “secret stash” that Tohme was holding was part of that loan money from Colony to MJ. MJ had found his dream home in Las Vegas and needed to save for a down payment.

    Like

  28. Susan62509 permalink
    April 21, 2011 7:56 am

    Hi Chris:
    I agree with you entirely that we may have different points of view, with the bottom line we are dedicated fans of Michael. That is one reason I started commenting on this blog because I didn’t see any fighting. It’s such a pleasure to discuss different scenario’s without being personally slandered.

    You had mentioned MJ not using his Rolls Royce or art collection as collateral for the $6.2 million. My guess is an automobile depreciates and his art collection was too personal to sacrifice. Loan companies usually want solid assets that are equal to if not more than the value of the loan amount. Here’s a list of MJ’s companies:

    MJ’s intellectual properties up to 2009:

    100% ownership:
    The Michael Jackson Company LLC
    MJJ Productions Inc.
    MJJ Ventures
    Optimum productions Inc.
    MJJ Artistic Inc.
    Nation Comics Inc.
    Invincible Tours Inc.
    Triumph International Inc.
    Triumph Multimedia Inc. MJ-ATV Publishing Trust
    MJ Publishing LLC aka. MiJac Music
    New Horizon Trust I. II. and III.
    Go For Your Dream Foundation

    50% partnerships:
    Sony/ATV Music Publishing LLC
    Sycamore Valley Ranch Company LLC
    MJJ Records LLC
    World Events LLC
    MJ Licensing LLC

    Like

  29. Dialdancer permalink
    April 20, 2011 8:22 pm

    Helena & David,

    Check mailbox reference video.

    Like

  30. April 20, 2011 1:52 pm

    “makes you wonder where Tohme got that “secret stash” of MJ’s 5.5 million from”

    Chris, it makes me wonder too. That is why I will look into that AEG ‘contract’ further to see where this money could come from.

    “It was Barrack who contacted Phillip Anchutz for the tour.”
    ”this video shows with your own eyes that AEG put on there press release 10 shows”

    If I have a chance I will try to incorporate all this into my future posts about AEG based on their “contract”. You will surprised to see how much more we can learn from that contract of theirs. What I intend to do is avoid speculation and keep only to the facts I find there.

    Up till now we’ve looked only into the structure of the “contract” which allowed us to come to a conclusion that it was a fake and cut-and-paste job.

    But having this fake document in front of us is a splendid way to see now what AEG wanted to do to Michael.

    Some examples:
    – AEG turned 10 shows into 50 overnight, right? Now please compare it with the way AEG was planning to divide their money. 50 shows immediately brought them a huge sum. Considering that some tickets were sold as “secondary” (or at a much higher price that the original) this sum should have been enormous. And AEG was getting 10% out of that, while Michael still had his Production costs deducted from the balance and could be left with nothing in the end. So the more shows they sold the bigger their share was, while the production costs were only increasing (the staff was to be paid every day) and Michael’s share was being reduced as a result.

    – Everyone talks about 50 concerts instead of 10, but why don’t people pay attention to the fact that the ‘contract’ says their first leg was to begin on July 26 while AEG rescheduled it for July 8 or three weeks earlier? They knew they were not ready for the dress rehearsals! They only started auditions for dancers on May 4 or around that date! The time left was too little for making a show! And there was absolutely no need for such a hurry!

    Setting the shows for an earlier day was most probably a way to build pressure on Michael and probably break him physically and psychologically before the shows started.

    What advantages did it give them? If they had managed to do that the tour would have been probably cancelled and the contract terminated.

    In this case AEG could obtain full compensation for the tour from the insurance bought by Michael Jackson. BUT the insurance proceeds did not release Michael of the obligation to pay back his advances (according to the ‘contract’). He was to immediately return the advances given to him for 1) paying $3mln. to 2 Seas Records company 2) renting the house selected for him by AEG at a mere $100,000 a month 3) and money for producing the show – all this was to be repaid immediately. If he didn’t return at least one small portion of it within 5 business days they were to have immediate access to his Michael Jackson Company LLC.

    – I am constantly asking myself a question why Randy Phillips insisted on Michael Jackson performing at every rehearsal. Michael knew his songs so well that he could do without attending the rehearsals every day or not performing there at all. It was his obligation to provide a first-class performance and not AEG’s, so it was none of Randy Phillips’s business to insist that Michael danced and sang at every rehearsal (they had sanctions if Michael’s performance was not 1st-class).

    To some people it looks like AEG “being worried about the shows” – while to me it looks like AEG wanting to exhaust Michael BEFORE the shows in order to force him to say one day that “he was ill”, “should go to hospital” , etc.

    Then AEG could have demanded termination of the contract and their scenario could have been triggered off. In fact this is what Randy Phillips did actually say to Michael – if he didn’t come to the next rehearsal AEG would plug it off.

    So AEG already started acting on their plan…

    Like

  31. April 20, 2011 1:39 pm

    Chris, thank you very much for your very insightful comments.

    “I usually agree with you however on a few occassions you how should I put this..Sharpen your claws. LOL.”

    That is a very nice way of putting it – I was much more outspoken in this respect and said I would strangle everyone if they kept putting AEG’s guilt on a par with Sony’s. Whatever Sony did to Michael in the past is incomparable with what AEG did to him only recently. And what surprises me most is whenever I bring up AEG people reply to me about Sony! Is it intentional sidetracking or what? These are the times when I sharpen my claws…

    Though in general you are right – the past two years of vindicating Michael have turned me from a spring chicken into a sad and tired soldier with deep wounds and rough ways. Haters with their tricky methods have contributed a lot to it. I am not happy with the process either and am genuinely amazed that Michael could survive through a million much more of it and remain a wonderful human being at that. He was an angel shared with us by the Heavens.

    “a word of advice would be to take comments a little less personal”.

    If defending Michael from these vultures looks personal I can’t help it – I probably take what they did to him too close to my heart. Remember that we are investigating a murder case and all pleasantries are simply put aside here. But I will try to be as patient as I can…

    “you said you would look into Sony in due time I would ask you not to or at least not first priority. You said everyone cries Sony and no one mentions AEG (I agree). However, Colony Capital (Tom Barrack) is far more suspicious than Sony.”

    Sony isn’t my first priority – there are much more suspicious guys than them. Thank you for the article about Colony Capital, I am just collecting all those bits and pieces of information at the moment. The article is full of lies as it presents Colony Capital as a savior of Michael. I suppose that was the main idea of it all – to first present Michael’s financial situation as hopeless and make these crooks look like chivalrous and selfless guys “who came to his help”.

    Michael’s situation was not hopeless at all and wouldn’t have been difficult if it weren’t for people like Tohme by his side. By the way many Michael’s financial problems were alleviated by present-day Estate attorneys by mere negotiations and restructuring loans on better terms. They could have done it while he was alive too – if they had been by his side…

    Like

  32. April 20, 2011 11:53 am

    “I don’t know if “Power of Attorney” has different statutes in different States. My experience with it was to sign the persons name as long as you put your initials after the signature which automatically flags the attention to the reader that it was signed for by someone else with those initials.”

    Susan, I don’t know whether the rule is different in different states (I’m not from the US). But even if under a power of attorney people are allowed to put another person’s signature with their own initials following it , then if someone – for example, Tohme Tohme – put his signature for Michael Jackson on his “contract’ with AEG, he should have put his initials after that signature too.

    But there are no initials there, so no one could have legally signed it instead of Michael – therefore the signature we have on AEG’s ‘contract’ only pretends to be Michael’s and is most probably forged.

    “I wasn’t aware that book advances could be rolled over to the second book, etc. That is good to know.”

    I’ve learned about it from Ivan Hoffman’s blog which has a wealth of information on publishing and entertainment law. Here is a piece on cross-collateralization which contains this idea:

    “When a publisher and author enter into an agreement, whether for one book or a series of books, there is a clause that deals with cross-collateralization that should be negotiated. This term refers to the provision that allows the publisher to recoup, recover, any unearned advances paid the author from book 1 against royalties or monies coming due from book 2.

    To explain further, when you take out a loan, the lender often requires you to put up certain collateral to secure the loan. These are assets of some sort to which the lender can resort and ultimately sell should you not repay that loan. So as used in the publishing industry (and other entertainment-oriented industries as well), it is a mechanism whereby the publisher can resort to income due the author from other books to secure the repayment of an otherwise perhaps non-repayable amount–the advance.

    Initially, the operative contract language may vary but usually looks something like:

    “All Works covered by this agreement or any other agreement between Publisher and Author shall be considered one account and shall be accounted for jointly or collectively.” http://www.ivanhoffman.com/cross.html

    Like

  33. April 20, 2011 11:34 am

    “I would like to and definitely need to clarify something. When I make a comment with my opinion I am NOT directing it at you. Please do not take anything personally that I write because that is not my intention. I don’t believe in hurting other people in blog conversations.”

    Susan, I never thought your comments were directed personally at me. You were never offensive and never said anything that could hurt me (I hope I didn’t say anything which could hurt you either). It is some kind of misundertanding – I was talking only about AEG and nobody else but AEG.

    “The Michael Jackson Estate owns the Heal the World name, and neither Melissa Johnson nor her companies will ever be able to use Michael Jackson’s name or the Heal the World name.”

    I am really happy to hear that. Though I have tremendous respect for people who devoted their life to charity I think it is absolutely unnecessary to claim that they are in any way connected with Michael Jackson – except that spiritually all these people are like brothers and sisters to him of course.

    Melissa Johnson will hopefully go on with her charity work and I wish her every success in the work she is doing.

    Like

  34. Chris permalink
    April 20, 2011 11:10 am

    @Susan
    I was going to say yesterday but I was really tired and didn’t want to make mistake that although we have a very different point of view that doesn’t change the fact we all love MJ.

    Vindicate if you would permit me an observation sometimes you do take things personally from time to time. Now its your blog and I usually agree with you however on a few occassions you how should I put this..Sharpen your claws. LOL.
    I don’t think it is nasty or anything you just standby your opinion which is fine by me but a word of advice would be to take comments a little less personal. I also am guilty of this from time to time.

    Anyway, Susan you said something I was wondering MJs other assets e.g. his Rolls Royce is worth like 1.5 million or something if he only had 2 cover what 6.2 million why not put his Rolls and art work colllection as collateral instead of his big assets? Well I will come back 2 that.
    Also for the record I am not out to get AEG or whoever I didn’t even want to look into it but if there was any “suspicious activity” I wanted to investigate it and see if there was any proof to it.

    Vindicatemj you said you would look into Sony in due time I would ask you not to or at least not first priority. You said everyone cries Sony and knowone mentions AEG (I agree).

    However, Colony Capital (Tom Barrack) is far more suspicous than Sony.
    Tom Barracks contract with Michael I believe is going to be blow for blow Identical to AEG’s in one way that you said “the deal looks like a good deal; then you look into it and find it really isn’t”.
    I believe (yet can’t prove it until we get it) that if MJ doesn’t do the agreed clauses Barrack gets full ownership of Neverland.
    Tom Barrack had a clause that MJ must go on tour as part of the deal. Barrack came in on May 2008 Tohme came in the summer of 2008 and negotiated both AEG and Neverland deals. Colony Capital were co-producers of this is it tour.
    Another clause was if Barrack bought Neverland MJ had to get ALL of his personal belongings out in 90 days, which is what led to the auction mess. (which by the way MJ stopped, makes you wonder where Tohme got that “secret stash” of MJ’s 5.5 million from doesn’t it.) Which brings me back to Susan did MJ know what was going on with his smaller assets? Tohme had complete control apparently. Anyway…

    It was Barrack who contacted Phillip Anchutz for the tour.
    “Jackson would embark on a three-year tour of Europe and Asia before finishing in the US.”

    Read more: http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/49633,people,news,the-michael-jackson-comeback-plan-dies-aged-50-tom-barrack#ixzz1K3ZEnAku

    I didn’t see any of that in AEG “contract” and also this video (although I don’t agree with alot of it) shows with your own eyes that AEG put on there press release 10 shows and offical poster at 6:42 to 7:05.
    Yet in same video 4:51 Randy says in the original agreement MJ agreed 31 shows and put it up to 50.

    I’m gunna stop there other than to say that Frank dileo said Tohme had complete control of MJ’s finances where as this article says Colony capital had complete control of Michaels personal finances.

    http://www.propertycommunity.com/property-in-the-us/106-the-history-of-neverland-ranch-the-home-of-michael-jackson.html

    There is a very good video on youtube that shows Randy Phillips for what he is, however it is Muzikfactory2 who did it. I know a lot of ppl do not agree with her methods (I’m top of that list) however credit is due where credit is due.
    Instead of her forcing her opinions on you (last 30 ecs maybe but that it) she has put together multiple interviews with Randy Phillips something I wanted to do myself. You can judge its quality yourselves but it is self explanatory you don’t need to force opinions down some1 throat you just need to let the lying fool fall over his own tongue.

    Like

  35. Susan62509 permalink
    April 20, 2011 8:08 am

    Hi VindicateMJ:

    Wow, I enjoyed reading all your information. Thanks !!

    That “pooling” was a bad idea IMO. That’s an open invitation to problems and accountants to have a play day. lol

    I don’t know if “Power of Attorney” has different statutes in different States. My experience with it was to sign the persons name as long as you put your initials after the signature which automatically flags the attention to the reader that it was signed for by someone else with those initials. That is the procedure I’ve followed for 40 years. Also, when I was an executor, I asked my attorney how to sign the checks and he said use the deceased name and initial after the signature.

    I wasn’t aware that book advances could be rolled over to the second book, etc. That is good to know.

    Like

  36. Susan62509 permalink
    April 20, 2011 4:37 am

    VindicateMJ:
    OMG, I just read the first sentence of your latest comment. I haven’t read the rest of it yet as I wanted to post the HTWF settlement with the Estate today. I would like to and definitely need to clarify something. When I make a comment with my opinion I am NOT directing it at you. Please do not take anything personally that I write because that is not my intention. I don’t believe in hurting other people in blog conversations. I give my opinions in general. Some may agree or disagree and those that have different opinions are wonderful to read because it opens the door wider for everyone to learn including myself.

    Here’s the latest on the Estate vs HTWF:

    Statement from the Estate of Michael Jackson regarding Heal the World

    From the Estate:

    Press reports on TMZ and other media sites regarding the settlement terms between the Michael Jackson Estate and the Heal the World defendants are wrong. The Estate is taking back the Heal the World Foundation and all of the Michael Jackson trademarks it allegedly owned. The Michael Jackson Estate owns the Heal the World name, and neither Melissa Johnson nor her companies will ever be able to use Michael Jackson’s name or the Heal the World name.

    Like

  37. April 19, 2011 12:12 pm

    “To claim that AEG wanted MJ dead in order to own part of his catalogue is ludricous”.

    I am not claiming that. The only thing I am doing now is analyzing the contract and making preliminary conclusions that the contract was a cut-and–paste job and was highly unfavorable to Michael in its terms. However a good point about this ‘contract’ is that it was most probably invalid too. At this stage I am still far from making final conclusions about AEG.

    Looking at it from the point that MJ didn’t die. If MJ could not meet his deadlines to pay back part or all of the AEG upfront loans, AEG would not automatically be granted a portion of MJ’s catalogue or his companies because the they were only collateral. If MJ suddenly came up with the cash to pay AEG back in full, (even after his deadlines) by law, AEG is considered paid in full.

    The Promissory Note clearly states that if Michael did not make his monthly installment in repaying back that advance and if the situation was not corrected within 5 business days, AEG had the right to demand repayment of the full $6,2mln. advance AND/OR exercise their right on the collateral:

    “…Holder at its election, and without presentment, demand, notice of any kind, all of which are expressly waived by Maker, may declare the entire outstanding balance of principal and interest thereon immediately due and payable, together with all costs of collection, including attorney’s fees, and/or may exercise upon or enforce its rights to its Collateral, as are set forth in this Agreement.”

    “MJ had many options from his assets to sell or re-borrow against to come up with this cash. If MJ wanted to sell 1% or 2 % percent of his catlogue to Sony to pay AEG, he could. In other words, MJ was still in control of his AEG loan, not AEG.”

    It is good you are saying that.

    “No loan person/company is automatically entitled to take your title deeds, corporations, etc. and transfer ownership into their name. A loan person/company has to initiate court proceding in order to collect your assets. Again, dead or alive, AEG would never have been able to obtain MJ’s ATV catalogue or his businesses”.

    You are probably right here and one of the reasons for that is that the “contract” is most probably invalid. We also don’t know what assets the Michael Jackson Company LLC had at the time. But even if it didn’t have anything substantial to offer to AEG it doesn’t mean they didn’t want to get the company (there is still a possibility they might not have known what assets it had).

    The principal pattern of their behavior still remains the same – they wanted Michael’s company badly and their Promissory Note shows it better than anything else.

    I hope to look into the matter further and report my findings later.

    Like

  38. April 19, 2011 11:38 am

    “if MJ did not have any liquid cash to deliver upfront in order to get the 02 concert initiated then he had to rely on his non-liquid assets as collateral.
    MJ knew this. AEG was providing a loan to MJ and AEG needed to secure this loan.”

    Firstly, I am not sure that the artist is supposed to invest his own money into he shows to “get them initiated”. It is more of a Producer’s job, isn’t it?

    Secondly, Michael was entitled to an advance (and not a loan) – which is usually given without any interest and is kept by the artist until the final settlement. The same goes for writers and their contracts with publishing houses. (In case the first novel by writer was unsuccessful he can even keep the advance as it will be deducted from his 2nd novel proceeds – in case they have an agreement for several novels, of course).

    So there is nothing unusual in keeping the advance until the final settlement and NO producer or publishing house will ask for rocoupment of the advance before that.

    Even standard live performance contracts specify that artists have the right to an advance and if they haven’t received it they can even refuse to perform.

    So when AEG was giving Michael $6,2 mln it wasn’t a loan and it wasn’t an “act of mercy” on their part – Michael was entitled to an advance as any other artist is!

    And it is only probably because of the sum of that advance that AEG could ask him for a collateral – otherwise they couldn’t even ask for it.

    The fact that under that Promissory Note AEG wanted the advance to be repaid and on a monthly basis too shows that those pages were most probably attached to the Promissory Note later as the first page of the Promissory note says something different – that the advance was not to be returned until 6 months after the last show in the last leg of the Tour.

    So that Promissory Note may well be a cut-and-paste job too!

    Michael’s signatures on the last page of the Promissory Note, if you remember, came on a separate sheet of paper which could be attached to any text at all……

    Like

  39. April 19, 2011 10:58 am

    “the AEG contract was drawn up that MJ received 90% and AEG 10% of profits”

    Profit is an absolutely wrong word here. We have discussed it with you already – but I will repeat.

    Profits are something which is left after you deduct all your expenses. No matter how big a sum you get as a result of your business activity it is only after you deduct what you’ve spent on it that you can see whether you have made any profit or have zero profit or have arrived at a minus.

    In the contract AEG says that “All they collect” minus “Pool Expenses” will be “Net Profit” which is to be divided 90%-10%.

    This formula is fine – but only until you learn that the Pool expenses are solely AEG’S expenses.

    It means that after AEG deducts its expenses they happily get 10% out of the remaining sum. And it is only THEN – from the remaining 90% – that the Artist is to deduct his expenses on producing the show (and we know that all Production Costs were at the ARTIST’S expense!)

    And what if the Artist’s production expenses are HUGE?
    Then he will RECEIVE NOTHING or very little (or may even suffer losses).

    What will remain of his “90%” after that? And will anything remain of it at all?

    This AEG’s formula of dividing “profit” is a complete fiction!

    It is a fiction because while everyone thinks that “Pool” expenses are the expenses of both parties they say that “Pool” expenses are their expenses only!

    And they say it not even in their “contract”, but in a list of “definitions” which they attach to it on some unknown date, as that document does not have a date or signature on it!

    Like

  40. April 19, 2011 10:03 am

    “IMO, MJ’s signature on his Will/Trust or AEG contract does not appear to to be a problem or question to KJ.”

    This is a very surprising thing – what seems to be absolutely clear to all of us is not clear to Katherine Jackson and her lawyers – did she have a look at the “contract” and its signatures at all?

    I showed its last page with alleged Michael’s signature on it to many of my acquaintances and all of them are unanimous that it is not authentic. People practically laugh at it. And when I tell them that this is supposed to be a contract they laugh even more.

    Like

  41. April 19, 2011 9:53 am

    —-“KJ vs AEG lawsuit: KJ is only going forward with breach of contract, negligent hiring and employer responsibility against AEG. Kenny Ortega was removed from her lawsuit.”

    I know that, that is why I am deeply dissatisfied with the way her lawyers are handling that lawsuit against AEG.

    —–“KJ was provided a copy of the AEG contract via her request through the probate court. She had to sign a confidentiality agreement in order to receive it. Where did Leonard Rowe get his copy of the AEG contract for his book? How legitimate is Rowe’s contract & is it the final version?

    I don’t know where Leonard Rowe got it from – you should ask him if you can. But then how legitimate is the version published by radaronline? It is absolutely the same thing only with some clauses blacked out. The format of the “contract” is the same – it also starts as a letter and finishes with that shoddy page with some signatures on it and a hope that they will negotiate the definitive agreement in the future.

    —–“Did MJ give power of attorney to any of his managers to sign his name? Since 2002 everyone appears to question MJ’s signature.”

    Oh, my dear, when I give you a power of attorney you CANNOT sign any documents for me bu putting MY signature under the document. All you can do is put your OWN SIGNATURE there (on behalf of me). This is all the power of attorney does – it doesn’t give you the right to forge my signature. I am surprised you don’t know this basic rule.

    —–A promissory note has to be tied to a contract in order to make sense of the promissory note. The contract is the basis for the note to be written.

    It was very nice of AEG that they tied that Promissory Note to their “contract” – this is how we know that the version they are presenting to us is FINAL. The promissory note refers to that paper as the only ‘agreement’ they had.

    Like

  42. Susan62509 permalink
    April 19, 2011 6:33 am

    MJ had his assets divided into multiple companies and trusts he created. If the AEG contract was drawn up that MJ received 90% and AEG 10% of profits and MJ did not have any liquid cash to deliver upfront in order to get the 02 concert initiated then he had to rely on his non-liquid assets as collateral. MJ knew this. AEG was providing a loan to MJ and AEG needed to secure this loan. If MJ defaulted on his AEG loan, AEG would have to file a a creditors claim with the Estate to get reimbursed. Sony does not own MJ’s portion of his catalogue. To claim that AEG wanted MJ dead in order to own part of his catalogue is ludricous.

    Looking at it from the point that MJ didn’t die. If MJ could not meet his deadlines to pay back part or all of the AEG upfront loans, AEG would not automatically be granted a portion of MJ’s catalogue or his companies because the they were only collateral. If MJ suddenly came up with the cash to pay AEG back in full, (even after his deadlines) by law, AEG is considered paid in full. MJ had many options from his assets to sell or re-borrow against to come up with this cash. If MJ wanted to sell 1% or 2 % percent of his catlogue to Sony to pay AEG, he could. In other words, MJ was still in control of his AEG loan, not AEG. No loan person/company is automatically entitled to take your title deeds, corporations, etc. and transfer ownership into their name. A loan person/company has to initiate court proceding in order to collect your assets. Again, dead or alive, AEG would never have been able to obtain MJ’s ATV catalogue or his businesses.

    Like

  43. Susan62509 permalink
    April 19, 2011 5:21 am

    Probate law states every person named in a Will/Trust is to receive a copy of it.

    Katherine never disputed the validity of MJ’s Will, Joe did. KJ disputed the executors position/title and wanted to be included as such. Streisand recommended she she drop her complaint & she did.

    Prosecutors in CM’s trial cannot be retained KJ as they are paid by the taxpayers in the State of California. IMO, MJ’s signature on his Will/Trust or AEG contract does not appear to to be a problem or question to KJ.

    Brian Oxman’s license was suspended the first week of April 2011 for 3 years and his wifes for 2 years. KJ cannot identify the difference between a ligitimate and honest attorney vs the scoundrels she & Joe have been surrounded by for years. Sometimes people select their attorney by what they want to hear and side with them only.

    Like

  44. Susan62509 permalink
    April 19, 2011 5:15 am

    KJ vs AEG lawsuit: KJ is only going forward with breach of contract, negligent hiring and employer responsibility against AEG. Kenny Ortega was removed from her lawsuit.

    KJ was provided a copy of the AEG contract via her request through the probate court. She had to sign a confidentiality agreement in order to receive it. Where did Leonard Rowe get his copy of the AEG contract for his book? How legitimate is Rowe’s contract & is it the final version?

    Did MJ give power of attorney to any of his managers to sign his name? Since 2002 everyone appears to question MJ’s signature.

    A promissory note has to be tied to a contract in order to make sense of the promissory note. The contract is the basis for the note to be written.

    Like

  45. okunuga permalink
    April 15, 2011 7:29 pm

    i have this feelling that KJ is going to loose her case against AEG unless she get rid of people like brian oxman and stop listening to other leeches like howard mann,trent jackson her primary care giver and her husband joe and alligned herself to the Estate attny or get new quality lawyers.

    Like

  46. April 15, 2011 5:50 pm

    When I first saw the “notice” provisions of this “contract” in Rowe’s book, without even reading the “contract” I knew something was not right. No notice whatsoever to the “artist” Michael Jackson who signed for himself? All notice provisions to the “artist” Michael Jackson and to “artistco” (the company) are to go to Tohme with Michael’s forged signature appearing for the company? With a copy to Dennis Hawk, Tohme’s attorney? If Tohme had authority to bind the company, then why didn’t he sign for the company? After I got over my shock at seeing this slop (and thinking perhaps the “forged” signature was actually a signature “stamp”), and then really reading Rowe’s book (which I’m not quoting as expert on the subject), I came to conclude this was preliminary. But now, a year later, after reading so much more on the relationship between and amongst, Tohme, MJ, Phillips, AEG, et al., and reading your excellent dissection of this “contract”, I have come to see this is no innocent preliminary version of anything. It was a concerted attempt on AEG/Phillips’/Tohme’s part to cover their backsides in case anything “went wrong”; to be sure they never lost a dime and all responsibility fell back on Michael. As to the forged signature, IMO someone would have to take initiative to have an expert analyze it. Sounds odd because it’s blatantly so obvious, but also odd is that obviously no one in the family is challenging it.

    Has a document from the Sec’y of State ever come to light listing Tohme Tohme as a manager or member of Michael Jackson Company LLC? Was his name ever on anything official stating his relationship with this LLC?

    Like

  47. April 15, 2011 5:12 pm

    “You and kaarin22 suggested using a graphology analysis to verify the signature on this document. I would have thought that would have the first thing done for this document and the highly debated 2002 Will and Trust.”

    Dial, I think that the Will was readily available to Katherine Jackson while the so-called “contract” wasn’t shown to her until the order of the judge – and it wasn’t provided to her by AEG due to that confidentiality clause which the Estate attorneys also had to observe.

    This was probably one of the reasons why Katherine got alienated from the Estate attorneys (if this is indeed the case). Instead of consulting them as truly professional attorneys she surrounds herself with some highly suspicious guys to whose advice she evidently listens to. I don’t think these people are reliable at all, and even if she consulted them about that fake signature, only God knows what they could tell her.

    In her place I would find several totally independent forensic graphology experts (with a very good reputation too) and submit to them those signatures, never saying that they belonged to Michael Jackson – this way she has better chances to get a true result. Probably the prosecutors currently involved in Murray’s case can help (?)

    Like

  48. Dialdancer permalink
    April 15, 2011 4:40 pm

    Helena,

    Thank you, I have not been able to follow this as I would like so my information on who, when and what is very stretchy. You and kaarin22 suggested using a graphology analysis to verify the signature on this document. I would have thought that would have the first thing done for this document and the highly debated 2002 Will and Trust. What are the chances we will even see what were the final documents. They could not have gone on with arranging the concert, promotion and ticket selling without one could they?

    Like

  49. April 15, 2011 2:02 pm

    “Though this analysis may prove the letter/promissory note was not binding, the point is, is it being taken as one by the courts?”

    I am no lawyer, so I cannot answer this question. However one thing I know for sure – if one of Michael’s signatures is found forged this will annul or make the whole contract void automatically.

    Instead of doing funny business with Mann and other suspicious creatures I would suggest to Katherine Jackson and other people in the family that they should submit that signature to a graphology analysis.

    Forging signatures is illegal, and if the case is proven the family does not even need to go into costly litigation with AEG in my opinion.

    P.S. Cut-and-paste contracts are also illegal, and this contract does produce the impression of a compilation job.

    However the promissory note may or may not be a cut-and-paste job. If it is proven genuine I suspect it may be effective on its own – without any contract attached to it, same as any promissory note you give for a loan taken from another person, bank, etc. So the situation with the promissory note seems to be a more serious one.

    Like

  50. Anne permalink
    April 15, 2011 1:46 pm

    MJ did not even accept, sign or agree to this cut & past parody of document because, simply, he never saw it in its “complete” form IMO in the first place….We can only speculate forever what he personally would have done if this had been the case……I really like to hear Frank Dileo’s or John Branca’s opinion to all of this and if they would ever consider something like that document for any client they have ever had in their careers as entertainment lawyers or managers…..

    Like

  51. Deborah Ffrench permalink
    April 15, 2011 1:41 pm

    Hi Vindicate,

    Though this analysis may prove the letter/promissory note was not binding, the point is, is it being taken as one by the courts?

    Like

  52. April 15, 2011 1:10 pm

    Re signatures.Lookingn at the 3 signatures on the last page of Letter of Intent the left side MJ signature does not fit.MJ´s signatures have 3 up-down strokes (in some the midddle is shorter than the ohters)
    The forged(?) signarure has these strokes as well, but they lack the grace and fluidity of the genuine srokes,all have a slight bend to the right ,going downward.I am not a graphologist.Could one be cosulted? There are other diffences as well, but I´ll not go into those.

    Like

  53. April 15, 2011 11:15 am

    “Do you think the family got a copy of the final contract?”

    Dial, yes, of course Katherine Jackson has a copy of this paper (I cannot seriously call it a contract and a final one at that). Katherine was provided with a copy of it by order of the judge.

    “Is that why the law suit against them was called off by Katherine or has it been called off? Media keeps changing the story.”

    I think Katherine has called off her suit against Kenny Ortega and some points of the suit were not supported by the judge. I am no lawyer and may be totally wrong but her lawsuit seemed to me rather weak and not very professional-looking. They could have focused on other issues than those which were selected for the lawsuit.

    Like

  54. Dialdancer permalink
    April 15, 2011 5:25 am

    Helena,

    Do you think the family got a copy of the final contract? Is that why the law suit against them was called off by Katherine or has it been called off? Media keeps changing the story.

    Like

Trackbacks

  1. « L’accord » de AEG : Truquage du début à la fin (1) « "Mon reflet dans le miroir… c’est toi" (Rumi)- Carma
  2. Conrad Murray and AEG in Michael Jackson’s life « Vindicating Michael

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

%d bloggers like this: