Mhm, was ich nur immer nich kapiere: Wenn diese Idioten immer als Lügner entlarvt werden, warum wird dann nicht mal kräftig zurückgeklagt? Und wenn es tatsächlich zu diesem Fall kommt, können wir die Platte für dieses Jahr knicken...
// Klagen - Sammelthread //
-
-
war auch schon mein gedanke...:hm
sieht für mich echt nimmer nach zufall aus, dass sowas immer dann anläuft, wenn bei mike was neues auf dem plan steht...
es is zum
-
Aber leider gibt es immer noch Menschen, die nicht an die "Conspiracy" glauben.
-
Datum ist ja wirklich clever gewählt

Aber meiner Meinung nach wird diese Klage, wie sämtliche zuvor, im Sand versinken

-
Mhm, was ich nur immer nich kapiere: Wenn diese Idioten immer als Lügner entlarvt werden, warum wird dann nicht mal kräftig zurückgeklagt? Und wenn es tatsächlich zu diesem Fall kommt, können wir die Platte für dieses Jahr knicken...
Ach, ich sehe das ,im Moment jedenfalls, noch nicht allzu dramatisch. Natürlich ist es ärgerlich, aber diese Klage kann genauso schnell wieder abgelehnt werden.
Ich bezweifle, dass Michael da überhaupt persönlich vor Gericht erscheinen muss, mal schauen...
-
Weitere Informationen:
ZitatAs it seems now, the case will go on trial. As the articles said, some of the charges has been dismissed, and some not.
From December, 2006:
"Allegations of assault, battery, willful misconduct, false imprisonment and sexual battery are still on the table, however."Since then the Judge dismissed other parts related to "Sony" and "MJJ Productions". They'll have a case management hearing on September 27th, 2007, and the trial will start on October 1st, 2007.
Source: LeslieMJHu, MJJF
ZitatDon't worry. The guy is a fruitcake. He has a history of making false claims. The courts have to go throught the motions but this case is not going anywhere. He claims (that when he was about 2 years old) he wrote Michael's songs for him among other things for pete's sake.
It is just civil. Unfortunately people can bring unjustified claims in a civil but that is what the court is for: to determine if they have any validity or not. These claims don't. They are ludicris.
Source: eternitys child, MJJF
ZitatSource: whisper, MJJF
-
Danke TLC, bestätigt, was ich mir schon dachte.

-
Mhm, vielleicht auch ein guter Test wie die mediale Reaktion darauf ist...es gibt ja die Chance das so etwas wenn es zu offensichtlich ist zu Michaels Gunsten medial kippen könnte nach allem was er durch hat.
-
Hier mal Informationen zu einem anderen Fall:
The Prescient vs. Michael Jackson:
Trial begins Monday June 18th. Its supposed to last 1 or 2 wks
It is expected that Michael will be present at the trial.UPDATE ON MICHAEL ATTENDING THE TRIAL:
This past week the judge asked MJ's lawyers to confirm if Michael was coming to the trial because they needed to confirm it to the federal marshals and court house security.
His lawyer Londell McMillian got back to the judge and said Michael didn't intend to be there but that they reserved the right to call him as a witness if they decided to. Prescient of course objected to that. So the judge ordered that MJ's side can't have it both ways (reasonably). He either goes to court and is a live witness or his taped deposition will be used as the evidence in chief. -
Dieser Krankenhaus-Fall steht wohl auch demnächst an, Infos:
ZitatJune 18th is also the date that a Case Management Conference in the Ortiz vs MJ case takes place. That's the wrongful death type civil lawsuit from when someone died while Michael was admitted to the hospital. Judge Rodney Melville is (again) handling the case. As long as Michael has lawyers representing him for this hearing, there should not be any problems.
Source: TSCM, KOP-Board
Anmerkung:
Vielleicht kann man den Thread-Titel umbennen, da ja anscheinend in naher Zukunft so einige kleinere Prozesse anstehen, dann muss man nicht extra für jede Klage/jeden Prozess einen eigenen Thread aufmachen und hier können dann immer die jeweilig neuesten Informationen gepostet werden?
-
Alles anzeigen
Hier mal Informationen zu einem anderen Fall:
The Prescient vs. Michael Jackson:
Trial begins Monday June 18th. Its supposed to last 1 or 2 wks
It is expected that Michael will be present at the trial.UPDATE ON MICHAEL ATTENDING THE TRIAL:
This past week the judge asked MJ's lawyers to confirm if Michael was coming to the trial because they needed to confirm it to the federal marshals and court house security.
His lawyer Londell McMillian got back to the judge and said Michael didn't intend to be there but that they reserved the right to call him as a witness if they decided to. Prescient of course objected to that. So the judge ordered that MJ's side can't have it both ways (reasonably). He either goes to court and is a live witness or his taped deposition will be used as the evidence in chief.Irgendwie komm ich da nicht mehr so ganz mit. Um was geht es denn in diesem Prozess?
Währe schön, wenn diser ganze BS endlich mal ein Ende hätte! -
Datum ist ja wirklich clever gewählt

Aber meiner Meinung nach wird diese Klage, wie sämtliche zuvor, im Sand versinken

Das ist möglich aber man versucht Michaels Ansehen wieder im Vorfeld zu schädigen und das ist nicht gut wenn er wieder ein Album rausbringen will. Bin sprachlos nicht nur über den angeblichen Fall sondern über die Drahtzieher welche es zum Fall machen möchten. Der Zeitpunkt kann nicht treffender sein!!!
-
The Prescient vs. Michael Jackson:
Trial begins Monday June 18th. Its supposed to last 1 or 2 wks
It is expected that Michael will be present at the trial.I did a bit of a case chronology I did for the MJJF back in October 2006. Here's what I had then:
QUOTE
Prescient vs. MJ Publishing Trust ... here's the chronology.... after Prescient/Derrien Dash filed the suit July last year.1. The doggy agreement is on Prescient letter head but only sighned by Don Stabler for MJ Publshing Trust.
2. MJ’s former lawyers filed a motion to dismiss the case March 10th 2006
3. July 31st –Judge agreed in part & dismissed 3 or 4 items from original/amended complaint (basically saying Prescient’s contract was between Prescient and MJ Publishing trust and that’s it (not MJ-ATV, MJ himself or any other of his companies).
4. Perfect Circle – another company in LA had also filed a suit to piggy back on Prescient's case against MJ saying that they introduced Prescient to Don & Randy and that Prescient should pay them a portion of anything they get etc… so they filed a suit as an interested party etc. Their suit was dismissed entirely and they were kicked of the case completely July 31st.
5. MJ restructures and forms a new Trust, New Horizon Trust
6. Prescient finds that out and motions the court to add NHT on the case saying MJ’s side had moved MJâ€s properties/etc to NHT.
7. NHT is represented by a high powered attorney David Zaslovski in NY together with Londell. They file a response denying everything and saying they didn’t even exist when the deal (Prescient & MJPT) was formed/signed
8. Prescient files motions asking the judge to reconsider the dismissal he gave in July…. Basically Prescient wanted the judge to allow them to say that even though the contract was between Prescient and MJPT, that both sides made an error and that it was also between MJ-ATV and by extension with NHT….
9. MJ side responds saying no way buddy……… thats wrong, illegal and not supported by law
10. Last week the judge agreed with MJ’s lawyers and told Prescient their motion had been reconsidered and denied. The July 31st dismissal of part (most of) their complaint was to stay.Side notes:
Bank of America sued Prescient for money they incurred collecting and handing over documents to Prescient…. They sued for 100K. Prescient was refusing to pay it. BOA said we told it would cost you, you could have got these documents from the defense’s side but you subpoena’d us for the documents so pay up. The judge agreed and this week ordered Prescient to pay BOA the 1st about 50K.MJ’s former (fired lawyers) are holding on to MJ’s legal files, they’re angry they were dismissed and are claiming they should be paid 500K. MJ’s side is saying they dispute that money…. The past 3 wks the judge has been trying to work out something so that MJ’s side gets the files as they continue to resolve the fees issues… the judge suggested a bond be placed in court for the files. MJ’s side to give the court the claimed amount (about 525K) the court will hold it until the fee issues are resolved…. Whichever side proves its case gets the money…. If the former lawyers do, they get it, if MJ’s side proves the former lawyers should not get that much and the judge agrees then MJ gets his money back or some of it back… in the meantime that allows for the files to be transferred to MJ’s current lawyers……
This is still being resolved at this moment.All this seems to have started by Randy, who did this with Don Stabler without MJs permission (as per MJ’s lawyers).
Is Randy part of the conspiracy? I have to hope to God in heaven that he’s not… it would be the worst betrayal. However its hard not to think he is because he’s the catalyst for MJ being sued by Prescient and his name was also in the Brent As.s complaint saying Randy claims MJ owes him 1.5Mil and owes Randy’s girlfriend 50K… really?Back in October, i also posted (Ms Tenda posted them for me) some PDFs from the case and discussed it a little more here http://www.mjjforum.com/forums/index.php?s...79666&st=50
I will post an update from "October 2006 to Present" soon.
A lot has happened since then. The trial should be interesting.Quelle : aveeno1 vom MJJ
-
Here's added info on the cases at hand...
Precient vs. MJ Publishing Trust
- Its the Michael Jackson Publishing Trust that's being sued (as per the judge) not MJ himself as an individual or any of his other companies.- Precient claims they want to be paid 48M that they say is a 9% cut on a 270M loan they "found" for MJ from Fortress and a 500+Million they also "found" for MJ from a different lender that MJ was supposed to use to buy back the 50% of the catalogue from Sony.
This last part no one is totally clear about and the media is mum about it too. Speculation is running wild on this part of the case (is MJ buying back that part of the catalogue? what would that mean? did he really get that money? etc etc.......Thanks to aveeno1, KoP-Board
Hab ich grad gefunden is schon ein wenig älter . Wenigstens steht da um was es geht
-
Zitat
Is Randy part of the conspiracy? I have to hope to God in heaven that he’s not… it would be the worst betrayal. However its hard not to think he is because he’s the catalyst for MJ being sued by Prescient and his name was also in the Brent As.s complaint saying Randy claims MJ owes him 1.5Mil and owes Randy’s girlfriend 50K… really?
Oh mein Gott!
Mir wird schlecht..... 
-
^ das war doch schonmal thema, ehe die mjjsource-site eingestampft wurde...
da hörte man auch, dass es da eisige atmosphäre geben soll, weil mike da keine zahlungen geleistet hätte für die site, dir betreuung der site ect..nur - mike war garnet der geldgeber, dafür hat mike schon immer leute, die solche sachen abwickeln und dauerzahlungen kontrollieren.
ausserdem soll mike sich -angeblich- geld geliehen haben, als er blank war...

alles sehr schräg -
Wurde MJJsource nicht durch Karen Faye betrieben?
Und in wiefern ist Michaels Bruder, Randy, in geschäftliche Dinge involviert? -
randy und seine freundin leiteten mjjsource.
*sorry, karen hatte ich ganz vergessen.
ja die war auch mit drinne... die war auch mit randys freundin befreundet, wenn ich recht erinnere
dann war da noch dieser komische anwalt involviert...(KORGIE - wie hiess der nochmal?)ach es gab da sehr viele seltsame stories... wenn nur die hälfte davon stimmt,
ist das krank genug
-
Und deswegen heißt es auch, dass Michael Randy und dessen Freundin 1,5 mio schulden soll?! Also irgendwie..... cracy!
-
dann war da noch dieser komische anwalt involviert...
Brian "The Ox" Oxman.
[E]
666, danke fürs Posten.
Was da steht, ist einfach haarstreubend...Da jetzt der 13. ist und ich legal über die Inhalte von dem Buch von Aphrodite Jones reden kann...
Dort schreibt Tom Mesereau, dass RANDY ihn an Bord geholt hat und dass sie schon länger befreundet waren.
Außerdem schreibt Aphrodite Jones, dass Michael Jackson dem Dieter nicht die Rechte an seinem Namen gab, sondern eine "Power Of Attorney" - eine Generalvollmacht.
Ob Wiesner mit dieser Vollmacht dann sich die Rechte übetragen hat und für wie lange... Weiß wohl niemand im Moment.
Konitzer hatte diese Vollmacht auch, aber die wurde ihm, laut A. Jones, wieder entzogen.[/E]
Jetzt mitmachen!
Du hast noch kein Benutzerkonto auf unserer Seite? Registriere dich kostenlos und nimm an unserer Community teil!