jepp, soll er gesagt haben...
so hat das jemand gehört, der dabei war. nicht im gerichtssaal, sondern ausserhalb.
da haben wiesner und mike wohl ne kurze zeit miteinander gesprochen...
MJ and Wiesner had a very friendly meeting over 2 hours. More to come soon...
LeslieMJHu
Irgentwie versteh ich das ganze net und nebenbei wird mikr auch grad ganz schlecht 
mhm...das wäre in der Tat beängstigend.
[B]Michael Jackson Testifies in Lawsuit Brought by Former Manager
Die Story ist aber nicht von einem "Beobachter" sondern von Roger Friedmann.Steht auf seiner Webseite von Dienstag und ist für mich somit unglaubwürdig 
Und das man mit seinen ehemaligen Geschäftpartnern "freundlich redet" finde ich, wenn man einen für alle Seiten einvernehmliche Regelung finden will, auch nicht so unverständlich. Allemal besser als harte Gefecht im Gerichtssaal.
friedmann hat die story in seiner kolummne veröffentlicht, ja.
aber darum kann er doch trotzdem die story so wie sie geschildert wurde von diesem beobachter haben.
habe das aber auch vor 2 tagen ganz wo anders gelesen - und ich glaube friedmann hat die 'fakten' nur übernommen.
aber egal... friedelschniedel hin oder her...:Q
wäre ja ...witzig... wenn sich da wieder kontakte anbahnen würden...O.o...
und 
hallo veena 
schön, dich auch mal wieder hier aktiv zu sehn 
mhm also ich weiß nicht ob das witzig wäre, wenn ich mir die "Management-Bilanz" der Herren mit Michael anschaue...
Hallo Badwoman ! Ja ab und zu bin auch aktiv 
aber meistens lese ich hier nur. Bin also über alles bestens informiert:such
Und zu R.F. Klar schreibt der auch Sachen die irgendwie stimmen. Aber gerade weil sie vorher schon irgendwo auf den Boards stehen ist er suspekt. Er kombiniert alles wie er will und der Sinn der Sache geht dabei flöten. Ich glaube kaum das der irgendwelche seriösen Quellen kennt, typischer"vom Hören-sagen" Schreibstil 
Und Wiesner und Michael wieder in "Beziehung"?!:wau Da müsste ich, mit Verlaub, an Michaels Verstand leise Zweifel hegen. 
Und zu R.F. Klar schreibt der auch Sachen die irgendwie stimmen. Aber gerade weil sie vorher schon irgendwo auf den Boards stehen ist er suspekt. Er kombiniert alles wie er will und der Sinn der Sache geht dabei flöten. Ich glaube kaum das der irgendwelche seriösen Quellen kennt, typischer"vom Hören-sagen" Schreibstil
Und Wiesner und Michael wieder in "Beziehung"?!:wau Da müsste ich, mit Verlaub, an Michaels Verstand leise Zweifel hegen.
mhm also ich weiß nicht ob das witzig wäre, wenn ich mir die "Management-Bilanz" der Herren mit Michael anschaue...
Witzig ? Ich kann da nix witziges dran finden
@ BEIDE... erkennt ihr ironie nur, wenn sie euch ins bein beisst?
seh ich aus, wie ein wiesner fan???
na...? 
na also.
.
.
Und zu R.F. Klar schreibt der auch Sachen die irgendwie stimmen. Aber gerade weil sie vorher schon irgendwo auf den Boards stehen ist er suspekt. Er kombiniert alles wie er will und der Sinn der Sache geht dabei flöten. Ich glaube kaum das der irgendwelche seriösen Quellen kennt, typischer"vom Hören-sagen" Schreibstil
Und Wiesner und Michael wieder in "Beziehung"?!:wau Da müsste ich, mit Verlaub, an Michaels Verstand leise Zweifel hegen.
^ du solltest öfter aktiv sein, süsse 
zum thema...
wie gesagt... das war ironie von mir...
darum ja auch diese form:
Zitatwäre ja ...witzig... wenn sich da wieder kontakte anbahnen würden...O.o...
bei friedelschniedel sind wir uns eh einig
ab und zu landet er mal nen zufallstreffer, aber ansonsten ist er die grösste mistschleuder in sachen mj-berichterstattung 
keine frage 
Ich hab dich schon verstanden Bady keine Angst
Sonderbar... aber irgendwie kann ich mir nicht vorstellen, dass irgendjemand Bruchstücke des Gespräches mitbekommen hat. Man wird doch darauf achten, dass man solche geschäftlichen Dinge wirklich in einem Zimmer unter 4 Augen bespricht.
Weiß nicht so recht, Wiesner und Michael klingt für mich nicht so gut. Gefällt mir garnicht, aber wir wissen ja nicht, was da tatsächlich los war in D.C.
Vielleicht hat Michael dem Wiesner in dem Zimmer nur gesagt, wie sehr er ihm eigentlich wirklich auf die Eiere gegangen ist! *räusper* bin schon weg.......
Mother of Jackson's Accuser: I'm a Fraud
Posted Aug 1st 2007 1:11PM by TMZ Staff
The mother of Michael Jackson's 2004 accuser has struck a plea bargain in her welfare fraud case.
TMZ was in court as Janet Arvizo (whose married name is now ironically Janet Jackson) copped a plea through her lawyer. Arvizo had been charged with felony welfare fraud. During cross-examination in the molestation trial, Arvizo admitted she had failed to disclose income that would have disqualified her from receiving welfare benefits.
In addition to pleading to a reduced charge of misdemeanor welfare fraud, Arvizo was fined over $6,000, performed 166.5 hours of community service and was sentenced to 30 days of informal probation.
Her lawyer is planning on filing a motion to have the charge wiped clean from her record.
Mom of Jackson accuser gets fraud charge reduced
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A charge of felony welfare fraud against the mother of the boy who accused Michael Jackson of sexual abuse was reduced on Wednesday to a misdemeanor and is eventually expected to be expunged, her lawyer said.
The woman, who was not identified during the 2005 Jackson trial to protect the identity of her son, pleaded no contest last November to receiving fraudulent welfare payments. No contest is the equivalent of a guilty plea under California law.
The mother's credibility and reputation were attacked by Jackson's defense team during the trial, which ended in the pop star's acquittal in June 2005 on all charges of child molestation.
Her lawyer, Rayford Fountain, said on Wednesday she had paid more than $8,600 in restitution and completed more than 150 hours of community service.
Investigators initially alleged she fraudulently received nearly $18,800 in welfare payments by failing to disclose money received from an insurance settlement but the amount was later lowered to about $8,000.
Fountain asked the judge to place the woman on informal probation for 30 days to allow her to pay a court fine and said he would then ask for the charge to be dismissed and expunged.
The woman has moved out of state since the end of the trial and was not in court for Wednesday's hearing.
© Reuters 2007. All rights reserved.
Mom of Jackson accuser gets fraud charge reduced | Entertainment | People | Reuters
ZitatAlles anzeigenUpdate: Schaffel Case:
-> Did we ever figure out what happened to this? Did Michael win or lose?
We don't really know for sure in part because the judge denied that motion. There was also this motion filed by the defense towards the end of last week:
08/02/2007 Notice (NOTICE OF INTENTION TO MOVE FOR NEW TRIAL)
Filed by Atty for Defendant and Cross-Comp.
Michael does actually deserve to have this trial retried/appealed, given the fact that certain jurors (including one of the most opinionated and stubborn ones) admitted that they were biased against Michael Jackson for completely unrelated matters, and said that they would have a hard time being fair to him during the trial. Yet, they were kept on the jury and in the end delivered a verdict that absolutely did not make sense based on the evidence. And then there was all of that totally irrelevant stuff uttered out by Marc Schaffel AND his sleazy attorney just to try and win through spin (both in and out of the court) which he should've been reprimanded for.
A trial like this never should have been heard by a jury anyways in my opinion, it was purely a financial issue and a single judge listening to the independent accountants and witnesses and reviewing the receipts, contracts and forms should have sufficed.
Source: TSCM, KOP-Board
ZitatAlles anzeigenSettlement In New "MJJ Productions" Case?
MichaelJackson.hu obtained some court documents from an ongoing legal battle between "Travelers Indemnity Company" and "MJJ Productions".
TIC sued MJJP on June 5, 2006, saying that MJJP breached some contracts.
The trial date has been set for December 4, 2007. However the attached court documents shows that the parties agreed to settle the case out of court.
Court documents here: Michael Jackson Blog: Settlement In New MJJ Productions Case?
Source: LeslieMJHu, MJNO
ZitatAlles anzeigenI have seen many court papers, and I can tell You that MJ has a great legal team. In my opinion, they will "kill" the majority of the cases in 1-2 months. There will be only 1 or 2 left, but that's normal for any celebrity/rich person.
Ongoing cases:
Kapon vs. Jackson - MJ asked for a mental examination on Kapon, this case will go nowhere
Wiesner vs. Jackson - They will settle very soon, this case won't go on trial
Travelers Indemnity vs. Jackson - They will settle very soon
Video&Audio Center vs. Jackson - The judge already entered default on "MJJ Productions", they will settle very soon
Jackson vs. Universal - MJ already won, will end very soon
Ruiz family vs. Jackson - Stupid case, will go nowhere
Abelson vs. Jackson - MJ will pay him soon
Sydow vs. Jackson - MJ will pay him soon
Jackson vs. Bernstein - The trial will start next summer, but lots of things can happen until then...
Transitional Investors vs. Jackson - I can't predict anything in this early stadium
At the end MJ will win...
Source: LeslieMJHu, MJJF
Nur noch soooooooooo wenige
hehe* jup. Ich glaube dieser Thread hier sagt am meisten von allen über den Status des neuen Albums aus.:D
Haben wir glaub ich noch net oder
Lawyers to Jackson: You Never Paid Us Backo
Posted Aug 14th 2007 6:29PM by TMZ Staff
Filed under: Celebrity Justice, Michael Jackson
Another batch of Michael Jackson's former lawyers claims the Gloved One screwed them out of dough. Who doesn't Jackson owe money to these days?!
In a lawsuit filed today in L.A. County Superior Court, the King of Pop is accused of stiffing celebrity super-lawyers Lavely & Singer out of $113,750 in legal fees. According to the documents, the lawyers set up a payment plan for the singer to pay off his $180,000 debt, but Jackson never ponied up the final installment.
It's the second time this year that a team of Jackson's former lawyers has accused him of skipping a bill. As TMZ first reported, a Delaware-based law firm sued Jackson in June, claiming he never forked over $109,994.48 he allegedly owed them for acting as "general counsel" in a case against a concert promoter who accused the singer of backing out of two New Year's Eve concerts in 2000.
A rep for Jackson was not available for comment.
* The Lawsuit (pdf)
Du hast noch kein Benutzerkonto auf unserer Seite? Registriere dich kostenlos und nimm an unserer Community teil!
