Es wird ja noch weitergehen, deshalb ist der Artikel in einem eigenen Thema wohl besser aufgehoben.
Michael Jackson family's civil trial blames AEG in singer's death
Mother and children allege that the entertainment giant heartlessly pressured the star to deliver a comeback tour he was in no shape to take on.
It was AEG Live's substantial resources that made the deal attractive to the financially troubled Jackson in the first place, and it is the dynamic between the rich company and the cash-strapped performer that is at the heart of the suit. The company advanced Jackson money against future concert earnings to cover every aspect of his life and had the right to seize his assets if he failed to perform at 50 London shows.
In court papers, Katherine Jackson's lawyers have said the relationship created a legal duty on the part of AEG "to treat him safely and to not put him in harm's way." They said AEG breached those duties by contracting with Murray, who they allege went along with their only interest: ensuring that Jackson could perform.
During the criminal trial, AEG officials testified that Murray was Jackson's choice and that they had wanted to hire a British doctor.
"He was very firm. He said no, I need my own physician and I need him 24-seven," said Randy Phillips, chief executive of AEG Live.
Murray worked for Jackson for two months but was never paid by AEG because the singer hadn't yet signed the contract, a point that Jorrie, the contract lawyer, noted several times in her testimony.
The civil case is expected to yield far more details about Jackson's problems than the criminal trial did.
"Generally in civil court, the range of issues to be decided is far broader than they ever are in a criminal case; and that means a lot more evidence comes in," said David M. Ring, a Los Angeles lawyer who has sued on behalf of plaintiffs in wrongful death cases. "Instead of just looking in the closet, you are looking in the whole house."
Katherine Jackson's lawyer said he expected that civil jurors would learn vastly more about the singer's relationship with AEG than their criminal-case counterparts did. The case file already includes a copy of Jackson's contract with the promoter, a document kept out of the manslaughter case. Details about Jackson's long-standing financial problems — another subject prohibited in criminal court — would be central to the case against AEG.
Putnam and AEG declined to comment. To defend itself, the company could present unflattering information about Jackson's substance abuse, his seeking of propofol from various physicians dating to the 1990s and his often rocky relationship with his family. None of those topics were allowed at the criminal trial.
Although the suit is still in its early stages, both sides have claimed some victories. Earlier this year, a judge threw out some portions of the Jacksons' suit, including allegations of fraud and negligent infliction of emotional distress on the singer's children. Superior Court Judge Yvette M. Palazuelos ruled that the remainder of the claims — including breach of contract and negligence in hiring Murray — could go forward on the theory that Jackson "was particularly vulnerable and dependent" on AEG.