F. Marc Schaffel, Michael Jackson's former business partner, has succeeded in placing a lien on Jackson's two properties at Neverland and his parents' home in Hayvenhurst Avenue in Encino.
The liens will remain in place until Jackson pays the $559K awarded by a judge in favour of Schaffel a fortnight ago.
In the event that Jackson is thinking of earning some money, by producing a record or appearing on stage, now might be a good time to start.
Showing posts with label Marc Schaffel. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Marc Schaffel. Show all posts
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Tuesday, August 01, 2006
Another Day Another Trial
It seems that Michael Jackson has some form of addiction to court cases, as yet another one is appearing in his already busy court schedule.
Jackson is now being sued for legal fees he allegedly owes Ayscough & Marar, an LA law firm, who claim that Jackson owes them $200K for their services in 2005.
Attorney Brent Ayscough claims that his firm was hired by Jackson, to provide legal services during his child molestation trial. One of the cases that the firm were allegedly asked to oversee was the suit brought against Jackson by former business associate Marc Schaffel.
Ayscough and Marar's lawyers claim that they were paid on time until mid 2005, when Jackson's legal fees were paid out by his trial lawyer Thomas Mesereau's company.
They claim that the money paid to Mesereau was to be spread around several law firms, who were all working for Jackson. However, Ayscough & Marar claim that they haven't received that money. Mesereau & Yu are not named as defendants in the case.
The lawsuit filed by Ayscough & Marar also details some of Jackson's debts; including $300M to Fortress Investment Group and $1.6M to his brother Randy.
If the allegations are true, it seems that the lesson to be learnt here is that when working for Jackson demand payment in advance.
Jackson is now being sued for legal fees he allegedly owes Ayscough & Marar, an LA law firm, who claim that Jackson owes them $200K for their services in 2005.
Attorney Brent Ayscough claims that his firm was hired by Jackson, to provide legal services during his child molestation trial. One of the cases that the firm were allegedly asked to oversee was the suit brought against Jackson by former business associate Marc Schaffel.
Ayscough and Marar's lawyers claim that they were paid on time until mid 2005, when Jackson's legal fees were paid out by his trial lawyer Thomas Mesereau's company.
They claim that the money paid to Mesereau was to be spread around several law firms, who were all working for Jackson. However, Ayscough & Marar claim that they haven't received that money. Mesereau & Yu are not named as defendants in the case.
The lawsuit filed by Ayscough & Marar also details some of Jackson's debts; including $300M to Fortress Investment Group and $1.6M to his brother Randy.
If the allegations are true, it seems that the lesson to be learnt here is that when working for Jackson demand payment in advance.
Saturday, July 15, 2006
And The Winner Is?
Michael Jackson's legal tussle with Marc Schaffel ended Friday, with Santa Monica jurors awarding Schaffel $900K and Jackson $200K.
Jurors were not impressed with either party, and said that they overlooked unappealing qualities of both parties to rule on the merits of the various financial claims.
Jury foreman Roy Shimogaki, asked if the decision to award both parties money showed Jackson and Schaffel were credible, said:
"I wouldn't go that far.
The plaintiff was not the most upstanding character, but neither was the defendant."
Showbusiness attracts such unpleasant characters.
Jurors were not impressed with either party, and said that they overlooked unappealing qualities of both parties to rule on the merits of the various financial claims.
Jury foreman Roy Shimogaki, asked if the decision to award both parties money showed Jackson and Schaffel were credible, said:
"I wouldn't go that far.
The plaintiff was not the most upstanding character, but neither was the defendant."
Showbusiness attracts such unpleasant characters.
Friday, July 14, 2006
Jury Deliberates
Michael Jackson's legal tussle with Marc Schaffel, over an alleged debt owed to Schaffel of $1.4M, has now been placed in the hands of the jury.
The closing arguments concluded yesterday. Schaffel had originally claimed $3.8M. However, following the usual wheeling and dealing in such cases this has been reduced to $1.4M.
The closing arguments concluded yesterday. Schaffel had originally claimed $3.8M. However, following the usual wheeling and dealing in such cases this has been reduced to $1.4M.
Wednesday, July 12, 2006
Defence Alleges Deception
The defence in the current Michael Jackson trial, in which he is being sued by former associate Marc Schaffel for alleged non payment of fees, has leveled a counter allegation that Schaffel was trying to enrich himself.
They called accountant Jan Goren to the stand, who said that he was able to trace most of the complicated transactions in a ledger kept by Schaffel. However, he noted that some of the explanations provided by Schaffel were inaccurate.
Jackson's lawyer, Thomas Mundell, noted that there were a lack of receipts. Goren said that a $500K transaction that Schaffel claimed was a loan to Jackson, was not a loan at all.
Schaffel had testified that Jackson was in New York on September 11 2001. He claimed that Jackson called to ask for $500K, in case he needed to go into hiding with his family, and then stopped at Schaffel's home to pick up the money. Jackson has denied the story.
Goren said Schaffel did withdraw that amount from a checking account for Neverland Valley Entertainment Co., the business he was in with Jackson, but then deposited the same amount into his personal money market account.
Mundell asked Goren if he identified "any 'cash to MJ' transactions that were not bona fide."
"Yes," said the accountant, "numerous ones."
Schaffel's attorney, Howard King, has promised to rebut the claims, and said it would become clear that Schaffel is not seeking reimbursement for any of the alleged loans which are being challenged as deceptive.
Mundell said he was introducing the details to show "a pattern of false claims of loss" by Schaffel.
Quote:
"We want the jury to look at the pattern of deceit".
Goren testified that Schaffel is probably owed $471K.
The defence contends that given the number of deceptive transactions by Schaffel, he is owed nothing.
The trial continues.
They called accountant Jan Goren to the stand, who said that he was able to trace most of the complicated transactions in a ledger kept by Schaffel. However, he noted that some of the explanations provided by Schaffel were inaccurate.
Jackson's lawyer, Thomas Mundell, noted that there were a lack of receipts. Goren said that a $500K transaction that Schaffel claimed was a loan to Jackson, was not a loan at all.
Schaffel had testified that Jackson was in New York on September 11 2001. He claimed that Jackson called to ask for $500K, in case he needed to go into hiding with his family, and then stopped at Schaffel's home to pick up the money. Jackson has denied the story.
Goren said Schaffel did withdraw that amount from a checking account for Neverland Valley Entertainment Co., the business he was in with Jackson, but then deposited the same amount into his personal money market account.
Mundell asked Goren if he identified "any 'cash to MJ' transactions that were not bona fide."
"Yes," said the accountant, "numerous ones."
Schaffel's attorney, Howard King, has promised to rebut the claims, and said it would become clear that Schaffel is not seeking reimbursement for any of the alleged loans which are being challenged as deceptive.
Mundell said he was introducing the details to show "a pattern of false claims of loss" by Schaffel.
Quote:
"We want the jury to look at the pattern of deceit".
Goren testified that Schaffel is probably owed $471K.
The defence contends that given the number of deceptive transactions by Schaffel, he is owed nothing.
The trial continues.
Wednesday, July 05, 2006
Jacksongate
The jury in the current Michael Jackson trial, brought by ex associate Marc Schaffel, got to listen to some of his phone calls on Wednesday.
The calls became increasingly frantic as he demanded action from Marc Schaffel on a number of projects including, a collaboration with Marlon Brando on TV shows and videos and the release of a charity recording.
The tapes were of voice messages left on Schaffel's answering machine. Schaffel claims that Jackson owes him $3.8 million in royalties, expenses and other debts.
In one message dated 2001, Jackson said:
"Marc, it's Michael. ... Marc, please never let me down. I like you. I love you. ... I really want us to be friends and conquer the business world together. Please be my loyal, loyal friend. I love you."
How utterly nauseating!
Schaffel claims that he had been working on a number of projects for Jackson, and had arranged a $10M line of credit for him.
Schaffel went on to talk about the possible deal with Marlon Brando, quote:
"We had several meetings with Marlon. Michael wanted Marlon Brando to do several DVDs on acting lessons. Mr. Brando was getting up there in age and Michael considered him the greatest actor of all time."
Jackson left several messages about Brando. In one he said:
"Marlon Brando has been pushing. He's a wonderful man. He's a god. He wants a lot of money. He wants to get things done right now."
Another project that failed to materialise was Jackson's record, "What More Can I Give," which was a charity project for victims of 9/11. It was never released (much like the Katrina record), because of complications involving Jackson's relationship with the record label.
In 2003, plans changed, and Jackson called Schaffel with urgent messages saying he now had a plan for the recording to be a charity project tied to the Iraq war.
"It should be for America in Iraq... It's a perfect cause. It means more now than any other causes."
Where's that one then?
Schaffel also alleged that he made to Brazil in November 2003 to deliver $300K to someone in South America, to take care of a personal matter.
Schaffel acknowledged that he was paid $1.4M in royalties from two videos sold to Fox television and received other expense payments, but said he was still owed $664K in royalties.
Schaffel's attorney called Alvin Malnik, who said he advised Jackson on financial matters without charge after they met in 2002, he claimed that Jackson was bewildered by money affairs.
He said he once received an urgent call from Jackson saying he needed $1M immediately.
Quote:
"It was very, very important that he buy a piece of jewelry for Elizabeth Taylor and a substantial amount of it went for that.
The reason was that Elizabeth Taylor would not sign a release for her participation in the Fox special. He knew her well enough that he knew if he brought a piece of jewelry he could obtain the release and that's how it was done."
That's how it's done folks, money and gifts will get you what you want. That at least is how it has worked so far for Jackson, this approach may no longer work for him.
The calls became increasingly frantic as he demanded action from Marc Schaffel on a number of projects including, a collaboration with Marlon Brando on TV shows and videos and the release of a charity recording.
The tapes were of voice messages left on Schaffel's answering machine. Schaffel claims that Jackson owes him $3.8 million in royalties, expenses and other debts.
In one message dated 2001, Jackson said:
"Marc, it's Michael. ... Marc, please never let me down. I like you. I love you. ... I really want us to be friends and conquer the business world together. Please be my loyal, loyal friend. I love you."
How utterly nauseating!
Schaffel claims that he had been working on a number of projects for Jackson, and had arranged a $10M line of credit for him.
Schaffel went on to talk about the possible deal with Marlon Brando, quote:
"We had several meetings with Marlon. Michael wanted Marlon Brando to do several DVDs on acting lessons. Mr. Brando was getting up there in age and Michael considered him the greatest actor of all time."
Jackson left several messages about Brando. In one he said:
"Marlon Brando has been pushing. He's a wonderful man. He's a god. He wants a lot of money. He wants to get things done right now."
Another project that failed to materialise was Jackson's record, "What More Can I Give," which was a charity project for victims of 9/11. It was never released (much like the Katrina record), because of complications involving Jackson's relationship with the record label.
In 2003, plans changed, and Jackson called Schaffel with urgent messages saying he now had a plan for the recording to be a charity project tied to the Iraq war.
"It should be for America in Iraq... It's a perfect cause. It means more now than any other causes."
Where's that one then?
Schaffel also alleged that he made to Brazil in November 2003 to deliver $300K to someone in South America, to take care of a personal matter.
Schaffel acknowledged that he was paid $1.4M in royalties from two videos sold to Fox television and received other expense payments, but said he was still owed $664K in royalties.
Schaffel's attorney called Alvin Malnik, who said he advised Jackson on financial matters without charge after they met in 2002, he claimed that Jackson was bewildered by money affairs.
He said he once received an urgent call from Jackson saying he needed $1M immediately.
Quote:
"It was very, very important that he buy a piece of jewelry for Elizabeth Taylor and a substantial amount of it went for that.
The reason was that Elizabeth Taylor would not sign a release for her participation in the Fox special. He knew her well enough that he knew if he brought a piece of jewelry he could obtain the release and that's how it was done."
That's how it's done folks, money and gifts will get you what you want. That at least is how it has worked so far for Jackson, this approach may no longer work for him.
Friday, June 30, 2006
Jackson Attends Court On Video
Michael Jackson gave his deposition yesterday, in the court case over the dispute with Marc Schaffel and $3.8M, via videotape.
In the video he said that he thought Marc Schaffel had been compensated, because he seemed happy.
Schaffels' attorney, Howard King, showed a portion of the tape (which was made in London) and noted:
"I've wanted Mr. Jackson to be here to tell his story.
He won't be here except by deposition. I had to go to London to take it. He will make a fine presentation. He's finely made up, costumed. You'd think he'd been in front of cameras his whole life."
In the tape, made in September 2005, Jackson was asked if he thought Schaffel wanted to be paid for his services.
Quote:
"I know he wanted something from me, of course... I do remember these long letters. He wanted me to pay him."
Jackson then continued:
"I'm sure he got money."
How could he be sure?
"Because he always seemed to be happy."
King noted "Money doesn't buy happiness."
King raised Schaffel's connection with the gay porn industry:
"Mr. Schaffel has a successful business background and one of these was in the legal adult entertainment business. In 2000 he was done with that and he began to work with Mr. Jackson."
Jackson's lawyer, Thomas C. Mundell, noted the Jackson is forgetful and accused Schaffel of fraudulently moving funds from Jackson's accounts to his own pocket and billing Jackson for expenses when he no longer worked for him.
He went on to contend that Schaffel in fact owes Jackson money.
Quote:
"The evidence will show Mr. Schaffel should have left well enough alone. He could have gotten away with a chunk of money from Michael Jackson ... but he sued for several million dollars."
King called Allan Whitman, a longtime Jackson business manager who was fired this week, as a witness.
Whitman detailed the advisers who came and went, as Jackson hired and fired them.
Some, according to Whitman, were paid $100K a month for services while others such as billionaire Ron Burkle and business magnate Alvin Malnik gave their services for free.
The trial continues.
In the video he said that he thought Marc Schaffel had been compensated, because he seemed happy.
Schaffels' attorney, Howard King, showed a portion of the tape (which was made in London) and noted:
"I've wanted Mr. Jackson to be here to tell his story.
He won't be here except by deposition. I had to go to London to take it. He will make a fine presentation. He's finely made up, costumed. You'd think he'd been in front of cameras his whole life."
In the tape, made in September 2005, Jackson was asked if he thought Schaffel wanted to be paid for his services.
Quote:
"I know he wanted something from me, of course... I do remember these long letters. He wanted me to pay him."
Jackson then continued:
"I'm sure he got money."
How could he be sure?
"Because he always seemed to be happy."
King noted "Money doesn't buy happiness."
King raised Schaffel's connection with the gay porn industry:
"Mr. Schaffel has a successful business background and one of these was in the legal adult entertainment business. In 2000 he was done with that and he began to work with Mr. Jackson."
Jackson's lawyer, Thomas C. Mundell, noted the Jackson is forgetful and accused Schaffel of fraudulently moving funds from Jackson's accounts to his own pocket and billing Jackson for expenses when he no longer worked for him.
He went on to contend that Schaffel in fact owes Jackson money.
Quote:
"The evidence will show Mr. Schaffel should have left well enough alone. He could have gotten away with a chunk of money from Michael Jackson ... but he sued for several million dollars."
King called Allan Whitman, a longtime Jackson business manager who was fired this week, as a witness.
Whitman detailed the advisers who came and went, as Jackson hired and fired them.
Some, according to Whitman, were paid $100K a month for services while others such as billionaire Ron Burkle and business magnate Alvin Malnik gave their services for free.
The trial continues.
Thursday, June 29, 2006
Hey Hoh Back To Court We Go
As is the custom in the summer months, Michael Jackson makes sure that he has a court case to worry about.
This one involves a dispute between Jackson and Marc Schaffel, a former disgruntled business associate; it reached court yesterday.
Schaffel claims that Jackson owes him $3.8M for loans, unpaid wages and expenses.
The case is expected to last over a week, and is being held in Santa Monica.
Jackson has announced that he has split with his accountants, business managers and lawyers.
This one involves a dispute between Jackson and Marc Schaffel, a former disgruntled business associate; it reached court yesterday.
Schaffel claims that Jackson owes him $3.8M for loans, unpaid wages and expenses.
The case is expected to last over a week, and is being held in Santa Monica.
Jackson has announced that he has split with his accountants, business managers and lawyers.
Wednesday, June 21, 2006
Another Summer, Another Trial
The good old summer time is once again upon us, and in keeping with the season it is now time for another trial involving Michael Jackson.
This one involves his old associate Marc Schaffel.
Jury selection begins June 26.
This one involves his old associate Marc Schaffel.
Jury selection begins June 26.
Friday, June 16, 2006
No Charity Single
It seems that the much vaunted and awaited charity single from Michael Jackson for the victims of hurricane Katrina, ironically entitled "What More Can I give?", will not be released.
There is an argument over royalties. It is reported that Jackson insisted on maintaining ownership of the copyright of the song, and had no intention of donating any of the royalties made from the track.
The only money to be donated to charity, if the single was released, would have been from actual CD sales.
Details of this dispute were brought to light by a videotaped statement for the forthcoming lawsuit filed by his former associate Marc Schaffel.
There is an argument over royalties. It is reported that Jackson insisted on maintaining ownership of the copyright of the song, and had no intention of donating any of the royalties made from the track.
The only money to be donated to charity, if the single was released, would have been from actual CD sales.
Details of this dispute were brought to light by a videotaped statement for the forthcoming lawsuit filed by his former associate Marc Schaffel.
Wednesday, June 14, 2006
Back To Court
Michael Jackson is going back to court this Monday, or rather his legal team are. This time it is to fight his corner in a case involving Marc Schaffel, an alleged pornographer and ex Jackson associate, who is seeking $3M from Jackson for breach of contract.
Schaffel also alleges that Jackson is broke, and is addicted to painkillers; de rigueur in Hollywood I would have thought.
A quote from Schaffel's trial brief says:
"In the rarefied air of the world Michael Jackson inhabits, sometimes referred to by his closest advisers as 'Michael World' things were different."
Schaffel alleges that Jackson carried no credit cards, cash or cheques, and relied on advisers and others to attend "to his every need."
Schaffel claims that Jackson plays one adviser against another, via "emotional pleas and strident demands."
Jackson's attorneys claims:
"To say that Schaffel is an unsavoury character is an understatement. He is a professional swindler and pornographer with a long history of dishonest, immoral and manipulative behavior."
Why did Jackson become involved with such an unsavoury character then?
Schaffel claims that Jackson hired him to produce two rebuttal documentaries to the British documentary "Living With Michael Jackson."
Jackson's attorneys are counterclaiming for alleged money owed to Jackson.
Schaffel also alleges that Jackson is broke, and is addicted to painkillers; de rigueur in Hollywood I would have thought.
A quote from Schaffel's trial brief says:
"In the rarefied air of the world Michael Jackson inhabits, sometimes referred to by his closest advisers as 'Michael World' things were different."
Schaffel alleges that Jackson carried no credit cards, cash or cheques, and relied on advisers and others to attend "to his every need."
Schaffel claims that Jackson plays one adviser against another, via "emotional pleas and strident demands."
Jackson's attorneys claims:
"To say that Schaffel is an unsavoury character is an understatement. He is a professional swindler and pornographer with a long history of dishonest, immoral and manipulative behavior."
Why did Jackson become involved with such an unsavoury character then?
Schaffel claims that Jackson hired him to produce two rebuttal documentaries to the British documentary "Living With Michael Jackson."
Jackson's attorneys are counterclaiming for alleged money owed to Jackson.
Friday, February 24, 2006
Mesereau Quits
Tom Mesereau, Michael Jackson's lead attorney in last year's child molestation case, has quit his position as Jackson's lawyer.
Mesereau and his partner, Susan Yu, resigned yesterday. They were representing Jackson in his $4M lawsuit brought by Jackson's ex-business partner Marc Schaffel.
However, neither Mesereau nor Yu appeared for Schaffel's deposition last week.
It appears, according to reports, that Mesereau has quit because he is not getting paid.
It is very unwise of Jackson to treat the lawyer, who won the molestation case, in this manner.
Mesereau and his partner, Susan Yu, resigned yesterday. They were representing Jackson in his $4M lawsuit brought by Jackson's ex-business partner Marc Schaffel.
However, neither Mesereau nor Yu appeared for Schaffel's deposition last week.
It appears, according to reports, that Mesereau has quit because he is not getting paid.
It is very unwise of Jackson to treat the lawyer, who won the molestation case, in this manner.
Wednesday, December 14, 2005
Brando's Plans For Jackson
Marlon Brando was a great friend and fan of Michael Jackson, so much so that he wanted to make a two-part TV special which would have highlighted each other's careers.
Jackson was apparently so thrilled with the prospect that he allegedly called and left his former aide, Marc Schaffel, a voice message at 4:41 in the morning which stated that the project was to start as soon as possible.
The message allegedly said:
"Marlon Brando is pushing, and he's a wonderful man. He's a god. We have to get this done. He wants to get it done before Christmas ... He just wants to make it a big deal. He wants a lot of money, and we would own it together . . . He really wants it, I mean I think that he feels he won't be living too much longer,"
Allegedly, part-one of the show was to be set in Neverland, with Brando chatting up Jackson about his music.
Brando's private Polynesian island was supposed to be the scene for the second part, with Jackson questioning Brando.
The project however never materialised as Brando died on July 1, 2004.
Jackson was apparently so thrilled with the prospect that he allegedly called and left his former aide, Marc Schaffel, a voice message at 4:41 in the morning which stated that the project was to start as soon as possible.
The message allegedly said:
"Marlon Brando is pushing, and he's a wonderful man. He's a god. We have to get this done. He wants to get it done before Christmas ... He just wants to make it a big deal. He wants a lot of money, and we would own it together . . . He really wants it, I mean I think that he feels he won't be living too much longer,"
Allegedly, part-one of the show was to be set in Neverland, with Brando chatting up Jackson about his music.
Brando's private Polynesian island was supposed to be the scene for the second part, with Jackson questioning Brando.
The project however never materialised as Brando died on July 1, 2004.
Thursday, October 27, 2005
Jackson Sues
Michael Jackson cannot, so it seems, resist going to court.
This time, instead of being on the wrong end of the law, he intends to try to sue someone else.
Jackson has filed a lawsuit in Los Angeles for $1M against Marc Schaffel, who testified for the prosecution at Jackson's trial and who is also a producer of gay pornography.
Schaffel had sued Jackson in November 2004, for over $3M in allegedly unpaid loans and other debts.
Jackson, in his case, argues that he entered into a written agreement with Schaffel in August 2001; to produce his song "What More Can I Give?".
The proceeds of the song, after expenses and a small royalty for Schaffel, were allegedly to go to charity.
However, allegedly, Schaffel contrary to the agreement did not pay the production costs.
Jackson then fired Schaffel in 2001, once he allegedly learned of his association with gay porn.
Jackson alleges that despite that, Schaffel falsely represented himself as affiliated with Jackson and received $1M from Music Fighters Co in Japan without reporting it to Jackson.
Jackson also claims that Schaffel kept $250K worth of sculptures and paintings from artist Romero Britto in 2003, that were supposed to be delivered to Jackson.
Whatever the outcome, it is clearly going to provide the lawyers with some lucrative work.
This time, instead of being on the wrong end of the law, he intends to try to sue someone else.
Jackson has filed a lawsuit in Los Angeles for $1M against Marc Schaffel, who testified for the prosecution at Jackson's trial and who is also a producer of gay pornography.
Schaffel had sued Jackson in November 2004, for over $3M in allegedly unpaid loans and other debts.
Jackson, in his case, argues that he entered into a written agreement with Schaffel in August 2001; to produce his song "What More Can I Give?".
The proceeds of the song, after expenses and a small royalty for Schaffel, were allegedly to go to charity.
However, allegedly, Schaffel contrary to the agreement did not pay the production costs.
Jackson then fired Schaffel in 2001, once he allegedly learned of his association with gay porn.
Jackson alleges that despite that, Schaffel falsely represented himself as affiliated with Jackson and received $1M from Music Fighters Co in Japan without reporting it to Jackson.
Jackson also claims that Schaffel kept $250K worth of sculptures and paintings from artist Romero Britto in 2003, that were supposed to be delivered to Jackson.
Whatever the outcome, it is clearly going to provide the lawyers with some lucrative work.
Tuesday, September 27, 2005
The Trials Continue
Michael Jackson, despite ending one trial in California, has several other "legal" issues to attend to.
Jackson flew to London on Friday to take a deposition by the attorney representing his former business partner, Marc Schaffel.
Schaffel is suing Jackson for $4M, for an unpaid loan.
However, because Jackson does not want to return to the USA he requested that the deposition be served at London's Dorchester Hotel.
Jackson paid for Schaffel, King, Mesereau, Jackson's Houston attorney Michael Sydow and their entourages to fly London via business class and for their hotel bills.
Nice trip!
Allegedly, Jackson claimed innocence, by denying knowledge of the items that Schaffel bought for him.
Other legal matters that Jackson must attend to include:
-$48M lawsuit brought by Darien Dash
-Custody/visitation fight with the mother of his two eldest children
-A civil action brought by a New Orleans man, who claims to have a repressed memory of Jackson molesting him when he was underage
Jackson flew to London on Friday to take a deposition by the attorney representing his former business partner, Marc Schaffel.
Schaffel is suing Jackson for $4M, for an unpaid loan.
However, because Jackson does not want to return to the USA he requested that the deposition be served at London's Dorchester Hotel.
Jackson paid for Schaffel, King, Mesereau, Jackson's Houston attorney Michael Sydow and their entourages to fly London via business class and for their hotel bills.
Nice trip!
Allegedly, Jackson claimed innocence, by denying knowledge of the items that Schaffel bought for him.
Other legal matters that Jackson must attend to include:
-$48M lawsuit brought by Darien Dash
-Custody/visitation fight with the mother of his two eldest children
-A civil action brought by a New Orleans man, who claims to have a repressed memory of Jackson molesting him when he was underage
Thursday, May 05, 2005
Killers Claim
Rudy Provencio, an associate of one of Michael Jackson's associates Marc Schaffel, testified yesterday that a member of Jackson's team once referred to "killers" pursuing the Arvizos.
The prosecution contend that Jackson's associates put together a plan to hold the Arvizos prisoner in 2003, by saying that killers were after them.
This "ruse" would force the Arvizos into performing the rebuttal video.
Provencio testified that a Jackson employee, Vincent Amen, said that the only real threat was from students at Gavin Arvizo's school, who used homophobic insults against him.
He went on to say that at one stage Schaffel had tried to curtail a discussion with him by saying:
"I can't talk right now, they just escaped."
Provencio then claimed that Vincent Amen, also said that he couldn't talk "because the family just escaped."
Provencio contradicted Debbie Rowe's testimony, as to her video being genuine, noting that Schaffel frequently coached her performance.
Quote:
"He would prod her to do it better or say it better, as any producer would,".
It seems that Rowe's tears, in one part of the video, were not enough; and that Schaffel made her do the scene again with more feeling.
I wonder if, at the end of this trial, anyone will come away with their reputations intact?
The prosecution contend that Jackson's associates put together a plan to hold the Arvizos prisoner in 2003, by saying that killers were after them.
This "ruse" would force the Arvizos into performing the rebuttal video.
Provencio testified that a Jackson employee, Vincent Amen, said that the only real threat was from students at Gavin Arvizo's school, who used homophobic insults against him.
He went on to say that at one stage Schaffel had tried to curtail a discussion with him by saying:
"I can't talk right now, they just escaped."
Provencio then claimed that Vincent Amen, also said that he couldn't talk "because the family just escaped."
Provencio contradicted Debbie Rowe's testimony, as to her video being genuine, noting that Schaffel frequently coached her performance.
Quote:
"He would prod her to do it better or say it better, as any producer would,".
It seems that Rowe's tears, in one part of the video, were not enough; and that Schaffel made her do the scene again with more feeling.
I wonder if, at the end of this trial, anyone will come away with their reputations intact?
Tuesday, May 03, 2005
A Hefty Withdrawal
Beverly Wagner, a manager of a Los Angeles-area bank, gave testimony in the Michael Jackson trial yesterday.
She stated that Jackson's associate, Marc Schaffel, withdrew $1.5M from her branch two months after the Bashir documentary aired.
She said that cashed one cheque for $1M on April 2, 2003, and another for $0.5M a few days later. The cheques were for cash, against the account of Neverland Valley Entertainment.
The prosecution claim that Schaffel conspired with Jackson to use the money to hold the Arvizos captive.
She stated that Jackson's associate, Marc Schaffel, withdrew $1.5M from her branch two months after the Bashir documentary aired.
She said that cashed one cheque for $1M on April 2, 2003, and another for $0.5M a few days later. The cheques were for cash, against the account of Neverland Valley Entertainment.
The prosecution claim that Schaffel conspired with Jackson to use the money to hold the Arvizos captive.
Wednesday, April 27, 2005
Come Fly With Me
Cynthia Montgomery, a travel agent, gave testimony in the Michael Jackson trial yesterday.
She told the court that she made a flight booking to Brazil for the Arvizos, after a request from Frederic Marc Schaffel a Jackson associate.
The prosecution contend that Jackson associates wanted the Arvizos to vanish to Brazil indefinitely, after the airing of the Bashir documentary.
Montgomery testified that she although was told to book a one-way flight, she reserved a round-trip flight because Americans aren't allowed into Brazil without a return ticket.
The Arvizos never actually made the flight.
Montgomery also said that she watched Jackson being taken into custody, and noted that the sheriff's deputies did not manhandle Jackson.
Jackson contended that they did, in a December 2003 60 Minutes interview. A subsequent California state investigation cleared them of any wrongdoing.
Montgomery gave her testimony under immunity, as the FBI is investigating her in connection to Jackson being secretly videotaped on a charter jet flight she booked.
Montgomery is suing Jackson for allegedly stiffing her on the charter flight's $18K fee.
Does anyone have clean hands in this case?
She told the court that she made a flight booking to Brazil for the Arvizos, after a request from Frederic Marc Schaffel a Jackson associate.
The prosecution contend that Jackson associates wanted the Arvizos to vanish to Brazil indefinitely, after the airing of the Bashir documentary.
Montgomery testified that she although was told to book a one-way flight, she reserved a round-trip flight because Americans aren't allowed into Brazil without a return ticket.
The Arvizos never actually made the flight.
Montgomery also said that she watched Jackson being taken into custody, and noted that the sheriff's deputies did not manhandle Jackson.
Jackson contended that they did, in a December 2003 60 Minutes interview. A subsequent California state investigation cleared them of any wrongdoing.
Montgomery gave her testimony under immunity, as the FBI is investigating her in connection to Jackson being secretly videotaped on a charter jet flight she booked.
Montgomery is suing Jackson for allegedly stiffing her on the charter flight's $18K fee.
Does anyone have clean hands in this case?
Saturday, March 19, 2005
Lien on Neverland
Michael Jackson's creditors are circling above his head, like vultures over a rotting corpse.
It is reported that gay porn producer Mark Schaffel, one of the unindicted co-conspirators in the trial, is going to add a lien on Jackson's Neverland ranch. This confirms the prosecution's claims that Jackson has financial difficulties.
Schaffel, who produced two unaired "rebuttal" videos meant to counter the negative publicity from the 2003 documentary "Living With Michael Jackson", is trying to claim repayment of his $3M in outstanding debts.
These allegedly comprise; $1M for the production of the two videos, and $2M in personal loans, payments and gifts for such famous Jackson friends as Elizabeth Taylor and Marlon Brando.
The Jackson camp has declined to comment on the matter, they cite a gag order.
It is reported that gay porn producer Mark Schaffel, one of the unindicted co-conspirators in the trial, is going to add a lien on Jackson's Neverland ranch. This confirms the prosecution's claims that Jackson has financial difficulties.
Schaffel, who produced two unaired "rebuttal" videos meant to counter the negative publicity from the 2003 documentary "Living With Michael Jackson", is trying to claim repayment of his $3M in outstanding debts.
These allegedly comprise; $1M for the production of the two videos, and $2M in personal loans, payments and gifts for such famous Jackson friends as Elizabeth Taylor and Marlon Brando.
The Jackson camp has declined to comment on the matter, they cite a gag order.
Thursday, March 03, 2005
The Enemy Within
Ann Gabriel (real name Ann Kite and president of the webcaster alliance), a public relations specialist, gave testimony at Michael Jackson's trial yesterday.
She said that the Michael Jackson's team of handlers including; a high-profile lawyer, a gay porn producer and a man with reputed mob ties, seemed to be working against Jackson's interests in the fallout of the damaging 2003 documentary about Jackson.
The testimony augmented the defence's contention that Jackson's "colleagues" were acting without his knowledge, for their own selfish reasons.
Defence lawyer Thomas Mesereau probed every statement Gabriel made to investigators about the 6 day period, in February 2003, when she was working as a crisis manager for Jackson.
Gabriel, who has never met Jackson, told the jury that her contact with some his media people led her to believe that they had a vested interest in letting the media storm about Jackson develop.
It seems that some of them, according to Gabriel, including five unindicted alleged co-conspirators were making a profit from a cut of a "rebuttal video" that Jackson's production company sold to the Fox network for $3 million.
The prosecution contend that the molestation occurred after the rebuttal video was produced.
The indictment charges that, with Jackson's knowledge and approval, Schaffel, Frank Tyson, Vincent Amen, Dieter Wiesner and Ronald Konitzer conspired to keep the accuser and his family hidden and then fly them off to Brazil; until the media frenzy, over Martin Bashir's "Living with Michael Jackson" documentary, subsided.
Gabriel testified that she was surprised when David LeGrand, a lawyer on Jackson's payroll, called to express concern that the accuser and his family had left the ranch unnoticed.
Gabriel, who worked for Jackson from Feb. 9 through Feb. 15, 2003, was then fired. She believes that was because she was working proactively as a publicist, while the men closest to Jackson seemed to be working in the opposite direction.
It seems that Mark Geragos, a lawyer who for a time represented Jackson, called a tabloid television show and demanded that Gabriel not be allowed to appear on air; that is at least Gabriel's take on the events.
She went on to say that Geragos then wanted her to sign a confidentiality agreement, that indicated she was working as a private investigator; she refused.
After being fired, Gabriel seemingly stayed in touch with LeGrand. He told her that Jackson's media handlers had gotten what they wanted for their rebuttal video from the accuser's mother.
Quote:
"He said they no longer had to worry about [the mother]. They had her on tape and they were going to make her look life a crack whore..".
Mesereau raised many objections to Gabriel's testimony; these were mainly overruled.
Judge Melville gave Mesereau a shape warning over Mesereau's attempts to get Gabriel to repeat her testimony:
"Mr. Mesereau, I want to ask you to look at the jury and realize they are tired of hearing this...You asked that same question 10 times today. You need to grasp the evidence and not keep repeating it."
If Gabriel's testimony is accurate, at the very best, it shows that Jackson's judgement in respect of those who he associates with is highly questionable.
People are judged by those that they associate with.
She said that the Michael Jackson's team of handlers including; a high-profile lawyer, a gay porn producer and a man with reputed mob ties, seemed to be working against Jackson's interests in the fallout of the damaging 2003 documentary about Jackson.
The testimony augmented the defence's contention that Jackson's "colleagues" were acting without his knowledge, for their own selfish reasons.
Defence lawyer Thomas Mesereau probed every statement Gabriel made to investigators about the 6 day period, in February 2003, when she was working as a crisis manager for Jackson.
Gabriel, who has never met Jackson, told the jury that her contact with some his media people led her to believe that they had a vested interest in letting the media storm about Jackson develop.
It seems that some of them, according to Gabriel, including five unindicted alleged co-conspirators were making a profit from a cut of a "rebuttal video" that Jackson's production company sold to the Fox network for $3 million.
The prosecution contend that the molestation occurred after the rebuttal video was produced.
The indictment charges that, with Jackson's knowledge and approval, Schaffel, Frank Tyson, Vincent Amen, Dieter Wiesner and Ronald Konitzer conspired to keep the accuser and his family hidden and then fly them off to Brazil; until the media frenzy, over Martin Bashir's "Living with Michael Jackson" documentary, subsided.
Gabriel testified that she was surprised when David LeGrand, a lawyer on Jackson's payroll, called to express concern that the accuser and his family had left the ranch unnoticed.
Gabriel, who worked for Jackson from Feb. 9 through Feb. 15, 2003, was then fired. She believes that was because she was working proactively as a publicist, while the men closest to Jackson seemed to be working in the opposite direction.
It seems that Mark Geragos, a lawyer who for a time represented Jackson, called a tabloid television show and demanded that Gabriel not be allowed to appear on air; that is at least Gabriel's take on the events.
She went on to say that Geragos then wanted her to sign a confidentiality agreement, that indicated she was working as a private investigator; she refused.
After being fired, Gabriel seemingly stayed in touch with LeGrand. He told her that Jackson's media handlers had gotten what they wanted for their rebuttal video from the accuser's mother.
Quote:
"He said they no longer had to worry about [the mother]. They had her on tape and they were going to make her look life a crack whore..".
Mesereau raised many objections to Gabriel's testimony; these were mainly overruled.
Judge Melville gave Mesereau a shape warning over Mesereau's attempts to get Gabriel to repeat her testimony:
"Mr. Mesereau, I want to ask you to look at the jury and realize they are tired of hearing this...You asked that same question 10 times today. You need to grasp the evidence and not keep repeating it."
If Gabriel's testimony is accurate, at the very best, it shows that Jackson's judgement in respect of those who he associates with is highly questionable.
People are judged by those that they associate with.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)