JabarR74 said:

thanks i will contact them later

bboy87 said:

i've been saying brandi is adopted but i didn't have the print, thanks

mimi07 said:

You want evidence that Latoya told that to the police? You do? Let me take you back to June 27th, when reports first floated. The police DID release reports that a man called Jeffre Phillips had "found" coke, creams for skin bleaching, Diprivan and medication for glaucoma in Michael's house. The police DID confirm that he told them Michael had a heroin addiction. Remember the 25 bottles of Diprivan? Well, according to reports from June 26, Jeffre Phillips, again, was the police's source. Remember the Marijuana story? Remember when the police released a statement claiming that "some false evidence has been produced by some close to Jackson"? I want to see you counter-argumenting me, despite the fact that I know full well that you won't be able to.

mimi07 said:

She was also the first one to call him a drug addict. She was also the first one to claim he was so addicted that he would push the family. Unfortunately for her, the autopsy report confirmed he was NOT addicted and the public later discovered the reasons as to why Jackson wanted nothing to do with his hounding/harrassing family (remember what happened when Rowe and Joe discovered that Michael was going to tour again? Remember? Or do you have selective memory?)

I have the facts, you have the suppositions. Who wins? The answer is pretty clear. Just like the facts: Latoya, Randy and Leonard Rowe are the ones pushing for the "drug addict stories"...and why? Because they are the ones who want to be executors of the estate as they have confirmed that OFFICIALLY on a courtroom. Then you have Janet who has no idea what Propofol is and talks about it as if it is coke or heroin.
[Edited 2/3/10 11:55am]

sag10 said:

You didn't understand anything, did you? Not to be prepotent, but you did NOT understand anything!

The autopsy report clearly confirmed that MICHAEL WAS NOT A DRUG ADDICT and wasn't taking the drugs Latoya told the police he was taking. He was NOT taking heroin. He was NOT taking coke. He was NOT taking Diprivan. He was NOT taking medication for glaucoma. Was he using creams for skin bleaching? Well, do you think he enjoyed looking like a cow (white with dark patchs)? We do NOT know if he was using a cream for skin bleaching. We DO know that he used it, in the past, in order to look cromatically uniform, but we also know why he wanted to look that way: because Jackson had Vitiligo.

It's clear that Latoya is inventing these things because she wants: 1. To invalidate the wills (questioning the dead person's mental capacities and her/his habits [mainly with drugs] it's any person's only option to invalidate a will [apart from undue influence and a false signature...the family has already tried both!]. However, a judge with a IQ higher than 20 will know she/her family is/are lying. 2. Sue AEG (get why she constanly invents stuff about AEG? Get why she constantly rants about this company? Get why she claims he was overworked? Get why she says he just signed to do ten shows? Get why she says he was murdered by a net of people? Get why she says Michael told her constantly AEG was going to kill him? Get why she says, all the time,that Michael called AEG's people "bully bosses"? Get why the family is constantly claiming that Michael was murdered and Murray was just the hitman/fall guy who had orders by higher identities to kill him? Get why the family is talking, all the time, about how Michael was controlled by AEG? Besides, claiming AEG took advantage of a drug addict [something Jackson was NOT] is the family's only way [and would be any family's only way] of sueing the company. However, they are lying and, therefore, will never successfully sue AEG.)
[Edited 2/3/10 12:19pm]

MOL said:

does anyone think the family will be called to the stand? since they are source of the drug stories, and based on the other thread where you have a significant number of posters pretty much stating that mj more or less deserved to die b/c he was an addict and murray shouldn't be blamed, do you think murray and his lawyers will call the family to the stand to help provide a defense?

if - and it's a big if since the autopsy does not indicate drug abuse that we know of - if there is a possibility that mj was an addict, do you think the family will be called to testify to that, and do you think the prosecutors are prepared to defend mj?

bboy87 said:

Hmmm!

kibbles said:

That's a very big question mark...

kibbles said:

First: Dr. Ionache, Dileo, Raymone Bay, Meserau and his team and many many more have already confirmed that Jackson was NOT an addict. In addition, the autopsy reports erases any doubts: Jackson wasn't a drug addict, period.

The family knew NOTHING about MJ. He kept a distance. They were constantly harrassing/hounding/stalking him for reunion tours, money, reunion tours, money, reunion tours, money, reunion tours, money and blah blah blah. Remember what Mike LaPurré said? The Jackson family treated him as a cash-cow and made his life a living hell for...money and reunion tours. The TII circus with Rowe and Joe is a great example of that. Remember what Michael used to tell his tours' producers? Remember that Michael begged AEG for help since his father was torturing him for money? Therefore, Michael avoided them (and most of the people from his camp confirm this) and kept a BIG distance. The Jacksons never understood why Michael kept a distance from them and avoided them so, in order to justify it -without blaming themselves- they came up with the "addict story". A false, outrageous lie which, insterestingly enough, put them in a flattering light since it can be a (false) justification for everything. Ex.: In reality, Michael kept a distance from them because of the fact that they make a circus out of everything and are disgusting, greedy people who see nothing but dollar signs in him. However, in the media, the Jacksons claim that the only reason Michael avoided them was because he was an addict who couldn't hear a "no" from his family who constantly tried to save and help him. Ex2: People started questioning themselves why was Joe and Rowe constantly hounding/stalking/badgering Michael since January 09. In reality, it was because they wanted a piece of the O2 pie. However, in the media, the Jacksons claim Joe was only trying to save Michael from his horrible addiction which is an outrageous lie.

Do I think the Jacksons will testify agaisnt Michael? Not directly. They will use Brian Oxman (obvious answer). Randy will also use his pal Mark Lester and Latoya will use her boyfriend/manager. Joe, obviously, will also call his ex-convicted-and-known-scammer Leonard Rowe. The Jacksons are one-trick poneys.

Prosecutors won't defend MJ because of the family, which is pretty obvious in my eyes. The point is: the false "MJ was an addict story" is great for both the family and Murray.
[Edited 2/3/10 16:09pm]

More: the Jacksons are the sources of the drug stories but not because Michael was a druggie. It's because the "Michael was a druggie" story is the only way they can sue AEG and invalidate the will. Get why the family ACTUALLY NEVER got a second autopsy report and refused to leak the first one? THey know damn well that Michael was NOT an addict....but money talks louder.

MOL said:

then i can see the prosecutors calling the aeg doctor, coroner, mez, bain to the stand to talk about whether mj was an addict.

but if mj wasn't clean, look for the defense to call janet, latoya, joe and rowe, tito, and marlon to the stand. i hope what you're saying is true, b/c all murray needs is reasonable doubt. although i truly believe that mj's being an addict is irrelevant and in fact if he was, makes the doctor even more guilty of negligence since he took an oath that drug dealers don't take to protect life when at all possible.

but looking at some of the posters on this thread, all murray needs is someone who will blame mj for his death, and he will walk. i think that's why the prosecutors have taken so long with this case. they're afraid that might happen.
[Edited 2/3/10 17:03pm]

ViintageJunkiie said:

i have this episode on vhs, i'm scared to play it cause i don't want the tape to rip thank goodness for youtube

kibbles said:

But MJ was clean. That's a fact. He was NOT a drug addict. That's another fact.


Answering the questions: it's pretty obvious, by now, that the family will testify INDIRECTLY. They aren't that stupid. Joe will testify through Brian Oxman and Leonard Rowe, Randy will testify through Mark Lester and Don Stabler and Latoya through her manager. They will tell lies, for sure. The family will make everything to paint MJ as an out of control addict who couldn't do anything right and was controlled by higher forces. That will open lots of doors for them (if they don't fail at convincing the jugde and their lies stand still): the will will be invalidated and the family will put their hands on the money...and, of course, they'll be able to make millions by sueing AEG.

MJ was NOT a drug addict and that is, right now, the family's biggest nightmare. After all, because of that fact they can't put theit greedy hands on millions and millions and millions. Get why the family is so busy at painting Michael as a druggie...despite the fact that they know full well he wasn't one?
[Edited 2/4/10 2:51am]

MOL said:

None of the brothers are trying to paint Michael as a drug addict

Jermaine said FIRMLY Michael wasn't an addict and that Michael's situation was different. He's said this many times

Randy, although he has said some questionable stuff, said Michael was murdered

Tito, Marlon, and Jackie won't say anything about the case until everything has come out

I agree with you about Joe and Leonard Rowe. Rowe and Michael didn't have the best relationship. Michael didn't trust Rowe

bboy87 said:

Wrong. Tito said, in an interview for the Mirror, that Michael was a drug addict. Marlon said the same in an interview for the Mirror. Latoya has said that many times, as well.

I agree with you on Jermaine. He has been very supportive. However, I NEVER mentioned his name in my posts, in this matter, so your argument does not make sense.
[Edited 2/4/10 5:01am]

mimi07 said:

I'm surprised there's no petition for it.

MOL said:

Should Mike's family NOT get his money? I don't get your point.

Graycap23 said:

well, i get what MOL is saying.

mj did leave his money to his family - his kids and his mother (for as long as she's alive, according to reports).

but apparently the rest of his extended family don't think they should have been omitted, and there inlies the intrigue.

MOL said:

there's nothing stopping the defense from calling the family DIRECTLY. why call a third party when murray's lawyer can call the family to the stand directly? after all it was janet, for example, who stated in public that there were interventions and the family wasn't blind(?) to mj's drug use. why call rowe when you can make her testify directly?

Graycap23 said:

Michael left his money to his kids and his mother (temporarily). So, yes: the rest of the family should NOT get his money. That's what Michael wanted and clearly stated in his will. Yet, the rest of the family keep trying to put their dirty hands on the kids' money.

If you do not know what you're talking about, then don't say anything at all.
[Edited 2/4/10 10:42am]

mimi07 said:

That's what I've been talking about. Latoya keeps ranting about how there are many people involved in MJ's death because she wants to sue AEG, along with papa Joe and Randy. When she says "many people", she means AEG. And why? Because she smells a lawsuit against this company. She's not interested in the murder and blah blah blah...she's interested in the money she can make by accusing AEG of murdering Michael. Get why the family keeps talking about a net of people involved in MJ's death? Get why the family keeps talking trash about AEG?

kibbles said:

Look:the Jacksons were sueing Michael when he was alive through Patrick Alloco. Since that lawsuit went nowhere, they sued him, once again, through Leonard Rowe. Remember the 300 millions lawsuit agaisnt Michael? The Jacksons didn't sue Michael directly because their names would be tarnished, in the media. That's a strategy that doesn't deceive anyone anymore: whenever the family wants to leech money off of MJ, they use other people so that their names won't be tarnished in the public eye. MJ's family always did their best in order to pass the "we are the perfect family" image to the public. If they testified against MJ directly, their names would be tarnished. That's why they will testify INDIRECTLY. They will use other people to do the dirty job.

MOL said:

lol.....a bit high strung?

MOL said:

I could give you thousands of examples of this, but I'm going to give you just two: Jeffrey Philips. When the family tried to paint MJ as a drug addict to the police, they didn't go directly to the police. They ordered Philips to go tell the police HE had found drugs in MJ'S house.

Remember when "sources close to the family" sold rumors to tabloids claiming MJ was too weak, thin and all and all fucked up to do the 50 shows in th 02 arena? The "sources close to the family" were Joe and Leonard Rowe, who were getting revenge on MJ for not allowing them to leech off of him.

I could give you millions of examples.
[Edited 2/4/10 11:01am]

Graycap23 said:

This is so FUNNY!