fShare
0

HTWF Exhibits starts a disagreement between MJ Estate and HTWF

 

 

HTWF was late to turn in their evidence and they gave thousands of pages of documents. They also didn't name of number the documents. Let me give you an example from the exhibit list

 

this is Estate's exhibit 46 : 1/12/2005 E-mail from Johnson to Raymone K.Bain dated 1/12/05 [Bates stamped HTWF 005203-04]

 

this is HTWF exhibit 877 : tmr-jackson-3-hl.pdf

 

As you can see what the HTWF exhibits are unclear and they are not numbered.

 

 

Furthermore Estate paid and did the task of Bates Stamping of HTWF's documents ( bates stamp is a numbering system as you can see from the Estate's example. You later on use that number so it's easy for each side to find the document being mentioned in the thousands of pages)

 

For months they have been wanting HTWF to change their exhibit list - adding definitions of the evidence and using bates-stamp numbers.

 

When you look to the above posted Katherine Jackson declaration you'll see that there are mentions of exhibits 4.a, 4.b etc. Estate lawyers are saying that no copies of that exhibits were given and they cannot determine what exhibit4.a refers to as the bates numbers etc aren't used.

 

Simply put Estate is arguing that when HTWF refers to an exhibit they do not know what they are talking about as they aren't using bates numbers and name / definition of the exhibits are lacking.

 

-----------------------------------------------------------

 

 

Judge's order about the defense evidence exhibits

 

[I]All defense exhibits not previously identified and presented to plaintiffs for the first time on April 13, 2011 are ordered excluded. The Court instructs defense counsel to provide plaintiffs with a finalized list of exhibits (no greater than 200 in number) no later than noon on April 15, 2011.[/I]

 

Translation:

 

The recent witness statements coming from the defense had exhibits referenced that the Estate hasn't seen at all, those are excluded. Judge limited the possible evidence exhibits to a maximum of 200 and asks the defense to give a final list to the Estate.

 

----------------------------------------------------

 

Defense exhibits gets filed with the court

 

 

As ordered by the court HTWF defense lawyers filed their final 200 evidence exhibits with the court. We can't see the evidence but can read descriptions.

 

Most of HTWF's evidence is emails between Johnson with Michael's managers, publicists and lawyers.

 

 

From descriptions we can see some interesting communications

 

- Al Malnik : Johnson was sending emails to Malnik 2-3 weeks before Michael's death about trademarks.

 

Food for thought: Don't you think this is quite interesting given that Malnik wasn't working with Michael for years?

 

- Michael Amir Williams : There's also several emails listed as being sent to Michael Amir Williams , Michael's assistant at the time of his death. Interestingly there's also an email to Van Alexander asking him to vouch for Melissa to Michael Amir Williams so that he wouldn't think that she's just another fan.

 

Food for thought : So Michael's own charity's sole director needs introduction?

 

- Van Alexander : There are emails from Melissa to Van Alexander asking for Michael's help with the cost of domains and asking Michael's active participation with charity.

 

Food for thought: I thought that Raymone Bain said that Michael wouldn't be responsible for expenses and that Oxman &Raymone Bain said that Michael wouldn't been giving attention to the charity.

 

-------------------------------------------

 

Objections are filed.

 

 

Objections are filed by the both sides. Not surprisingly both sides are arguing that the witnesses from other sides testimonies are hearsay, irrelevant, personal opinion, lack personal knowledge etc.

 

HTWF Lawyer's filed their Final Brief as well. Their main point is similar to what Melissa Johnson said in her testimony before. They argue that "she acted with authorization granted by Michael through his representatives and with blessing of his beneficiaries Katherine Jackson (and his kids)". They again say that they didn't need a licence because they are the same thing as Michael. They state all their arguments will be supported by Oxman and Bain and Katherine.

 

Interestingly "Michael intended his family and his kids to continue on with HTWF" is added. I wonder how they come to this conclusion. It's quite a stretch from "Michael gave me his authorization to run HTWF" to "he wanted his kids involved in it". Even if you go with his will he wanted 20% to be given to a charity chosen by a committee, in no place he wants his family and kids be involved in the charity.

 

and a tidbit: the agreed facts state that Melissa Johnson have not ever spoken with Michael.