their attorney really did a number on the ceo of aeg, the company that hired michael jackson to do the tour. he caught him in a lot of contradictions. he was able to show that clearly anybody who was looking at michael jackson knew that jackson was sick and was looking pale and had problems. so as i say from a public relations standpoint, i think clearly the jacksons scored a lot. whether they re winning the case though is another matter i think. and go ahead. finish your thought. the reason i say that is because when you step back on this case, the thing you have to remember ultimately is the claim here is that they, the concert company, aeg, was negligent in hiring conrad murray, the doctor that jackson wanted. now, jackson suggested conrad murray. conrad murray had never up until that point in time been
favor of the jackson family? from a public relations stand-point, it most certainly d. because their attorney really did a number on the ceo of aeg, the company that hired michael jackson to do the tour. he caught him in a lot of con a contradictions, and everybody looking at michael jackson was sick and pale and had problems. so i think as a public relations standpoint i think clearly the jacksons scored a lot. whether they are winning the case, though, is another matter. and go ahead. no, finish your thought. the reason i say that s. when you step back from the case, the thing you have to remember ultimately is the claim here, they, the concert company, aeg, was negligent in hiring conrad
the concert promoter for $40 billion but that s more than jackson made in his career, a lot more. but money she said the jackssons missed out on with the unlikely toned his career. 40 billion decide? michelle, what do you think? i think that she is out of her mind. and that she is going to point the finger at anyone for the neglect hiring of this doctor. she needs to point the finger at herself. the concert company has no duty to michael jackson to making mother she is taken care of. he is to make sure he is safe and no lights fall on him. neil: claiming the promoter knew more about his condition than the family did. if she is, that s a terrible argument. everything they re responsible for, this family could point
accountable. neil: how about holding the family accountable? i agree that s going to neil: if you re going to point fingers at promoters and doctors, if family doesn t know, everyone has to look in the mirror here and it s a track beyond compare. this is a family that kidnapped the grandmother to get her declared incompetent so they can get their haps on the money. this is a desperate family. willing to do almost anything. neil: where will the case end up? it s never going to trial. it will get settled. but i d like to seive it go to trial because i d like to see the concert company, i would like to see if maybe we can hold them conditionallable bought the entertainment industry has a habit offing too this, using people ohave addicts and problems and using them to the maximum, and it would be nice to see them be held accountable when they do something as grossly neglect as hiring a
court ruling. we get to this later when we talk about lindsay lohan, but the supreme court ruling in may said california needs to not keep all the prisoners in. the prisoners are at maximum capacity. that law was created for cases like conrad murray, where he is not a mass murderer. this is the case where the judge might say you don t have to serve time. eric: does it bother anyone that one of the unless, i m mistaken in this issue. conrad murray, doctor paid by michael jackson and by the concert company. does that bother anyone? greg: it doesn t bother me. i look at the jackson family and the doctor. reprehensible people. they are doing each other s favors. what bothers me are the people outside on monday afternoon holding signs. that scare me more than occupy wall street. people who aren t at their job. but instead are standing in front of any kind of court