There is a person making videos posting them on YouTube is spreading inaccuracies, usually we would just ignore those that just do not know how to research, by research we do NOT mean read the tabloids!! I feel so let down i am even having to address this, After the years of suffering Michael endured and his countless message about the media, this person still persist on using TRASH from tabloids, some relying on Friedman for information, Read about him here,,,,,
We hope this will end the questions whether Branca was rehired or not after being fired in 03, and WHY he was fired.
PLEASE do not take Michael for a fool as Sony did, you all remember his speech, “They never thought this performer would OUT THINK THEM”
Michael generated SEVERAL BILLION DOLLARS for $ony, NOT BRANCA!!
OK, So lets get to the video in question first of all, in rebutting this video ALL of your question will be answered, if its answers you are looking for!!
Seigel did not have to resign, he was fired,
John Branca and Michael did not part ways, making it look like it was mutual, Branca was fired for embezzlement, stealing, theft, he was DEMANDED.. DEMANDED.. to hand over ALL docs, which would include the Will in question!
John Branca You are FIRED!
User writes “After investigations there was no proof Branca was a bad guy”
Ermm
When LeGrand was questioned during the 05 trial, by PROSECUTION, he was asked, “Did you FIND evidence of wrong doing by Branca” to which the reply was NO! This is correct, no evidence was found… This is the only line of question branca supporters are using as gospel, and ignoring all the questions Thomas Mesereau asked, Tom asked those questions to get them ON COURT record, there was a reason for this, and the reason was, John Branca along with Tommy Mottola did ATTEMPT to embezzle money to an off shore account!
See Interfor report here:- which reads “Interfor believes that, at this stage of the investigation, IF WE HAD ADDITIONAL TIME AND PROPER BUDGET WE COULD DEVELOP INTELLIGENCE WHICH WOULD UNCOVER A SCHEME TO DEFRAUD JACKSON AND HIS EMPIRE BY MOTTOLA AND BRANCA BY DIVERTING FUNDS OFFSHORE!”
I have seen others say, this was probably for JB for his 5% if this is the case, whey was it leaving Michaels account, it should have gone direct from $ony to Branca!!
Money WAS going to off shore accounts, “Jackson’s Money through Mottola and Branca”
The only one person who knew if HIS money should be in the Caribbean was Michael, Michael knew he did NOT have a off shore account, Michael knew HIS money should not be going to the Caribbean!! Michael knew he was being ripped off! PERIOD! You dont need me to tell you what Michael felt about Mottola! Michael refered to Branca as the Devil also! The two were one as far as Michael was concerned!!
Interfor Report John Branca.
Let me give you a scenario, Conrad Murray, did anyone see him give MJ the propofol, But you all know he did it, and it was wrong, IF he had NOT been charged, does that mean he would be innocent!!! You see where i am going with this,
Branca acting for $ony and Michael at the same time is CONFLICT OF INTEREST! why is this being ignored by many!
In the legal profession, the duty of loyalty owed to a client prohibits an attorney (or a law firm) from representing any other party with interests adverse to those of a current client. The few exceptions to this rule require informed written consent from all affected clients. In some circumstances, a conflict of interest can never be waived by a client. In perhaps the most common example encountered by the general public, the same firm should not represent both parties in a divorce or child custody case.
A prohibited or undisclosed representation involving a conflict of interest can subject an attorney to disciplinary hearings, the denial or disgorgement of legal fees, or in some cases (such as the failure to make mandatory disclosure), criminal proceedings. In the United States, a law firm usually cannot represent a client if its interests conflict with those of another client, even if they have separate lawyers within the firm, unless (in some jurisdictions) the lawyer is segregated from the rest of the firm for the duration of the conflict. Law firms often employ software in conjunction with their case management and accounting systems in order to meet their duties to monitor their conflict of interest exposure and to assist in obtaining waivers.
Michael knew he was being conned, he knew, he fired Branca, there is nothing more to add!
Michael did not rehire Branca right up until the 05 trial, if he had, then why would Tom Mez ask these questions, whilst Michael was sitting right there, would Michael allow HIS attorney to be exposed this way!! The questions were objected, but Tom being the smart person he is, acting FOR MICHAEL got those ON RECORD, When someone gets something on record its for a important reason, Michael WANTED it on RECORD!!
The first video:-
@ 1:34 “MR JACKSON EXPRESSED CONCERNS ABOUT BRANCA LOYALTY”
User in the top video tries to make viewer belive Branca was Michael attorney Nov 03, Just because a media outlet called him, and HE DID NOT RETURN calls, come on,, please how stupid does this user think the general public is!!!
Why on earth would Branca return a call when he is NOT working for Michael, this is so ridiculous it hurting my head!!! If Branca was rehired after, then why did Tom expose Branca in 05, i hope you trust Branca was NOT rehired up until of at least 05, i will continue further…. User used Friedman as proof, Friedman who says Branca was part of permanent gov of Michaels team, back then i doubt if everyone knew what was happening on the INSIDE, i doubt if Branc ran to the media with the letter that he was fired, and Michael did not make a habit of publishing his private business! So its blatantly obvious Friedman got it WRONG!! Friedman also reports Branca negotiated a CBS interview for Michael, this story was picked up by numerous media outlets who reported the same, such as MTV, none checked to verify the reports.
Once a story is publised on the internet, hundreds of others pick up the same, please read this letter from Janet Jackson attorney, and you will see what i mean http://www.scribd.com/doc/103151104/Janet-Jackson-v-TMZ Just because it is repeated by thousands, does not make it TRUE!
Recently Friedman published a story, which i am not going to share, basically the emails that were leaked in the Lloyd V AEG/MJ Estate lawsuit, incriminating AEG. Friedman is blaming the Jackson siblings for them, saying the siblings leaked them because they want money, I commented on the artilce, saying “Dude are you on propofol, the case in question is Lloyds of London V AEG. Branca, how on earth would the Jackson Siblings get their hand on these sealed doucments! Friedman deleted my comment, so trusting anything with Freidmans signatory on it is like trusting the big bad wolf with little red riding hood(dont tell me you dont know that story)
@4:11 users used a news article where as Branca tells reporters Michael will be arraigned Friday, the reporter assumes Branca is still hired by Michael, again i want to reiterate, i doubt if the reporter knew Branca had been fired, Geragos was Michael litigation attorney at the time, so he may have been on the phone with HIM< and if Branca was present it was to SELL his 5% share of the catalog, which btw he was NOT supposed to have had in the first place!! More on the meeting here
As the most far-reaching transaction of his career progressed on paper, Jackson wanted his long-time lawyer, Branca, nowhere in sight. “You are commanded to immediately cease expending effort of any kind on my behalf,” Jackson wrote him on Feb. 3, 2003, offering no reason for the firing. (See: You’re Fired!)
Yet, Branca hardly could be shut out, given a 5 percent interest in Jackson’s Sony/ATV stake. Branca would have pocketed $17 million from the dealings, Malnik said in a recent interview. In a letter to Koppelman on July 28, 2003, Branca underscored his financial interest in writing, to be passed on to Goldman. (See: Branca’s Secret Letter)
@5:13 Finally a accurate report because we know Michael was very hurt by Eminem, Branca was fired!! yet the user chooses to ignore, lols
@5:45 Branca renegotiated the Sony contract, NO, the contract was already in place, Michael was not aware of the small print, thought he was free of sony but was not, actually it was Branca’s screw up that left Michael in this predicament!
User has posted so many “Tabloids” articles “Branca did NOT return calls” this speaks for it self, as Branca was NO LONGER speaking for Michael!!
@6:20 JJ lawsuit, yes Branca and Michael parted ways for good, meaning Michael got back his 5% and would never have to see Branca face again,
Scenario, couple separate, Then divorce, but are tied because their home is joint, they sell the house, thus part ways for good, NOTHING TO TIE THEM,
@ 6:43 users states Branca was responsible for Michael buying ATV cat, it was Michaels money, Branca was acting attorney only, any acting attorney would have done the same,. John Branca should actually be grateful to Michael, that he was able to slip in through the back door and take 5% of Michaels $ony/ATV catalog,
Break down on Piers Morgan interview here ……….
User states there is no letter rehiring Branca 2003, with all the controversy going on, if this letter existed you can bet your lives Branca would have published it by now!
Furthermore Branca was NOT even hired on June 17th 2009 as we have recently learned from leaked AEG emails, Michael was NOT at rehearsals.
Branca was fired for embezzlement, he concealed the old Will, should never have been in possession of it, the letter from Michael firing and demanding speaks for itself! Just because an attorney may have made copies, this does not make it valid, i copy of a check can never be used in a bank, this is laughable excuse by the user! How can anyone be so certain there was no later Will, HOW! Speculation, wishful thinking evident just another blog to cover the dirty dealing of John Brana, please see tab at the top of this page on irrefutable evidence on Michael Jackson Estate Fraud!!
Branca could have made a lot of money of Michael but did not, hmmm
**Branca took 5% of all Michael’s businesses and performance income along with another 5% of Michael’s Sony/ATV royalties. It is a conflict of interest to take stake in that which you represent. Branca represented both Sony and Michael. Plus Branca double/Triple charged Michael for his services, see his contract in JJ court filing
I have posted the Interfor report, Brana was working for Mottola, if he had not been Michael attorney, $ony would not have given Branca a second glance!!
Users post “Warp” aticle written by an unbiased investigator, states the article is not Michael Jackson friendly, actually it NOT Branca friendly!!
@12:28 Branca stood to make $17 million if Michael sold his catalog, Michael did not sell, Branca still extorted $15 Mill from Michael for the 5%,
User states Branca advised Michael not to sell the catalogs, EXCUSE ME!! Michael never ever wanted to sell his catalog!!! Branca did not help with the $ony loan, it was Michael who would only get the loan if Branca sold his share, as Michael wanted NOTHING to do with Branca!!!! Are we to believe Sony really cared if Branca(Their man) owned 5% or not, again,
So Michael called Branca for advice, and it cost him 5%, and the users says Branca could have made of Michael, open you eyes, he just made $15 Million!!!!
@14:09 Branca suggested the merger with Sony!! Was this a good thing or a bad, You decide knowing how Michael felt about Sony, and how they treated him, bribing radio stations not to play Invincible, trying to force Michael in to bankruptcy so they could take it all, this was a bad idea, knowing Branca was working for Sony all along!!!
When Sony was caught they settled
LOLS,,,, In ending users says Branca is not too found of Sony,
Branca gives $ony EVERYTHING MJ including “This Is It” Movie for $250 mil, TII makes $395Mil, You do the maths, WHO DOES BRANCA WORK For!!!
Value: $392 million
Sony Pictures bought Jackson’s rehearsal footage from AEG for $60 million. In retrospect, the price was something of a bargain. “Michael Jackson: This Is It” was released Oct. 28, 2009, and earned $72 million at the U.S. box office, according to BoxOfficeMojo.com, making it the highest-grossing concert film in history.
Overseas, the film earned $188 million at the box office; of that, $56 million was tallied in Japan alone. After AEG recouped the company’s investment of more than $35 million in the canceled shows at London’s O2 and the film, the bulk of the theatrical take-court documents indicate it could be as high as 90%-went to Jackson’s estate.
On the home video front, the “This Is It” DVD has earned $43 million in U.S. sales, with 2.7 million units sold since its Jan. 26 release, according to The-Numbers.com, a division of Nash Information Services. Nash estimates the film made another $25 million in rental revenue.
In Japan-where the film was also sold as part of a special “This Is It” bundle for the PlayStation 3-DVD sales topped $18 million on its first day of release; 351,000 Blu-ray copies have been sold, according to rankings service Oricon, adding about $7 million to the total.
In terms of TV, the industry standard is that exclusive rights for ad-supported TV costs 12% of the domestic box office for a four-year window; this rule of thumb is in flux, however, as the length of exclusive windows extend and the number of outlets involved in the deals increase. In November 2009, Viacom purchased the exclusive U.S. TV rights to air “This Is It” on its MTV and BET family of networks-including VH1 and Palladia, as well as MTV and BET-for six years. Given the additional years in the contract and the film’s box-office tally, the deal could be worth upwards of $15 million. (By contrast, FX is reported to have paid between $25 million and $30 million for just the U.S. commercial TV rights to “Avatar.”)
With its family-friendly PG rating, “This Is It” can be shown in all distribution mediums outside of traditional theaters, including airplanes, cruise ships and hotel chains. Licensing fees for nontheatrical performances vary based on the movie and its potential reach and how long it will air after it debuts in theaters, but it’s generally forecast to be about 7% of total revenue for a film. For “This Is It,” that puts the number at $24 million.
Billboard reports ONE BILLION on Michael first anniversay, Branca says Estate made $400mil TOTAL after 3YEARS, this CROOK should be in JAIL!!!! WHERE THE F**K HAS ONE BILLION DOLLARS GONE!! THE AMERICAN DREAM INDEED!!! FOR THE CROOKS IN California!!
Finally, Estate has twitter account, they LOVE to respond to fans, specially those that sing the Branca tune, why dont TeamBranca just ask him to confirm when he was hired fired, https://twitter.com/MJonlineteam I would really Love to see what he has to say,, well i already know he will LIE through his teeth, still it will be fun just so we can catch him in yet another lie!!
Whilst you guys are contacting Branca, Please ask him WHY THIS HAPPENED!! TOMMY MOTTOLA ON MICHAEL JACKSON’S UNRELEASED … Well we know why, but would like to hear what he blurts outta his mouth
You must be logged in to post a comment.