Quantcast
Channel: Vindicating Michael

Two Lawsuits re Michael Jackson and Their Drastically Different Outcome. CASCIO case (part 3). ANOTHER FIGHT

$
0
0

You probably wonder why the matter of Cascio songs is so important for vindicating Michael Jackson blog.

There are two reasons for it.

The first and foremost is the undoubtedly fictitious character of a lawsuit against the Cascios and MJ Estate (specifically John Branca) initiated in order to knock off the remaining key figures from the game that has been steadfastly played against Michael Jackson for very many years – and this is irrespective of the goals the Plaintiff pursued or thought she was pursuing. The puppet can have one goal while the puppeteers have another.

In this game John Branca is under constant attack as the main creator of MJ’s lifetime and posthumous financial success, while the Cascios inadvertently found themselves in another important capacity – as the key figures capable to speak in the defense of Michael Jackson.

The Cascios like their privacy and have never enjoyed the limelight, but if need be they would certainly brace themselves to testify about their innocent relationship with Michael when they were children.

At the 2005 trial Frank Cascio was not subpoenaed by Thomas Mesereau as a witness for the defense because Frank himself was in danger of being charged with conspiring to “abduct the Arvizos and hold them captive” and other craziness that went with this absurd claim.

But at the forthcoming trial of Robson/Safechuck vs MJ Estate the participation of the Cascios is almost unavoidable and the voices of two brothers – Eddie and Frank, as well as the whole Cascio family could bust the tales of the two extortionists and bring the jury to Michael Jackson’s side.

So for those who are sponsoring Robson and Safechuck in their enterprise, the Cascio family has always been an obstacle – same, for example, as Aaron Carter, Dr. Arnold Klein, private investigator Scott Ross and even Lisa-Marie Presley, all of whom could speak up for Jackson.

However these people are already gone and the number of those who were very close to Michael at that time is quickly diminishing, leaving only the Cascios, Michael’s nephews and nieces, and a couple of other people capable to stand up for him in a court of law.

And when some people are an obstacle to others’ vicious plans they tend to either disappear (God forbid) or get so heavily tarnished that it is hard to wash the stains off.

The Casio family most probably doesn’t even realize the real reason for the campaign against Eddie Cascio who recorded Michael’s last songs when he was staying in their home. The songs were just a pretext used for brainwashing the blind and deaf among MJ fans, while the real reason is completely different and is targeted at the reputation of the Cascio family as possible witnesses in the defense of MJ, at their integrity and good name.

To be more precise, what started as a whim of some fame-seeking activists in 2010, a couple of years later was recognized as a powerful tool in support of Robson’s and Safechuck’s attacks against Jackson – and this is when and why a lawsuit against Cascio and MJ Estate (and Sony) was initiated and brought into life.

So though the initial outrage was triggered by Damien Shields and some Jacksons, the huge potential of the problem was only later acknowledged by those behind the scene and then utilized for their own ungodly ends.

TEMPLATE

The second reason why the lawsuit against Cascio and MJ Estate is directly connected with defending Michael’s good name is that now it definitely looks like a template for Robson’s and Safechuck’s similarly frivolous lawsuits against Michael’s Estate.

The template has proven to be effective – it showed that even if the case is based on hearsay, suppositions and no solid evidence whatsoever, it can still be successful if it goes hand in hand with much publicity and takes advantage of people’s prejudices and quick conclusions stemming from their emotions and ignorance of the matter.

This test of waters also showed that the California court system is not so much about justice now but is more about influencers and their covert manipulations, though outwardly everything seems to be in strict observance with the rules of the law.

This is why the outcome of the anti-Cascio case was so different from Katherine Jackson’s lawsuit against AEG case though the fact that AEG was liable was clear from day one, especially since 4 jurors officially declared that they felt they had been cheated during deliberations.

This is also why the anti-Cascio case strikes you as almost the exact replica of what we know of the progress of Robson/Safechuck’s lawsuits up till now. Both are based on suppositions only – the case against Cascio and MJ Estate had at least Dr. Papcun’s sham report to refer to, while the two rogues’ lawsuits are based on nothing but words.

Both cases are record-breaking in terms of their length – one took 8 years of litigation over what is actually a non-issue, and Robson/Safechuck’s fairy tales have been tossed back and forth within the California court system for 12 years now.

Both plaintiffs had several teams of attorneys working for them – Serova had two, and Robson &  Safechuck are currently with their third. So both cases require a good deal of money, at least for their numerous appeals, but the source of their funding still remains a mystery.

Both heavily rely on the court of public opinion – the anti-Cascio case was backed by millions of brainwashed MJ fans, and Robson/Safechuck’s tales enjoy publicity on an even grander scale, seeking empathy from every corner of the world by means of their mock documentaries and sympathetic media.

But the most important aspect of the two is that despite both cases being concocted out of thin air and initially thrown out by the judges (appealed and then dismissed again) each time they were miraculously resurrected and made their triumphant ascent to the top of the California justice system while the rhetoric around them grew more and more hypocritical, high-flown, stagey and bombastic.

HYPOTHETICAL GUILT

After Dr. Papcun produced his report about the Cascio songs on the “Michael” posthumous album, matters grew more intense for the horrible, horrible people who made those songs happen.

Firstly, what was initially Dr. Papcun’s cautious conclusion about only one track (“Breaking News”) was turned by anti-Cascio activists into hysterical proclamations that all three songs were fake and were definitely sung by Jason Malachi.

Producer Terry Riley was nearly torn into pieces and finally said that no songs on the album except “Hollywood Tonight” were authentic. The reason for his statement? It was the only one track proven to him by his friend Taryll Jackson, and unless the Jacksons gave their okay he would no longer believe anyone at all, even his own self.

The effect of many years of his harassment by MJ fans was devastating on Riley – the man who worked with Michael Jackson for more than 25 years and initially radiated confidence in those songs turned into an intimidated scaredy-cat terrified of uttering a word.

Teddy Riley: “This is really Michael, whoever says whatever”

Teddy Riley; [I’ve worked with him] over 25 years. This is Michael’s voice.

Teddy Riley: “You are still getting the true Michael Jackson”

“[But] he would never consider it being a final vocal”

VLAD TV: “It is essentially a fraudulent album from the point of view of the vocals themselves? TEDDY RILEY: “Except for that one song Hollywood”

“Except for that one song Hollywood, yeah, because that was proven to me”

The summary of the interview by VLAD TV says:

“DJ Vlad asks Teddy Riley for clarity on the subject by asking him if he believes that the lead vocals from the “Michael” album actually belong to the late pop singer. Riley replies by saying no because he has never seen or heard any proof that can verify MJ’s voice on the records. In the end, Riley ascertains that “Michael” was essentially a fraudulent album, aside from one track on the LP called “Hollywood.” Riley concludes that he would work on another MJ project as long as the vocals were authenticated by his son, Michael Joseph Jackson Jr. (aka Prince) and the rest of his estate beforehand.”

All alleged perpetrators were stigmatized by the anti-Cascio activists even before taking legal action, however the lawsuit took the matter to a different level as the Plaintiff accused Sony, MJ Estate and Angelikson of “deceptive practices” and claimed that she and the whole class of purchasers suffered damages and were defrauded out of their money.

Defendants Cascio, Porte and Angelikson were accused of wrongful acts committed “knowingly, willfully, intentionally, maliciously, oppressively, and fraudulently with the express purpose and intention of defrauding Plaintiff, and each of them, to the substantial financial benefit of Cascio, Porte, and Angelikson, entitling Plaintiff to punitive damages”.

It is interesting that though the Plaintiff said she represented all Californian album purchasers it seems that she was the only one entitled to punitive damages from Angelikson – in addition to recompensing the damages, cost of suit, the fees of attorneys and the like.

Sony and John Branca of MJ Estate were also to blame and were to refund the lost money to all their “victims” and were to get “permanent injunctive relief enjoining them from representing that Michael Jackson performed ‘Breaking News’, ‘Monster’ and ‘Keep Your Head Up’.

The lawsuit claimed that the Defendants’ conduct violated California’s unfair competition law and the Consumer Legal Remedies Act, and this is how the dispute stepped onto the minefield of “deceptive advertising” and was raised to the high realms of consumer protection laws.

The case was then litigated within those technicalities only, but the first thing that made me wonder was how on earth anyone’s “deceptive” advertising practices could be even discussed if the fact of deception was not even proven?

After all, the court couldn’t regard as Gospel truth that joke of a report by Dr. Papcun, especially if the other two forensic experts were of exactly the opposite opinion? Isn’t it a clear case of putting the cart before the horse, and discussing someone’s liability solely on the premise of their hypothetical guilt?

Even if we assume that the idea of the complaint was to take the case through the discovery stage only and make the Defendants produce their evidence (for ex. the FBI experts’ reports), wasn’t it still a huge waste of time and taxpayers’ money to engage the whole California court system in satisfying the whim and curiosity of a fan who didn’t even prove that her suspicions were valid?

This reminds me of the words of Marvin Putnam, lead attorney for AEG Live, who praised the ruling of the Court of Appeal against Katherine Jackson by saying:

 “We were confident that the court would uphold the jury’s verdict,” he wrote in a statement.

“This is also fantastic news for the taxpayers of California, who won’t have their hard-earned money wasted retrying plaintiffs’ baseless claims. Enough is enough.”

And how much more taxpayers’ hard-earned money was wasted by the entire California court system reviewing the fan’s complaint for eight long years? The complaint that was based not on facts but on a suspicion of a fraud only?

The case, however, went forward and reached gigantic proportions. At first the legal drama unfolded as follows:

  • On June 12, 2014 this legal source and other media  announced the ground-breaking news that “Plaintiff Vera Serova alleged Angelikson committed fraud and violated California consumer protection laws by having an impostor record vocals for a posthumous Jackson album, and that Sony and the MJ estate violated the consumer protection laws by touting the tracks’ authenticity. The complaint alleged that the class members lost money or property as a result of their purchase”.
  • After trying to settle the case amicably with the Plaintiff the Defendants gave up and on February 3, 2016 filed a motion seeking to throw out the lawsuit on the basis of the California anti-SLAPP laws.

Note: Anti-SLAPP laws provide defendants with a way to quickly dismiss meritless lawsuits, known as SLAPP lawsuits. Lawyers agree that SLAPPs have become “an all-too-common tool for intimidating and silencing criticism through expensive, baseless legal proceedings. Anti-SLAPP laws are meant to provide a remedy to SLAPP suits to anyone who is SLAPPed in California.”

Besides ordinary citizens, corporations can also be hit with meritless lawsuits and this is apparently why Sony resorted to this line of defense, meaning to say that the lawsuit was baseless.

But the problem here is that while making that anti-SLAPP motion they had to technically assume that even if they were defrauded, they were acting in good faith on their own part and intended no harm to consumers, and that they were just exercising their First Amendment right to free speech.

The above was a mistake in my opinion. As a result of all this anti-SLAPP talk the litigation entered a truly bizarre stage when the Plaintiff complained about “fake” songs merely on a suspicion, and the Defendants had to technically assume that they were not genuine “for the purposes of defense only” while in reality the songs were AUTHENTIC though unfinished and over-produced by a legion of music producers who worked on them after Michael Jackson’s passing.

Of course, after the lawsuit was filed there were no really good solutions to it, but it would have still been better, in my opinion, to give the complainant her day in court where she would have had to testify under oath and explain a couple of things too, and Dr. Papcun’s imitation of a report would have been fully debunked by really independent experts.

But things took a different turn, alas.

  • On June 30, 2016 Judge Ann I. Jones of the Los Angeles Superior Court denied Sony and Estate’s bid to throw out the consumer protection claims, finding that it was procedurally improper. As to the anti-SLAPP motion she said that it didn’t fit the case.

Some media and all anti-Cascio activists claimed that

a California federal judge accused the company of duping consumers into buying albums containing Michael Jackson songs performed by other vocalists”.

Whether the above was a media invention or was really said by the judge, please note that such a statement would be the abuse of power by the judge – there was no evidence of any “duping” as the case didn’t go through the discovery stage and the fraud was only the opinion of the claimant, so the judge wasn’t even supposed to discuss the merits of the case.

  • After the judge’s order the Defendants appealed.
  • On August 30, 2018 a three-judge panel of the California Court of Appeal reversed the order of Judge Ann I. Jones and ruled that the defendants’ motion should have been granted in its entirety. Fortunately the appellate judges set the record straight by stating that “whether or not the vocals are indeed Jackson’s was not the purpose of the hearing”, but “rather whether the album’s liner notes and a video promoting it qualified as “commercial speech.”

Advertisement is commercial speech and opinion is free speech, and free speech is protected by the First Amendment to the US Constitution.

And since the Defendants did not have first-hand information about the lead singer on the disputed tracks the Appellate court said that

“they could only draw a conclusion about that issue from their own research and the available evidence. Under these circumstances, their representations about the identity of the singer amounted to a statement of opinion rather than fact.

The situation was habitually warped and twisted by Damien Shields, other anti-Cascio activists and the media, who screamed at the top of their voices that firstly, Sony and Estate “admitted a fraud” though the Estate and Sony said no such thing and even released a statement to the contrary, and secondly, they misrepresented the Court of Appeals ruling by saying that it “allowed Sony to sell fake songs on Michael Jackson’s album” though no one had yet proven that the songs were fake.

The headlines about the ruling of Court of Appeals are tale-telling:

  • BREAKING: Court rules FAKE Michael Jackson songs can be sold as genuine, dismisses claims against Sony & Jackson Estate (Damien Shields)
  • Sony Music Reportedly Concedes They Released Fake Michael Jackson Songs on Posthumous Album  (Hiphop-n-more.com)
  • It’s Not Sony’s Fault If It Sold Fake Michael Jackson Songs (Rollingstone.com)

Well, at least one of the main goals of the lawsuit to make the media “pick up the story” was fully realized.

FLIMSY GROUNDS

In a new twist to the story the focus of the lawsuit began to somehow shift from the text on the back cover of the album to its artwork as it claimed that by portraying Michael on its cover the producers implied that he was the lead singer of all songs.

The other fault of Sony and MJ Estate was that they had the cheek to promote the album’s release in a YouTube video.

The “Michael” album artwork

My guess is that the absurd artwork argument quietly replaced the reference to the text on the album cover because the text itself actually contained no information which was alleged in the lawsuit.

Those who didn’t hold the DVD disk in their hands will be greatly surprised by the text printed on its back side and in the inserted booklet.

More information about it is in this post, complete with the photos of the album, but the gist of the story is that Sony was extremely truthful and honest about the album and took extra care to warn the prospective purchasers of its specifics.

The booklet accompanying the DVD contained detailed description of each song and said that Michael Jackson was the lead vocalist of two songs (“Behind the Mask” and “I Can’t Make It Another Day”) while in all other cases he was credited for back or even additional vocals only.

The above doesn’t mean that Michael was not the lead singer of the rest of the songs – all if means is that his vocals there were a combination of multiple takes and had to be heavily processed, all of which didn’t allow Sony to declare that Michael Jackson was the lead vocalist there in the traditional meaning of the word.

And mind you, the above information concerned eight songs on the album, five of which were even non-Cascio songs.

As to the Cascio songs, two tracks (“Keep Your Head Up” and “Monster”) credited Michael Jackson for background vocals, while for “Breaking News” no specific information was given – same as for “Hollywood Tonight”, “Much Too Soon” and several others.

But why were the credits on the album so variegated to say the least?

This is because the producers were honest with the album purchasers and stated only the information they were fully confident of.

The BBC said that Sony and the Estate made no secret of the fact that the songs were incomplete and were only “foundations” and “creative blueprints” but not fully-fledged songs:

First listen: Michael Jackson’s new album

2 December 2010

The press release given to journalists at the album playback is honest in describing the source material for the album as “creative blueprints” and “foundations”.

In other words the songs were incomplete.

A team of producers including Teddy Riley, Eddie Cascio and Theron ‘Neff-U’ Feemster helped turn them into fully formed tracks. The result, somewhat predictably, is not a cohesive body of work.  What this album doesn’t do is give fans an indication of what Jackson wanted to do with the new material he was writing, or leave clues as to his state of mind in his last few years. ‘Michael’ is released in the UK December 13th. 

https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-11898874

As to the back cover of the album which was supposed to be the most “damning” evidence against the producers, it actually said the following:

“This album contains 9 previously unreleased vocal tracks performed by Michael Jackson. These tracks were recently completed using music from the original vocal tracks and music created by the credited producers.”

The back side of the album

Does anyone see any falsity in the above information?

I don’t.

  • Were the vocal tracks performed by Michael Jackson? Yes, they were.
  • Were they completed by using music from the original vocal tracks? Yes, they were completed by others who only used music from the original vocal tracks.
  • Were the tracks completed by also using music created by other producers? Oh, my God, they honestly admitted even that!

Purists will argue that all of the above amounts to the tracks not being real, and to a certain extent they will be right, but even if we agree on that, the fact remains that the prospective customers were warned about it.

As to their authenticity what could anyone expect of the unfinished songs when their main creator was no longer with us?

These songs are precious to the public from a different point of view now – besides Michael’s unrivalled gift for melodies of course they also show his frame of mind in the last years of his life and convey his last message to us (“Keep Your Head Up”). However they lack his brilliant finishing touch and we will have to accept that, alas.

So it was only natural that the tracks were far from perfect. Those were only Michael’s foundations and rough vocals for the songs, and completed by others at that. Probably one day AI will do a better job of those blueprints…

PROFESSIONALS SPEAK UP

At this point it won’t hurt to recall that in the early summer of 2009 Eddie Cascio and James Porte sent several of their tracks to sound engineer Angelo Montrone of Majestic Music Factory  for a preliminary mix.

The songs were sung by Porte which maddened the fans but didn’t confuse me a bit – it would have been extremely unsafe to share the originals even with Angelo Montrone.

Majestic Music

An inquisitive fan asked Angelo whether he thought that the songs were authentic and his opinion was that they are 95% real with only a slim possibility of 5% that some pieces of those tracks could be not.

Angelo Montrone’s career in sound engineering is about 30 years now, so he knows what he is talking about when he allows us to look into the inside of music production wizardry and reveals some of the studio tricks:

I can’t say with any certainty about what Porte and Cascio (Angel as we called him) had done vocally with MJ on any of the songs that I worked on. I worked on 3 or 4 songs for which they sent me audio and Porte’s guide vocals only. Porte does sound a lot like MJ himself.

From what your telling me that Porte and Angelo claimed, it would make sense to me. I know that they had worked on tracks for MJ at Angel’s NJ studio (I think they did one of the bonus tracks on the Thriller 25th there), and I was under the impression that they had done guides with MJ on the songs we were working on. Again, I never sat there and drilled them on exactly what they had or hadn’t done, because it wasn’t relevant to what I was doing. Usually if you’re writing with an artist the artist will sing the track to make sure the key is good, the song sounds good with their voice etc, so I would assume that there were some guides done by MJ based on the normal way things are done.

I’m sure this is a tough nut to crack. If you know for sure MJ didn’t record after I sent the mixes, well, it’s very likely that there were existing guide vox the producer had at their disposal. Beyond that it becomes very murky.

There are so many studio tricks that are used on singers to enhance their voices which are just part of modern pop music (pitch correction, copying words from other parts of the song, comping between takes, sliding things around, having another singer’s voice blended in subtly to enhance the sound of the lead vocalist) and no doubt that if the producer were working with MJ’s rough vocals they were using some of those tricks, which I’m sure MJ himself had used on previous albums (as everyone does to some degree).

Oh, so pitch correction and comping (combining) different parts from several takes of the vocals is absolutely normal in music production. And copying words from the same song (and even other songs if the singer is no longer with us) is normal too.

And even blending another singer’s voice into the lead vocals is another of their routine procedures which reminds me of the “Britney Jean” album recorded by Britney Spears. In case you don’t know, her background singer Myah Marie was identified as singing lead vocals on several tracks of that album.

Fans found that “she barely has 3-4 songs completely sung by her on this album, the other songs on the album are, at least, “completed by Myah Marie” and there are some songs where Britney Spears is nowhere to be heard.” “Yeah, that’s musical industry magic for you”.

But Spears did sing some of it and was credited as a co-writer of those songs which were advertised as being very personal, so the fans were satisfied, took the revelation calmly and only speculated what percent is Spears and Myah Marie on each of those songs. See here or here if you like.

And no one called the above instance “the biggest fraud in the history of music industry” and a “federal crime” that should be investigated by the FBI (as Damien Shields insists) though the Cascio songs do not have even a fraction of the controversy associated with “Britney Jean”.

Not that I am in favor of such practices but the comparison shows the unspeakable overreach, hypocrisy and bigotry of anti-Cascio activists.

Damien Shields presents himself as a journalist and is now “urging those involved with Jackson’s estate to contact the FBI over what he calls a “federal crime” by the song’s creators”

Angelo Montrone also explained the vibrato effect in the Cascio songs by saying that

“the shakey vibrato could be an artifact from pitch correction if the original pitch was sharp (dropping the pitch can make things sound deeper and slower).”

Angelo also found amusing that fans alleged that Jason Malachi would be an impersonator of those songs:

What I find amusing about these arguments is that no one ever mentions the fact that Porte himself is a great MJ impersonator. If they were going to fake the tracks, which I don’t think they did, Porte would have done it himself. That’s why I take a 95% stance that they are probably real and reserve that last 5% for the slim possibility that some of it could have been faked.”

Another professional, who made his presence at MaxJax (the now closed Maximum Jackson forum), explained exactly the same phenomenon which I referred to in the previous post – when several takes of vocals are layered on top of each other, the effect is that of a vibrato, and this is exactly what happened to those Cascio tracks:

According to someone on Max Jax, who also frequents here. This is all a case of the Cascio songs being Michael’s layered vocals as opposed to a single vocal take. That explains why he sounds like Jason Malachi, but it’s really Michael.

No doubt that the creators of “Michael” album were forced to use a number of tricks to complete those unfinished songs as this was the only way out, and it was this particular factor that did not allow Sony to name Michael Jackson as the lead vocalist of those eight tracks.

I repeat, not only of three Cascio’s tracks, but also of five more songs on the album.

So how on earth could the Plaintiff claim that she and other buyers “were tricked into believing that the album was sung by Michael Jackson as the lead singer” if Sony was actually extremely precise in their wording and avoided saying anything like that?

It is actually the highest degree of hypocrisy and pretense to claim that the Plaintiff purchased that compact disc “in reliance on Defendants’ claims that Jackson performed the lead vocals on the Cascio tracks” because while advertising those songs the Defendants never claimed any such thing.

And it is similarly hypocritical of the whole California court system to follow the Plaintiff’s lead and pretend that they were blind enough not to see what could be read on the album cover with a naked eye.

WHAT ABOUT MALACHI?

The anti-Cascio activists will claim that since Sony refrained from crediting Michael Jackson as the lead singer of Cascio songs, it is a sure indication that it was Malachi who sang them. But following this logic they will also have to agree that the remaining five songs are sung by Malachi too, even their indisputable and favorite “Hollywood Tonight” 🙂

None of it is true, of course, and I am not even saying that Jason Malachi never, NEVER said that he had anything to do with those tracks – even though Damien Shields falsely claims the opposite in the final episode of his podcast, which he triumphantly called “The Confession”.

This so-called confession allegedly took place sometime in January 2018 when Serova’s new lawyer (Jeremy Bollinger) received a phone call from Malachi’s lawyer (Allen Tilles) who allegedly wanted to discuss “how Jason might be able to help you guys resolve this”.

Shields thinks that Jason was ready to make a confession, however a week later Malachi’s lawyer called to say that their meeting with Bollinger and the Estate’s and Sony’s lawyers was off.  Shields put words in Jason’s mouth by saying:

  • “How was Jason going to help them resolve it? By finally confessing that he was the singer on the Casio tracks. This was the moment that the entire fiasco would come to an end and the truth would finally  be told and so a meeting between Bollinger, Tills and lawyers for the Estate and Sony was arranged for the 30th of January 2018 but the day before the meeting was set to take place Tills reached out to Bollinger to tell him that the meeting was off”.

According to Bollinger,

  • “one conversation with Sony’s attorney and there was an immediate about-face from this attorney. “Sorry I can’t meet with you”.  I mean he was being kind of open and frank and and friendly and then it was like shut down. Wouldn’t even talk to me anymore”.

In reality, the planned presence of lawyers for the Estate and Sony makes it immediately clear that if the meeting was to take place, it was surely not about the “confession”, but something else (like the liability of Damien Shields and Co for defaming Jason Malachi, for example) because a “confession” would have been made privately, hush-hush and not in the presence of Sony and the Estate.

Actually, more than half a year later, in August 2018 Damien Shields only hoped that Malachi would “come clean” one day and urged him to move quickly, adding a threat that he would become a defendant too if he didn’t choose to come forward of his own free will.

No wonder Jason Malachi complained that he was stalked, bullied and intimidated by these people.

Here are a couple of screenshots from Damien Shields’ interview dated August 25, 2018 and accompanied by the following note:

  • “In this interview Damien Shields claims Malachi more or less admitted privately that it is him on those songs. Now they are waiting for him to come clean publicly, and if he won’t he will be added to the lawsuit as another defendant.”

The “more or less admitted” statement makes it clear that Jason Malachi said no such thing and seven months after the alleged confession they were still waiting for it.

“[Jason] is very coy about it but also not doing anything about it at the moment, so if he doesn’t choose of his own free will to come forward and settle this, if he doesn’t do that, then he’s just gonna been a defendant at some point. Look, the writing is on the wall for Jason” [Aug.25, 2018]

Damien Shields: “Move quickly. Unless, for example, Jason decides he’s gonna come clean and then it’s over”

“It will end up with Jason in a courtroom, if he doesn’t just tell the truth and I’m not saying that to intimidate him or attack him or anything, it’s just the truth, so that will be … the next step is finding himself involved”. [Aug.25, 2018]

Despite Damien Shields’s good looks the above is actually a revolting sight of a bigot enjoying himself very much while threatening and intimidating a person whose only guilt is that his vocals resemble the vocals of Michael Jackson.

NEW APPEAL

With nothing but the “artwork” argument and no confession from Jason Malachi the brave MJ fan supported by her new team of lawyers MOSS BOLLINGER, LLP invigorated her lawsuit by approaching the Court of Appeal herself  (the previous time it was appealed by the Defendants) with a petition to rehear the case.

And since that moment the events began rolling one after another at lightning speed:

  • The Plaintiff petitioned the Court of Appeal for rehearing the case.
  • On September 13, 2018 the Court of Appeal denied rehearing and modified the opinion to add a footnote. The modification did not alter the judgment. The anti-Cascio activists and media decried the ruling as a license for the Estate and Sony “to sell fake songs under Michael Jackson’s name”.
  • In October 2018 the Plaintiff filed her first petition for review with the Supreme Court of California.
  • In December 2018 the Supreme Court granted the Plaintiff’s petition but paused all proceedings regarding it until resolving an unrelated but similar case (FilmOn v. DoubleVerify, Inc).
  • In September 2019, in light of the resolution in the FilmOn case, the Supreme Court sent the Plaintiff’s complaint to the Court of Appeal for reconsideration.
  • The Court of Appeal reviewed the case again and on January 8, 2020 reaffirmed their decision in favor of the Defendants. The anti-Cascio activists and media again ran with the old story that “the Estate and Sony were allowed to sell fake songs under Michael Jackson’s name”.
  • On February 17, 2020 the Plaintiff filed her second petition with the Supreme Court. This time it was supported by numerous Amici briefs from the so-called Amici Curiae.

Amicus curiae is Latin for “friend of the court.” An Amicus brief is a legal brief filed by these friends of the court to offer the appellate judges additional arguments in support of one of the parties.

Unless friends of the court are lawyers who can prepare the legal briefs themselves, the appellate attorneys compile these briefs at a fee between $10,000 and $15,000 though on occasions they may work pro bono too.

The Plaintiff’s second trip to the Supreme Court was supported by Amicus briefs from sixteen friends of the court who represented the army of organizations, counsels, lawyers’ associations, societies, consumer protection groups, the Berkley Center for Consumer Law and Economic Justice, Housing & Economic Rights Advocates, Consumer Attorneys of California, Attorneys General, State Solicitors General, Los Angeles Chief City Attorneys and others.

In other words the whole legal & consumer protection community and even the government of California stood as one in support of a Michael Jackson fan (think of the irony of it), expressing their indignation that Sony and the Estate “made false and misleading claims” to her and other purchasers of the album, and “declared ignorance of their misrepresentation”.

This horrid behavior could certainly bring “broad, destabilizing consequences for advertising principles”.

And all of it was said in full seriousness – as if someone had indeed proven that the songs were fake and all those pompous statements weren’t based on a mere suspicion only.

Californian Government Joins Fraud Lawsuit Against Sony Music and Jackson Estate

January 30, 2021

By Damien Shields 

The California state government has officially joined a class action lawsuit against Michael Jackson’s estate and record company.

In a press release issued yesterday, the state’s Attorney General, Xavier Becerra, accuses Sony of “shirking responsibility” for making “false and misleading claims” about a posthumously released Michael Jackson album, and then declaring ignorance of their misrepresentation.

The Attorney General also filed an amicus brief with the California Supreme Court, urging them to intervene in the case of Serova vs Sony Music Entertainment, et al., for fear that “broad, destabilising consequences for well-established false advertising principles,” could be felt if it did not take action and rectify a problematic Appeals Court decision in the case.

When all those “friends of the court” including two General Attorneys and other government entities got involved in the subject, the outcome of the case was already determined.

  • Facing the barrage of those legal briefs the Supreme Court granted the petition review.
  • But at this point Sony informed the court that the parties had reached an agreement to settle the case “independent of the outcome of the opinion from the Supreme Court.”
  • However the insistent fan was not satisfied and petitioned the Supreme Court to still decide the matter because “the settlement was not yet approved” and because of “the importance of the issues”.
  • And the issues were apparently so crucial for the California citizens that the California Supreme Court put aside all their other business, met the fan’s request and released an opinion piece on August 18, 2022 which said that they reversed the judgment of the Court of Appeal.

 The case was transferred back to a lower court for “further proceedings consistent with their opinion” though it was actually not meant to go anywhere because of the settlement agreement between the parties.

THE GREAT OUTCOME

While the anti-Cascio activists and fan community in general hailed the big win of the valiant fan who challenged the formidable Sony, MJ Estate and Angelikson Productions and won, the media trumpeted “the importance of its outcome for the future”.

Legal observers said that “the ruling is important for California consumers and entertainment industry in general because it was handed down by the highest court in California, where much of the world’s music, film and television is produced” –  and where, as everyone knows, the entertainment industry was squeaky clean until Sony came along and released those three controversial songs.

The Supreme Court ruling was also praised by consumer protection groups for setting a new legal precedent around entertainment advertising.

As to the SLAPP complaint Ted Mermin, an Amicus Curae for the Plaintiff and executive director of the Berkeley Center for Consumer Law & Economic Justice said that the court’s decision rejected Sony’s anti-SLAPP arguments narrowly, based only on the facts of the case in question, so it did not set broad new precedent around the use of the law by corporations.

Serova reached an undisclosed settlement with Sony and MJ Estate. No details were provided but all other buyers of the album who were promised a refund in case of winning the case seem to have been bypassed.

Roger Friedman claimed thatno money exchanged hands” but this begs the question of who covered the legal costs and fees of two Serova’s legal teams then. After all, both teams of lawyers were working on a contingency basis and were to be paid from the settlement sum, weren’t they?

Another question is who bore the appellate costs which must have been gigantic considering Serova’s own appeal to the Court of Appeal and her two trips to the Supreme Court. Was it the MJ Estate, some unnamed sponsors or the California government and its taxpayers who covered all the expenses? And which one would you prefer? 🙂

Dennis Moss and Jeremy Bollinger, the new attorneys for Serova, were fully satisfied with the outcome and said that “their expectation was that all claims in the case,  including the claims against other parties involved in the production of the album” (apparently, Angelikson) “would be dismissed based on the settlement with Sony and MJ Estate”.

As a result of litigation no one got any evidence for or against the Cascio tracks, so the situation went back to where it initially was – those who doubted the tracks still repeat their mantras, and those who didn’t doubt them and Cascio’s integrity are still sure that the songs are real, though over-processed by producers.

Sony and the Estate never changed their position as to the authenticity of the songs and still assert that they are legit. However they removed 12 Cascio’s songs from all streaming platforms, nine of which have never been officially released, thus sacrificing them to the bloodthirsty hunt of the anti-Cascio activists and denying the Cascios their well-deserved income.

John Branca of the MJ Estate stands firm that the tracks are genuine but said that it was a mistake to release them (apparently, by overestimating the sanity and reason of MJ fans) and under no circumstances will they release any other Cascio tracks even in the face of a possible claim from Cascio and Porte for loss of profit and the resulting damages to their company.

Apparently, the removal of those songs infringed the Estate’s contract with Angelikson Productions, so now it is a new headache for the Estate, but this is certainly no concern of those activists who can’t care less.

So the overall result is that one part of MJ fans can be extremely proud of themselves for getting rid of the songs which Michael Jackson recorded with Cascio and Porte in the last months of his life, tried hard to complete them but had no time for it.

And the other part of Michael Jackson’s fans have had their first bitter taste of how powerful the matrix of power and connections can be, and how the court system (mal)functions when the matter fits the agenda of some wealthy people who have connections in the California high places and the media. 

Up till now we’ve had two negative examples of how this matrix works – in the absolutely justified Michael Jackson’s wrongful death case against AEG Live which was stonewalled in the end, and conversely, in the fictional case against the Cascio songs that was blown out of all proportion and was given the full reign.

In November 2026 the California court system will undergo the third test – the frivolous lawsuits of Robson and Safechuck, so we will see if the system will be able to stand up to the high principles of fairness, quality of justice and professional excellence it so loudly proclaims.

If I were you I wouldn’t rely too much on a fair verdict there. The progress of the two extortionists’ lawsuits is too reminiscent of Serova’s case with its dismissals, appeals, repeated reviews and constant resurrections.

One of the first grave signs was that just two days prior to the accusers’ appeal on January 3, 2020 the California legislation was amended to extend the time for “victims of childhood sexual assault to bring claims from age 26 to age 40” including claims against third-party perpetrators which very conveniently fit the exact situation of Robson’s and Safechuck’s lawsuits.

And the most sinister sign of all is that after their latest appeal on August 18, 2023 the ruling of the California Court of Appeal to remand the matter to a trial court was based on a grave violation of its own basic principles.

The thing is that a Court of Appeal is to focus only on the legal errors (if any) made by the lower courts but is not to look into the factual merits of the case. However that Court of Appeal not only flagrantly violated that principle, but actually opined that Michael Jackson was guilty of the alleged crimes based on the two rogues’ allegations.

Same as in Serova’s case the mere suspicion transformed into fact for that court, and the non-proven allegations were used by the appellate judges for making derogatory and inappropriate statements exceeding their authority.

For example:

“Here, defendants employed Jackson and knew he was a danger to young boys”.

“The defendants knew of Jackson’s dangerous proclivities”.

“The question in this case is whether Michael Jackson, as puppetmaster of his two wholly-owned corporations, could have taken cost-effective steps to avoid the harm the plaintiffs allege he inflicted upon them.  The answer is yes.”

“For tort purposes, Jackson’s corporations were Jackson. They did his bidding and his alone.  Jackson himself owed a tort duty to the plaintiffs in this case.  So did Jackson’s marionettes, because Jackson’s fingers held every string.

Statements like the above made by a Court of Appeal whose sole duty is to see whether the lower court didn’t misuse the law, will be a complete shock to any independent legal observer, so THIS IS WHY the anti-Cascio and pro-AEG cases are so important for us.

Both are a signal that the California court system is flawed now and that it will most probably do as it is told in Robson/Safechuck’s case too – unless the public has full access to the trial transcripts, has independent analysts to comment on the trial proceedings and preferably sees everything with their own eyes if the trial is televised.

I hope that at the very least an independent film crew will have access to the trial proceedings and will make a true and honest documentary on the basis of their recordings.

In short, all people of integrity are in for a really big fight.


Trending Articles