mj93年庭外和解合同细节

luoyi0214

这个庭外和解合同显示，杰克逊只在疏忽这一指控上进行和解，不包括儿童性骚扰这一指控。而疏忽在这里的定义是儿童精神上的压力或者是疏忽而导致的受伤，并不是娈童指控。合同强调钱德勒一家仍可以对mj提出性侵犯等指控，同时警察仍然保持对整个案子调查的权利。所有之前报道里说杰克逊因为怕被指控娈童而进行庭外和解的谣言都是误导。 在这个和约里，mj反复强调任何指控都是荒谬的，并坚称自己清白。并称他们一家人在说谎。在签这个和解书以后，mj仍然要接受警方的调查，并且不能逃脱任何娈童指控。
这个文章同时也合理，客观地指出了当时mj为什么进行这个庭外和解，是被这家人无奈的勒索。并指出如果你的孩子被人性侵犯了，你会在一份称自己是骗子的庭外和解上签字么。可钱德勒一家人就选择这么做了。在签订和解书以后，钱德勒一家仍可以针对性侵犯对mj进行指控。

The Settlement – Did Jackson admit to any wrongdoing?

For various legal, personal, professional, financial and practical reasons, Michael Jackson settled the civil lawsuit filed against him by his accuser’s family in 1993. The recently leaked settlement document reveals several interesting facts:
1) Michael Jackson denied any wrongdoing.

2) The boy and his parents could have still testified against Jackson in the criminal trial.

3) Jackson only settled over claims of negligence and not over claims of child molestation.

Tabloid reporter Diane Dimond, who leaked the details of the settlement, tried to make it seem as if Jackson admitted to molesting
the boy simply because he settled over the negligence allegation. Dimond pointed out that the original lawsuit said: “Defendant
Michael Jackson negligently had offensive contacts with plaintiff which were both explicitly sexual and otherwise.”

It is clear, however, from the wording of the settlement document, that the “negligence” allegation was redefined:
“Such claims include claims for bodily injuries resulting from negligence; whereas, Evan Chandler has made claims against Jackson
for bodily injuries resulting from negligent infliction of emotional distress; whereas, Jordan Chandler has made claims against Jackson for bodily injuries resulting from negligent infliction of emotional distress.“

Negligence has been defined in the settlement as the “infliction of emotional distress”; there is no mention of sexual abuse. Referring to the lawsuit’s definition of “negligence” is inconclusive because each legal document intentionally defines the terms to ensure that there is no misunderstanding. Furthermore, if the negligence allegation was directly related to the child molestation allegations, why did Evan Chandler also claim to be the victim of negligence?

OTHER INTERESTING EXCEPRTS FROM THE DOCUMENT:

“This Confidential Settlement shall not be construed as an admission by Jackson that he has acted wrongfully with respect to the Minor, Evan Chandler or June Chandler, or any other person or at all, or that the Minor, Evan Chandler and June Chandler have any rights whatsoever against Jackson. Jackson specifically disclaims any liability to, and denies any wrongful acts against the Minor, Evan Chandler or June Chandler or any other persons. The Parties acknowledge that Jackson is a public figure and that his name, image and likeness have commercial value and are an important element of his earning capacity. The Parties acknowledge that Jackson claims that he has elected to settle the claims in the Action in view of the impact the Action has had and could have in the future on his earnings and potential income.”

Jackson repeatedly asserts his innocence while the accusing family does not once maintain that the boy’s allegations are true.

“The Parties recognize that the Settlement Payment set forth in this paragraph 3 are in settlement of claims by Jordan Chandler, Evan Chandler and June Chandler for alleged compensatory damages for alleged personal injuries arising out of claims of negligence and not for claims of intentional or wrongful acts of sexual molestation.”

THE PAYMENT:

The document states that $15,331,250 was put into a trust fund for Jordan Chandler. Both of his parents, as well as their attorney Larry Feldman, got a cut of the settlement. (Barry Rothman and Dave Schwartz, two principle players in the case who were left out of the settlement, later filed their own individual lawsuits against Jackson). Eight pages detailing the payment were allegedly missing from Dimond’s copy of the settlement but according to Jackson’s current attorney, the negligence allegation included in the lawsuit prompted Jackson’s insurance company to step in and settle the case for him. This means that Jackson might not have paid the Chandlers anything. It also means that the insurance company most likely conducted their own investigation into the allegations and concluded that Jackson did not molest the boy; insurance companies generally do not settle if they believe the Defendant is liable. They will, however, settle for negligent behaviour.

DISMISSAL OF THE ACTION:

The document also shows that the Chandlers dropped the child molestation allegations from their complaint:

“Forthwith upon the signing of this Confidential Settlement by the Parties hereto, the Minor through his Guardian ad Litem shall dismiss, without prejudice, the first through sixth causes of action of the complaint on file in the Action, leaving only the seventh cause of action pending.”

“Upon the full and complete payment of all Settlement Payments… the Minor, through his Guardian ad Litem, shall dismiss the entire action with prejduice.”

The first through sixth causes of action were the sexual abuse allegations; the seventh cause of action was negligence. Again, Jackson settled over the family’s claims of negligence and not over their claims of child molestation.

WAS IT HUSH MONEY?

Finally, the document makes it clear that the Chandlers could have still testified against Jackson in a criminal trial:

“The Minor, by and through his Guardian ad Litem, and Evan Chandler and June Chandler , and each of them individually and on behalf of their respective agents, attorneys, media representatives, partners, heirs, administrators, executors, conservators, successors and assigns, agree not to cooperate with, represent, or provide any information, to any person or entity that initiates any civil claim or action which relates in any manner to the subject matter of the Action against Jackson or any of the Jackson Releases, except as may be required by law.”

The only stipulation in the settlement is that the parties could not testify about the allegations in civil court.

“In the event the Minor, the Minor’s Legal Guardians, the Minor’s Guardian ad Litem, the Minor’s attorneys, Evan Chandler or June Chandler, or any of them individually… receive a subpoena or request for information from any person or entity who has asserted or is investigating, any claim against Jackson… they agree to give notice in writing to Jackson’s attorneys regarding the nature and scope of any such subpoena request for information, to the extent permitted by law. This notice shall be given before responding to the request.”

The above paragraph makes it clear that the Chandlers were not prohibited from testifying against Jackson in a criminal trial, as long as they notified Jackson’s attorneys beforehand. Contrary to popular belief, the settlement did NOT silence anybody. It was the family’s own decision not to testify in the criminal case; they could have gotten money and justice but they only opted to take the money.

luoyi0214

Ask yourself this: if your child was molested, would you not do everything in your power to put the person responsible behind bars? The Chandlers did not. Instead, they dropped the claims of child abuse against Jackson, signed a document where he basically called them liars, took his money and refused to talk to authorities. I have already pointed out the numerous reasons why Jackson settled the case; what reason did the Chandlers have to not testify?

One could argue that they did not want to be put through a public trial, however, this assertion does not make sense when you consider the fact that the Chandlers were more than willing to testify in the civil trial. In fact, court documents reveal that the only reason the judge refused to stay the civil proceedings was because Feldman was allegedly worried that Jordan Chandler would forget his story when testifying. Furthermore, Evan Chandler later sued Jackson and asked the court to allow him to produce an album of songs about the allegations. The actions of the Chandlers are not indicative of a family reluctant to tell their story.

For the past ten years, the media have been referring to the settlement as a “pay off” but here is my question: what exactly did Michael Jackson “buy” when he settled the civil lawsuit? How can anyone call it “hush money” when it did not prevent the accuser from testifying against him? How can anyone call it “hush money” when the entire world already knew about the allegations? How can anyone call it “hush money” when there was still an ongoing criminal investigation that was not affected by the civil suit?

Finally, Evan Chandler asked for $20 million before the allegations were reported to authorities. Assuming Michael Jackson had actually molested Jordan Chandler, why did he not take that opportunity to avoid getting caught? He could have paid Evan Chandler and avoided the entire ordeal. Instead, he rejected Chandler’s initial demand for money. If he was guilty, why did he do that?

If it is still your contention that Jackson’s plan was to settle the civil lawsuit in order to bribe the boy into not testifying against him in the criminal trial, can you please explain to me why Michael Jackson asked for the civil trial to be postponed? He wanted the civil trial to take place after the criminal trial was resolved, which means any potential settlement would have been negotiated after Jackson was either acquitted or convicted. This would have made it impossible for him to “bribe” the boy into not testifying. Jackson’s actions contradict the notion that he wanted to buy Jordan Chandler’s silence.

A more logical explanation as to why Michael Jackson settled is that he was innocent and although he initially refused to be blackmailed by Evan Chandler, he had no choice in the end. Once the alleged abuse was brought to the attention of authorities, it suddenly became apparent to Jackson just how ugly things would get. The media went into overkill, the justice system was not working in his favor and the civil lawsuit filed by the Chandlers had backed Jackson into a corner. He could have either gone through with the civil trial and risked a weakened defense in the more important criminal trial or settled the civil lawsuit and risked people thinking he had something to hide. Obviously, Michael Jackson valued his life more than he valued the opinions of other people so he opted to settle the lawsuit.

Once the civil lawsuit was settled, Michael Jackson still had the criminal investigation to contend with.

CrystalGloves

93年的案子
钱德勒
我看见这些我就火大

梦想桃花源

对那一家人，五马分尸都不解恨

MJ拉登

叫他们绝子绝孙

浪漫一生

结算-杰克逊是否承认自己有任何不当行为？
对于各种法律，个人，专业，金融和现实的原因，迈克尔杰克逊解决了民事诉讼原告提起他的家人对他于1993年。最近泄漏的定居问题的文件，暴露出一些有趣的事实：

1）迈克尔杰克逊否认有任何不法行为。

2）男孩和他的父母仍然对杰克逊作证在刑事审判。

3）只有解决了杰克逊的疏忽索偿，不超过猥亵儿童的索赔。

小报记者台的蒂蒙德，谁泄露的解决办法的细节，试图使它看起来好像杰克逊承认猥亵男童仅仅因为他在疏忽的指控解决。戴蒙德指出，原有的诉状中写道：“被告疏忽迈克尔杰克逊曾与原告有联系的进攻都是明确性和其他。”

很明显，但是，从解决文件的措辞，即“疏忽”的指控被重新定义：

“这样的索赔中包括因疏忽造成的人身伤害索赔;而，埃文钱德勒，他对杰克逊的索赔从痛苦的情绪施加疏忽造成身体伤害，而约旦钱德勒，他对杰克逊的索赔从疏忽导致他人造成身体伤害的情绪痛苦。“

疏忽已定义为情绪困扰“施加解决”，而没有提到的性虐待。谈到诉讼的“疏忽”的定义是不确定的，因为每一个法律文件，故意界定范围，以确保不会有任何误解。此外，如果疏忽指控是直接相关的儿童性骚扰指控，为什么埃文钱德勒还声称自己是受害人的疏忽？

其他有趣的EXCEPRTS从文档：

“这个秘密协议不得解释为杰克逊承认，他错误地采取了行动方面的小额，埃文钱德勒月或6月钱德勒，或任何其他人或在所有或小额，埃文钱德勒和6月有任何钱德勒任何对杰克逊的权利。杰克逊明确不承担任何责任，并拒绝任何针对小额，埃文钱德勒月或6月钱德勒或任何其他人的不法行为。各缔约方承认，杰克逊是一个公众人物，他的名字，肖像具有商业价值，并且是他的谋生能力的重要因素。双方确认，杰克逊说，他已选择定居的行动已经并可能在将来对他的收益和潜在收益的影响，在行动索赔。“

杰克逊一再声称自己是无辜的，而不是指责家庭一旦认为，男童的指控属实。

“缔约方认识到，解决支付本段3条规定的损害赔偿，指控涉嫌个人的疏忽而产生的债权进行伤害和索赔要求不符合约旦的钱德勒，钱德勒和6月埃文钱德勒理赔故意或不法行为性骚扰行为。“

的付款方式：

该文件一千五百三十三万一千二百五十〇美元是成为一个乔丹钱德勒信托基金提出的国家。这两个他的父母，以及他们的律师Larry Feldman，得到了解决晋级。 （巴里罗斯曼和戴夫施瓦茨，两个案件原则球员谁被排除在解决了，后来提出自己对杰克逊的个人诉讼）。 8页的详细的付款据称失踪戴蒙德的解决复制，但根据杰克逊目前律师的疏忽的指控包括在诉讼中提示杰克逊的保险公司的介入，解决了他的案件。这是杰克逊可能不会支付钱德勒任何手段。这也意味着，保险公司最有可能进行的指控，将其纳入自己的调查，并得出结论，杰克逊并没有骚扰的男孩;保险公司一般不定居，如果他们认为被告承担赔偿责任。他们，但是，解决的疏忽行为。

解雇行动：

该文件还表明，钱德勒放弃了他们的申诉猥亵儿童的指控：

“随即经协定双方在签署这一秘密协议，通过他的诉讼监护人的未成年人在不妨碍解雇，首次通过关于在操作文件第六申诉行动的原因，只留下的第七个行动的原因等待。“

待所有结算付款，充分和完全的付款“...小额通过其诉讼监护人，应驳回与prejduice整个行动。”

首先通过第六届行动原因的是性虐待的指控;的第七个行动的原因是疏忽。同样，杰克逊在解决家庭索赔疏忽和猥亵儿童超过他们的要求没有。

难道暇步钱呢？

最后，该文件明确指出，钱德勒还可以作证对杰克逊在刑事审判中：

“小额，并通过他们的诉讼监护人和埃文钱德勒Chandler和6月，其中每个单独对各自的代理，律师，媒体代表，合作伙伴，继承人，管理者，执行者，修复，继承人及受让人的名义，同意不配合，代表，或提供任何资料，向任何人或实体启动任何民事索赔或诉讼关乎以任何方式或对杰克逊杰克逊发布的任何行动的主题，除非是必须由法律规定。“

和解协议的唯一规定就是当事人不能作证，在民事法庭的指控。

“得到这一事件的未成年人，未成年人法定监护人，未成年人的诉讼监护人，未成年人的律师，埃文钱德勒月或6月钱德勒，或其中任何个人...传票或由任何人或实体谁坚称或资料的要求正在调查，任何对杰克逊索赔...他们同意以书面形式向杰克逊的律师的性质和信息的任何传票，要求这些范围的通知，在法律允许的范围内。本通知之前，应给予回应这一要求。“

前款清楚地表明了钱德勒并没有禁止杰克逊作证对刑事审判中，只要通知杰克逊的律师事先。流行的观点相反，和解并不沉默的人。这是家庭自己决定不出庭作证的刑事案件，他们可以赃款和正义，但他们只选择了拿钱。

收藏分享评分

浪漫一生

钱德勒一家是畜生，他们根本不配做人，连做人的基本道德都没有。

骨瓷杯

没看懂 不过 这一家人 真不配活在世上 一家子垃圾

trucy2025

贪婪的人，讨厌的一家！

最爱你羞涩的笑

93事件对迈的打击，心痛的要命

girl77

一切来的都太迟了

yanmilin

迈妈说：如果你自已的孩子真的受到了侵犯，作为家长的第一反应就是要打那个人的屁股，而不是想着拿钱．

说得太对了

迷雾依人

希望这一家畜牲快下地狱！！

Luman

这叫什么事呀!!!!钱德勒一家是畜生,杀,杀杀

jzyg108

一切都晚了，但能还Michael的清白的文件还是希望越多越好！