Jury mulls Jackson’s fate
By MICHAEL J. TITTINGER Daily Press Staff Writer
SM COURTHOUSE — In his closing argument, Michael Jackson’s attorney looked to turn the $1.4 million suit against his client on its head, alleging that Jackson’s accuser actually owes the entertainer money.
With that, a jury retired before lunch on Thursday morning to deliberate in the contentious lawsuit that has featured its fair share of accusations and intimate disclosures over the two-week trial in Santa Monica.
The jurists — six men and six women — are now left to decide whether the singer failed to make good on a series of business agreements or if his former trusted advi- Deliberations in the breach of contract lawsuit got underway after both sides’ attorneys had exhausted their entitled closing arguments and rebuttals, winding down a case of sensational accusations that occupied Judge Jacqueline Connor’s courtroom for nine days.
Jackson’s attorney, Thomas Mundell, meticulously sifted through each of Schaffel’s claims during his closing argument on Thursday morning, refuting his bookkeeping and alleging that the plaintiff actually owed the singer approximately $660,000 for breach of fiduciary duty and fraud in mishandling the accounts established for businesses he formed to negotiate deals for the pop singer.
“The accounts were pretty much looted,” said Mundell, showing that the accounts in question — once totaling millions — were practically empty or overdrawn within a month of Schaffel’s being fired by Jackson.
Schaffel’s attorney, Howard King, who concluded his closing argument on Wednesday afternoon, tried to convince the jury that Jackson was looking to renege on a series of oral contracts empowering his client to act on the entertainer’s behalf — including an alleged highly sensitive payment of $300,000 to an undisclosed party in Brazil amid Jackson’s criminal trial on child molestation charges one year ago.
Meanwhile, Mundell again on Thursday portrayed his client as a child-like genius unable of helping his own cause by recalling financial dealings — such as a $7 million loan from former adviser Alvin Malnik, or the $2 million he supplied for the business with Schaffel — leaving him ripe for the picking by manipulative hangers-on.
“This is a case about misplaced trust,” Mundell said in closing. “Here, we have a gentle artist, who despite all his fame and all his money, is lonely. He’s insulated. He brought his passion and his musical genius to the world, making him vulnerable to people who want to take advantage of him.”
Mundell re-read a message that Jackson sent Schaffel, relaying his hopes for their pending partnership. Jackson asked that Schaffel never let him down.
“I like you. I love you. I have been betrayed so much,” Jackson said. “We can conquer the business world... but please be my loyal friend.”
Mundell concluded by stating, “Mr. Schaffel is not Michael Jackson’s loyal friend,” before telling the jury they should send Schaffel “home with nothing.”
Afterwards, King took advantage of an allowed rebuttal on Thursday to counter the Jackson camp’s arguments, much of which he charged were off topic — smokescreens set to draw attention away from the business agreements made between his client and the pop superstar.
King took issue with his Schaffel’s background as a gay adult film producer being brought up by Mundell, as well as his counterpart’s continual assertions that Jackson is not responsible for the deals he wrought because he is incapable of remembering the details.
“Mundell wants you to conclude that Mr. Schaffel is a liar and everything else,” King told the jury.“He wants you to suspend logic and not reward anything.”
King posed the jury with questions pertaining to the mysterious payment of $300,000 in Brazil, wondering aloud why neither Jackson nor his closest advisors never questioned the payment and, in fact, did reimburse Schaffel for his travel expenses for his trip there. Speculation has persisted that the $300,000 was either hush money offered during Jackson’s child molestation trial in 2005 or was authorized by the singer as seed money in an attempt to adopt Brazilian boys.
Citing a lack of evidence to prove otherwise, King contradicted the defense’s assertion that Schaffel hadn’t paid his fair share to produce the charity record entitled “What More Can I Give?” in 2001, performed by Jackson and a slew of other recording artists, including Usher, Jason Timberlake and Celine Dion. The rights of ownership to the song, and the potential profits that accompany the master tape, was a heated point of contention on Thursday.
“It’s a contract — you receive money, you owe money, you pay me money,” said King.
Schaffel originally claimed in his lawsuit that the entertainer owed him $3.8 million for a series of cash advances, royalties and other services, but subsequently reduced his claim to $1.6 million. On Thursday, King outlined claims totaling $1.4 million.
Schaffel, who claims he was empowered to negotiate creative projects for Jackson in return for a percentage of the profits, was let go in 2001 after Jackson learned he was involved in the adult entertainment business. He then was back on the scene in 2003 and claims he is due unpaid royalties from a pair of TV specials, the charity record and various other business dealings.
At issue is whether or not Jackson — who appeared at the trial only through video-taped deposition — understood that the money he was given was his own or a loan. Schaffel claims it was money that was owed to him for his work while Jackson believes the cash was generated by his own projects. Employees and business associates like Schaffel had access to Jackson’s money and often forwarded him large amounts of cash.
Mundell has sought to portray Schaffel as a hanger-on who parlayed his friendship with Jackson into a means of supporting his exorbitant lifestyle.
“We did not pick this fight,”Mundell said, before the jury was sent off to deliberate. “We are only making claims back because Mr. Schaffel has sued Mr. Jackson.”
Jackson is countersuing Schaffel as a result, with Mundell asking the jury on Thursday to reward the entertainer approximately $660,000 to account for money Schaffel allegedly misused — including $400,000 for a house in Calabasas — plus interest and the costs of hiring a forensic accountant to trace Schaffel’s multiple mis-handlings of Jackson’s funds, according to Mundell.
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on July 14, 2006. Read the original PDF.