Tonight:
4°c
Sheikh: I lent Jacko $1m ... and I gave his brother a Rolls
Paul Cheston, Courts Correspondent20 Nov 2008
AN ARAB sheikh lent Michael Jackson $1million during the fallen pop superstar's child abuse trial, the High Court heard today.
But Bahrainian prince Sheikh Abdullah Bin Hamad Bin Isa Al-Khalifa said Jackson thanked him for the loan in 2005 yet did not pay it back. The sheikh also gave the star's brother Jermaine a Rolls Royce and $450,000 as a gift.
The prince and the popstar have since fallen out and Sheikh Abdullah is suing Jackson for allegedly breaking a $7million (£4.7million) contract.
The second son of the king of Bahrain today told the court that Jackson agreed a contract to sing some of the Sheikh's own songs.
He explained his musical ambitions before it unexpectedly emerged that Jackson would come to London to defend his reputation.
The star had been due to give evidence via videolink from Los Angeles but his doctor has given him the all clear to cross the Atlantic. He will appear in the witness box on Monday.
Sheikh Abdullah today said that he was introduced to Jackson by telephone after writing four songs with brother Jermaine in Bahrain. The sheikh admitted that he had no musical training other than playing the piano as a child.
"I write music with producers. I don't write music myself, no," he replied to questioning from Jackson's counsel Robert Englehart QC. "I am very involved in the producing and have a creative input," he said.
He also agreed with Mr Englehart that none of the songs he recorded at his Bahrain studio was released and that he spent $450,000 on Jermaine while he stayed in the country from December 2004 to March the following year.
The sheikh bought Jermaine the Rolls-Royce when he returned to California. "That was never paid back, was it?" said Mr Englehart.
"No," replied Sheikh Abdullah, adding that he did not expect his generosity to be repaid.
Mr Englehart said that, before the prince actually met Michael Jackson personally, he had sent the popstar $35,000 and then $1million during his criminal trial in California.
"Michael was in need of that and that is correct," said the sheikh. "He thanked me afterwards." The sheikh agreed there was no contract at the time but denied that he provided it as a gift. "These payments were sent to help Michael and many times he confirmed to me he would pay me back."
Mr Englehart said there could never be a guarantee that the money would be repaid.
"You anticipated that, if Michael was acquitted and came to Bahrain, made records that were released, there might be in the future some money available from the commercial exploitation of the recording?"
"Correct," said the sheikh.
Bankim Thanki QC, representing the sheikh, had earlier told the court that his client was abandoning part of his claim to force Jackson to honour his agreement.
"Sheikh Abdullah does not want any collaboration in the future and nothing more to do with him.In essence, he wants to draw a line through the relationship and, in short, he wants his money back."
The pair allegedly had an agreement designed to ensure repayment of the money the sheikh advanced to Jackson.
The star travelled to Bahrain in 2005, with his children and staff, at the sheikh's invitation following his acquittal at the criminal trial. The Bahrainian claims they became good friends.
Sheikh Abdullah claims he and Jackson entered into a "combined rights agreement", under which the troubled superstar was committed to a recording contract, the production of an autobiography and a musical stage play.
Jackson insists there was no valid agreement and says the payments were gifts. The case continues.
Reader views (2)
Why is this case being heard in a Court in England and Wales? Was the alleged contract agreed here?
- Alan Griffiths, Forest Gate, LONDON. UK, 20/11/2008 23:37
Report abuse
The Sheikh is welcome to send me some money or a Rolls Royce if he wants. I could do with a nice treat.
- Marian, London, 20/11/2008 16:03
Report abuse
