Jackson's Mom and Dad Split Over Executors/Joe Threatens Estate

well, if he didn't want to hear it, why did he talk publicly about Joe? I doubt he'd be surprised to hear people blaming Joe for all kinds of ill here.
Regardless, That is his father. He can talk dirt ill against Joe if he wants , because he can but I highly doubt you'd find MJ egging you,a total stranger, on to disrespect his father/family, at some point you will go too far and offend and he would say " hey, thats my father/mother you're talking about" .

I think to disrespect MJ's family is to disrespect him. and I've seen more than disrespect on this forum of which I can do nothing about but ponder.

MJ: Family is everything. It’s love. It’s what we were taught. We’re friends at the end of the day, which is important. Other than what the public or press people say, we’re friends. We love each other very much.

-Excerpt taken from Geraldo Interview (2005)

Some say that to challenge the will is to challenge MJ's wishes, but why are you the very ones challenging the love that he said he had for his family at the end of the day?

The root of all this bickering seems to be MONEY, but what is MONEY? MONEY is nothing.It yeilds forth no happiness, peace, nor protection. Money is successful in bringing on Pain and heartache. I learned that on June 25, 2009.
 
Last edited:
Joe is another story.But would he want his fans to discuss his fanacial issues? I do not think so. Have you ever heard him saying something bad about his brothers and sisters? I think this family needs more respect from his fans. It is alreday goes too far.


Respect is earned and not given. Just because Michael did not bad mouth them in public does not mean we have to live by his rules.

Sorry, when people do stupid or selfish shit they need to be call out on that, I do not care who they are. Maybe if Michael did more of that, maybe his family would not had push him around as much. Maybe Michael did, we will never know.

Also seriously, stop with the grief excuse. Everyone has experience lost big and small, but you cannot use it to excuse everything that person does for now on. Katherine should had hire a specialty lawyer to begin with instead of the yahoos she was listening before. She had enough bearing about her to run to court barely a day after Michael died to gain control of his estate, so I am certain she could had done that. All she has done up to this point regarding the will is waste her money and time. If she did not have a valid argument against the executives, she should had stood quietly and watch instead of listening to her spoil children.

Yes, I said spoil because anyone who leaves their families for their elder mother to raise while you go across the world selling stories about your dead brother make you spoil to say the least.

I am glad Katherine finally came to her senses, but I wish she would had stood up sooner before things got as far as it did.
 
The root of all this bickering seems to be MONEY, but what is MONEY? MONEY is nothing. I learned that on June 25, 2009.



I know what you mean, and I respect your point of view, but you should teach that lesson you learnd on June 25th with Joe, who most likely didn't learn it.
 
Michael Jackson estate fight becomes public family disputeBy Alan Duke, CNN
November 11, 2009 -- Updated 0343 GMT (1143 HKT)
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/SHOWBIZ/Music/11/10/michael.jackson.estate/index.html?section=cnn_latest
Los Angeles, California (CNN) -- Michael Jackson's mother dropped her challenge of the two men named as executors in her son's will, but her sudden reversal caught her husband by surprise Tuesday and led to a bitter fight in court.
In the end, the judge approved John Branca and John McClain as executors to run the pop star's estate and he ruled that Michael Jackson's father had no right to challenge the decision.
Joe Jackson, however, will have his day in court in December to argue that he should get a monthly allowance from his son's huge estate.
Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Mitchell Beckloff also unsealed court documents that revealed the family spent $1.1 million on Michael Jackson's funeral in August, using money from his estate.
Katherine Jackson's change of heart came three weeks after she hired attorney Adam Streisand to replace the lawyers who were leading her four-month-long challenge of Branca and McClain.
Streisand announced in court Tuesday morning that Katherine Jackson "feels it's high time that the fighting ends."
"She feels that Mr. Branca and Mr. McClain have been doing an admirable job," Streisand said. "We're going to try to partner with them and work closely with them to make sure that the estate is doing the best that it can for the legacy of Michael Jackson, for the kids, most importantly."
Streisand said Katherine Jackson kept the decision a secret from the rest of her family until Tuesday.
It drew a harsh response from attorney Brian Oxman, who on Monday filed Joe Jackson's challenge of Branca and McClain. It was a fight that Oxman said Katherine Jackson had promised she would help wage.
"She has now reneged on her obligation to her family," Oxman told the judge. Joe Jackson's lawyer said Katherine Jackson's reversal was "one of the most despicable displays" he's ever seen in court.
Oxman accused Katherine Jackson of reaching a secret deal -- behind Joe Jackson's back -- with the men who control their son's estate.
Her lawyer fired back.
"That is not only baseless, but just a product of Mr. Oxman's imagination," Streisand said.
There was no deal and it was a surprise to the estate lawyers, he said.
"Before I announced my position, Mrs. Jackson and I were the only two people in the world who knew what I was going to say," Streisand said.
As for Joe Jackson's challenge for control, Streisand told the judge, "He has no right in the assets of the estate."
Until now, the Jacksons have painted a united public front in the battle over who controls the estate.
"Lawyer to lawyer, it was contentious between the two of us in there, in order to try to get things to come to a resolution," Streisand said after court.
"She doesn't wish in any way to be involved in any dispute or fight with him, but she wants to see things get moving along in a more cooperative way," he said, referring to Katherine Jackson and her husband.
Joe Jackson, 81, and Katherine Jackson, 79, have been married for 60 years but they live separately.
Joe Jackson is not named as a beneficiary in his son's 2002 will, but he filed a petition last week asking for an allowance from his son's estate to cover $20,000 in monthly living expenses.
Katherine Jackson is a beneficiary of the will, along with Michael Jackson's three children and unidentified charities, and she receives a monthly allowance as ordered by the court in July.
Katherine Jackson supports her husband's request for a monthly allowance, Streisand said.
Howard Weitzman, the lead lawyer for the estate, said they would take her wishes into consideration in deciding their position on an allowance for Joe Jackson.
Judge Beckloff will hear his request for a monthly allowance on December 10.
Joe Jackson's petition to challenge the executors is dead, unless Oxman can resurrect it in a appeals court, which he told the judge he may try.
"I hope that an appellate court will agree with me," Oxman said.
Joe Jackson contended that Branca and McClain should be disqualified as executors because they hid from the court a mistake regarding Jackson's signature.
The signature section of the will said it was signed on July 7, 2002, in Los Angeles, although there is proof that Michael Jackson was in New York on that date, Oxman said.
The judge ruled that only a beneficiary, such as Katherine Jackson, is in a position to make the challenge.
Court documents unsealed Tuesday showed the estate paid $1,098,000 for Jackson's funeral and burial.
The bulk of the cost went to Forest Lawn cemetery in Glendale, which was paid $855,730, including $590,000 for the crypt and monument inside the Holly Terrace section of it's Great Mausoleum, the document said.
Jackson's burial garments cost $35,000, while another $16,000 was spent in flowers for the funeral, the papers said.
Michael Jackson died on June 25, 2009, from what the coroner ruled was "acute propofol intoxication."
 
Regardless, That is his father. He can talk dirt ill against Joe if he wants , because he can but I highly doubt you'd find MJ egging you,a total stranger, on to disrespect his father/family, at some point you will go too far and offend and he would say " hey, thats my father/mother you're talking about" .

I think to disrespect MJ's family is to disrespect him. and I've seen more than disrespect on this forum of which I can do nothing about but ponder.

MJ: Family is everything. It’s love. It’s what we were taught. We’re friends at the end of the day, which is important. Other than what the public or press people say, we’re friends. We love each other very much.

-Excerpt taken from Geraldo Interview (2005)

Some say that to challenge the will is to challenge MJ's wishes, but why are you the very ones challenging the love that he said he had for his family at the end of the day?

The root of all this bickering seems to be MONEY, but what is MONEY? MONEY is nothing.It yeilds forth no happiness, peace, nor protection. Money is successful in bringing on Pain and heartache. I learned that on June 25, 2009.

what are you on about? I was one of the first ones on this board to say that Joe is his father and he should get an allowance. so back off dude.

that said, you can make excuses for Joe all you want, but the way he's behaving right now... he doesn't deserve a SHRED of respect from Michael's fans. NONE WHATSOEVER.
 
I know what you mean, and I respect your point of view, but you should teach that lesson you learnd on June 25th with Joe, who most likely didn't learn it.

Seemingly so. But as MJ fans, I think we should be the bigger person.

The disrespect being leveled in these financial (money) discussions go against MJ's wishes. We care of and try to protect his wishes in his will (regardless of the issues we might see with it), why can't we care for the wishes he had in regards to his family?
 
what are you on about? I was one of the first ones on this board to say that Joe is his father and he should get an allowance. so back off dude.

that said, you can make excuses for Joe all you want, but the way he's behaving right now... he doesn't deserve a SHRED of respect from Michael's fans. NONE WHATSOEVER.


Joe should not get an allowance just because he is Michael's father. If Michael wanted to give Joe any money he would had named him the the will. Since he didn't, Joe is privilege to nothing.

Anyone who says that Joe deserves an allowance because he is the father should had told Michael that when he wrote both the 1997 and 2002 wills/
 
what are you on about? I was one of the first ones on this board to say that Joe is his father and he should get an allowance. so back off dude.

that said, you can make excuses for Joe all you want, but the way he's behaving right now... he doesn't deserve a SHRED of respect from Michael's fans. NONE WHATSOEVER.

Im not arguing for Joe's allowance or what not. Nor am I defending Joe as you insinuate. I'm just appalled at the disrespect leveled against the family, in general.Its unnecessary. Its not what MJ would have wanted, but hardly anyone cares for what MJ wanted nowadays.
 
I was coming not from the "he's his father" pov, Ramona. I was coming from the "he's 81, diabetic, and had a stroke" pov. I'm reconsidering, given everything that's happened today. I've already explained this upthread.
 
Im not arguing for Joe's allowance or what not. Nor am I defending Joe as you insinuate. I'm just appalled at the disrespect leveled against the family.Its unnecessary. Its not what MJ would have wanted, but hardly anyone cares for what MJ wanted nowadays.

MJ wouldn't have liked it. unfortunately, things have changed for him AND for us. I'm sick and tired of Joe and Oxman and some others in this family trying to shaft MJ's kids. do you think MJ would appreciate THAT? no, because that is exactly what they're trying to do, make no mistake.
 
MJ wouldn't have liked it. unfortunately, things have changed for him AND for us. I'm sick and tired of Joe and Oxman and some others in this family trying to shaft MJ's kids. do you think MJ would appreciate THAT? no, because that is exactly what they're trying to do, make no mistake.
No he wouldn't appreciate people trying to "shaft" his kids. But aren't cases such as these bound to include disputes as to who gets what after someone of MJ's like passes away suddenly leaving behind an unexpected will. In the end, justice will prevail, as we've seen by the judge's decision today. I don't know why the getting all worked up attitude is for, in the end everyone will get what they should get. some will end up with most, some and maybe none.
 
Respect is earned and not given. Just because Michael did not bad mouth them in public does not mean we have to live by his rules.

.

If we are his fans we have to respect HIS rules about HIS family. I think it is very clear. It looks so rude when strangers especially if they are FANS discuss his family members with zero respect. I understand haters can do it but why fans have to do the same? We can discuss anything but with good manners imo. This was my point.
 
I was coming not from the "he's his father" pov, Ramona. I was coming from the "he's 81, diabetic, and had a stroke" pov. I'm reconsidering, given everything that's happened today. I've already explained this upthread.


Sorry about the misunderstanding. I am just trying of people defending Joe on this point.
 
If we are his fans we have to respect HIS rules about HIS family. I think it is very clear. It looks so rude when strangers especially if they are FANS discuss his family members with zero respect. I understand haters can do it but why fans have to do the same? We can discuss anything but with good manners imo. This was my point.


Just because I am a fan does not mean I am obligated to agree with everything Michael says or does, it does not work like that. As I have said before, respect is earned not given. That goes no differently for the Jackson.

Although some fans may go too far, I can understand their frustration and anger. Also, Haters hate for no reason. The fans here who dislike or do not respect the family usually have very good reason for their feelings, just as you have good reasons to support the family.

If more people had help Michael stand up to his family instead of pulling the 'family loyalty' card on him, I think he would had lived a healthier and happy life. That is my stance on the subject.
 
The call is not for support but rather for Respect. Can we have a civil discussion with both sides of the fence? Is that possible?

Showing disrespect doesn't get anyone anywhere that is productive. Its highly unnecessary. Its like useless cursing/swearing that gets in the way of substance.
 
Joe should not get an allowance just because he is Michael's father. If Michael wanted to give Joe any money he would had named him the the will. Since he didn't, Joe is privilege to nothing.

From what i have read that michael would give katherine jackson a monthly allowance and michael told katherine to give joe half, then I assume he would want her to continue to give joe half of the allowance, if joe have doccuments and katherine say the same then they should give an allowance.
 
Are you trying to say that this issue cannot be discussed respectfully?
If not, that is sad.


No, I was respectfully asking how you consider answering respecfully to this thread. It's a question. I'd like to know what you consider would be respectful comments. Cause obviously, it seems difficult to stay neutral and calm when Joe comes in the subject.

with love :)
 
J
From what i have read that michael would give katherine jackson a monthly allowance and michael told katherine to give joe half, then I assume he would want her to continue to give joe half of the allowance, if joe have doccuments and katherine say the same then they should give an allowance.

half? half?! for what? or, rather, for whom?!

from what I know, Katherine was supporting a bunch of people (including Jermaine's kids) who lived in that house. whom did Joe support?
 
Last edited:
Are you trying to say that this issue cannot be discussed respectfully?
If not, that is sad.

and there you have it.

it *is* sad. WE ARE SAD. WE ARE HEARTBROKEN. WE ARE SICK AND TIRED OF PEOPLE WHO ARE SUPPOSED TO MOURN MIKE, NOT CHALLENGE HIS WILL AND DESIRE TO GIVE THE MONEY HE EARNED BY SPENDING HIS BLOOD, SWEAT, AND TEARS (SOME OF WHICH WERE GENERATED BY HIS FATHER OVER THE YEARS) AND NOW HIS LIFE TO WHOM HE PLEASED.

so, please, cut us some slack.

sorry about all the shouting. I'm just really, really angry tonight. so I'm gonna say goodnight and go to bed. maybe tomorrow I'll be calmer and treat y'all with more respect.
 
Joe should not get an allowance just because he is Michael's father. If Michael wanted to give Joe any money he would had named him the the will. Since he didn't, Joe is privilege to nothing.

From what i have read that michael would give katherine jackson a monthly allowance and michael told katherine to give joe half, then I assume he would want her to continue to give joe half of the allowance, if joe have doccuments and katherine say the same then they should give an allowance.


Then he should Katherine to split her half. Michael never directly gave him the money, so Michael holds no responsibility to him. If you used that logic, Michael's estate would be paying for that entire family, saved Janet. Michael never gave anyone money directly in his family, except his mother.

Like I said, if you feel Joe should get an allowance because he is the father, you should had told Michael that when he wrote his will.
 
Today at TMZ live chat they told that while alive MJ supported some of his brothers as well. But they say that what he did when alive is irrelevant. They said that today the only relevant thing is the will and executors do not have to provide an allowance for Joe and/or any of the siblings.

In this reality if the executors approve an allowance for Joe they would be doing that because they have a good heart.
 
I'm sure there was a huge fight in that house if indeed Katherine did not tell anyone about her decision to stop the madness .
 
I'm sure there was a huge fight in that house if indeed Katherine did not tell anyone about her decision to stop the madness .


What the worst they can they do to her. If they get on her nerves too much, she can throw their butts, as well at their kids and baby's mommas, out on the street. Or, make them at least pay the damn rent.
 
Judge: Joe Jackson can't challenge will executors

Judge: Joe Jackson can't challenge will executors

Tue Nov 10, 8:46 pm ET

LOS ANGELES – Michael Jackson's father does not stand to inherit any of his son's assets and cannot challenge the appointment of the executors chosen by the singer to handle his will, a judge said Tuesday.

Superior Court Judge Mitchell Beckloff said Joe Jackson was not named in the will but could pursue a motion to receive a family allowance from the estate because he claimed his son had been supporting him.

Joe Jackson and his son had an often-strained relationship, and Michael Jackson said at one point that he would get physically sick — as a child and as an adult — at the sight of his father.

Beckloff ended a contentious all-day hearing by telling Joe Jackson's lawyer, Brian Oxman, that his client had no standing to prolong the legal fray over Jackson's estate and would gain nothing from doing so.

"I don't think he gets to step into this and create further litigation," the judge declared. "Joe Jackson takes none of this estate. This is a decision his son made."

In another development, the court released an accounting that the estate had paid nearly $1 million in expenses for the private family funeral held at Forest Lawn Memorial Park.

Some of the expenses were $11,716 for invitations and programs; $35,000 for burial garments; $30,000 for cars and security; and $15,000 to a designer.

"I would have done it less expensively. But it was Michael Jackson, who was larger than life," Howard Weitzman, an attorney for the estate administrators, said outside court. "There's no reason he should not have a funeral that's larger than life."

Earlier in Tuesday's hearing, Michael Jackson's mother withdrew her objections to the appointment of two longtime Jackson associates as executors of his will.

The surprise announcement came from Katherine Jackson's new probate attorney Adam Streisand, who said his client felt it was time for the legal battle to end over the appointment of attorney John Branca and music executive John McClain.

Katherine Jackson now believes their appointment, as spelled out in her son's will, can "enhance the legacy of Michael Jackson in the best interest of his children," Streisand said.

It was Streisand's first major move in the case since he was chosen last month by Katherine Jackson to replace the team that had represented her since her son's death in June.

Beckloff later made the formal appointment of the executors after deciding Jackson's father could not challenge the move. Oxman threatened to appeal, which could interfere further with the appointments.

Streisand said Katherine Jackson decided she wanted to let the executors go about earning money for the estate rather than incurring more legal fees.

Oxman, however, accused her of reneging on an agreement with her family to challenge the executors and called the announcement in court "one of the most despicable things I have ever seen."

He accused Katherine Jackson of making a secret deal with the executors, a statement vehemently denied by Streisand and Weitzman.

Streisand said no one but he and Mrs. Jackson knew of her decision until he stood in court and announced it.

"All the credit goes to Mrs. Jackson," the lawyer said. "She is really the wise sage of this family."

The judge scheduled a hearing for Dec. 10 on Joe Jackson's request for a family allowance. Streisand suggested Katherine Jackson would support that request.

The will left Michael Jackson's assets to his mother, his children and children's charities.

Branca is an attorney who represented Jackson for more than 20 years and is regarded as the architect of his financial empire. McClain is a music executive and childhood friend of the singer.

Katherine Jackson's original legal team complained that she was not being given enough of a role in making decisions after her son's death. While they considered a challenge, the judge allowed the administrators to go forward with projects including the movie, "This Is It," which brought $60 million into the estate and became a box office hit.

Branca and McClain were credited as executive producers on the movie.

A 60-page motion filed by Oxman detailed Joe Jackson's bid to get money from his son's estate. The father is seeking an allowance to help cover expenses that exceed $15,000 a month, according to the court documents.

The documents said Joe Jackson receives a $1,700 monthly Social Security payment and had relied on his son for support for many years.

Joe Jackson suffers from diabetes and had a stroke in 1998, the filing stated.

A former steelworker, he managed and trained his children and organized the Jackson 5. He has been married to Katherine Jackson for 50 years, but he lists his home in Las Vegas. She lives at a family home in the San Fernando Valley north of Los Angeles.

The filings list Joe Jackson's age as 80 in one place and 81 in another.

His list of monthly expenses includes $1,200 for rent for his Las Vegas home; $2,500 to eat out; $1,000 for entertainment, gifts and vacations; $2,000 on air travel and $3,000 on hotels.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091111/ap_on_en_mu/us_jackson_estate_26
 
Re: Judge: Joe Jackson can't challenge will executors

I thought this would be worth a extra thread but first I put it in this one. The mods could move it. Thanks.

Michael Jackson estate fight becomes public family dispute
By Alan Duke, CNN
November 11, 2009 -- Updated 0343 GMT (1143 HKT)

Los Angeles, California (CNN) -- Michael Jackson's mother dropped her challenge of the two men named as executors in her son's will, but her sudden reversal caught her husband by surprise Tuesday and led to a bitter fight in court.

In the end, the judge approved John Branca and John McClain as executors to run the pop star's estate and he ruled that Michael Jackson's father had no right to challenge the decision.

Joe Jackson, however, will have his day in court in December to argue that he should get a monthly allowance from his son's huge estate.

Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Mitchell Beckloff also unsealed court documents that revealed the family spent $1.1 million on Michael Jackson's funeral in August, using money from his estate.

Katherine Jackson's change of heart came three weeks after she hired attorney Adam Streisand to replace the lawyers who were leading her four-month-long challenge of Branca and McClain.

Streisand announced in court Tuesday morning that Katherine Jackson "feels it's high time that the fighting ends."

"She feels that Mr. Branca and Mr. McClain have been doing an admirable job," Streisand said. "We're going to try to partner with them and work closely with them to make sure that the estate is doing the best that it can for the legacy of Michael Jackson, for the kids, most importantly."

Streisand said Katherine Jackson kept the decision a secret from the rest of her family until Tuesday.

It drew a harsh response from attorney Brian Oxman, who on Monday filed Joe Jackson's challenge of Branca and McClain. It was a fight that Oxman said Katherine Jackson had promised she would help wage.

"She has now reneged on her obligation to her family," Oxman told the judge. Joe Jackson's lawyer said Katherine Jackson's reversal was "one of the most despicable displays" he's ever seen in court.

Oxman accused Katherine Jackson of reaching a secret deal -- behind Joe Jackson's back -- with the men who control their son's estate.

Her lawyer fired back.

"That is not only baseless, but just a product of Mr. Oxman's imagination," Streisand said.

There was no deal and it was a surprise to the estate lawyers, he said.

"Before I announced my position, Mrs. Jackson and I were the only two people in the world who knew what I was going to say," Streisand said.

As for Joe Jackson's challenge for control, Streisand told the judge, "He has no right in the assets of the estate."

Until now, the Jacksons have painted a united public front in the battle over who controls the estate.

"Lawyer to lawyer, it was contentious between the two of us in there, in order to try to get things to come to a resolution," Streisand said after court.

"She doesn't wish in any way to be involved in any dispute or fight with him, but she wants to see things get moving along in a more cooperative way," he said, referring to Katherine Jackson and her husband.

Joe Jackson, 81, and Katherine Jackson, 79, have been married for 60 years but they live separately.

Joe Jackson is not named as a beneficiary in his son's 2002 will, but he filed a petition last week asking for an allowance from his son's estate to cover $20,000 in monthly living expenses.

Katherine Jackson is a beneficiary of the will, along with Michael Jackson's three children and unidentified charities, and she receives a monthly allowance as ordered by the court in July.

Katherine Jackson supports her husband's request for a monthly allowance, Streisand said.

Howard Weitzman, the lead lawyer for the estate, said they would take her wishes into consideration in deciding their position on an allowance for Joe Jackson.

Judge Beckloff will hear his request for a monthly allowance on December 10.

Joe Jackson's petition to challenge the executors is dead, unless Oxman can resurrect it in a appeals court, which he told the judge he may try.

"I hope that an appellate court will agree with me," Oxman said.


Joe Jackson contended that Branca and McClain should be disqualified as executors because they hid from the court a mistake regarding Jackson's signature.

The signature section of the will said it was signed on July 7, 2002, in Los Angeles, although there is proof that Michael Jackson was in New York on that date, Oxman said.

The judge ruled that only a beneficiary, such as Katherine Jackson, is in a position to make the challenge.

Court documents unsealed Tuesday showed the estate paid $1,098,000 for Jackson's funeral and burial.

The bulk of the cost went to Forest Lawn cemetery in Glendale, which was paid $855,730, including $590,000 for the crypt and monument inside the Holly Terrace section of it's Great Mausoleum, the document said.

Jackson's burial garments cost $35,000, while another $16,000 was spent in flowers for the funeral, the papers said.

Michael Jackson died on June 25, 2009, from what the coroner ruled was "acute propofol intoxication."

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/SHOWBIZ/Music/11/10/michael.jackson.estate/index.html?section=cnn_latest
 
did ppl really expect anything different frm joe and oxman??? all this does is show what mj had todeal with when he was here. parasites everywhere.
 
Also seriously, stop with the grief excuse. Everyone has experience lost big and small, but you cannot use it to excuse everything that person does for now on. Katherine should had hire a specialty lawyer to begin with instead of the yahoos she was listening before. She had enough bearing about her to run to court barely a day after Michael died to gain control of his estate, so I am certain she could had done that. All she has done up to this point regarding the will is waste her money and time. If she did not have a valid argument against the executives, she should had stood quietly and watch instead of listening to her spoil children.

I am glad Katherine finally came to her senses, but I wish she would had stood up sooner before things got as far as it did.

The reason we use the grief excuse is because of its validity. We do all experience grief, but we haven't had to deal with it with millions watching, talking heads coming at us from every corner, badgering us, telling us what do, raising the possibility that our son was murdered, that prospect alone adding a whole new dimension to the grief, and he's dissected physically and then again in the press with some of the most heinous and despicable speculation ever leveled on anyone. Plus, there are three young children she had to stay strong for, initially having to deal with the possibility they could be placed in a mother's home that was a stranger to them. Then here come friends saying the children aren't even her son's.

I don't paint a halo on Katherine Jackson. I know she made mistakes, but she was getting through chaos NONE OF US EVER have had to navigate through while simultaneously handling the loss of a child. Of course, she listened first to the lawyers and people who had always been in her inner circle because that's what you do when something devastating happens. You hang onto your existing support system, and that support system did not include estate specialists, but lots and lots and lots of opinions

She had to be in court within a couple of days after Michael's death and was in one battle after another over money, custody, executors, etc.

Yeah. maybe she should have gotten that specialist in the very beginning, but I certainly understand why in the midst of her whirlwind she relied on the people who had always been there for her.

I marvel that she got to this point when she did and am glad things are settling down around her. I think she fully deserves our understanding.

ETA: Also, sometimes things have to play out. If she had gotten this estate specialist in the beginning and he had made the kinds of decisions he is now, others would have told her that he was not serving her best interest. She probably would have fired him within a couple of months. She can accept what he's saying now because she can see for herself it's the best way to go.
 
Last edited:
Joe should not get an allowance just because he is Michael's father. If Michael wanted to give Joe any money he would had named him the the will. Since he didn't, Joe is privilege to nothing. /

agreed. Michael had given joe enough money (too much)during his life time, and michael is not his only child. Joe still have 8 children alive!!!!!!!!
 
Back
Top