Latest on MJJC

Katherine Jackson: Statement About Attorney

Soso Deaf said:
um....blanket has no legal mother. if what mj said was correct, she was a surrogate who has no rights to her child and who may or may not have even been the biological mother, could've used a donor egg. she had two yrs to assert those rights, she did not. he is the only legal parent of that child.

so it's been legally stated and put on the record that he has no mother. ok? so that's final and a fact and over and done with. deb can get them b/c he's her two childrens' next of kin
Click to expand...


Not correct watch the video of michael being asked about blankets mother and how she don't want to deal with the spot light period.

He said why should she, that tell you from what his saying he have a mother.

Michael kept a very private life away from the press and if blankets mother requested that michael keep her out of the spot light and don't want to deal with the drama then that's just what he did.
 
terrell said:
See Michael, this is why YOU should have listen to the warnings about this drug and not let a doctor outside of a hospital give it to you (which proved this doctor was shady). Let this be a lesson to all especially when you have minors.
Click to expand...
whoa now.....wtf?
 
mistty4m said:
Not correct watch the video of michael being asked about blankets mother and how she don't want to deal with the spot light period.

He said why should she, that tell you from what his saying he have a mother.

Michael kept a very private life away from the press and if blankets mother requested that michael keep her out of the spot light and don't want to deal with the drama then that's just what he did.
Click to expand...
actually no. i believe it was debbie he was referring to. and even if that's what he SAID, legality and the birth cert say something else. if she was shy or wasn't ableto handle themedia, that's one thing. u don't alter or falsify a birth certificate b/cof it.

it wasn't falsified b/c the woman who bore him was doing a job. she wasn't the bio mother of him anyway. it was a contract, hence he's the only legal parent of the child.
 
Soso Deaf said:
actually no. i believe it was debbie he was referring to. and even if that's what he SAID, legality and the birth cert say something else. if she was shy or wasn't ableto handle themedia, that's one thing. u don't alter or falsify a birth certificate b/cof it.

it wasn't falsified b/c the woman who bore him was doing a job. she wasn't the bio mother of him anyway. it was a contract, hence he's the only legal parent of the child.
Click to expand...


Are you joking Debbie is already a in the spot light and to answer the question Debbie is not blanket mother.

Because the mother didn't want to deal with the press and michael respected her wishes because she not greedy to be in the spot light.

Like some said in a qoute regarding blankets mother.
"There is no information available on Blanket's mother and I hope it stays that way. The public doesn't need to know."
 
thank you soso ,

Katherine only was granted custody because Debbie did not ask to be put in charge . the minute Debbie changes her mind , katherine will lose those kids . and what she and her kids are trying to do now won't help her case at all when Debbie start making "trouble".
 
mistty4m said:
Are you joking Debbie is already a in the spot light and to answer the question Debbie is not blanket mother.

Because the mother didn't want to deal with the press and michael respected her wishes because she not greedy to be in the spot light.

Like some said in a qoute regarding blankets mother.
"There is no information available on Blanket's mother and I hope it stays that way. The public doesn't need to know."
Click to expand...
I have a feeling all of this is going to effect Blanklet when he get older.
 
as for Blanket mom , well , I have a feeling Aljendrena will say she is the mother .lol
 
williamorange1 said:
thank you soso ,

Katherine only was granted custody because Debbie did not ask to be put in charge . the minute Debbie changes her mind , katherine will lose those kids . and what she and her kids are trying to do now won't help her case at all when Debbie start making "trouble".
Click to expand...
Well then if that is the case, then that would have gone against would go against the WILL as well. See, like I said, nothing is nail in stone.
 
mistty4m said:
Are you joking Debbie is already a in the spot light and to answer the question Debbie is not blanket mother.

Because the mother didn't want to deal with the press and michael respected her wishes because she not greedy to be in the spot light.

Like some said in a qoute regarding blankets mother.
"There is no information available on Blanket's mother and I hope it stays that way. The public doesn't need to know."
Click to expand...
no mike said that in reference to debbie. she can'thandle it. and bashir said "she can'thandle her kids?" and mj said yes. it was too much for her.

what he initially said about blankets mother contradicted what he later said about her. so the birth cert confirmes that it was not a relationship. it was a surrogate. I HATE TALKING ABOUT THEIR BIOLOGY/MATERNITY/PATERNITY so let's come off of that.

basing this on the fact that debbie can get two of thekids, means that she can get the youngest b/c her next of kin is blanket's next of kin. that's the LAW.

so this figment of fans' imagination of a mother for blanket does not exist. she had two yrs....he's almost 8. too late now.

deb can go in and get those kids. she's their next of kin. she was trusting katherine to do right. they need to fall back b/c thelast thing these kids need is to be moved again.
 
terrell said:
Girl, it is my anger over all of this mess and how this did not have to happen. It all could have been avoided.
Click to expand...
girl i get it but when u have a doctor lying and sayin it's ok...u gon trust a cardiologist or a nutritionist? hmmmmmmmm i'd say the one w/ a ph.d and he did and it costhim his life
 
I'm sure this have effected on them a little dealing with all this stuff and drama going on and some people don't make any thing better from some of the words they use.

We on this forum can never understand how it is to have lost a son in that way, to have lost a father in that way and to have to handle the lost of a love one in the spot light.


It must be hell period, but GOD always make a way and protecting those he love no matter what.
 
mistty4m said:
Are you joking Debbie is already a in the spot light and to answer the question Debbie is not blanket mother.

Because the mother didn't want to deal with the press and michael respected her wishes because she not greedy to be in the spot light.

Like some said in a qoute regarding blankets mother.
"There is no information available on Blanket's mother and I hope it stays that way. The public doesn't need to know."
Click to expand...

Surrogate gave birth to Blanket with an anonymous donor egg.

So there will be no claim for Blanket.

Debbie, however, can claim Blanket, as she is the mother of Blanket's siblings and her children are Blanket's next of kin.
 
no mike said that in reference to debbie. she can'thandle it. and bashir said "she can'thandle her kids?" and mj said yes. it was too much for her.-------------------- And see this is my issue with DR (whom I use to defend to see the children until I learned more. Me and Bee use to get into on this board about this). If it was too much for DR back then, then is it too much for her now. The daiper changing, the bottle feeding, getting up at nights, etc is over, these kids are almost young adults (Prince will be 18 in the next 5 years which will be here in a moment). No keep on stepping.
 
Soso Deaf said:
girl i get it but when u have a doctor lying and sayin it's ok...u gon trust a cardiologist or a nutritionist? hmmmmmmmm i'd say the one w/ a ph.d and he did and it costhim his life
Click to expand...
So true but I just wish MJ would have used better judgement. The fact this drug was ordered in the manner in which it was and that you could NOT get a presciptions for it would tell me everything if what the nurse is saying is true-I believe her. I believe Micheal knew this drug was not suppose to be out of the hospital. But yeah, Murray is the blame at the very end because he is the doctor and the ethics remain with him.
 
terrell said:
no mike said that in reference to debbie. she can'thandle it. and bashir said "she can'thandle her kids?" and mj said yes. it was too much for her.-------------------- And see this is my issue with DR (whom I use to defend to see the children until I learned more. Me and Bee use to get into on this board about this). If it was too much for DR back then, then is it too much for her now. The daiper changing, the bottle feeding, getting up at nights, etc is over, these kids are almost young adults (Prince will be 18 in the next 5 years which will be here in a moment). No keep on stepping.
Click to expand...
it wasn't that that was too much. it wasn't the diapering, it was the fans it was his family it was the media. it was mike....to take him away from those kids, to take them away from him, rather, was something she couldn't do.

what bee failed to realize is that if she was the 'mrs. mommy' that everyone wanted her to be, she would've taken those kids from mj and she would've been a bigger bitch to fans than she is now. she said what she had to say to minimize the blow.

b/c then, they had their daddy to take care of them. daddy is gone now. now she's the one who has to step in and she had to do that. she's a strong woman. but to take her kids away from mj would've crippled him beyond all means. so she did not do that. she then CHOOSE to honour the will and his wishes. it's been four months...not going so well. i think she knew that katherine needed thekids there more than she (debbie) did. yet again, another unselfish action on her part.

i see her as the woman who did anything and everything to make mj happy. she had her moments. riled up but at the end, she did it for reasons that we saw but some we didn't see and some we can't understand b/c we weren't there.

but she could've been a lot worse. she's not but right now, i feel she needs to be there b/c between grace and randy, those kids don't stand a chance
 
shimar said:
MJs babies aren't gonna have anything left by the time they are grown-ups.

I just hope that the ad litem lawyer appointed to the child grows a pair - and reams the judge for allowing a multiple bankrupted family member, with no known current employment, with a history of fleecing the deceased of tens of miilions of dollars, then the deceased having to pay out lawsuits to repair the damage done by this family member - assume the title of "executor" to the CHILDREN'S estate.

Yes, it's the CHILDREN'S ESTATE, and I exclude Katherine only because she is a short-term beneficiary and her share is on loan until she passes away.
Click to expand...
Do you not see, there is a real reason to be alarmed, about branca and mccain and the will, or do you not care if branca is up to no good as long as the jackson family are not running the estate with there on lawyers, if you were really concern about the kids percent you would want the real truth, they have evidence to try and prove there case let them, branca timing is suspicous, michael and branca were not on good terms, dr thome hired and fired the staff. dr thome said it himself, and branca was not on michael team before dr thome took over, londell at one time was working for michael he would have some inside knowledge, to give the jacksons family.
 
There is no legal mother of record for Blanket. His birth certificate says "Unknown" for the mother. Therefore, his legal next of kin are his siblings Prince & Paris. If the 2002 will is invalidated, the 1997 will would be probated. Unfortunately for Katherine and the Jackson Family, the terms of the 1997 will so happens to be identical to the 2002 will. The only exception is that Paris and Blanket were not in that will. The courts will then abide by the 40% 40% 20% split and add Paris and Blanket to the terms as they are Michael's children. John Branca and John McClain would still be Executors as they are named executors in the 1997 will.

If the 1997 will for whatever reason is invalidated, the courts would give 100% of Michael's estate to the children. The children would then be appointed another Guardian Ad Litem (most likely an attorney) who will oversee the estate until the children are of legal age to administer it themselves. Then the situation becomes dicey because if the wills are invalidated, that means guardianship (Michael's wishes) are invalidated as well. Which mean the State of California would seek their next of kin, which happens to be Debbie Rowe, NOT Katherine Jackson.

Debbie Rowe, much like Larry Birkhead could become very powerful if the wills are invalidated. She could get custody of her children, get custody of Blanket, and legally administer Michael Jackson's estate until the children are of age.

I pray for Katherine because she is being led astray on this one.
 
Soso Deaf said:
debbie need to get them chillun NOW. lol sorry but this is a mess. she made sure joe was out of the picture but i bet she had no idea she had to keep jermaine and randy out, as well. and can she? since their children live at the house and are close to the kids now? this is one big damn mess. rndy need to go and sit down.
Click to expand...

The kids seem happy to me. They have aunts, cousins, their Grandma who obviously love them. I really don't understand why you want that to change.

Challenging the will is irrelevant. The Jacksons think MJ was murdered & I agree with that. I would challenge anything & everything suspicious, give it to the police too. One never knows where something might lead, then perhaps to another till you have the truth. I would leave no stone unturned to get justice for my son, brother.

I think DR still has issues with handling the spotlight that would come with having the kids full time anyway. She was really frightening when she got mad at those reporters.
 
thanx miss tenda! lol

there is NOTHING wrong w/ branca on the estate...i see no reason to be alarmed. if the will was fraud, don't u think he'd a left his ass something? he's made no bad decisions as of yet except the stupid memorab. thing w/ aeg but it was in agreeance w/ mcclain as well.

no one is talking about mcclain, if branca is so bad and mcclain is so good, wouldn't mcclain say someting?

it'd be more concerned that family who has a history of filing bankcruptcy is fighting for control over BILLIONS OF DOLLARS...don't u?
 
jrsfan said:
The kids seem happy to me. They have aunts, cousins, their Grandma who obviously love them. I really don't understand why you want that to change.

Challenging the will is irrelevant. The Jacksons think MJ was murdered & I agree with that. I would challenge anything & everything suspicious, give it to the police too. One never knows where something might lead, then perhaps to another till you have the truth. I would leave no stone unturned to get justice for my son, brother.

I think DR still has issues with handling the spotlight that would come with having the kids full time anyway. She was really frightening when she got mad at those reporters.
Click to expand...
im glad she went off at them. sorry but the kids were nearly in an accident. soemone needs to come out fists swinging but where is that? jacksons are all talk, they always are. deb...not so much. she'll get in ur ass...

cousins who's parents aren't supporting them. cousins who their trust is paying for for them to go w/ them. how are jermaine and randy'skids going to all these things if theirmom is broke? it's coming from their trust allotment, it has to be.

she can't manage money at all. she's getting over $80K a month and can't pay an electric bill? :doh: this is who u want in charge? she's being manipulatedby her kids. the same kids who would have her ask mike for $ cuz he couldnt tell her no.

good one

branca had nothing to do w/ a damn murder. he gets 3% lousy money imo...he could make more doing something else. y not look at aeg or murray or klien? but branca?

doing this will NOT give them money or allow them to be in charge of themoney. what don't people get? all the difference is from the prior will is the additoin of the children. that's it. same executors. same everything.
 
Trish said:
There is no legal mother of record for Blanket. His birth certificate says "Unknown" for the mother. Therefore, his legal next of kin are his siblings Prince & Paris. If the 2002 will is invalidated, the 1997 will would be probated. Unfortunately for Katherine and the Jackson Family, the terms of the 1997 will so happens to be identical to the 2002 will. The only exception is that Paris and Blanket were not in that will. The courts will then abide by the 40% 40% 20% split and add Paris and Blanket to the terms as they are Michael's children. John Branca and John McClain would still be Executors as they are named executors in the 1997 will.

If the 1997 will for whatever reason is invalidated, the courts would give 100% of Michael's estate to the children. The children would then be appointed another Guardian Ad Litem (most likely an attorney) who will oversee the estate until the children are of legal age to administer it themselves. Then the situation becomes dicey because if the wills are invalidated, that means guardianship (Michael's wishes) are invalidated as well. Which mean the State of California would seek their next of kin, which happens to be Debbie Rowe, NOT Katherine Jackson.

Debbie Rowe, much like Larry Birkhead could become very powerful if the wills are invalidated. She could get custody of her children, get custody of Blanket, and legally administer Michael Jackson's estate until the children are of age.

I pray for Katherine because she is being led astray on this one.
Click to expand...


That's exactly what I've been sayin'!!!

:clapping::clapping::clapping::clapping:
 
Soso Deaf said:
im glad she went off at them. sorry but the kids were nearly in an accident. soemone needs to come out fists swinging but where is that? jacksons are all talk, they always are. deb...not so much. she'll get in ur ass...

cousins who's parents aren't supporting them. cousins who their trust is paying for for them to go w/ them. how are jermaine and randy'skids going to all these things if theirmom is broke? it's coming from their trust allotment, it has to be.

she can't manage money at all. she's getting over $80K a month and can't pay an electric bill? :doh: this is who u want in charge? she's being manipulatedby her kids. the same kids who would have her ask mike for $ cuz he couldnt tell her no.

good one

branca had nothing to do w/ a damn murder. he gets 3% lousy money imo...he could make more doing something else. y not look at aeg or murray or klien? but branca?

doing this will NOT give them money or allow them to be in charge of themoney. what don't people get? all the difference is from the prior will is the additoin of the children. that's it. same executors. same everything.
Click to expand...

There is lots of talk of a prior will. I have asked this before & I will ask again - does anyone have a copy? I have searched the internet & no luck.
Thanks so much.
 
Soso Deaf said:
it wasn't that that was too much. it wasn't the diapering, it was the fans it was his family it was the media. it was mike....to take him away from those kids, to take them away from him, rather, was something she couldn't do.

what bee failed to realize is that if she was the 'mrs. mommy' that everyone wanted her to be, she would've taken those kids from mj and she would've been a bigger bitch to fans than she is now. she said what she had to say to minimize the blow.

b/c then, they had their daddy to take care of them. daddy is gone now. now she's the one who has to step in and she had to do that. she's a strong woman. but to take her kids away from mj would've crippled him beyond all means. so she did not do that. she then CHOOSE to honour the will and his wishes. it's been four months...not going so well. i think she knew that katherine needed thekids there more than she (debbie) did. yet again, another unselfish action on her part.

i see her as the woman who did anything and everything to make mj happy. she had her moments. riled up but at the end, she did it for reasons that we saw but some we didn't see and some we can't understand b/c we weren't there.

but she could've been a lot worse. she's not but right now, i feel she needs to be there b/c between grace and randy, those kids don't stand a chance
Click to expand...
Debbie has the rights to see the kids she is not shut out, and I believe debbie is a good person, she can talk to katherine and get her information that way and if katherine believe the will and branca are a reason to go up against them about the estate, debbie can be inform straight from katherine, debbie respect michael and i believe she would respect katherine judgement.
 
blueocean said:
Debbie has the rights to see the kids she is not shut out, and I believe debbie is a good person, she can talk to katherine and get her information that way and if katherine believe the will and branca are a reason to go up against them about the estate, debbie can be inform straight from katherine, debbie respect michael and i believe she would respect katherine judgement.
Click to expand...


Not if Katherine's judgment is detrimental to the children - which it IS, given that the Jacksons are talking about the MJ3 at every given moment for money.
 
blueocean said:
Debbie has the rights to see the kids she is not shut out, and I believe debbie is a good person, she can talk to katherine and get her information that way and if katherine believe the will and branca are a reason to go up against them about the estate, debbie can be inform straight from katherine, debbie respect michael and i believe she would respect katherine judgement.
Click to expand...
the same family who was talking smack about her immediately after mj died? saying she better not come after the kids?

well IF she's seeing them and taking them out or doing things with them, she's doing a better job on staying private than the family is at this time
 
jrsfan said:
There is lots of talk of a prior will. I have asked this before & I will ask again - does anyone have a copy? I have searched the internet & no luck.
Thanks so much.
Click to expand...
i think it's been confirmed that the will from 1997 is IDENTICAL to this one except for the addition of paris and blanket.

only if they declare that one invalid does it go to last case scenario involving the state of cali and new executors...i don't get it at all. IF the two execs were the witnesses how is that a conflict. im sure there were others there.

they're doing all they can to both honour his legacy and to make money to get that debt down. so what's the issue?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top