Comments on: Janet Jackson’s statement, she has ‘best interests of the children’ in mind

By: Ravensdaughter

Ravensdaughter — Wed, 08 Aug 2012 15:57:05 +0000

The longer the wait, the harder it will be to prove Michael Jackson’s (the testator’s) intent in having the will drafted as it was. If a court is trying to dismantle and re-craft a will-the endpoint of a will contest-the central evidence must be the intent. At times, competence of the testator at the time the will was drafted can be challenged, but that’s a bigger mess.
My view-they don’t have a case, except in the court of public opinion.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Ravensdaughter

Ravensdaughter — Wed, 08 Aug 2012 15:51:36 +0000

I call bulls–t…
See reply to Kim above (nothing personal to you Kim, just an opportunity to comment more extensively once I saw your comment..)
Re: Paris’ mural-sweet, and GF has talent!

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: sandcastles

sandcastles — Wed, 08 Aug 2012 02:08:41 +0000

thank you for saying this. You are the only person I have read that has mentioned that the aunts and uncles HAVE NO RIGHT to discipline these kids. They are not legal guardians. i don’t know about any other families, but my mom and dad would have a fit if my aunts and uncles would’ve tried to tell me what I could and couldn’t do. Actually, they did. Also, I am adopted, and I am offended when anyone puts quotations around “dad”. I am just the same as my brothers and sister that weren’t adopted, and I have a birth certificate that says I am as born to my parents as my siblings were.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: polk8dot

polk8dot — Tue, 07 Aug 2012 14:13:26 +0000

@ ‘Isn’t it possible the executors of the estate are not trust worthy?’
Of course it is, entirely. But there are different ways of going about things. The way Janet and co. chose is clearly the wrong one, as it involves pretty much illegal acts. Kidnapping their own mother, trying to cut the kids off from the world, etc. Those actions put them and their motives in a very suspicious light.
If you have a problem with a will or its executors, you go to court, which they seem to have done. Then you gather evidence to support your claim, and wait for a chance to let it all come out and hopefully support your position. That’s the way any SANE, NORMAL and CARING for the kids person would do it.
But they clearly went sooooo much further than that. It makes no difference who Michael chose as executors. It was HIS right to chose a homeless person if he wanted to. It was his right to provide huge salary for them, in hopes of ensuring their total devotion to the kids wellfare. It was his right to leave out every single family member he wanted to. It was HIS EFFING MONEY!
No matter what his family say now, they have clearly overstepped the boundaries of ‘for the good of the kids’. They chose to disregard any legal, law abiding ways of proving their claims, instead focusing on getting their hands on the estate any way possible, then worrying about the public perception.
Money is a source of a lot of evil, and this crazy family has been destroyed by the decades old chase after money and fame. Too bad that the only thing they learned over time is to live off each other and plot against those who might cut their access to the money that was never theirs to begin with.
They are sick, twisted assholes, and the executors should take them to court for forceful attempts to overthrow the will and imprison the kids until they agree to become their pawns. Sick, sick, sick and disgusting.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Jag

Jag — Tue, 07 Aug 2012 13:49:34 +0000

I thought that his mother and now a nephew are over the will. Or is that just custody of the children?

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Kim

Kim — Tue, 07 Aug 2012 11:25:11 +0000

I dont trust the executors because MJ fired them as attorney and manager years before he died.They need to take
the contesting will to court.Why wait 3 years?

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Kate

Kate — Tue, 07 Aug 2012 09:52:50 +0000

A friend of mine was recommended to do this with her kids when her husband died, by a grief counsellor. So it must be therapeutic, and sounds normal.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Kate

Kate — Tue, 07 Aug 2012 09:50:57 +0000

Oh, I agree there as well. There is far, far more to parenthood than who biologically impregnated the mother. He loved and wanted and cared for those kids, and they adored him back. He’s their father whatever DNA might have to say. I just meant that there isn’t, IMO, absolute certainty that he isn’t also their bio parent. I agree it’s an irrelevance anyway, though.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Marie Antoinette Jr.

Marie Antoinette Jr. — Tue, 07 Aug 2012 08:21:49 +0000

It doesn’t matter because he is dead. Whether or not Mike made *good* (cough) decisions is a moot point. His last will and testament is what matters, because it was his money to do with what he saw fit at the time.
The whole purpose of a will is to make sure your decedents respect your wishes regardless of their personal opinions.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: erika

erika — Tue, 07 Aug 2012 04:35:24 +0000

you know…i keep thinking this family is NUTs…and they are. I wouldn’t trust ______ Jackson with caretaking a walnut!

but, the THREE ‘sane’ people in this family are Prince, Paris and Blanket. God help those kids, guide them, protect them from these surgically enhanced freaks!!!

it’s soooo clear they loved their father and I think they are the ONLY ones on earth who truly understood and loved him. God Bless..

Report this comment as spam or abuse