Star & OK!: Jackson’s kids are devastated, Debbie Rowe’s custody fight

Both Star and OK! Magazine have cover stories dealing with Michael Jackson’s children this week. Shock of all shocks, it looks like Star’s cover story is a bit more respectful, with the headline, “Michael’s Kids: Inside Their Shattered World”. Star has a source who claims (I believe, correctly) that the kids are simply devastated. Michael was their whole world, “father, mother, playmate. Now that he’s gone, everything is different for them.” They cite little Paris’s heart-wrenching tribute to her father yesterday, and they make it seem like the kids are incredibly confused and emotional right now:

Hearts broke around the world when Michael Jackson’s 11-year-old daughter, Paris, delivered a teary tribute to her late father during his memorial, saying simply: “Daddy has been the best father you can ever imagine, and I just want to say, I love you so much,” before breaking down.

As Star reports in our July 20 issue, the King of Pop’s three children are struggling with their devastating loss — and wonder who will raise them now that their doting dad is gone.

Prince, Paris and Blanket “are scared and confused,” says a family insider. “Michael was everything to them — father, mother, playmate. Now that he’s gone, everything is different for them.”

While Prince, 12, has tried to put on a brave face for his younger siblings, he often breaks down and sobs uncontrollably. It’s the same with Paris, who constantly bursts into tears and runs out of the room — her brief but heartfelt tribute to her father at the Staples Center on Tuesday was typical of her behavior. As for little Blanket, 7, he asks, “Who will be my Mommy?” according to the family insider.

“It has hit the kids hard — really hard,” adds the insider. “They were in a state of shock at first… But then it began to sink in, and it’s just heartbreaking to watch.”

[From Star Magazine]

Meanwhile, over at OK!, the cover story is “Debbie Rowe vs. The Jacksons: $100 Million Or The Kids”. OK! claims that Debbie Rowe is fully prepared to go to war for her children, but that the Jackson family might try to pay her off with a lump sum to relinquish her parental rights. A source close to Debbie claims that she’s very wary of the kind of environment the Jackson family might provide for the kids, but a source close to the Jackson family claims they really are looking out for the kids. CB wants me to mention that OK! has gone steadily downhill with its content and reporting, so this is most likely all total bullsh-t:

Behind the black wrought iron gates of the Jackson family mansion in Encino, Calif., Michael Jackson’s three children spend their days playing with their cousins and their pets and watching movies — but no news reports — as they adjust to life without their famous father.

Their grandmother Katherine Jackson tends to their needs and offers a calming presence. “His kids are strong,” says Michael’s brother Jermaine Jackson. “They have a lot of love and care.”

That serene life may soon disappear. The children — 12-year-old Michael Joseph Jr., aka “Prince”; Paris-Michael Katherine, 11; and 7-year-old Prince Michael Jackson II (also called “Blanket”) — are pawns in what could shape up to be an intense custody battle between Katherine and Debbie Rowe, the biological mother of the two oldest children.

“Debbie believes Katherine has a good heart, but the life they would live with the Jacksons is unthinkable,” an insider tells OK!. “They belong away from the media circus. Kids need fresh air and freedom. They can’t get that at the mansion in Encino.”

But Debbie may soon have to decide between her kids or cash. “She’s likely to walk away with a lump sum of money if she agrees not to seek custody,” a friend of Debbie tells OK!. “She will probably end up with $100 million. It would be worth paying out, from the Jackson family’s point of view, to prevent a tug-of-war for the children.”

However others point at the discrepancies regarding how much MJ’s estate is worth, anywhere between $200 million and $500 million, including Attorney Larry Heller, a tax, probate and estate expert, who says that while “Debbie Rowe has some leverage as to the amount” she could receive in a settlement, “I wouldn’t be comfortable saying she could get quite that much. She could get several million dollars.”

On July 2, Debbie came out swinging in her battle for custody, telling KNBC Los Angeles reporter Chuck Henry, “I want my children,” and offering to submit to DNA tests to prove she was their mother. But her attorney, Eric George, later said she hadn’t reached a final decision on what to do in court.

Meanwhile, a court granted temporary custody to Katherine, 79. In Michael’s will, he asked that she be named the guardian — and if she was not able, singer Diana Ross, 65, should gain custody; he left no provision for Debbie to care for the children. “The fact that he left her out says loud and clear that he wanted her to get nothing,” says L.A. attorney Michael G. Dave, who specializes in family law.

A custody hearing is set for July 13, and the potential battle is already turning nasty. Michael’s sister Janet Jackson believes it’s “disgusting to use the kids for money,” a family insider tells OK!.

Janet, 43, has reassured Michael’s children that they won’t be lost in the commotion that has surrounded the family since her brother died. “She told them if they need her for any reason, even just to talk or if they want pizza, to call her immediately.”

This isn’t the first time custody of the kids has come up: In their 1999 divorce agreement, Debbie signed away her parental rights in exchange for an $8.5 million settlement. But when a teenage boy accused Michael of sexual abuse in 2003, she applied for custody again, even though she admitted she had not seen the children in years. In 2006, Debbie allegedly made another deal with Michael to relinquish rights to the children in exchange for cash.

While custody questions continue, the L.A. County Department of Children and Family Services is investigating the welfare of the Jackson kids, prompted by reports of Michael’s drug use. It will also assess conditions at Katherine’s home. The report is expected to take a month to complete, but Jermaine says it’s obvious the children belong with Katherine: “The will is what it is,” he says. “This is what Michael wanted.”

[From OK! Magazine]

That’s interesting that Janet is getting more involved. Many of us (myself included) would like to see Janet either take custody, or be a big part of raising the kids. I’m not quite sure what to think of Debbie Rowe – she seems to have the whiff of “grifter”, but I’ll give her the benefit of the doubt and say that she probably does care about the well-being of the children as much as she cares about the money.

Thanks to CoverAwards for these cover photos

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

48 Responses to “Star & OK!: Jackson’s kids are devastated, Debbie Rowe’s custody fight”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. CandyKay says:

    If Janet is such a loving auntie, why doesn’t she offer to take the kids herself? Pizza, indeed.

    I also don’t think the Jackson family are very reliable sources when it comes to Debbie Rowe’s motives, ie ‘”Micheal’s sister Janet thinks its disgusting to use the kids for money,” a family insider tells OK.”, plus the subsquent allegations of cash settlements. Since Rowe would be challenging the family for custody, they have every reason to make her look as bad as possible.

    Considering the messy state of Michael’s finances, there might not be much money for anybody for as long as his estate takes to unravel.

    That could easily be five or ten years – long enough for Priince and Paris to be adults, so that custody wouldn’t offer significant financial benefits.

  2. HEB says:

    If Debbie Rowe moves to get custody it will only be to keep them away from Joe Jackson.

    She’s already got plenty of money, and for gosh sakes, all she wears is jeans and t-shirts, doesn’t look like she needs or wants more.

  3. nnn says:

    I personally think that their mother should step in and performs her visitation rights. they need a mother and a grand mother. They should act at an agreement for the future well being of those kids. Opposing the two is emotionally not good in the long run.

    But what i would like is the media to stop reporting those stories. Too many emotions and too many manipulations involved around that sensitive case.

    It should be dealt privately and both parties should act in that prospect.

  4. Gigohead says:

    Will Miko Brando come forward and claim Blanket as his son? He surely looks like Miko!

    I’ve never seen that photo of Debbie holding Paris. I highly doubt she’ll get her kids back. Not going to happen.

  5. sandy says:

    yes, nnn.
    i’m most disappointed in michael’s family. whether they knew that he was a drug addict(sounds like they did via grace’s account of an intervention with katherine and janet) or didn’t – how could this HUGE family of 10 people fail him the way they did??? 10 people? it makes no sense?
    they can all live with the regret that they didn’t get help for him.
    these kids have lost their only caretaker and now have to be thrust into lives with strangers. only solace, is the kids have each other.
    on a side note: now that i’ve seen them push paris into speaking at the memorial yesterday, i predict joe jackson will try and get them into music. pathetic all the way around.

  6. manda says:

    Oh please. If she wanted her kids she wouldn’t have sold them to MJ. She may have given birth to those children but she doesn’t deserve to be called their mother.

  7. someone says:

    I don’t know if being with the Jacksons full time, is in the best interest of those kids. I think also that the kids need to be away from the limelight, so they can have a more normal childhood..Lord knows they haven’t up until now..and I think if Joe has anything to do with it, they never will!

  8. Constance says:

    I think the person most devastated by Michael Jackson’s death besides his children is Debbie Rowe. She loved him – and yes it was unconventional but she gave him what he wanted most – children and she gave him those children with her heart and soul. She was grateful for the money he gave her and she gave him complete controll over the children – the fact that he provided for her was an act of love. I think Ms. Rowe is being judged harshly and that her relationship is one that is both still private and still a love story. She has every right to be concerned that her children may be in harm’s way because of their grandfather. Michael’s mother is probably stronger now that his father’s antics have been exposed and she realizes that if anything goes amiss she will be held responsible. I can understand Ms. Rowe’s concerns and I would hope that what’s best for the children is the most important to all parties. And, giving Ms. Rowe custody might just be what’s needed. After all, her children are all she has left of Michael who she loved and was loved by. I would also hope that the woman who cared for their daily needs– their nanny would remain as their immediate caretaker until she retires. It would make the transition for the children much easier.

  9. Linda says:

    Two of these children have a biological bond with Debbie – experts the world over will tell you that it plays a pretty important factor. We can see the importance of a biological parent to children who have been adopted and sometime seek out who their biological parents are.

    No one knows the real story on why Debbie is not part of their lives – Michael had a way of removing people from his life and Debbie was in no position to mount any type of fight for those children. The fact still remains is she is their mother and whether she gets custody or not, she can be a souce of comfort to these kids.

    I don’t trust Michael’s mother or father – both of these individuals are greedy – they have demonstrated that for years and the last thing any of these children need is to be around Joe Jackson – the man is a monster.

    Whoever is going to take care of these kids – the wise thing that any guardian could do for these kids is to get the nanny that has cared for them for so long back in place – this is the type of stability these children need right now.

  10. Codzilla says:

    Sandy, you can’t force an addict into recovery. All the interventions and ultimatums in the world aren’t going to convince someone to embrace sobriety if he/she isn’t willing to make the change. While his family was FAR from perfect, blaming them for his death isn’t right. He made his own ill-fated decisions at the end of the day.

  11. yae says:

    Janet should get the kids. She has the same high level of compassion as her brother. She’s so full of love. Those kids would get the comfort they need from her. And they wouldn’t be in culture shock from the changes.
    I really hope someone is looking at that option seriously.

  12. Diana says:

    Extensive work by the courts before any action is taken. Psych evals will be required for the children, Debbie and Katharine. I may be wrong, but I believe Debbie could go one of two ways. First, the restoration of visitation rights. Second, money.

    These children are in need of stability, grounding, roots, continuity, and whoever can provide it will be the best place for them.

    (Where the Jackson’s are concerned, I’m pleased to read the executor’s have control over the estate).

  13. Tazina says:

    Why would the kids be given to a 79 year old woman who stood by and did nothing while her small son Michael was being whipped with a belt by his father? Instead she stayed with the abuser for many years and allowed it to continue happening. And the abuser is still in the picture…..strange. The kids should go with their mother who should still be around in 20 years unlike their grand-mother.

  14. cassie says:

    Sandy, Did the Kennedy’s fail David the brother that OD’d? Did Sean Penn fail his brother. Did all the people who have had a relative or loved one die from substance abuse fail them. I had a relative who died after over 10 attempts at rehab. Don’t judge because one day your adult child may deal with this issue and you will feel the frustration and helplessness. RIP to everyone who has been lost to addiction.

  15. OXA says:

    I do not want the kids with Katherine and certainly no where near Joe. With the exception of Janet, the rest of the Jacksons used Michael as their ATM. Michael owned the Encino compound and paid the staff plus all his mothers expenses. She knew when she went to court to get her hands on the estate, that there was a will, she met with Michaels attorney and had a copy of it, yet still went to court that afternoon and lied, saying there was no will. The kids would be better off with Debbie Rowe and Grace, out of the Jackson Circus and Hollywood so they can many have a chance at a more normal life.

  16. cassie says:

    Grace is with them at the Jacksons place and John Branca didnt notify of the will until hours after they filed paperwork.

  17. UNBELIEVABLE says:

    I am astonished at how silly people can be! A biological bound does not necessitate an emotional one. Debbie has accepted money twice for her children and walked away. No visitation or provisions to see or get the kids if something were to happen to Micheal. Now again she is back and everyone truly thinks its because of the safety of the kids. I don’t think so!! If she had been that concerned about the kids safety at anytime including during the allegations against Micheal she could and should have put up such a fuss that she could have asked for what she wanted and recieved it…custody or visitation! Oh but wait she did get what she wanted millions of dollars. TWICE!!!! and now she is back for more.

  18. diddy says:

    joe doesnt live with Katherine for godsakes, he lives in vegas and has done for more than 10 years now with his other family; the only time the kids would see him is at family gathering like they have in the past ,he wouldnt be involved in their daily upbringing.

    so people need to stop with the remark of keep them away from joe , even when MJ was alive the kids knew who their granddad was and have been with him and other member of the family at family ocassions so he isnt a stranger to them either

    this is a pic below of the kids, mj and all the whole family including joe

  19. princess pee says:

    I am really not comfortable with the idea of Debbie raising the kids, and I could list the reasons why I feel this way for hours. BUT, it’s not my family and I have no right to a say in what happens. I will gossip to my hearts content about it, but the truth is this is a very serious, personal and sad matter for these people to deal with. My opinion should count for NOTHING to them (and neither should yours, other commenters).

    Sandy, I can understand how you feel. But you have to understand that an adult can refuse help. We don’t know that the Jacksons all stood by, watching Michael crumple and fall over the years and doing nothing. They may have tried extensively to get him to accept help. You can’t force an adult to do what YOU want. They didn’t fail him anymore than he failed them, really. Which means not at all. What, exactly, do you think they should have done? Lastly, I totally had the impression that Paris wanted to speak at the memorial… if the kids were pushed, wouldn’t we have heard something from Prince Michael I?

  20. Lucy says:

    This is all about the money, Jacksons mounted this hate campaign from the moment of Michael Jackson’s death.

    Is Debbie Rowe a crazy junkie that lives in a card board box, off course not. She is fit to be there mother and offer these kids a stable environment. Just because Michael Jackson manipulated her out these kids lives, does not mean she can not claim them now.

    In the end it is all about the money, if the Kids go to Debbie Rowe, almost half of Micheal Jackson estate goes with them.

  21. nnn says:

    Extensive work by the courts before any action is taken. Psych evals will be required for the children, Debbie and Katharine. I may be wrong, but I believe Debbie could go one of two ways. First, the restoration of visitation rights. Second, money.

    Debbie has already visitation rights which were confirmed in 2006. She should just perform it and find a decent agreement with Katherine.

    Both women should mend fences and act jointly for the well being of those children.

  22. Zoe (The Other One) says:

    Another genius scoop from the trashmags.

    ‘MJ’s kids are devasted at the death of their beloved father’.

    No shit Sherlock.

  23. mel says:

    “Debbie believes Katherine has a good heart, but the life they would live with the Jacksons is unthinkable,” an insider tells OK!. “They belong away from the media circus. Kids need fresh air and freedom. They can’t get that at the mansion in Encino.”

    Are you kidding me the Pappos will be stalking the kids even more if they end up with Rowe. Whowever made that statement needs to get a clue!!!

  24. Lucy says:

    Little Paris speaking at the yesterday looked so staged. It looked like they practiced that statement. Good luck Debbie. They will throw everything including the kitchen sink at you..

  25. Lucy says:

    Little Paris speaking at the yesterday looked so staged. It looked like they practiced that statement. Good luck Debbie. They will throw everything including the kitchen sink at you..

  26. the original kate says:

    i have a feeling that if michael had left debbie some money in his will she wouldn’t be suing for custody.

  27. Feebee says:

    I think for Debbie Rowe it’s one thing having the kids be with Michael Jackson, their father. She wanted MJ to be a father and so helped him do that. It’s a whole other story having the kids be with the Jackson family without Michael.

    We don’t know why she said those (in hindsight unbelievably stupid) things about not wanting to be their mother etc. It may have been part of the business arrangement… thought to have been easier on the kids (how I’m not sure). This will be a wait and see game.

    Why are people so convinced Janet would be such a fantastic guardian?

  28. truthful says:

    I just read a statement that tells it all about Debbie, “I never wanted to be a mother, I just did this for MJ, I just like my horses, that’s all I can be responsible for.”

    She is a money grubbing cow! she is looking for another pay-off to go away.

    Joe and Katherine Jackson have been divorced for years, Joe lives in Vegas with his SIDE daughter that he had on Katherine..he hardly EVER comes to LA anymore.

    I think Janet will step in but it will take time..heck, they just buried him yesterday..they have a ton of relatives cousins that they play with at the Encino Ranch, Marlon has been married to his wife for over 30 years, Rebbie has raised 3 kids of her own and has been married forever..they have plenty of family..

    I just don’t think Rowe is the person to raise them,,heck, she almost decked a pap the other day and was in the middle of a big ruckus and cussing, horrible..I saw it on-line.

    Debbie also made a point to mention when she was married to MJ, she never got up in the middle of thenight nor changed a diaper, she said MJ did or a nanny.

    RIP MJ

  29. Cinderella says:

    I don’t think Debbie should get the kids, however, she should be given visitation rights so the kids will get to know their biological mother. By the time they’re adults they can decide if they want her in their lives.

    During the memorial, the kids seemed very attached to the family. A few shots showed Paris snuggled against Katherine. Grandkids don’t do that to grandparents they’re not close to.

    As far as Paris’ speech being staged…no way. To me, it seemed that she wanted the world to know that regardless of what people thought, he was a great dad.

  30. Fire says:

    This whole thing is so sad, all the way around. I was a fan of Michael’s (and still love most of his music) – I think he was a genius and one helluva dancer.

    But I also think there was a lot of weirdness going on with the molestation charges, kids sleeping in his bed, multiple surgeries, skin bleaching, addiction to anesthesia medication, etc. etc. I think he lived in a fantasy world that was created to help block out a lot of things – Joe’s abuse, growing up in the limelight, no privacy whatsoever… The world will never know what went on, in his head or behind closed doors. It’s a shame that his talent is marred by all of the scandals, lawsuits and erratic behavior. (Does everyone remember him appearing in court in his pjs? Was this a sane man?)

    Paris was NOT forced or pushed to speak at the memorial – you can easily see that on the video if you watched it. It has been said that she wanted to, but it wasn’t “on the schedule.” I think it took a lot of courage for her to do that. These kids are devastated.

    As far as Debbie is concerned, I think she honestly loved Michael and had the kids FOR him. She didn’t want to be a mother, which is obvious. I do think that she is not out for a pay-off right now, she is just concerned for their well-being. Now that Michael is gone, she is probably wondering what their lives are going to be like, who will take care of them, etc. She had an agreement with Michael – he would be the caregiver. Now he is gone. She has stated that she doesn’t like to be in the limelight and ended up divorcing Michael for that reason (among others I am sure). She couldn’t deal. And I think she still can’t. And the media has gotten even more “in your face” in the last few years it seems. So, for her to put herself back in the spotlight, she must really care about the well-being of those kids. She already got money from Michael. She has said that he has pretty much set her up for life. She doesn’t need more money to life in peace on a farm with her horses….

    Anyway, those are my two cents worth. I really have mixed emotions about this whole situation. As a mother myself, it was hard for me to not tear up when Paris spoke. It’s so sad to lose a parent. I lost one at 39, I can’t imagine losing one that young.

  31. diddy says:

    article from 2004 that shows joe and Katherine dont live together and havent for years,2933,137049,00.html

    According to legal documents obtained by this column, Katherine Jackson, disgusted by her husband’s philandering, obtained a petition for divorce on March 9, 1973, and filed it with the Los Angeles County clerk.

    According to several people I’ve spoken with in the last few days, Katherine Jackson was finally convinced to rescind the divorce papers at the urging of elders at her Jehovah’s Witnesses church.

    Katherine also attempted to divorce her husband in or around 1979, but again was persuaded to drop the action, my sources said.

    One motivation for Katherine’s unhappiness, at least in the second instance, was the revelation that her husband had fathered a love child with his mistress.

    That child, a girl named Joh’Vonnie Jackson, is now 30, lives with Joseph Jackson in Las Vegas and for some time worked at that city’s McCarran International Airport. Joh’Vonnie’s mother is Cheryl Terrell.

    Joseph Jackson’s extramarital affairs, including one with a Motown Records assistant named Gina Sprague, have been detailed in a TV movie about the Jackson family as well as in several books, including one by the Jacksons’ daughter La Toya. …

    Joh’Vonnie Jackson, according to my sources, has held several positions at McCarran Airport, including working as a baggage handler. She is not included in Jackson family events and has never visited Michael Jackson’s Neverland Ranch.

    When the Jackson siblings appear in court together to show solidarity for Michael, Joh’Vonnie is not present. As far as I can tell, neither Michael nor Janet has ever referred to Joh’Vonnie in any interviews.

    On Katherine Jackson’s 1973 divorce petition, she listed the five of her nine children who were still minors at the time: La Toya, Marlon, Michael, Steven (aka Randy) and Janet.

    Rebbie, Tito, Jackie, and Jermaine were all over 18 by that time. Joh’Vonnie, the youngest child of Joseph Jackson, is eight years the junior of Janet, who was born in 1966.

    Even though neither of Katherine Jackson’s divorce petitions was ever finalized, the couple do not live together, insiders say.

    Katherine spends most of her time in Encino, Calif., and Joseph lives in Las Vegas. His wife was not present this year when he had his annual birthday bash in Sin City.

  32. CandyKay says:

    Diddy, Joe Jackson may not be present in the home, but he certainly is present in the family, as we have seen over the past few days. And he’s not a good influence.

    Who is the best person to bring up Michael’s children to be independent, emotionally healthy adults? That description doesn’t seem to fit anyone in the Jackson family – including Janet, who has had troubles of her own.

  33. Tazina says:

    Katherine Jackson isn’t going to be around that much longer. These kids may be still in their teens without a parent and then where do they go? Who will want them then? And it’s not easy taking in teenagers and expecting them to conform to the rules in your particular house. They are much better off with Debbie who has tried to see them in the past. Her phone calls were not returned. She tried to get custody during the molestation charges. When Michael moved to Dubai there went any other hope she had to see them…But it all boiled down to the fact she just never had the money to fight Michael Jackson in court. And she would have needed a lot of it.

  34. kim says:

    The Jacksons are very protective of their grandkids.There are over 25 grandkids some in their 20s and 30s and I have never heard of any of them involved in any scandals or hanging out at Hollywood clubs. I know Jermaine alone has 7 or 8 kids when have you seen any pics of them? I wished Michael had kept them covered up so the paps wouldn’t know what they looked like. For some reason about 2 months ago he took off their covering/masks.

  35. Rosanna says:

    It’s so sad to see people glorifying a biological parent despite the fact that she has had NO interest in parenting whatsoever! Why do you all think it matters if a parent is a biological one? Some biological parents are pure sh*t who shouldn’t EVER have become parents. You guys are all speaking out of your clichè and fears.

  36. nicole says:

    A dog that drops her puppies and doesn’t take care of them is no more a mother than this woman is, all she wants is the media attention and the money. Why would a judge give her custody of a child that she has not link to whatsoever besides having the child. It would be the same as if an adopted child’s parents died, do you think that the biological mother could just waltz right in there and get custody? NO!

    Janet or LaToya should have the kids…more Janet than any of them….those kids adore her and she wants kids. Plus the kids should not be broken up, poor Blanket should not be left alone, and none of them should be left around Joe Jackson!

  37. Cheyenne says:

    Don’t even think about giving those kids to Latoya. She’s a straight-up nutcase, no matter how affectionate she looked with the kids at the memorial service. Janet has lived far away from the children for most of their lives and they hardly know her. Ditto Rebbie, who is probably the most stable sibling in the whole clan.

    Debbie Rowe has no more emotional connection with those children than the cleaning lady. She’s in it for the money.

    Aside from Michael, the only adult who seems to have had a real emotional bond with the kids is their former nanny, Grace Rwaramba. When all is said and done, she might be the best caretaker for them.

    However this plays out, it’s going to be a mess.

  38. Angel says:

    I think that Michael’s “Will” should be honored. That is why he made the “Will” to let eveyone know what he wishes to do. Should not be fair, to leave a will with your request, then the “Courts” come in and do as they wish. The “Will” should be honored! His wishes should be honored! His assets and his kids should go to the people he wanted them to go to. That is why we all have a “Will”! Makes no sense to do anything different than the “Will” states.

  39. gg says:

    Debbie was shut out and it is not about the money. Who could actually make a stand against Jackson in court? please.
    Also, in court, a biological mother who has been shut out of her kids’ lives would hold a strong case.

    However I DO think, and there is strong evidence, that the Jacksons ARE wanting that money and have been slagging anybody else having custody since MJ died.

    May Debbie FINALLY be allowed to be with her children in some capacity. Only a complete idiot wouldn’t at least award her visitation, and it was a really shitty shitty thing for MJ to specifically cut her out of his will, after she bore his children – that is just shameful in my opinion. Any biological mother has a right to be with her kids, I don’t care who they are). Debbie hasn’t shown instability – but hell yeah the Jacksons sure have, in spades!


  40. gg says:

    And Angel, if a man who has severely questionable judgment writes a questionable will, then it will be questioned in court. They don’t just grant everything automatically when kids are concerned. There will be joint custody anyway with somebody. Katherine ain’t getting full custody and neither is Diana Ross, who is also getting up in years herself. The whole idea is absurd.

  41. Katie says:

    I believe that if Rowe wants the children, she will get them. That is if she wasn’t just a surrogate and her DNA matches. They always rule in favor of the biological mother, unless they have problems such as the Britney Spears mess. To the best of my knowledge, Rowe does not have a drug issue, but you never know.

    It certainly does not help that JOE will not keep his yap shut. NOBODY wants that man near anymore kids, much less thinking about grooming them for show biz. Someone representing the Jackson family needs to tell him to shut his mouth. Put a gag order on him.

    Poor Prince 2/Blanket. Where did he come from?

  42. jews2266 says:

    Ms. Rowe received money in exchange for the children..Why in GODS name do you think she should get them now? All she wants is money, money and more money. anyway,the children really don’t know her at all. Whos to say she will not neglect them?

  43. jews2266 says:

    she is a ugly woman with an ugly mind..MS rowe that is. she is already spending money on face lifts to make herself look better or should i say more like a mom.

  44. JUSTINE says:

    All Michale’s kids were cute blanket mostly hes so small. i don’t see how u couldn’t like him. Ms. roe doesn’t deserves custody of any of the kids. shell just turn them into brats when there just nice as can be right now. if she gets custody of them kids the kids will probably not like that at all. i wouldn’t that’s for sure. cant wait to see who they go with i hope its nowhere near Ms. roe. them kids need love and respect and fun in there lives and Ms. roe is not gonna give that to them. So she doesn’t deserve them.

  45. colleen says:

    i think the kids should stay with their grandmother kathrine even thou she is older now and also bring in their nanny so the kids would also feel more comfortable but i also feel snice kathrine is older in age that if something ever happen to her that their aunt janet jackson should also take care of them cause janet and micheal was so close. i also feel that the family should have kept a closer eye on micheal im not saying its their fault for his death and i know that latoya said that micheal had a way of removing people out of his life but i still would have check up on him and also find out what kind of drugs he was taken and what were they needed for and latoya said she only stayed three minutes away from micheal then she should have really been around him and she also predicted before micheal’s death that she seen this coming for him that he wouldn’t make it to the london concerts i hope and pray that everything works out for the kids im still feeling micheal’s lost and im very sad about it and i think about him all the time may he finally be able to rest in peace now and maybe the media and the press will leave him alone now

  46. Allie says:

    Well Janet should get them

  47. Пежо says:

    я злобныйе флудер, флудил флудю и флудить буду. Наверное

  48. maydrania says:

    Тут кто-нибудь разбирается в радио? Нужен коллега, который рассказал бы вкратце о транзисторе Т2 (не понятно как проверить гв = гв1). Надеюсь, радиолюбители тут “водятся”. Если не по теме совершенно, то извините. Вынужден написать, выхода просто не вижу. ЗЫ: если орфография не правильная то тоже извините, мне 13 лет только.