Jul 28 2012

The way I see it…

Category: Justice,Prose/EssaysSeven @ 8:27 pm

Mrs. Jackson with her grandchildren

Here is how I see this Jackson family debacle at this time. This is my opinion and my opinion only. I don’t insist it is the truth, because none of us know what the truth is. My opinion as written below may change as other information becomes available. I only offer the below as an alternative perspective on the situation, and in lieu of  “popular opinion” and media spin on the matter.

_ _ _ _ _

If MJ’s will is valid (and it probably is), then why didn’t these two lawyers just kindly answer the family’s questions/concerns about it privately? Sure the courts have validated it, but if the family has concerns or questions, why not just answer them, specifically?

Why does the estate (or those associated with or working for them) instead seem to blow smoke, obfuscate, and issue condescending, accusatory, and vague public responses, and subsequently blast days worth of negative stories about the Jacksons in the media as they appear to have done? Why not just privately answer the questions and concerns the Jackson family members have about the will and about the control or undue influence they feel are being wielded over Mrs. Jackson?

How did Michael sign that will if he wasn’t in LA that day? There may be a viable explanation for that. That would be great! The estate should provide those answers to the Jacksons. Would Michael sign a will on which his children’s names were spelt wrong? How and why did John Branca still have a copy of that 2002 will after he he had left the employ of Michael Jackson and was obligated upon termination to return all documents to Michael? And so on.. If it’s all on the up-and-up, then why don’t these guys just kindly answer the questions, privately, honestly, and transparently?

Instead, it seems like they have a household bouncer (Trent Jackson, allegedly the head of security or similarly involved, some say he’s an assistant to Mrs. Jackson) and possibly other personnel, particularly attorneys Ms. Ribera and Mr. Perry Sanders and others to whom that letter was addressed, who have spent the better part of a week now on the line 24×7 to the media feeding them stories about the Jacksons – which has had the end result of smearing them in the public eye and creating a distraction from this family’s concerns as expressed in their letter.

If that was the intent, it certainly worked. It created a distraction from the questions about the will and abuse/control issues and at the same time, smeared the Jacksons so badly that the entire public has turned against them. They are negatively defined as “greedy bullying swindlers just after money” , nevermind at least one of them has her own considerable fortune and doesn’t need any estate money, and the rest are on tour making money or happily married and financially independent and have been for years.

I do know this much: Propaganda works. When employed skillfully it can turn gentle, innocent people into sinister, raging criminals and raging, sinister criminals into benevolent Kings in the public’s collective eye. Remember Michael Jackson and what it did to him. In PR terms, this kind of a ruse would be called a “success“. That’s right – a success. We may see it as a fiasco but to those orchestrating such media firestorms – they are a fantastic success.

This is how the tobacco companies are still allowed to sell a product that is dangerous and kills people. It’s how the United States railed against nationalized health care (even though all other developed countries have it) because – well you know – “death panels“: a term that PR experts chose specifically to strike paralyzing fear in the hearts of anyone who would even think of supporting health care reform. Trust me. They research this stuff. They know psychology better than the psychologists do. And they use it to manipulate public opinion every day.

Fearmongering. Hysteria. Sensationalism. Take something with a hair of truth or even no truth at all. Take it out of context then claim it’s XYZ when it’s really ABC. Create a distraction from the original substance of the issue by insisting the real issue is XYZ. And then the public completely forgets about ABC because they’re all in a pitchfork-wielding mob about – OMG!  XYZ!!  Insert it into a veritable funhouse of mirrors to distort it innumerable ways and then publish, print, broadcast it to the high heavens. In the end, the truth is buried forever and some big media corporations have made millions off of the story to boot. The real criminals go free and the benevolent innocents are forever destroyed in the public eye, their lives and livelihoods ruined.

Happens every day, and that is no exaggeration. You saw it happen to Michael.

You can’t find anything written about these Jacksons now that doesn’t say “it’s all about the money! They just want control of that estate!“.

Is that because this is really true? Or is it just the PR — the spin — the “meme” — the false premise?

You know what I mean — a false premise like:  Michael Jackson is a pedophile, freak, drug addict and weirdo that bleached his skin because he didn’t want to be black!

That kind of false premise.

Yes, there’s a big difference between truth and spin, as you might guess. I’d think MJ fans particularly would be keenly aware of that. Oddly, they’re not. Why buy into the media’s spin on all this – anymore than MJ fans bought into the spin about Michael? You could tell the difference then. Why not now?

Do you think the tabloids and media have suddenly became honest and truthful entities when it comes to this family? Really? If you look at the basic facts of what happened — ignoring all the sensationalist spin and instead attempt to employ some logic instead, a different picture emerges.

Let’s look at the “greedy bullying swindlers” meme that has been put out and propagated by the estate/media spin machine:

It’s said that the older versions of MJ’s will reads very much like the existing one with exception of adding the children’s names as they were born. These siblings who are now questioning the will are not named in any prior versions of his will, either. This means that there is no money to be gotten by them from this either way, even if the current will were declared invalid. So — the premise that “they’re just after money” is not logical then, is it? It just doesn’t add up. The false premise put forth that everyone cannot seem to let go of, makes no sense. At that, it beggars belief that the current will would be declared invalid at this juncture. It won’t.

So why the hell are they doing this? Let’s apply some simple logic to this question instead of spin:

Consider that maybe – just maybe – contrary to the spin that virtually every media outlet as well as the estate has employed about this, – maybe they’re not after money. One has to let go of the false premise that they are, because that’s the only way it logistically makes any sense.

It seems to me these siblings want answers and changes, not dollars. They’ve said they feel that their mother is (or was) being abused and controlled. They said they feel the two lawyers running the estate may be doing so under false pretenses and they want something done about that (they want the executors to step down due to all these issues). That’s what their letter said. Read it.

It did NOT say they wanted money.

It did NOT say they wanted to run the estate themselves or control it themselves.

As I understand it, Janet is quite wealthy of her own accord and is financially independent and has been for years. The only way this makes any sense (to me) is if it’s NOT about the money. It’s not what they said, it’s not what their stated concerns are, and frankly the actions of certain others involved in this particular matter bear out the fact that there are some serious problems in the Calabasas household.

Beware the false premise(s) planted by estate operatives and/or the media.

That letter, by the way, was evidently not meant by the Jacksons to be public. It was allegedly leaked by Perry Sanders or one of the other recipients of the letter. In fact it would make more sense that one of the recipients publicized the letter in order to smear those who sent it. And lo and behold. It worked just like that, didn’t it?

Trust me – the Executors are behind this. The “powers that be” use tabloid media to spin their lies and divide our family.Randy Jackson

So all this questioning: “well why did the Jacksons make it public?” Did you ever consider – that maybe they didn’t? One of the recipients may have publicized it. And once it was made public by this estate operative/addressee, the estate responded to the letter, also publicly. And after that, a massive smear campaign in the media was launched against the Jacksons – with the copious help of Mrs. Jackson’s lawyer, Ms. Ribera, and Mr. Perry Sanders, another attorney the letter was addressed to, and Trent, the security head/bouncer/assistant/whatever, who was also an addressee/recipient of the letter. Trent Jackson is the one who filed the ‘missing persons‘ report on Mrs. Jackson.

We’re told Trent is also the one who has been feeding information to TMZ, and the one who turned Janet and others away from the home on the day of the alleged “altercation“. He also alleged to be the one who fed the security camera footage to the media and he is also said to be the one who called police to the scene. One member of the LAPD said they felt “used” by this whole debacle.

In her ABC Nightline video, Mrs. Jackson said someone (I’m just assuming Trent) sent away the nanny, cooks, housekeepers so the house was chaos while she was gone. I don’t know if that’s true, but she mentioned that they had been sent away. She said she thought she knew who might be behind some of this stuff.

You sort of get the idea that (at least) this Trent guy meant to cause trouble here. And what about all these lawyers feeding information that is frankly none of anyone’s business to the media for a week? Randy Jackson tweeted that Mrs. Jackson had fired Trent and the security team. Reports surfaced later that she could not do so, citing “no authority“. How would you feel if you didn’t have the “authority” to remove a troublemaker/bully from your own home if you wanted to?

Now, let’s remember what the letter to the estate from certain family members said: It said that the estate is controlling and abusing Mrs. Jackson. Well lo and behold would you look at that. If even some of this is true, then this entire situation is a prime example of just that – Mrs. Jackson is being controlled and abused.

If Mrs. Jackson is unable to even fire anyone or decide whom she wants to have or not have in her home or around her grandchildren; if Trent is allegedly being forced on her even when she no longer wants him around; if Trent is partially or mostly responsible for the chaos and upheaval that ensued while she was out of town; if Trent is the person whom the Jackson siblings said they wanted to get their mother away from (and thus the reason for this trip), I’d say just maybe the letter is right. Mrs. Jackson is (or was) being controlled and abused. If she is dealing with this guy’s machinations day in and day out, and these chatty lawyers and perhaps other staff issues, and cannot even control who may or may not live and work in her own home or around her grandchildren or family – that’s pretty terrible. Don’t you think?

Of course it’s just my opinion and you know what they say about those. But as I stated previously, it seems to me that this is partially what has gone on here and what the problem is – or was. And yes, of course like everyone else, I’m just guessing. So these are my guesses based on how I’ve watched all this unfold and I’ve seen most of it since the moment Alan Duke of CNN first tweeted about it days ago – fed the story by Mrs. Jackson’s lawyer, Ms. Ribera, who in my own opinion ought to be fired as well for spending too much time talking to the media.

Instead of any viable answers to the concerns the family expressed in that letter about the will or about estate control issues, this family had what was a private legal correspondence to the estate unduly publicized (possibly) by one of the addressees of the letter; the family got a public “answer” to the letter from the estate which was vague, condescending, and accusatory, the family have gotten ambushed for a week with a very nasty negative public smear campaign undoubtedly orchestrated by some of the same people they named in that letter; one of them we’re fairly certain about and another named in many media reports including the original one, Ms. Ribera.

I saw that video where Janet allegedly pushed or slapped Paris. She didn’t. The video showed one thing, while the sensationalist media spin said something completely different. Paris herself said that Janet never pushed or slapped her. Now that Mrs. Jackson has denied she was ever “kidnapped” by her own kids (which was ridiculous to begin with), Trash Media Zone (TMZ) asserts that Mrs. Jackson was somehow “in on it” – that she helped orchestrate her own “kidnapping“.

Oh for God’s sake, please. Do MJ fans really believe this?

I don’t believe these siblings had sinister intentions, anymore than I believe Michael ever did. I don’t believe they were after money or control. I believe they were very concerned about their mother handling the pressure and stress of managing staff and dealing with some who seem to be bullies and manipulators. Many such persons surrounded Michael. Now, they seemingly surround his mother. And if she had no choice in hiring/firing any of them, and is forced to have certain people in her home and life that she does not want involved, that’s even worse. They felt she was being controlled and abused. And there are still unresolved questions about Michael’s last known will and like it or not, they are entitled to reasonable answers about that.

I just know that this is not a family that does the kinds of things that are being reported.…somebody wanted to publicize this, somebody wanted to make a big issue out of it (by giving the security videotape to the media) –Thomas Mesereau

It’s reported that TJ had been left in charge of the children before when Mrs. J was out and there were no issues. Why were there issues this time? I don’t know but I suspect that some internal animosity in connection with these problematic staff had come to a head. They wanted their mother away from it and she has relatives in AZ so she went away for awhile. Why did “they cut her off from the children“? In her statement to ABC Nightline, Mrs. Jackson said she had “given up her phone” and that her assistant was checking on the children daily. Since the idea was for her to get away from the stress in that home and to assure her ability to relax and rest, it makes sense to me that the chaos and media firestorm that ensued after her departure were not reported to her and thus she did not know about it and thought all was well at her home and with her grandchildren. This is a more reasonable explanation than all the hysterical and sinister bullshit being parroted out there about kidnapping and her being”cut off” from the grandchildren.

Meanwhile, the kids, who it is reported were told Mrs. Jackson was going out of town, were obviously miffed that they couldn’t speak to her, but seemed for the most part fine, Paris chatting away on twitter about movies, music, and other subjects — until suddenly Paris started tweeting that her grandmother was “missing“. What changed then? I suspect that is when the children were told she was “missing” by someone in the household, perhaps because she didn’t show up at the brothers’ concert as planned. She went to Arizona, instead.

It seems maybe someone did not communicate this change in plans to the children and other staff, or they thought they did, but the information was never relayed. Perhaps the information was withheld so that a chaotic situation could be created to make this family look bad. Considering that certain people in the Calabasas household  had just received a letter from these same family members accusing them of being abusive and controlling, that isn’t out of the question, is it? And if that is the case, then this once again proves the premise of the family’s letter to these individuals to be valid ie: abuse and control.

Or, it could have simply been an honest misunderstanding or miscommunication. Regardless, some communication was clearly lost somehow and for some reason, deliberately or otherwise. A hysterical assumption was made or chaotic situation deliberately created in the Calabasas home, actions carried out accordingly and the media had a field day with it. However, Mrs. Jackson was certainly not “missing” or kidnapped by her own children as was alleged and probably didn’t even know all this was going on.

After all this, if the estate are unwilling to address the family’s concerns about the will and about the treatment of Mrs. Jackson in a professional, private and honest manner, then this only adds weight to the argument that perhaps they are fraudulently in control and they (along with those associated with them) are wielding undue influence over Mrs. Jackson. This may particularly be true if she is not even allowed to control who does or does not work in or enter her own home; if this situation was publicized and fed to the media as a means to discredit her and her family and upset her grandchildren in lieu of providing answers to the family’s written concerns; or if any miscommunication was intentional on the part of anyone involved estate-side.

As for Ms. Ribera and Mr. Sanders, I personally would not trust attorneys who are online with tabloids and media 24×7 for days at a time feeding stories to them about people’s personal lives. That indicates to me that these attorneys have other interests than (and which may even trump) managing Mrs. Jackson’s legal affairs.

These lawyers and everyone involved in running that estate should be ready, willing, and available to calmly, kindly and PRIVATELY answer any questions or concerns the family has about their brother’s will, his estate or the management thereof, or issues surrounding their mother and what goes on in her home.

Why? Because it’s Michael’s family and there should be nothing to hide from them.

Whether you like or trust some of the Jackson family or do not like or trust some of them, and regardless what their own internal squabbles, misunderstandings or disagreements are – they are Michael’s family and any estate execs or their operatives ought to be transparent with them about what is going on with Michael’s estate and certainly about what is going on with their own mother – IF in fact there is no reason for such concern.

Otherwise, those concerns only appear to have validity. And frankly and just in my own opinion, based on how this debacle has unfolded, they do bear serious consideration.

If the family’s private letter to the estate has been publicized by the recipients of said letter or other estate operatives, and subsequently the family have been subjected to a media firestorm of negative propaganda by these estate operatives/employees – and it appears to me this may have happened, then this behavior on the part of the estate  is unacceptable, unprofessional and unethical. It is divisive and extremely damaging to the Jackson family and particularly to Katherine and Michael’s children – the very people whose interests the estate presumptively exists to protect and serve.

Worse, it closely resembles the type of treatment and pattern of behavior that Michael Jackson himself was subjected to during much of his life.

I sincerely hope that the estate will deal with these concerns in a private, professional and courteous manner. I also hope that they will do something to contain certain overbearing employees/household members and overly-chatty attorneys who were involved.  I hope the new arrangement with TJ and Mrs. Jackson sharing guardianship works out well.

Additionally, I hope that Michael’s children will eventually be able to understand the history and the scope of this problem and forgive their relatives (Michael’s siblings) for trying (however unsuccessfully) to protect Mrs. Jackson, and to find out the truth behind their father’s death.

_ _ _ _ _

Geraldine Hughes gave one of the least hysterical and most reasonable summaries of the situation on Thursday when TJ gained temporary guardianship of the children:

Let’s not rush to judgment based on the temporary guardianship given to Tito’s son today. Let’s all wait until Katherine Jackson surfaces. According to her attorney, it is only temporary and he will not allow her to be permanently stripped as guardianship. Because of the age of MJ’s kids, they are old enough to voice their opinion as to who THEY want to be their guardian. We see that they love their grandmother to death and will not allow her to be taken completely away, while, on the other hand, she needs help with them, and to be protected from anyone trying to take their custody. This might actually be a win win situation. The judge granted the temporary order until August 22, 2012. TJ has always been close to MJ kids. They love him, he’s young enough to handle and help raise them, and he has a vested interest in Michael Jackson’s estate. Also, the judge ordered him to move into their home, therefore, they don’t have to be uprooted from school, home, etc. Even if Katherine is not reinstated as guardian, she can continue to live with them, help look after them, while not being under too much pressure and guarding her health. This ruling does not cut her out of MJ’s will as being his heir. I just don’t like how this came about. I think Janet, Jermaine, Rebbie & Randy’s intention might have been good (thinking only of their mother’s health), but it might have backfired negatively for Katherine. Let’s wait and see and keep our prayers up for the entire Jackson family.

And Deborah of Reflections on the Dance shared this:

One of my sources has shared the following…

It’s been shared that Trent Jackson, Joe Jackson’s nephew, head of security and home surveillance, is the person who stopped Janet and Randy from entering the home to speak with the children, and who reported an altercation to the police. It is also this same person who has apparently been leaking video to TMZ.

Mrs. Katherine is unable to fire this person, who has apparently been causing a lot of trouble, as she does not have the authority to do so. Supposedly there have been problems in the home due to this person and this is the reason that Mrs. K and the siblings took the actions that they did. Janet was also asked to help on her mother’s and brother’s request, and flew in from Italy to support her mother, though these actions backfired.

I believe the statement directly above from Deborah is likely true because someone pointed out to me on twitter that during the playing of the security surveillance video from the Calabasas home the day of the altercation, Trent Jackson’s name appears on the video. It appears both on CNN’s copy and during the interview with Tom Mesereau.  I screen-capped a couple shots from the Mesereau interview. The words “From Trent Jackson” clearly appears in the upper left-hand corner of the security portion of the video. You can see it here and here.

I do not believe there was anything sinister or underhanded about the actions Jermaine, Randy, Janet, Tito and Rebbie took in this situation. I believe their intentions were good and based on real concern fr their mother, even if their actions backfired or were badly executed. I hope that with TJ Jackson and Mrs. Jackson sharing guardianship of the children, much of the manipulation and pressure that Mrs. Jackson has obviously been subjected to by certain staff will be relieved and that she will be able to enjoy her family and especially her grandchildren once again.

-Seven

Tags: , ,

50 Responses to “The way I see it…”

  1. Seven says:

    Lynette,

    I’m aware that Randy has raised the will issue before. He’s been concerned that the same people controlling and isolating Katherine are the same people who controlled and isolated Michael before his death and in all the arguments against him, I’ve not seen his concern addressed or satisfactorily disputed. I believe he thinks (regardless of court decisions about the will), it’s all tied together.

    That Branca’s name isn’t on the will seems irrelevant to me. He is named as and accepted the position as one of the executors. The question was about signatures, children’s names and why Branca just happened to have a copy of it — and the interesting fact that AEG brought the man back into the fold just weeks before Michael’s death in order to prevent a “conflict of interest” ie: so that AEG and MJ didn’t have the same lawyer. It is unclear whether Michael approved of this decision or if it was forced on him by AEG. IOW, this goes back to those weeks before MJ died, not just to the will. MJ was also isolated from his family (and his fans), by some of these same people and it seems apparent they were controlling him to a great degree. I can see the reasons for concern here. Everyone wants to focus just on the will and it’s a bigger picture than that. This entire debacle would be only part of it.

    I’m aware that the letter from the siblings is a legal document. Are these things usually blasted to the public? Is that typical?

    I know who Howard Mann is. I know who Marc Shaffel is. And I know about the HTW Foundation and Melissa Harris. I assure you I am not impressed with any of these characters.

    I also know the estate execs have made a lot of money and paid off MJ’s debts. I also know that a lot of that money goes to the executors themselves. It’s tremendous profit for them. Yet Michael Jackson is dead pretty much due to corporate greed, AEG is involved in this mess as well and yet no one questions their motives.

    You stated: “they did plan to have Katherine’s ability to carry out her duties as the Guardian placed in question.” – how do you know of these plans?

    It appears that TJ Jackson also had similar plans, as he went to court claiming Katherine was out of character when he spoke to her on the phone asking to obtain guardianship himself. Also, Randy has said that Katherine told TJ “NO”, twice in regards to this. If having Katherine’s abilities placed in question was the plan, then it seems TJ Jackson also had the same plan because he certainly did just that. Trent Jackson seemed hellbent on the same, having created utter chaos in that household while KJ was gone, calling police numerous times, filing a “missing person” report on someone whose whereabouts was known and stated by others in the family, having convinced the MJ3 that their grandma was “missing” (thus Paris’ sudden mood change from chatting about movies to “OMG my grandma’s missing!”) and feeding security video and other info to tabloids almost non-stop along with estate lawyers.

    And don’t get me wrong. I have no problem with TJ. I’m sure he’s a fine young man and can take care of the kids and I’m in fact happy with the arrangement that has resulted in this regard. I was concerned myself with Katherine’s ability to handle 3 kids, and now two teenagers. So I’m happy she has help.

    But if it’s alleged that RANDY’s primary motives were to question Katherine’s guardianship abilities and gain control, then he certainly isn’t the only one who seems to have had those motives. Someone inside that household was hellbent on creating a veritable sh*tstorm and RE-gaining control after they felt they’d lost it – which again adds weight to the claim that the estate and their employees (Trent is obviously one of them) may have been excessively controlling and abusing Mrs. J to begin with. And the estate’s latest letter banning almost half her family (including her husband) from her place of primary residence while forcing her to allow those she may not want in her midst only reinforces that assertion on the part of the family.

    It’s clear that there is a war over control here but I’m not sure it’s being fought family-side for the reasons people assume given their stated concerns and what’s unfolded here. And it may not be waged on the estate side for the reasons people assume either. No doubt we’re all wrong in some ways in regards to the whole debacle. I do think it’s important to consider different perspectives however, than only the popular meme being pedaled all over the media and elsewhere, which MJ fans ought to know better than to buy into considering God-awful, untrue garbage they pedaled about Michael Jackson (and largely still do).

    Probably we can all agree that no matter “who done it”, that Katherine and the kids ought to have been spared the grief and involvement, at least.

  2. Johanna says:

    Wow Seven, something you said made my hair stand up – that they are “isolating” Katherine, just like how they did to Michael before he died. Keep away all your friends and people who would fight for you. Control the money and control the security, use them to keep out the people who support you. Stress you out until you accede to their demands or die of stress, whichever comes first. We know what happened to Michael.

  3. Seven says:

    That’s the concern as I understand it Johanna and as Randy himself stated it. Whether anyone agrees or not, that is what seems to be the problem, not just the will.

    Some of the events surrounding Katherine seem to be very similar to those surrounding Michael before he died (and involving some of the same people). And this largely hasn’t been addressed or investigated and unfortunately it likely will not be.

    It’s just something to consider in all this. Obviously, I hope it’s not true, but I believe I understand their concern judging by this entire situation.

  4. Ebony says:

    The estate has blocked many people from the jackson house due to the actions of THE JACKSONS! As I said before If Randy’s claim of disputing the rule was honorable. He would have continued the dispute while the estate was in debt.

    I use the media, but I do not trust them. I trust Michael. Michael stayed away from these people with good reason. I trust Michael’s children. They have no dog in the fight here. They get everything in the will at the end of the day no matter who gets control for the next 3 years Until Prince is 18.

    Who from the estate isolated Michael prior to his death? Where is the proof of that? Michael and his children went to a Family Day celebration for Janet’s birthday one month before he died. That is not isolation.

    Michael isolated himself. When you come from a family of griftters you tend to do that. The problem here is Michael was not a good judge of character. (much like his mother) He got in with grimy people time and time again. Had his family treated him like more than an ATM he might have trusted them enough to let them in and they could have helped vet out the scumbags.

    And I am sorry, but I have it as a rule to never trust a man who doesn’t pay his child support. If you don’t have enough honor to care for the child you created… you have no honor.

  5. aldebaran says:

    Thank you for more info about the legal issues that date back to 09, Lynnette, and about the present situation. I was not aware that the letter recently sent to the Estate was a ‘Letter of Demand” and is in fact a legal document. So what does that mean? Will a judge re-open issues that were dealt with before going all the way to the Ca Supreme Court? Seven can you tell us about this?

    Since the word ‘war’ came up in your comment, Seven, I am so concerned about all this. Would it not be better to have Mrs. Jackson simply be a grandmother with an allowance from the Estate, and not a Guardian, even a Co-Guardian? She is too old to be going through this and the kids are too young–they are all vulnerable. I hope Judge Beckloff can sort this out so that Mrs.Jackson and the kids can live in a calm and safe and loving home.

  6. june says:

    @aldeberan, your last paragraph echos my sentiments exactly. Whatever the underlying reasons or blame for the events of late, the primary concern should be Michael’s children and his mother. However, to remove her as co-guardian, against her will, some type of ineptitude on her part would have to be shown. I hope the co-guardianship with TJ Jackson is successful as everyone, including the children, wants this to work.

    On the issue of the “demand letter”, it never should have hit the public, however this leak happened, and, in my opinion, reflects the signators’ state of mind vis-a-vis the executors of the estate (Tito now excepted). The legality of the will was properly adjudicated in 2009 all the way to the Supreme Court, and was explained to the siblings then; I believe that the passage of time, and the actions of some, have caused them to again bring it to the forefront and that the tone of their letter was completely inappropriate and unprofessional (I’ve heard their letter was written for their signatures by Howard Mann for heaven’s sake.)

  7. Nicke says:

    I believe Prince; he said his dad warned him about certain people and he provided a screen cap that said it all. There was no excuse for refusing to allow the children to speak to their grandmother when they needed to touch base with her. Scratch the surface and you’ll see that those kids are still grieving and their grandma is their emotional connection to their father.

  8. Seven says:

    Ebony,

    Remember that Branca was brought back into the fold by AEG before Michael died to prevent the appearance of conflict of interest by AEG and MJ having the same attorney. Thus, Branca worked with/for AEG.

    Who isolated Michael? On AEG’s orders, security thugs isolated Michael from both his fans and family. Michael’s fans would wait outside Staples Center day and night to see him when he arrived and went home. Word got out via the media that Michael had been complaining to fans that he didn’t want to do 50 shows and was very concerned, seemingly on the verge of tears, as to how he would do them all, as well as being very upset that Tohme had all his Neverland stuff up for auction. “They give me everything they want, but nothing I need” was one of his comments.

    After “those in charge” learned about that, they instructed security NOT to allow Michael to talk to his fans and his family also could not get to him. These fans were very upset and worried and wrote Michael a letter that they were allowed to give to him during one of the only very brief encounters fans were allowed to have on his last day here. You can read details of all this here: http://michaeljacksonthelastangel.com/michael-jackson-last-month.html

    It’s unknown whether he read the letter(s) or not. So that’s who isolated him before his death. And it was allegedly Branca who talked Katherine out of proceeding with the wrongful death suit against AEG.

    As I understand it, Michael wanted to talk to Joseph to get feedback on the business deal with AEG. He and his father may have had their differences but he respected his father’s opinion when it came to business. He didn’t always follow Joseph’s advice but he apparently sought it out. Other family members were turned away by his security during the last days/weeks of his life.

    Remember who Michael had just spent time with in May 2009, just before his death: his family. Remember WHO was in that courtroom every day in 2005 and during the Murray trial: his family. So no, I’m not so convinced that Michael isolated himself from them that much. And remember who garnered the services of Tom Mesereau in 2005 – Randy.

    As for Jermaine and Randy and this shared wife and their child support, I concur. That the estate paid this for them is revolting to me. But I’m not convinced that whatever their stupid sexual escapades were, this somehow means they didn’t mean they didn’t love their brother or that he didn’t love them. And it has nothing to do with their fear (whether it’s true or not) that the same pattern of control and isolation is being wielded over their mother that was wielded over Michael in the last days of his life – isolating him from those who genuinely cared about him and who could help.

    Michael was treated like a piece of property by those in charge of the This Is It production. Now, his mother and children are being treated the same way by this estate. I can see how this might concern some people. I’m not saying I approve completely of how they handled it, but I can see why they might be concerned.

  9. Gloria says:

    I’ll start by making the point that the Will has never been DECLAIRED valid by a court. It was declaired valid by default, as Branca made sure that the only one who had grounds to challenge it, was Katherine, and then only under threat of loosing her inheritance. Because the Will was not challenged, and the time period to do so ran out,there fore, by default the probate court saw the Will as valid. The Jackson’s concerns about the Will have never been brought before a court.
    The reason the Estate won’t calmly answer the Jackson’s question is because they can’t. To stop and look at the things the Jackson’s are asking should make EVERYONE want those answers. To drag the Jackson’s through yet another media shit storm sure takes the heat off of those question though, doesn’t it? Well as Michael Jackson fans, we all sure be demanding those answers. McClain is not only name as an executor but also signed as one of three witnesses. Also not customary. I want the the Will’s issues addressed by those executors. Explain why the 2002 Will wasn’t returned when Branca was fired in 2003 and it was requested that he do so. If all is on the up and up answer those question for ALL OF US!

  10. truthmarathons says:

    As usual, Seven, you are the voice of reason in this whole mess. I totally agree with you. The first question I had was, the siblings would not benefit from Michael’s Will, so how can anyone say this is a “money grab” on their part? It became evident from the timing of this fiasco though. The letter went to the Executors (and many others-including AEG) and BINGO–the Executors responded PUBLICLY and that is very telling for me. It has become a sport for the media to ridicule anything “Jackson”–Michael before he passed and now the family. Everyone who criticizes the family forgets that (no matter what) Michael loved them and also we really don’t know all that has transpired behind the scenes. The fact that Janet and Rebbie would be involved in this is also very telling. They usually don’t get involved, yet they did. Why? I believe they do sense danger for Katherine. The aftermath of the letter is a smoke screen to deflect attention away from the real issue–answering the questions posed in that letter, as you so rightly point out. Now, the Branca minions are out in force defending this corrupt (IMO) attorney over Michael’s blood. Cool heads never prevailed in this debacle, and the media succeeded in blowing this whole situation up (KJ kidnapped???) It is very sad to see that MJ fans don’t even WANT to ask questions. They just blindly follow employees/fans of those powerful forces who manipulated and controlled Michael’s life, especially at the end. Now, of course the Estate is releasing all the great financial news on the Estate’s profits since Michael’s death, but I really do question this release for many reasons. There is so much more going on here than we know, people really need to reflect back on what Michael endured and ask some serious questions about who really benefits here.

  11. chic says:

    The estate paid the foreclosure on the Jackson compound and is having it remodeled or had it remodeled. Most are all the debts
    paid and Michael’s estate is worth billions and growing. Mrs.
    Jackson gets 40% and so does Prince,Paris and Prince Michael II
    aka Blanket, charities receive 20%. I am happy with the set-up
    now. TJ seems to be good with the children and they like him.
    I think he knows what to do in helping Mrs.Jackson run the estate,
    he seems sincere only time will tell. I wish Randy would leave
    everything alone he has no voice about the will,no authority about
    anything. He is the cause of the problem.

  12. Seven says:

    Chic,

    Jermaine has said he’s happy with the financial set-up as well – and it wasn’t just Randy who signed the letter – Jermaine did too and the estate paid off child support for both of them! Rebbie has never said a word and neither has Janet. So the “they’re only after money” meme still doesn’t hold water. Janet Jackson’s net worth is valued at $ 150 million dollars. She ranked 7th in the Richest Women’s list in 2007. http://www.forbes.com/2007/01/17/richest-women-entertainment-tech-media-cz_lg_richwomen07_0118womenstars_slide_8.html – why would she bother with any of this unless something was terribly wrong in that household?

    The points you’ve made yourself should tell you is that the money isn’t the issue here.

    This family stood by Michael when it was unpopular to do so and when he was too cash poor to be of any real financial value to them – you don’t remember that? Who walked into the courhouse with MJ every day in 2005? The family? Or John Branca? Who went to the Murray trial? Branca wasn’t there. And John Branca couldn’t even be bothered to go to Michael’s funeral.

    And something odd about what went on with Paris and I’ve pointed it out in my other comments. If my beloved Grandmother was missing for one day, I would be frantic from day One, not tweeting about music & watching Batman for a week and *then* suddenly become worried on day 7. Someone was manipulating those children, I believe, thus their sudden change in attitude about this whole thing. One report is that they knew Katherine was off on a trip and that Prince carried her bags to the car when she left. Paris didn’t seem too worried when she was singing and dancing at her uncles’ concert right around when all this was going on.

    Speaking of that, it is inconceivable to me that if Mrs. Jackson were in any real danger, the brothers would go on performing. While Katherine was gone for 6 days, Paris was laughing, joking, tweeting about Batman. I witnessed that myself. But around day 7, she’s suddenly frantic? What happened between day 6 and day 7? And why wasn’t she so worried about her “missing” Gran on Day 1 or day 2?

    I’m not blaming Paris — I am suggesting that someone in that household was manipulating those kids because this behavior is odd and very inconsistent to say the least, had she been “kidnapped”. I believe they were being used as pawns in this whole thing.

    There must be something else going on to cause these siblings concern and it certainly appears that Mrs. J is being railroaded and controlled by the estate – with an iron fist – and I have to believe this had been going on long before this entire thing blew up publicly or they’d not have brought it up in their letter. Just as AEG isolated, controlled and treated Michael as if he was their personal property, this estate seems to be treating Mrs. J. like she is their property, isolating and controlling her similarly. And this happened to Michael just before he died. So I can see why some people may be concerned – and obviously not about money.

    But speaking of money, has anyone looked at how much the estate admins are getting for their iron-fisted rulership? It’s no chump change. Loose estimate is executors make 10% of total estate earnings – around $47.5m in 3yrs. Katherine gets $35,000 a month (not including what she gets for the MJ3) – so around $1.2m in 3yrs. Odd that more people don’t question their material motives or hellbent efforts at control. But then as I say, propaganda works and the estate have the legal, financial, and political resources and influence to blast out a whole lot of it. Whilst everyone lambastes Randy et al for “going to the media” too much – estate lawyers and Trent were talking to the media almost 24×7 during the bulk of this.

    I’ve myself said I’ve no problem with TJ and actually think that part of all this is probably a good thing. But what led to it is not. And I can’t imagine Mrs. Jackson is happy now that she has to leave her primary place of residence to see half of her family and many of her grandkids and her husband.

  13. Gloria says:

    Chis,
    Remember, the kids only will get an allowance until they are 40 years old! Until then Branca and McCain collect 10% of EVERY deal. They each made $12.5 million on the $ony deal alone, and MJ never wanted anything to do with $ony ever again. He would hate that deal! Seven is right, The Executors are rolling in millions, while KJ and the kids get doled out a penance of what is Michael’s, and therefore should be KJ’s and MJ3’s, money!

  14. Seven says:

    He wasn’t ever really right back on good terms with Sony,” says Stuart Backerman. “The Beatles Catalogue is one thing but after the whole Tommy Mottola business, it was over. It was not gonna really be happening with Sony again.”

  15. chic says:

    Seven I agree with you and know the estate paid the child support
    for both Jermaine and Randy for the children they had from the
    same woman. Janet has her own and has helped others in the family
    as well. She said that she came from Italy to give Randy support
    and I guess Rebbie was giving her support too. So it is obvious
    that Randy is the culprit. He seems to have planned it. I don’t
    like sony and know they wronged Michael. I hate they have a share
    in the catalogue. Also I know the executors get 10% they should
    be paid. I’m not sure but I think Mrs. Jackson gets $70,000.00
    a month and the children get $10.000.00 each I got this from
    a reputable source. Wow,, that’s $100,000 a month. Michael left
    them well off. I know they were there for Michael during the trial.

  16. Gloria says:

    I really wonder if Katherine is allowed to leave to visit her “banned” children when any driver not employed by the estate are also not allowed on the property? I believe they have effectively banned her from seeing or even talking to anyone that is against the executors running the estate.Remember all MJ’s dropped calls and the phones being disconnected? After all Rebbie wasn’t part of the what the media is calling the “ambush”. Nor was papa Joe, yet they are banned. Why?

  17. aldebaran says:

    What I do not get in all this is why Mrs. Jackson did not call her grandkids and wards for so many days (10, I believe). To me, this is the big mystery that cannot be explained. When I go away and leave my loved ones who are dependent on me, I call them every night. I can’t rest unless I know they are well and taken care of. It seems if Mrs. Jackson had called none of this would have happened.

  18. Daryn says:

    How refreshing it is when an MJ fan does not participate in groupthink! Thank you for being brave enough to post your opinion even though it may be in the minority. It is the same as mine, and luckily I’ve been able to see through the b.s. because I don’t consume media day in and day out. When I was away from it for awhile, as I was when all this drama broke out, then I really began to see where things didn’t make sense. I have a fresh point of view untainted by media and hate.
    It really sickens and saddens me that a majority of twitter and fan community comments are hateful and vile and repeat what sources like TMZ say as though it were credible material! Its unbelievable to me that people are accusing Janet and, least of all, Rebbie as well as Michael’s entire family of being greedy! To me, the only thing that statement in itself said was that things are getting very serious; because those who have not been very outspoken (at least that we know of) are suddenly.
    When fans who right off the bat accuse without thinking for themselves, don’t know or even try to listen to all the facts are seemingly everywhere, it makes it hard to be a proud MJ “fan-mily” member or participate in any community forums because all it is now is ugly debate. I find that cursing out and shaming Michael’s family members in the name of Michael is so appalling and stupid that rather than getting involved in a debate, I state my opinion then sign off for a while. Maybe everyone just needs to sign off for a while. Consuming media is what is creating war mongering zombies of us.
    Anyway, thank you.

  19. Seven says:

    aldebran,

    It’s my understanding from Mrs. Jackson’s statement on Nightline that she left T.J. in charge and nannys, cooks, housekeepers etc. were present — and that an assistant who was with her was calling the house every day and giving her updates on the grandkids and telling her all was fine. I don’t think Mrs. J. was aware of all the chaos that had developed at that time and they were trying to keep it from her so as not to stress her and to keep her from being manipulated by Trent & the estate (using the children as pawns). She said she “gave up her phone” so she could rest.

    That said, I don’t approve of her being cut off from the grandkids like that. At the same time, I don’t ascribe nefarious money-related motives to it either. This part of it worst of all was not well planned out and certainly backfired for Mrs. J.

  20. Seven says:

    Chic,

    I think Mrs. J’s monthly allowance was increased at one point so that’s probably right — and also the estate execs applied for a percentage increase as well – looks like 3%:

    http://www.thecmuwebsite.com/article/michael-jackson-estate-executors-renegotiate-fees/ – and they no longer have to pay out of pocket expenses for many things that they previously had to fund themselves.

    Make no mistake they are making a very handsome profit off of this estate and its Sony and other deals. They do of course deserve to be paid for their work but working in tandem with AEG and Sony – and Branca being on the board of MusiCares, which is the beneficiary of much of the auctioning off of MJ’s belongings (which ought to be placed in storage for his children or in a museum) – let’s just say there is plenty of profit being had by all of these entities off of Michael. And these are the ones I worry about more than the family – because they have the financial, legal, and political clout to take anything they want from Michael’s legacy and fortune. The family have little pull or say-so on most of it and the only person who could contest anything – Katherine – has been consistently talked out of doing so.