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.


Tags: , ,

50 Responses to “The way I see it…”

  1. Lynette says:

    Katherine does not have to purchase that home to see her Grandchildren.She still has Havenhurst and she can go there when she wants to be with the other people in the family util the investigation which would be standard in this case.It is standard because someone mainly the siblings called her ability to care for Michael’s children appropriately into question.When the investigation is complete we will find out what really happened because the focus of the investigation will be Michael’s childrens interviews.

  2. Lynette says:

    Hi Seven I have all of the court documents for mthe probate if you would like to see them.This is not a new line for Randy Jackson.He first stated that the will was a fake in October of 2009.They did contest the will all the way to the California Supreme Court and the Attorney General has been overseeing the probate since the filing of the will.
    ON June 27th 2009 the lawyer for Katherine and Joe Jackson filed for Special Administrators Rights to his Estate. They did this following a telephone conversation with John Branca.The Petition said that they had rights to his Estate because Michael died intestate.He did not he died testate and the Will was actually on file with the court under will safekeeping.
    They questioned the signature on the will at that time.This is not something new and all three witnesses gave their declarations to the court that it was signed in front of them. IF you have a copy of the will you will see that John Branca’s name is not even on it.There is a third witness as required by law that is not even part of the Estate.Barry Seigel, was Michael’s former accountant an dhe was one of the witnesses that signed the will.The Executors did address all the families concern at the time.Randy Jackson I’m afraid does want control of the money because what none fo the fans seem to understand is the letter that was sent is actually a Letter of Demand.Meaning that it is a legal notice.
    It is true that certain family memebers Randy mainly have been working with Howard Mann and they did plan to have Katherine’s ability to carry out her duties as the Guardian placed in question.Howard Mann is the man that purchased the Vacarro warehouse of property and used some of the items in there to pressure Katherine to sign the deal with him and formed what we know as The Jackson Secret Vault. He was introduced to Katherine by Randy.He is also partnered with F.Marc Shaffle. Shaffel in essence wants to sell back to the Jacksons the footage that he got from MJ when he produced THe Private Home Movies special for FOX in 2003 after the Bashir documentary.He is also trying to get the rights to attach Michael’s name to the Heal The World copycat that was started by Mellisa Johnson.She started stealing the Heal The World name long before Michael’s death right after he disbanned it in 2002 because of the trouble that Schmuley Boteach got into.Michael did that to protect his charity from fallout from the investigation into Schmuley’s charity because they were tied together.These are all things that do fall under the Estate’s authority because the bankruptcy suit that Vacarro had against the family did not include Michael.It included Joe,Katherine,Tito, Jermaine and Randy I believe so they do not have a right to it.
    It is a long and very convuluted story but suffice it to say that all of the family’s concerns were addressed 3 years ago and they were found to be without merit at the time.As for whether or not they are doing there job you can go to Helena’s page and see the latest Estate report to the court that was filed on July 7th I think.

  3. Seven says:

    Ebony, as I understand it, AEG called Branca back, not Michael. The did this so that AEG and Michael would not have the same attorney and so that there would be no “conflict of interest” issues.

    As for child support for Jermaine and Randy, it’s my understanding that the estate paid their back child support for them! And Jermaine had said in the past that he is happy with the financial arrangements in place. That makes it even more unbelievable IMO, that they would now turn against the estate allegedly looking for money, as is illogically being claimed.

    It is a popular meme, but when applied, in too many ways it makes no sense.

    I think there are other reasons the siblings wrote that letter which have nothing to do with wanting money. This might give you a clue:


    As I remember, the siblings’ letter mentioned bullying, control and abuse of Mrs. Jackson. Did you read that part? As I wrote in my piece, it seems events of late bear out some real truth to that.

    And if recent events weren’t enough, now look what the estate has done now.

    > They’ve barred Katherine Jackson from letting her own children into her own home.

    > They’ve barred her from letting any security or drivers onto her own property unless they work for John Branca and John McClain.

    > Their letter stating who may and may not enter the estate’s (it’s theirs not Mrs. Jackson’s) Calabasas home authorises Trent Jackson to enter the property – even though Katherine has attempted to fire him and didn’t want him around. He was a key factor in stirring up recent issues there. Many blame it all on Randy, Janet et al. but Trent Jackson did his part to deliberately create chaos in that house while KJ was gone and as I stated, it’s certain that he meant to do just that. He was after all one of the recipients of the siblings’ letter and therefore no doubt set out to cause trouble for them in retaliation.

    > The estate has banned Katherine Jackson from allowing some of her infant grandchildren onto her property.

    > Katherine will now have to try to purchase the house in order to overturn these ludicrous sanctions. And who has the final say on whether Katherine can buy the house? The executors of the Estate.

    > Katherine is also banned from inviting her own husband onto her property.


    Now, remember the complaint in the letter Randy, Jermaine, Rebbie, and Janet signed: they said that the estate is controlling, bullying and abusing Mrs. Jackson. I’d say their new rules and restrictions are pretty controlling. She is no longer able to even have her own husband in her home and many of her own children and grandchildren. And, she is forced to continue dealing with Troublemaker Trent, whom according to Randy and others, she wanted fired but was told she didn’t have the “authority“.

    Not coincidentally, the same people involved state-side are the same people who isolated and controlled Michael in the weeks and months prior to his death. Randy spells out in his last tweet what the concerns are with all this. It’s pretty plain:

    1) When TJ asked my mother if he should ask for temporary guardianship, my Mother told TJ NO – twice.

    2) The Estate denied Rebbie, Janet and Jermaine access to the house when they returned to home to Calabasas with a letter written by Howard Weitzman, attorney for the Estate, who is not a resident of the home.

    3) The Estate is trying to isolate my Mother from her family JUST LIKE THEY DID TO MICHAEL, in order to propagate their lies, financial agendas and to protect a fraudulent will.

    4) The same people that are trying to manipulate my mother are the same people that were involved with my brother when he died.

    5) In order to obtain temporary guardianship, TJ lied to the court. Rebbie, Janet, Jermaine and I would never harm our mother and we are doing our best to protect her and the Estate knows that. I want to know why Perry Sanders would consider a negotiation based on lies.

    6) It is clear that anyone who stands up against the Executors of the Estate – John Branca, John McClain and their attorney Howard Weitzman – is denied access to my mother.

    7) It is my fear and belief, that they are trying to take my mother’s life.

    I realize that my take on this isn’t popular opinion and goes against the media and tabloid meme being touted at the moment, but the truth often isn’t popular. That’s because propaganda works. The estate and AEG have considerable financial, legal, and political pull in Los Angeles. A lot of it. And they can (and do) unleash a media / PR firestorm to destroy anyone who dares interfere with their control of THEIR estate and money. Michael is dead because of such greed, and many of the same people around him before he died are involved now.

    Whether you agree with it or not, you might try to understand that to some people, that looks rather suspicious and is of real concern.

    It’s amazing to me that MJ fans who knew enough not to believe the media’s spin and lies about Michael somehow believe that the media and tabloids have suddenly become honest and have started telling the truth about his family. It’s senseless.

  4. karen says:

    The one thing that has been questioning your version is Prince’s tweet. He said that Michael warned him of certain people and then Prince posted that chat with Janet. It has to make a person wonder. I don’t want to think the worst of Michael’s family, but Prince is an intelligent young man who talked one on one with his father.

  5. DarkChild says:

    Well done thy faithful servant. Agree TOTALLY. Someone is out to make the “Jacksons” look bad and they SUCEEDED. However, I was not deceived. I will say this and leave it alone: “The Jacksons are very much educated to the evil workings of the entertainment world and I am not”; I believe the Jackson siblings and Mrs. Katherine. The letter was leaked to make it seem as if they were greedy for money; abusive to their mother and to Michael’s children. Wake up everybody, It’s all BS

  6. Joy says:

    The estate did answer it and several of the Jackson’s were in court when it waas validated. Furthermore, Jermaine went on to brag about how “wonderful” Branca and McClain were for some time, until IMO the need for them needed money become so great.

    It is not easy for these attorneys beleieve it or not. As someone who knows something about CA and their probate system especially where minors are concerned, it is not a joke at ALL!

    The estate cannot just write checks either in certain transactions they have to get court approval and supply all the necessary documentation.

  7. Ebony says:

    The estate HAS answered Randy & co.’s questions. Randy and the other siblings just don’t like the answers.
    I am certain that the estate issued written responses to the siblings letters as all lawyers do. The siblings ,not happy about the responses take things to the tabloids. If I can answer these questions why didn’t they get the memo?

    1.As to the location on the will.. Someone forgot what city they were in at the time. There were signed affidavits from all of the witnesses to support that.

    2. The judge declared that discrepancy as minor. And the content of the 2002 will is exactly the same as the 1997 will.
    If there was a will after the 2002 will no one knows where it is and then that was MJ’s mistake.

    When MJ first died the family did the first money grab on the will. They were shot down & let it go because there was really no money to be had. There was only debt. Love or hate the executors they did a great job and 3 years later MJ’s estate is debt free. (The estate keeps KJ in the loop) And here they go contesting the will again, Now that MJ is in the black. (VERY CONVENIENT) Why not continue to complain amidst the debt? If this is in fact a principled argument. Randy claimed that it’s not about the money it’s about the will. WELL what are wills about?…. MONEY!!!

    While he was living MJ gave KJ approx 30,000 dollars a month allowance. With that she was able to run the household and support baby mama’s & grand children.
    Since MJ’s death KJ now has almost 100,000 a month in cash and the expenses taken care of by the estate. She is not hurting for money.

    The family is not happy because now that KJ has Mj’s kids the money has to be accounted for. The kids have an attorney and court officers to ensure their well being. Therefore KJ cannot be as generous as she may otherwise be with that influx of cash. THAT is why everyone is angry.

    The gravy train has stopped. Mj always gave KJ more than she needed because he knew she would share that money amongst the family. MJ’s death slowed that trickle down of cash.

    MJ was the cash cow & KJ was the farmer. MJ would deny KJ nothing and everyone knew it. So if anyone wanted money or anything from MJ they went through KJ.

    Does anyone find it odd that the two main rabble-rousers are the ones who owe back child support? The ones whose children & shared Baby Mama was indirectly supported by MJ through KJ?

    ABOUT MJ DISLIKING BRANCA & McClain: MJ (Love him with all my heart) was a pop star all of his life. And probably as most pop stars are a bit spoiled & temperamental at times. He was known for firing and re hiring the same people. (Grace the nanny, Ramone Bain) He got mad. He fired you. He got over it, he asked you back.
    I mean really.. How many of us say we are never speaking to someone again? And even as we say it know in our hearts that that is not true.

    MJ was very smart. He knew that his greatest career and financial achievements were made with Branca & Dileo by his side. He knew things began to go to hell after they left. He was trying to repair his life and brought back the people who he knew helped him do it before.
    In regular people terms think of it as calling that significant other you let go of too quickly in the past after you’ve been through crap with someone else.

    When you are down (in any respect) you seek comfort and protection, which is why in the end MJ called Dileo, Branca, and even Joe Jackson. Joe may be a piece of work, but he would never let anyone harm his kids. (According to MJ himself)

    I don’t think the events of late have anything to do with mis communication. You would have to be a pure idiot to mess up this badly.
    Everyone except Randy, Janet, Jermaine & Rebbie believed that KJ was on her way to the unity concert. When the plans were changed, any one of those four could have simply called TJ and explained that they were taking KJ to a spa to de- compress and they would rather she wasn’t bothered for a few days.

    We are not talking about staffers here. We are talking about your nephew in the house with a cell phone. Why couldn’t that simple phone call be made?
    Nooo. Too easy. Instead they created this bull crap story about a mini stroke and sent in a bought off physician. No decent doctor would tell an 82 yr old who had suffered a mini stroke to travel via plane instead of a spacious RV. A stroke damages blood circulation. Airplane flights cause blood clots. See where we are headed here?
    Why were Marlon, Tito & Jackie left out of the loop? They were not a part of the household stress.
    And KJ was too stressed to say hi to anyone on the phone but not too stressed to play UNO with a five year old running around?!
    Those siblings created an atmosphere of distrust and then complained that it spiraled out of control. When you push a boulder to the top of a mountain you cannot control what it crushes on the way down.

    You cannot rationally say that all of this was done out of good intent, because there were too many unnecessary lies.

    The people around KJ are Trent and TJ all of whom were there when MJ was alive. Why are they suddenly evil and dangerous? And if these people are so nefarious why leave the children, whom the money follows in their clutches?

    And lastly. The kids & social media. We have no idea what MJ would have been allowing the kids to do by now. When he died he had started to let them remove their masks so who’s to say? YES Paris IS a little extra with her tweets, but she is a 14-year-old girl. And they are usually a bit..extra. Prince, However is more level and he smelled a rat as well as Paris. Tweeting their distress, however cringe worthy shed a light on a bad situation, which clearly TJ & Trent could not resolve.

  8. Johanna says:

    Wow, I’m really surprised to see someone who shares my opinion. Everywhere I say this (that the siblings are not after the money), my comment is either not approved or gets loads of thumbs down. I posted on my FB and people even unfriended me! To date, I have yet to figure out how the siblings are going to get a penny out of this, or why Janet would want to. (If the siblings need money, they just go to Katherine, much easier than Branca.) Looking at just the black and white, the siblings made a bunch of accusations against Branca and McClain. Did anybody note that B+C did not deny ANY of them? Their reply was basically, “But the judge sided with us, nyah nyah!” That attitude is very much in line with what the sibs accused them of. Branca buying out Katherine’s lawyers? Well, he learned that at Sony, didn’t he? Even more surprisingly, a bunch of fan groups popped up and voiced their unequivocal support for B+C. I have an inkling who is behind this. To whom does it matter who the fans support? This is a legal matter and none of the fans’ business, we are all just rubberneckers and tabloid consumers. Obviously “we” must not lose any love for the executors because there is a major product release in September and they wouldn’t want us to hate them for any reason. Hmm, who’s after money now?

    The other thing I don’t understand is why TJ made a bid for custody. Katherine left him in charge when she went away. Surely she told him how long she would be gone, as he had to make arrangements to stay over at her house. Even if she didn’t come back within the stipulated time, it is preposterous for a babysitter to make a bid for custody of the children he was babysitting. You don’t steal someone’s kids just because the guardian came back a few days late! You do that only if they have died or they disappeared for so long that they are declared legally dead. Now Katherine is sharing guardianship with him because she needs someone to manage the servants. Note that she didn’t say the children needed another guardian or a father figure in their lives, or that she couldn’t handle two teenagers or that the nanny quit. She said it’s good to have someone take care of the running of the household. So why a co-guardian if what she needs is a house manager? Who is this TJ, whom is he batting for, and what is his interest in all this? If Randy is to be believed, TJ asked Katherine for guardianship twice and she said no, then when she was gone for a few days, he saw his opportunity, made her to look like she was irresponsible and mentally incapacitated, and swiftly took control of the kids behind her back.

    @sandyK – There is no such thing as an estate closing. “Estate” means money or property left behind, and as long as Michael’s records continue to sell and his name and likeness used to sell things, money will be rolling in for the rest of eternity. Interesting link to the accounting though – I see not a penny has been disbursed to charities.

  9. appleh says:

    Hi Seven, thank you for the article, I wish the media and others who are involved in this mess, would see it that way. Especially the tabloids, who are making the big buck about selling bogus stories, calling someone greedy is the best joke ever !!! I would laugh, if it wasn´t so serious ! What bothered me badly, was the reaction of the fans, who were deeply divided into an Estate and a Jackson Family “Camp”. I don´t know how they could be so misleaded by the media, they should know much better !!! The most shocking for me was, when the story appeared, that Paris called Janet a “bitch” and Janet slapped her (which, btw, never happend according to Paris tweet), there were a lot of fans who found Paris deserved it to be beaten and to be shown “to her place”, because she twittered family issues into public ! Have you seen the TV-Show, where Gladys Knight said she would have knocked Paris teeth out and the moron (sorry, but I have to say this) audience applauded her ! Those people are his “fans” and friends, do you have any words for this ?
    Have these people ever heard, that MJ would never lay a hand on a child ? What is wrong with them ?

  10. Rfsmith5139 says:

    Thank you!

  11. chic says:

    IMO the media and Randy are responsible for the awful event happening.

  12. Sina says:

    Seven, No way do I think the actions of Michaels siblings were aimed at the children (else they were also aimed at Marlon and other familymembers ) but at people around Katherine.
    What I hold the siblings responsible for is that the children were put square in the middle and became like collateral. It was not well thought of and could have escalated more seriously and I can understand that the children feel hurt . However ,I do not approve them going to the media. Once you pay lipservice to the tabloids , the same once who slaughtered your father, its a trainwreck in the making, we know how it ended for Michael. Besides, TJ was right in the house and they could have left it to him to handle as he is doing now. The Jacksons know that they are game whatever they do . There are always insiders who sell stories to the media which was proven seconds after the incident happened.
    It was all much to do about nothing, but deliberately made into a kidnapping, a false missing persons report and a feeding of the media that backfired now on the Jacksons, but in the end will have only losers. The children will again be interviewed by DFC, of all places at school, where not everyone seems to be positive towards them. This will be the thirth time, first was when Michael was on trial and in 2010 with the stungun incident. This is so sad and uncalled for.

    I dont know what is true or not about the will or what is the motivation to contest it, but what I find shocking is that the executors put pressure on Katherine to drop the case against AEG.
    Now I found out that it was actually AEG who took Branca on board of This is it a few days before Michael passed away. In none of his interviews he mentioned his connection to AEG or that HE had contacted AEG and that they arranged the whole thing behind Michaels back. It was first and foremost in the interest of AEG to protect them from jeopardizing their contract with Michael because of a a conflict of interest as they shared the same lawyer. If you read the article it makes perfect sense why Branca would prevent the Jackson family from sueing a company that brought him back into Michaels life. AEG recouped royally and easily because they didnt have to deal with Michael anymore.


    It is true that executors made a billion dollar deals,which may now be only on paper, and will only come to effect when Cirque and sony start making a profit. That is what they are supposed to do, and they have an easy job at that because Michael sells himself. What pisses me of is that they claim to have cleared Michaels image. The nerve!.
    When Michael passed away before there was an estate there were mourning fans who massively bought everything they could find and none of that was the estates making. The Michael album was a disgrace and Im 100% convinced that Cascio or whoever worked on the tracks flat out frauded them with the approval of the executors.
    So Michaels siblings have good reasons to want to go to the bottom of things. But I agree the letter was amateurish and I cant believe a real lawyer advised them on it. The Jacksons should learn the strategy : if you cant beat them, join them and find out from the inside.

    The attitude of certain fangroups I take with a grain of salt. What to think of a loony tune who will start a Janet music burning. Last time I heard about burning other peoples work, they were Taliban or al Quaida linked groups. I would feel sorry for Prince and Paris and may hope that is not the kind of support they are looking for.
    Im just reading Humberto Ecos book Inventing the enemy and one of the essays is about how and why enemies are invented. His sometimes hilarious observation is that enemies, if not real must be invented, because that is what give people identity , unites them and its against which they test their self-worth. So true.

    Your latest article about Michaels school is another perfect example of how stories are fabricated and believed without questioning, because who doesnt want to believe a sweet story about Michael.

  13. SandyK says:

    First, thank you Seven for this balanced view of events. And I very much agree that this entire situation got seriously out of hand on many levels. I do hope that the Estate does answer the legitimate questions that have been raised in a professional and private manner. Anything less should be unacceptable and contrary to the best interests of KJ and MJ3. I also strongly feel that Ms. Ribera and Mr. Sanders need to be replaced. They have not served KJ and MJ3 well especially in light of recent events. The very idea that Katherine has not had full control of HER household borders on the criminal and I do hope that this Trent character has in fact been fired as has been reported by Randy Jackson on his Twitter account.

    Randy Jackson ‏@randyjackson8 (July 25, 2012)

    “I was on the phone at 9pm in Los Angeles, with my sister Rebbie, when my mother FIRED Trent and Security”

    Second, @aldebaran, I totally agree with your observation concerning the letter that was sent to the estate. The siblings do have legitimate questions but why be so inflammatory on their part? That doesn’t make sense to me.

    Third, @Lana said, “People really do need to understand and believe, like it or not, that money = power in this world; and the larger the amount of money involved, the greater the chances of corruption.” So very, very true! And as you said, “If everything is above-board, there is no need for this nonsense.” Especially since these are not new questions as you point out. Hopefully this will be addressed in a timely manner.

    Fourth, as to the concern for Katherine’s safety we know that Michael had concerns for his own life which he shared with some members of his family. Is it that threat that they feel has now transferred to their mother? I hope not!!! I never fully understood Michael’s concern for his own life and thought that perhaps it was a function of his association with some shady individuals, his accumulating debt, which has very recently been cleared off the books and racist elements that didn’t want to have a powerful black man in their midst. (Those elements may very well have succeeded in preventing Michael from exercising his full potential outside of being an entertainer.) As for the clearing of Michael’s debt it has been nothing less than a monumentally amazing accomplishment and a testament to Michael’s continued earning power and universal appeal. And though many will disagree with me the estate executors deserve a lot of credit in this regard as well. However, it can’t be stressed enough that their role is limited to merely facilitating. None of it would be possible with out Michael at the end of the day and I’m certain the estate executors would more than agree with that.

    That said, it will be very interesting to see what happens when the estate is finally closed. Especially one of this size!! This event could happen a year from now according to recent financial disclosures as reported by MJJCommunity. Once the estate is closed, what happens to the current executors? Will Branca/McClain be immediately discharged? Who will run the estate from then on? Will Katherine have the ability to appoint new management? What if she passes, God forbid, before the estate closes?

    This source lists these steps as immediately preceeding the closing of an estate:

    Distribution and Closing
    1. Distribute Assets: Upon payment of all claimants, distribute all remaining assets to
    beneficiaries as prescribed by will and obtain receipts.
    2. Final Accounting: Prepare final estate accounting including reports of all receipts and
    disbursements and distribute to court if required and beneficiaries.
    3. ***Discharge: Obtain court order discharging executor and closing estate.


    MJ Estate Second Accounting – Document & Summary & Discussion

    http://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/threads/123642-MJ-Estate-Second-Accounting-Document-amp-Summary-amp-Discussion via @MJJCommunity

  14. maguk says:

    Whilst we all have a right to an opinion, and it’s human nature to speculate, I have been saddened to see such illogical, judgemental and arrogant comments from some “fans” on various blog-sites.

    Even when news is reported truthfully, we are only given a condensed version, which along with an often ambiguous headline, can leave things open to interpretation.

    We have all just witnessed (again) how spin, speculation and half-truths whip even the most rational of people into a frenzy of damaging spitefulness. And if anyone believes this behaviour is supporting Michael, and or his children, well it isn’t.

    I think Michael would be saddened, hurt and horrified that the fans he loved so much have contributed to this horrible event.

    Even worse the haters are out in force, re-hashing the same old disgusting accusations against Michael and his (“not his”) children and using the most appalling language to vent their spleen.

    Once your reputation is ruined no-one looks at you in quite the same way again, and there have been fans who seem to have assisted the media in their portrayal of this “dysfunctional family” ( albeit unwittingly) . Yes, whoever orchestrated this, was definately very successful in achieving their aim.It goes without saying that this is a serious and private family matter, but clearly that was never going to happen.

    Seven, thankyou for your sensible appraisal of these events. I sense that you too may be feeling just a bit cross with some MJ fans.. I certainly am.

  15. Jayn says:

    I agree completely, its sad that so many fans are turning their backs on the Jackson family without even hearing the whole story yet. We all know how badly the media mistreated Michael, and I have a feeling that this whole situation isn’t too far from that.

  16. Dialdancer says:

    Thank you.

  17. Cricio1950 says:

    Thank you Seven so much for this explanation. I only hope many will read it and some fans group will stop to work for the Estate benefit…THIS IS unaccetable more than tabloid itself.

  18. Seven says:


    You raise some really good points as well. I agree that the children should have a say in what happens. I was happy to read that Prince represented them in talks about the new guardianship arrangements. I’m hopeful that with TJ’s help, Mrs. Jackson can relax and remove herself from staffing and other issues she finds stressful. I too was concerned about her age and ability to handle 3 children – and two of them are now teenagers and teens are always a handful and a half even for a young parent or guardian. If there is any silver lining in this, it may be that Mrs. Jackson has in TJ what I hope is some loving and capable help as co-guardian.

  19. aldebaran says:

    I want to add that since Prince is 15 and Paris 14, they need to be given a great deal of ‘say’ in what happens to them. They need to be supported to make choices that are best for them, and not try to take care of the needs of the adults in this situation at the expense of their own. I think Michael did a lot of things he did not want to do for the sake of others, and I hope this does not happen to them.

  20. aldebaran says:

    Thank you, Seven, for your detailed take on this. You raise some valid questions and points. The judge certainly has a lot to deal with and I hope he will consider one thing as paramount–the well being of the children. In my opinion, this is the most important thing to consider. Adults have a lot more power in many ways than children–I think that is obvious. It is important to remember that Michael was such a strong advocate for children and saw how powerless they could be and yet how much they have to offer the world. His children also are very vulnerable both from their traumatic past history and from the present rather chaotic situation and I do believe they have a great deal to offer the world. I so much hope and pray that they will get the nurturing and protection they need to develop their full potential.

    As far as the behavior of the adults in this situation, I have to ask why the signers of the letter to the Estate used such strong language as to create an impression that they were guided more by emotion than reason. A calmer request for clarification of questions they have about the will would seem to get better results. The letter is in my opinion very inflammatory. Also, if it they feared for their mother’s life and safety, then security guards should have been there at the spa. Taking away someone’s phone would not stop a determined assassin, would it? Also presumably, they themselves received phone calls and so their location would have been known. Perry Sanders was able to locate them and fly out there.

    My solution to this is to protect the children and do what is best for them, and let the adults try and sort out their issues with each other but without harming the children. In my opinion, the children need to live with people who not only love and care for them, but who are reliable and responsible. At 82, Mrs. Jackson is limited in a number of ways. Also her allegiance to her own children is natural and may be a source of conflict for her if they want her to do something that is not in the best interests of the children’s well-being. So I think the best solution would be for them to have her as a grandmother but not as a Guardian. This way they have her love and support but will have a different Guardian (or Guardians) as well. Then if this happens, the big issue is who could be the legal Guardian. Perhaps the judge simply needs to appoint someone outside the family to fulfill this role. Prince is 15 and will be 18 in 2 and a half years and so he will no longer need a legal Guardian, so maybe this will be a solution that will help make the next couple of years pass in a way that is best for everyone–the cihildren especially. They will not lose their grandmother and she will not lose them.

    I do agree that it would be good if the Estate would issue a response to the issues raised about the will, and I hope that will happen rather soon so that these matters can be laid to rest once and for all.

  21. Lana says:

    I see it exactly the same way you do, Seven. I think the estate reps are making themselves look suspicious by not dealing with the questions Michael’s siblings are asking. An “us and them” situation seems to have been created (and perpetuated by “fans”). If everything is above-board, there is no need for this nonsense. And it’s not like the siblings just started asking questions last week; they asked these questions 3 years ago and did not get answers.

    Just because they’re not named in the will, does not mean the siblings should be treated as lepers. Michael may have had differences, or even trust issues, with some members of his family but he still loved them; and they all love him and their mother who they naturally want to protect. There may even be genuine fear that another life could be lost. People really do need to understand and believe, like it or not, that money = power in this world; and the larger the amount of money involved, the greater the chances of corruption.

    I’ve seen people mention that MJ hired Trent to be his mother’s assistant before he died. (As if that means she’s stuck with him for life). I don’t know how accurate that info is; but even if it were true, relationships change. She shouldn’t have to work and live with somebody if she doesn’t want to. She has no freedom, everything in her life is controlled by the estate because they issue the cheques.

    Imagine if it was your own 82 y.o. mother, and you suspected somebody was taking advantage of her or bullying, would you not try to step up and rectify the situation? Imagine if she had to share a residence with her bully! An unbelievable situation!

    I hope the siblings pursue this matter until the answers they want are forthcoming and they are not intimidated by the almighty power-mongers. I do not see their request as unreasonable.

  22. Seven says:

    Before anyone brings this up:

    I’m aware that the estate attorneys legally don’t “have” to answer the sibling’s questions as they are not beneficiaries – that is all the more reason that claims that “they are only after the money!“, and “they only want control of that estate!” are ridiculous. Someone ought to tell this to the media and others who seem to have been parroting the meme since the entire debacle began. It isn’t going to happen. No matter what.

    Sure, the estate only HAS to answer to the children, Mrs. Jackson and mostly, Judge Beckloff. However, as I stated in my write-up, properly addressing these siblings concerns would be the professional, ethical thing to do since it is Michael’s family – and their mother whom they are concerned for. By not doing so, the estate only causes themselves to appear to have something to hide in regards to allegations of fraud and control/abuse of Mrs. Jackson. While the siblings are not beneficiaries, she is. By appearing to contribute to or participate in division or public destruction of this family directly or indirectly, they also appear to be hurting those the are legally obligated to protect.

    Thus, it would be to their own benefit to address the family’s concerns whether they are legally obligated or not. Publicizing the siblings’ letter (if the estate or one of the recipients did so), issuing dismissive, accusatory, vague public statements in response to the letter, and then subsequently smearing them in the media for a week was in fact hurtful to the beneficiaries of the will. Very much so.

    Several of their attorneys (and Trent – not sure who he is paid by) spent at least a week speaking to the media and tabloids about this issue on more than a daily basis. I’m sure they are within their rights to do that, however it doesn’t appear very professional or ethical, either. While everyone goes on about Randy “going to the media too much”, others involved estate-side and within the Calabasas home during the week Mrs. Jackson was gone seemed to be in contact with the media/tabloids on a regular basis as well during that time and seemingly hellbent on creating chaos.

    So, it wasn’t just Randy. In my own opinion – this entire situation should have been handled privately – on all sides.

    _ _ _ _ _ _ _

    And bytheway yes I DO screen my comments. I’ve made that clear before. If you didn’t know, well now you do. 🙂

  23. ultravioletrae says:

    Thank you so much for this, you have beautifully articulated what happened. It came as quite a shock to me that the MJ fandom could be so easily manipulated. If I were concerned for my mother’s safety, fearing that she was in the same kind of danger my late brother was in, without a shadow of a doubt I would have publicly said she was going in one direction while diverting her to a safe, undisclosed location elsewhere, forbidding all phone contact which could give her location away. Randy Jackson makes perfect sense if you listen to him, but the fan/tabloid nonsense does not. If it really were just a matter of Katherine Jackson picking up a phone to talk to her grandchildren, why wouldn’t they have her do that? They didn’t. Why? Randy Jackson gave us the reasons. Katherine Jackson needed to be in a safe location, publicly articulated as “doctors orders.” I hope the police do their jobs and that the children never have to know what kind of situation the family is in. God help those fans that have just played into the hands of the very people MJ warned us about.

  24. KC says:

    The first article I have read regarding the Jackson debacle that has a voice of reason. Thank you Seven & I also believe Branca & McClain should reveal to Mrs. Jackson the circumstances regarding the signing of the will & it’s validity.

  25. Seven says:


    No I’m not a Jackson nor have I ever even met any of them. And no, I don’t “work for them” (I know that comment will come up because whatever side of this issue one is on, they’re accused of “working” either for Jacksons or for the estate – it’s rather ridiculous).

    I can accept that what you said re: the will may be true. But why doesn’t the estate provide that answer to the family privately, in writing, explaining that instead of evading the question or seemingly creating distractions.

    And what about the claims that they are bullying and controlling Mrs. Jackson? Those were only addressed with a media ambush against the family.

  26. Seven says:

    Whatever the truth is about the will, I think anyone in that family who has questions about the will, the management of the estate or how things are being handled in regards to their own mother, grandmother, etc. are entitled to private, truthful answers from the estate. They apparently still haven’t gotten answers to their questions. It makes the estate look dishonest, even if they’re not.

  27. Luzia de Paula says:

    I think the Jacksons themselves have written this page! I know my reply will not be published. It is very common to sign papers on a different date from the one which appear on the papers. At least in my country. Is it different in the USA?

  28. MiMi says:

    Thank you for this well written and logical perspective!

  29. VanessaL says:

    Seven, this is the one question I kept asking. WHY aren’t any of the news media even trying to answer the one question. Randy has a valid point. It’s not like he made this up. NO matter what you think of any of the sibling, you have to ask yourself, WHY can’t anyone answer Randy. Even the fans that thinks he’s in it for money or what-ever, you can’t denied, he has proof on his side, and he can proved it, and we all KNOW it…. MJ was not where they say he was at the time of the signing of that WILL that Branca and Team submitted. And like you said Seven, if Branca can prove otherwise, then he needs to talk to the family and stop this fiesta. Turning things around on this family just like the media did to MJ is just sicking to see. The very same peoples that trys so hard to clear and keep MJ name going strong, turns around and pulls a media tabloid act on the family. Spinning their words around and they bought it. How soon did we forget. That’s just what they did to MJ.
    Seven, I just want to thank you for posting your thoughts, and I agree 1000% with you on this one.

  30. Danielle C. says:

    Well done. I agree with what’s been said. It is my feeling that the media should not be believed; that one should always question what is put out by the media. Common sense says what is going on and what appears to be going on are two different things. Someone is trying to use the divide and conquer tactic, in my opinion, to retain control of the estate. When the letter the Jackson’s sent to the estate executors, all of a sudden bad publicity was being very quickly released to the media to distract from the real issue of power and yes, money. Although the Jacksons are famous, they are family. They disagree, have arguments and act just like normal families do. My gut instincts and common sense tell me they are not what they are being made out to be. It seems like Ceasar, being surrounded by enemies, but those enemies are now being smoked out, revealed and hopefully will be brought to justice. This is just my opinion based on information that is out there. The TRUTH is being revealed and there will be vindication for Michael Jackson.