I'm really curious about the AEG lawsuit. If they drop it it will be very embarrassing for them after their claims of seeking justice over Michael, all of Randy's obsessive tweeting about it like he gave a monkeys about justice, Janet cancelling tour dates and flying all over the world just to see Randy Philips testify... so why would they drop the lawsuit which would supposedly do that? Very embarrassing. When is Randy's deposition due? And Jermaine's? I want to read both before this lawsuit is dropped. AEG should counter sue them for mental stress and grief and defamation.
AEG is pretty clear that they would go for a summary judgement asking the case to be dismissed because it's meritless. During discovery AEG is been focusing on two things:
1. Asking Katherine what she based her accusations on: The last we have seen (April) it was all hearsay, the stuff we all read on Internet
2. Exploring Michael's history with drugs: The lawsuit claims AEG was the one that hired Murray and dictated that Michael was given Propofol. AEG thinks showing Michael's past relationship with Murray and his past propofol use will debunk this.
AEG has also said in emails they reserve the right to seek damages due to such claims. Even just legal costs would be millions. I think the summary judgement deadline is by the end of the year and unless there's a huge discovery in between, it seems AEG has the stronger hand.
I quite don't understand the logic of their plot? If they manage to get Katherine under conservatorship, wouldn't that mean that she is not fit to look after the kids, also the AEG case could be dissolved?
her conservator takes over her representation.
Ivy, help I have a few legal things I'd like to know.
Hypothetical questions:
If the Will is fraud and both Johns are out of the picture, is it safe to say that 1998 Will would be taken into action. The problem is that its the same as the newer one except Blanket is added the latter one. So if both Johns are unqualified they cannot use 1998 Will either, so will Bank of America take over then? Will the trust be disqualified too?
I have to divide this up
- if the 2002 will is fake, the older will becomes valid
- if the executors have anything to do with fraud / faking of the will, they get removed
- if there's no individual executors left, bank of america takes over
so you have to think scenarios and possible outcomes based on these 3 basic rules.
If there is no will at all that cannot be used, would it mean that kids gets the whole pot, and Katherine + charity gets nothing?
yes.
If a person dies without a will , the next of kin (wife/husband and kids) gets everything, if there's no next of kin then it goes to the parents of the person and if there's no parents it goes to the siblings.
Isn't it according to law that kids are the main beneficiaries, and brother will not get any money, or could they claim that Michael supported them too?
they didn't make the claim that they were supported by Michael - Joe did. and If Katherine was handing out money (as Jermaine said looking after her cubs) there's no way knowing if Michael was supporting them or if that was Katherine.
I think the current and past moves has always been about control of the Estate and/or increase Katherine's share. As we all know the will is only paying for Katherine's expenses while she's alive, she's not inheriting any part of the Estate and she cannot will her part. So if the goal is to get as much money as they can , it must be done when she's alive. Second part is the control, executors get 10% from what they bring it, and we also know that they control Michael's image and likeliness. They did stop many Jackson ventures ranging from the belts, perfume, deals with Mann / Vaccaro and even the tribute.. So trying to remove the executors and replacing them with Jacksons or Jackson family supporter executors might be the play to make money through Michael's name.
Im so appaled if that TMZ story I posted is true - that Randy and Jermaine are going around saying Katherine is ill so they can be her conservators and get money.
You know what I think it might be true. When Katherine's lawyer talked to CNN he said Katherine is of sound mind and totally capable of taking care of the kids. Don't you think it's an odd thing to say when no one was questioning her mind?
Did he? Although the letter has his name on, but it does not have his signature.
tito's signature is under his name, inside of Jermaine's signature. It's kinda hard to see but yeah he signed it
