Latest on MJJC

Vanity-Fair: MJ`s Family: Inside Their Desperate Attempt to Oust Estate Executors

Bubs said:
I know estate paid for them, but I don't think they'll be using them.
I suppose Katherine asked them to purchase plots for other siblings too, so Michael cannot even rest in peace without them harassing him:(
Click to expand...

Let's hope not. The plots belong to the estate so I think they might reserve one for Katherine & the others for Michaels's children & grandchildren. I don't believe the estate will give the plots to any of the cubs.

The article says that Sanders requested a detailed list of all the expenses/payments the estate has done so far because the one on the last report only shows only the totals and not the receipts. Can that be true? I don't think the judge would accept just any amount without any receipts. I think Sanders is like playing both sides.
 
I'm surprised that the description of this family in this book was so bad, and yet the only thing that Janet reacted on was she was holding MJ funeral because of the money she wanted back from the estate? Maybe she sues Sullivan once the book is out?
Click to expand...

Bubs man dont give her any ideas cuz she just might sue Sullivan
 
If the courts are saying that the estate is doing nothing wrong and everything is legal then there is no problem. The Jacksons are just trying to find ways to get more money. Everything they do is about money. Sorry but that is how it always comes across. I hope Vanity Fair doesn't retract the story because Janet wants them to. There is a guy with the book she should worry about. This is NOTHING to what Michael had to put up with. They are worried people think they are greedy and cold people? Too late.

Where were they to demand retraction or cancellation when somebody wanted to do a show on Michael's autopsy? Aaron carter's story or even when the man that killed their brother and son did some disgusting interview/documentary during the trial? They only put a big fight when it's about them. It's okay for people do trash Michael and nobody defends him. Not right.
 
Last edited:
Bubs said:
I can only imagine if any of the Jackson was in control of the estate, how much they would be paying to themselves:D
There would be nothing left to pay loans and other things needed to be paid.

If they discredit executors but that doesn't change the trust by any means or does it?

If Katherine wants all of her 40% now, will she accept 40% of debts too?

The more I read these shenanigans, the more I think that the only mistake Michael did was to name his mother as beneficiary to his will. The whole family is gone bonkers because of it:ermm:


I take my hat off for the executors, they must have a thick skin to deal with the Jackson soap opera.
Click to expand...

I don't see a big problem with KJ being named as a beneficiary. What I do have a problem with is her being named as first choice guardian b/c that puts the kids into the whole Jackson family madness that tore apart Michael. That I do not get why Michael did. Also giving KJ 40% in her lifetime was super generous--why would one person get 40% and all 3 kids only 40%, that's approx. 13% each. Makes no sense to me. Of course, that 40% was really for the whole family, aka the cubs, but it was still way too generous, but they still want more. How can they want more than 40% What about the 3 kids??? The will shows Michael was too attached (maybe through guilt?) to KJ and her cubs, even though he had kept his distance over the years.
 
jamba said:
I don't see a big problem with KJ being named as a beneficiary. What I do have a problem with is her being named as first choice guardian b/c that puts the kids into the whole Jackson family madness that tore apart Michael. That I do not get why Michael did. Also giving KJ 40% in her lifetime was super generous--why would one person get 40% and all 3 kids only 40%, that's approx. 13% each. Makes no sense to me. Of course, that 40% was really for the whole family, aka the cubs, but it was still way too generous, but they still want more. How can they want more than 40% What about the 3 kids??? The will shows Michael was too attached (maybe through guilt?) to KJ and her cubs, even though he had kept his distance over the years.
Click to expand...

Kath was the only one I think he really felt loved by.

Kath isn't getting the full 40%, money from that 40% is used to cover for all her own expenses while alive, but she's never entitled to the full amount. When she passes the 40% goes back to PPB.
 
marebear said:
Maybe it's just me but I don't know why Janet or any jackson should be reimbursed for anything. Michael was family and that was his funeral. That's what family do. If it was the other way around Michael would never asked to be paid back. I am not saying I think it's true that janet delayed the burial but I can believe she wanted her money back. She could have said no that's okay. After all the money and help Michael gave to his whole family they couldn't do that for him? It doesn't seem right to me.
Click to expand...

true.
And, it also wasnt michael's idea to spend all that money on the funeral. Who knows if he would have wanted it that way? Maybe he just wanted a simple, private ceremony? But of course that would mean that you cant sell the live feed and such, so..... :ph34r:
 
marebear said:
I hope Vanity Fair doesn't retract the story because Janet wants them to. There is a guy with the book she should worry about. This is NOTHING to what Michael had to put up with. They are worried people think they are greedy and cold people? Too late.

Where were they to demand retraction or cancellation when somebody wanted to do a show on Michael's autopsy? Aaron carter's story or even when the man that killed their brother and son did some disgusting interview/documentary during the trial? They only put a big fight when it's about them. It's okay for people do trash Michael and nobody defends him. Not right.
Click to expand...

If Janet really want to put a stop to this rumour her money demands was the reason for delay, she should go after the source = Sullivan, not VF.

They don't care what has been said about Michael in tabloids or telly as long as it's not about them. It was the fans and the estate that made autopsy program to stop. When there is disgusting written about Michael in tabloids or on telly, just watch the family, they do ****** nothing. It is fans, the estate or other people who do something to defend Michael, but not that lousy family of his.


la_cienega said:
Kath was the only one I think he really felt loved by.
Click to expand...

and in my opinion, Katherine has abused that love Michael's felt for her.
 
Radar has a post Janet Jackson Did Not Delay Michael's Funeral, The Family Couldn't Agree On Burial Place
http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2012/10/janet-jackson-did-not-delay-michael-funeral

Snippet from it:
"It's just absolutely sad that there are those in the world who are still trying to exploit Michael Jackson by writing false books about his life and death," the source says. "The Jackson family has been through enough and Michael's kids should be remembered before these ridiculous and false stories are released. No, this family isn't perfect, and they have a lot of issues, make no mistake about that… It just doesn't help to rehash and rewrite history for sensational headlines and to make money."

Another hypocrite two-face statement from family:wacko:
They too to are trying exploit Michael by writing false books (at least 3 of them wrote book after MJ's death).
Jackson family has been through enough? They have created the whole mess, so they have to deal with consequences.
They too should remember Michael's kids when releasing ridiculous and false stories. They too should stop rehash and re-write the history, especially when it comes to Michael and how he felt about his family.
 
Lmao, I find Janet's desperation to silence the stories hilarious. What goes around comes around. The sooner the Jacksons learn that, the better for them.
 
Rhilo said:
Lmao, I find Janet's desperation to silence the stories hilarious. What goes around comes around. The sooner the Jacksons learn that, the better for them.
Click to expand...

I agree, as a matter of fact, she "probably" would have served herself better if she had just ignored the story. More and MORE folks are no longer believing her "good" Jackson shtick.

Since Michael's passing, a lot MORE folks know what time it is with certain members of the Jackson family (including myself), and that whole "Mommy Napping" thing certainly did not play in Miz Janet's favor.

As far as I'm concerned, she might as well save the cost of her attorney's time in writing any letters, that money would be better served in getting some type of mental health help for her brother Randy. Who's head is likely to explode, now that he has been ORDERED to give his deposition in the AEG case.
 
What a waste of time reading that article was - the info in this forum is more intelligent and informed. I agree with pug, it seems to be written to support mrs j and her lawyers, i notice thome gets off lightly so he's probaby a source for the book. And any reporter that calls oxman 'shrewd' is clearly not the brightest bulb in the box. What is odd is that all the rubbish he seems to spout about the will and branca seems to come from perry sanders who i thought was meant to be a respected lawyer, ie not oxman - if randall is getting his theories from sanders then mrs j's lawyer seems just as deluded as everyone else in the jackson camp.

Every half-way informed poster here knows that mrs j doesn't inherit 40% of the estate and that the executors aren't stalling hoping she'll die before they have to shell out $100s of millions. And if branca wasn't working for mj, what law says he has to return the will and resign as executor? If mj wanted to override the will, he didn't need physical possession of it, he just had to write a new one. And who says an executor has to be a serving attorney, it can be anyone - ex-attorney, relative, friend etc. This randall guy makes a big thing of the executors having the power and control over mrs j's allowance, saying it's unusual. He just clearly has no idea of mrs j's history of disastrous business decisions and bankruptcy - he never once mentioned the estate paying the $6m moonie judgement against mrs j.

And the bit about aeg and sanders having a nuclear sized bomb re the executors and their dealings with aeg - how would a business relationship between the 2 be a conflict of interest - they had the tii deal to sort out. Suggesting the executors' relationship with aeg is the real reason they haven't joined in the wrongful death lawsuit is just idiotic. The lawsuit has simply no merit whatsoever as anyone who followed the murray trial would know and is just a bonanza for the lawyers. The whole article, and i imagine the rest of the book, is just so uninformed and no intelligence behind it - scary that these typeof reporters are given a platform.
 
OK so another non-researched, tabloidish book involving Michael's name is out. The problem is that when Sullivan trashes the family, Michael's name is included in the rubbish, so I get no pleasure in seeing him write truths/lies about the Jacksons. Even though he writes some lies about the Jacksons and show up their greed, the book still will not be good for Michael.

Here we have a person who uses all the information that came out in articles after the granny nappers episode, and he claims that insiders gave him that information. When Oxman is used as a Michael insider you know that you are going to get misinformation. Hopefully Sullivan will end up like Mann--being sued and losing everything, because even though part of his writings are true, there are gross lies written about other people. Maybe, victims are waiting for the book to come out before filing.
 
I believe that the delay in burial was in part because they couldn't decide where. But I also think Janet did want her money back. Even if the estate offered to reimburse her or she asked them to she should have said that's okay I don't need it. She is worth millions and that was her brother. He helped her and the whole family financially most of his life and I doubt anyone paid him back. It's the least they could have done for him.
 
^^Actually, in this one I believe Janet. I do not think she delayed the burial. What I think is that they were looking at where to bury him in order to ensure the most profit from the burial. I also think that Katherine wanted a private thing that excluded fans and the public, whereas the brothers wanted something elaborate to show off the Jackson importance, since Michael's importance was seen as their importance. At the same time there was the Jermaine angle where he pushed for Michael to be buried at Neverland in exchange for something from Colony Capital. I feel that it was Katherine's ideas vs the brothers that kept the burial at limbo. Then, once they realized that they did not have to pay for anything, they reached an agreement quickly where Katherine was able to do the private ceremony and then the public one was done which made the brothers happy. Of course Jermaine did not get his wish, but he got the public ceremony where he could show his connection to the great Michael Jackson.
 
I don't believe Janet delayed the burial either. I just believe that she wanted her money back eventually. The author of the book is probably twisting things around to make it look like she did. It doesn't sound like the book is too flattering to her or the rest of the family.
 
Last edited:
la_cienega said:
Kath was the only one I think he really felt loved by.

Kath isn't getting the full 40%, money from that 40% is used to cover for all her own expenses while alive, but she's never entitled to the full amount. When she passes the 40% goes back to PPB.
Click to expand...

I thought someone stated she was trying to get the 40% all at once, instead of in a stipend, and that was the reason for the request for the detailed audit of the Estate. (??) I still think 40% during her lifetime, even if it is in the form of a stipend, is generous. If she lives another 10 years, 40% is a lot. Prince and Paris and Blanket get 13.3% each (while KJ is alive), subject to the restrictions in the will as far as the age at which they receive their funds.

In 10 years, Prince will be 25, right? Paris will be 24. I realize they will be well taken care of, assuming the Estate clears the debts and continues to generate funds, but their individual share is considerably less than KJ's, while she lives. That was my point. Michael was generous to KJ and yet some are still not satisfied.
 
jamba said:
I thought someone stated she was trying to get the 40% all at once, instead of in a stipend, and that was the reason for the request for the detailed audit of the Estate. (??) I still think 40% during her lifetime, even if it is in the form of a stipend, is generous. If she lives another 10 years, 40% is a lot. Prince and Paris and Blanket get 13.3% each (while KJ is alive), subject to the restrictions in the will as far as the age at which they receive their funds.

In 10 years, Prince will be 25, right? Paris will be 24. I realize they will be well taken care of, assuming the Estate clears the debts and continues to generate funds, but their individual share is considerably less than KJ's, while she lives. That was my point. Michael was generous to KJ and yet some are still not satisfied.
Click to expand...


she won't get the 40%. 40% is put aside to use what is needed to care for her.

Let me make it really clear. Imagine that Michael's assets is 100 Million. 40% means 40 Million. Katherine won't get 40 million. What would happen that 40 Million would be put to an account and Katherine would be paid whatever is necessary for her care and living conditions - let's say $50,000 a month or $600,000 a year. When she dies whatever is left from the 40 Million is going to go to Michael's kids.
 
Vanity Fair responds to Janets letter:

"Vanity Fair stands by Randall Sullivan’s assertion that Janet Jackson’s demand to be reimbursed for her deposit on her brother’s burial plot was one of the reasons Michael Jackson’s funeral was delayed. Sullivan's sources told him that the amount of the deposit was $40,000, but records released last week indicate that the amount of the deposit was $49,000. Vanity Fair will make that correction on VF.com."


So, VF is not backing down, whats gonna happen now?


http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/janet-jacksons-lawyer-responds-vanity-377666
 
Wow..VF isn't biting. Janet Jackson has officially lost her Hollywood clout. Yikes.

if she is smart...she will sue. But I am one of those who believes that she might be in some type of financial strain. Waiting for the other shoe to drop...


Vanity Unfair is lying about "records released last weeks" .....those records have been out for over 2 years. Sullivan was too busy copy-pasting to do any type of research.
 
Memefan said:
Wow..VF isn't biting. Janet Jackson has officially lost her Hollywood clout. Yikes.

if she is smart...she will sue. But I am one of those who believes that she might be in some type of financial strain. Waiting for the other shoe to drop...
Click to expand...

Janet needs to sue. She doesn't have any other choice, in my opinion. If she ignores this, it's only going to get worse for her because that book is coming out soon. She doesn't need any more public relations disasters after everything that's happened with the Jackson family in the last few months.
 
I don't think she is going to sue Vanity Fair or Sullivan. If the she wanted she would have sued either or both of them by now, and try to stop Sullivan from publishing his book, or at least remove part of Janet of it. Whats the point suing someone after the book is made public and there is more garbage of Janet, if she could have sued him before the book is out? To me it doesn't make sense. Didn't Michael sue Victor G before the book was out and it wasn't published at least in US?

Anyways, she doesn't mind that her dear mother and sister in this book are practically described as grave robbers, Katherine calling to nanny where is the money, LaToya emptying everything out of the house, as long herself it not described greedy?
 
Last edited:
ivy said:
she won't get the 40%. 40% is put aside to use what is needed to care for her.

Let me make it really clear. Imagine that Michael's assets is 100 Million. 40% means 40 Million. Katherine won't get 40 million. What would happen that 40 Million would be put to an account and Katherine would be paid whatever is necessary for her care and living conditions - let's say $50,000 a month or $600,000 a year. When she dies whatever is left from the 40 Million is going to go to Michael's kids.
Click to expand...

I was thinking if they do that audit and see there is a certain amount of money. Could it be that Katherine is looking even bigger monthly allowance saying that as there is so much money, her allowance should be increased?
 
Bonnie Blue said:
Every half-way informed poster here knows that mrs j doesn't inherit 40% of the estate and that the executors aren't stalling hoping she'll die before they have to shell out $100s of millions. And if branca wasn't working for mj, what law says he has to return the will and resign as executor? If mj wanted to override the will, he didn't need physical possession of it, he just had to write a new one. And who says an executor has to be a serving attorney, it can be anyone - ex-attorney, relative, friend etc. This randall guy makes a big thing of the executors having the power and control over mrs j's allowance, saying it's unusual. He just clearly has no idea of mrs j's history of disastrous business decisions and bankruptcy - he never once mentioned the estate paying the $6m moonie judgement against mrs j.
Click to expand...

I agree with your post. Sullivan should have paid visit here and consult with us before publishing his book:D

Excellent point you make there that executor doesn't have to be current attorney, it could be anyone that Michael named.
Jackson's seemed to have a thick scull, and don't understand the simple thing that if Michael hated executors, why he never did a new will? The way Jackson's described Michael's hate towards Branca, I would have thought Michael marched straight to the other law firm and asked them to make another will, but obviously he didn't as no other law firm supplied newer one.

I'm not sure if I'm right about this but aren't all law firms are required to keep copies of their paperwork (customers) for 7 years?

I didn't pay attention to that part about Sullivan making big deal out of executors being on control of K allowance. Isn't that a normal thing when there is an estate, executors and beneficiaries?
 
Bubs said:
Didn't Michael sue Victor G before the book was out and it wasn't published at least in US?
Click to expand...


Michael did not sue VG because of his book. Michael sued VG because of his claims in interviews that he saw and possessed a video tape in which Michael was seen molesting his nephew, Jeremy. The problem with suing journalists in the US is that they are so much protected by the law. Such as with the Shield Law which says no journalist can be compelled to reveal his sources in court. This means in practice that they can say they got a certain info from an unnamed source and they cannot be forced in court to reveal who that source was - or if the source exists at all, or they just made up that info. This basically gives a licence to lie to journalists as it becomes very difficult to win a lawsuit against a journalist. All the journalist will have to do in court is to hide behind the Shield Law and say he's not willing to reveal his source - and so no one ever will know if his source is credible or if it is existing at all.

The reason why Michael was able to win against VG for his claim was because VG made the mistake of claiming that the mother of Jeremy (Margaret Maldonado) saw and possessed the tape and then Margaret could be called to testify and she said none of it was true and she did not ever meet VG. Had VG said his source was unnamed it would have been a lot more difficult to win against him.

If Sullivan's "sources" are unidentified and those sources cannot be called to confirm or deny the story, then it is very difficult for Janet to sue him and to win against him.
 
I don't believe Janet would sue. It would just open her up to MORE revelations, that I'm sure she doesn't want to expose.

For one, homegirl would HAVE TO sit down for a deposition (along with any member of her family that was involved with Michael's funeral). A deposition that Vanity Fair "could" leak to the public if they wanted to.

They would be free to ask Janet anything they wanted to ask her (along with any member of her family that was involved with Michael's funeral) and as we all know by now, Miz Jackson is very private when it comes to her own life. It's talking about Michael that she apparently has no problem with. Herself = No Way!

The pressure would be too much for her, she would end up in a mental ward, right along side her brother Randy.
 
Janet won’t sue she is bluffing and trying to play hardball after the press exposed her trying to bully and control Paris. The granny napping incident really embarrassed her and tarnished her public image. She hasn’t been on any talk shows or granted any interviews because she doesn’t want to answer questions about her anger issues. My perception of Janet is that she is mean. She is a very frustrated, angry, deceptive woman who is desperately trying to hold on to what little career she still has and preserve her image as MJ’s loving little sister. She needs to give it up because her cover is blown.
 
Victory22 said:
She needs to give it up because her cover is blown.
Click to expand...

True dat!

The minute she teamed up with her brother Randy, signed that foolish letter, got caught on security video trying to snatch Paris' phone, and being a part of the Mommy Napping caper, she put the final nails in her career coffin, in my opinion.

Even IF she had something to promote, she will not be able to avoid the above. And, in my opinion, if she says before hand she will not be answering any questions regarding the above, they will tell her to take a hike. LOL!
 
LA TOYA JACKSON
I Didn't LOOT MJ's House
Threatens Lawsuit
EXCLUSIVE
La Toya Jackson insists ... she did not raid Michael Jackson's home just hours after his death, pillaging plastic bags filled with cash -- and now, she's threatening to sue a major magazine for saying otherwise.

La Toya has fired off a cease-and-desist letter to Vanity Fair, claiming its recent article entitled "Estate of Siege" is "replete with misstatements of fact, false innuendos, and defamatory insinuations."

According to La Toya's letter, the article falsely claims she showed up at MJ's Carolwood mansion shortly after his death and loaded plastic bags filled with cash into a duffel bag. The VF article goes on to describe La Toya's bf leaving the home in a moving van.

La Toya claims the article describes her visit as a "mad scramble for money" -- strongly insinuating she stole large sums of cash from MJ's house.

According to La Toya ... the allegations are nothing but lies and she wants a full retraction asap.

If Vanity Fair doesn't oblige, La Toya says she'll sue.:hysterical:


Read more: http://www.tmz.com/2012/10/11/la-to...ath-loot-home-cash-vanity-fair/#ixzz290a8TSgn
 
Bubs said:
If Vanity Fair doesn't oblige, La Toya says she'll sue.:hysterical:
Click to expand...

Good, let her sue.

Maybe she and Janet can share an attorney to cut down on cost. LOL!

Think a deposition of Janet would be bad, just think of Ms. LaToya sitting down for a deposition. That would be a straight up hoot.

They would bust her for all the LIES she has told over the year's, starting with the lie regarding Michael, which she NOW claims she was "forced" to do. A deposition might also bring out HOW & WHY her so-called business partner got his hand's on Michael's private family videos (which was mentioned in the book recently written by the dude from the failed MJ Forever Tribute Concert).

Man, I hope they BOTH sue. Especially LaToya, I would LOVE to see her on the hot seat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top