Latest on MJJC

Debbie Rowe Wants Michael Jackson's Kids Back -- Going To Court for Custody

^^LastTear that child did not like the school since she went in, so even if that could be the cause, wouldn't Debbie know this long ago. Paris has been in school for some time now. Well since Debbie who likes to give information in social media is being quiet, maybe she wants this story to be out there. I guess we will find out soon enough what brought on this new tackiness. Every time something is going well for Michael some mess happens by one or more of the people he knew!!!

Bubs what I see you are trying to do is to throw out for discussion why Debbie came up with this stuff now, since this man was always a part of her life. He could have told her to do this way before, at least right after the kidnapping was the best time. I see no problem with discussing this. The reality is that each effect has a cause, so obviously something happened to cause this. It could be due to a disagreement, people wanting publicity, people wanting to threaten someone, and on and on.

I have my own curiosities, such as why did the brothers respond to this foolishness? They have been quiet when people say worse things about Michael or when that paper wrote that nasty story about Blanket. Why did this story cause them to respond?
 
Debbie's engagement to Marc Shaffel doesn't concern me. What does concern me is the well-being of Prince, Paris, and Blanket. If I'm correct, The two children were told that Debbie was their biological mother after Michael passed? Hopefully, the fans can tell me if this is true or not. I personally believe that Debbie waited too long to take these children. If she TRUTHFULLY wanted these children, she would have taken them when they were real little. Not waited until they about fully grown.
 
^^I don't think Debbie really wants these children. I think this story is to serve some specific purpose--what it is I do not know.
 
Tammy86 said:
Debbie's engagement to Marc Shaffel doesn't concern me. What does concern me is the well-being of Prince, Paris, and Blanket. If I'm correct, The two children were told that Debbie was their biological mother after Michael passed? Hopefully, the fans can tell me if this is true or not. I personally believe that Debbie waited too long to take these children. If she TRUTHFULLY wanted these children, she would have taken them when they were real little. Not waited until they about fully grown.
Click to expand...

We were not there. We don't know what they were told
 
Petrarose said:
^^I don't think Debbie really wants these children. I think this story is to serve some specific purpose--what it is I do not know.
Click to expand...

That's it what I think, and I leave the whole thing until we'll get more info what the hell is going on.

Ps, big thanks Petra for understanding what I was after.
 
If there is a purpose other then what we are talking about address that issue. You don't have to go to the rags to get something addressed. That's like Jermaine singing word to the bad to get Michael to call him
 
I don't believe the kids are going anywhere. Even if they allow Blanket to go with them, he is not going to want to live with Debbie. This is nonsense. No matter what has happened since Michael died, those kids love Katherine and they have made a family with her. I would rather they go live with Diana Ross in the worst case scenario since Michael did pick her as second choice guardian for his kids. He NEVER picked Debbie and that says a lot to me.
 
The kids are not going anywhere. I don't believe she wants them. This IMO proves how unstable she is
 
question, why is blanket being brought up? blanket is not debbie's kid. so we dont have to worry about debbie trying to take blanket also. I also don't think prince and paris are going anywhere. they are practically adults and prince doesn't even like debbie.
 
Petrarose said:
^^LastTear that child did not like the school since she went in, so even if that could be the cause, wouldn't Debbie know this long ago. Paris has been in school for some time now. Well since Debbie who likes to give information in social media is being quiet, maybe she wants this story to be out there. I guess we will find out soon enough what brought on this new tackiness. Every time something is going well for Michael some mess happens by one or more of the people he knew!!!

Bubs what I see you are trying to do is to throw out for discussion why Debbie came up with this stuff now, since this man was always a part of her life. He could have told her to do this way before, at least right after the kidnapping was the best time. I see no problem with discussing this. The reality is that each effect has a cause, so obviously something happened to cause this. It could be due to a disagreement, people wanting publicity, people wanting to threaten someone, and on and on.

I have my own curiosities, such as why did the brothers respond to this foolishness? They have been quiet when people say worse things about Michael or when that paper wrote that nasty story about Blanket. Why did this story cause them to respond?
Click to expand...

True but it's maybe more to do with Paris making progress.

I also understood Bubs, I asked the question whether Schaffel has remained in Debbie's life since she thought and testified to him being a crook who saw her as a commodity. Have they stayed close the whole time or did they kiss and make up after Michael passed.
 
michaeljackson&lisamarie said:
question, why is blanket being brought up? blanket is not debbie's kid. so we dont have to worry about debbie trying to take blanket also. I also don't think prince and paris are going anywhere. they are practically adults and prince doesn't even like debbie.
Click to expand...

Because it would be very unlikely that a court would separate the children.
 
LastTear said:
Because it would be very unlikely that a court would separate the children.
Click to expand...

I see, well again I don't think we have anything to worry about regarding her taking the kids. what I'm worried about is her putting BS in paris's head. prince seems like the really strong one, but paris seems like she may be easily manipulated right now.
 
I think Debbie will soon give a dementi, off course exclusivley on TMZ.
 
Tammy86 said:
Debbie's engagement to Marc Shaffel doesn't concern me. What does concern me is the well-being of Prince, Paris, and Blanket. If I'm correct, The two children were told that Debbie was their biological mother after Michael passed? Hopefully, the fans can tell me if this is true or not. I personally believe that Debbie waited too long to take these children. If she TRUTHFULLY wanted these children, she would have taken them when they were real little. Not waited until they about fully
grown.
Click to expand...

The kids had a relationship with debbie years ago. they used to see her
 
I thought Debbie denied that story about her engagement?

Re Sullivan's book--I find it hard to give much credence to that book. It was IMO very poorly put together. For example, any decent book should have an index, so you can find things. That is one huge book and so unless you took notes, there is no way to find anything. There is so much misinformation in there it's pretty worthless as a source. Sullivan SAYS x, y. z said this and that--but he is not credible as a source IMO. The things that is interesting about the book is the Tohme stuff, but again how reliable is what Sullivan says Tohme says? The fact that Sullivan repeats the lie that MJ was booed at the WMA in 06 just proves to me that his book was put together in a very sloppy, unresearched way, except for the info he got from T. Mez. And apparently he must have had T Mez check it so that any errors were caught--but I don't know that for sure, just guessing from T Mez's huge endorsement.

Re Debbie and this claim from TMZ. First, whatever TMZ says Debbie says/thinks/does has not been confirmed. BUT if it is correct that Debbie doesn't like the environment for the kids at KJ's house, well, how can anyone not agree with that? The kids were thrust in front of the media practically from Day One, and that only stopped fairly recently after Paris' suicide attempt, which in itself is a sign that the environment she was in was making her unbelievably unhappy. Look at the recent appeal KJ made to fans to give $$ for her MJ DVD. Who was on it saying Dad never got around to teaching me the moonwalk? From reports, TJ lives 2 hours away and has a bunch of his own kids, going on tour promoting his career, so why he is co-guardian is beyond me. I agree that KJ is too old. I also hate that the kids were not/are not able to live with Kenya, the dog that MJ go for them when he was in Las Vegas.

The granny-napping was not a prank to be overlooked, but the judge did overlook it after the ridiculous cover-up presented by KJ that the TV and phone did not work in her room at a high-end spa. Give me a break. Can we recall that KJ called and fired all the security and that Janet's new security showed up and wanted in? Imagine what would have happened--the kids would have been kidnapped too--no doubt in my mind that's what they were after.

Also from all accounts the kids are being raised by staff, basically, as KJ is too old and goes to her quarters etc. Paris was very lonely and on her own. Prince seems to have little if any supervision or discipline. I do not think this permissive, deprived (in terms of social life and culture and parental/guardian contact and love) is what MJ would have wanted.

If Debbie wants to file for guardianship, she has this right and IDK her motivations so I will not judge her b/c she just may have true concern for the kids but again I do not know for sure but I will not rule it out.
 
Jamba, re the engagement, Debbie called it in to TMZ, they released her taped phone call.

The custody issue has not been confirmed though. I agree with you re the children with Katherine, however I doubt they will be better off with Debbie especially given her engagement to Shaffel.
 
LastTear said:
True but it's maybe more to do with Paris making progress.

I also understood Bubs, I asked the question whether Schaffel has remained in Debbie's life since she thought and testified to him being a crook who saw her as a commodity. Have they stayed close the whole time or did they kiss and make up after Michael passed.
Click to expand...

They've been BFF's since 2003, before and after she testified at the trial to how much of a scum bag he is. I've always scratched my head over that one!
 
Petrarose said:
I agree with you here, if this story is true. Debbie knew about all the behaviors of the family members since 09. She warned Katherine to keep Joe away. She knew about the kidnapping, Paris' emotional state and did not seek custody then. Something must have happened recently that made her change her mind, if this story is true. She had Marc in her ear since 09 too, so what happened recently to cause this? Why wait still the oldest child is almost 18 to make these claims. The thing is just not making sense.
Click to expand...

People are really looking for "sense" in Debbie Rowe's actions? What sense there is in her hanging out with Marc Schaffel then? A person whom she called a vulture on the stand in 2005. Now she says she's getting married to him. Or what sense there is in her posting pics to TMZ about her daughter? Also reading some of her tweets in the past I always had the feeling that something is just not right with her mentally.
 
Petrarose said:
Bubs what I see you are trying to do is to throw out for discussion why Debbie came up with this stuff now, since this man was always a part of her life. He could have told her to do this way before, at least right after the kidnapping was the best time. I see no problem with discussing this. The reality is that each effect has a cause, so obviously something happened to cause this. It could be due to a disagreement, people wanting publicity, people wanting to threaten someone, and on and on.
Click to expand...

There could be about a million answers to the question why now - and 99% of those answers could have nothing to do with the Jacksons, but - for example - with Debbie's own financial situation. The automatic answer is not that it's the Jacksons' fault. Debbie's alleged complaints does not include anything serious, so to make up scenarios about how horribly the Jacksons must treat the kids for Debbie to threaten them is just wrong at this point.

A reminder: Debbie also did threaten Michael with custody battles from time to time. And I think we all agree that Michael was a great dad. So why did Debbie threaten him? Well, she always threatened him when the money flow from Michael to her dried up. Once Michael paid, all her so called "concerns" about the kids were gone again. Debbie is this kind of person, so I'd say it's more to do with money and/or attention seeking again than anything wrong in the Jackson household.
 
Tammy86 said:
If I'm correct, The two children were told that Debbie was their biological mother after Michael passed?
Click to expand...

Since there are family photos with MJ, Debbie and the kids, it's safe to say they always knew Debbie was their mother.
 
jamba said:
I thought Debbie denied that story about her engagement?

Re Sullivan's book--I find it hard to give much credence to that book. It was IMO very poorly put together. For example, any decent book should have an index, so you can find things. That is one huge book and so unless you took notes, there is no way to find anything. There is so much misinformation in there it's pretty worthless as a source. Sullivan SAYS x, y. z said this and that--but he is not credible as a source IMO. The things that is interesting about the book is the Tohme stuff, but again how reliable is what Sullivan says Tohme says? The fact that Sullivan repeats the lie that MJ was booed at the WMA in 06 just proves to me that his book was put together in a very sloppy, unresearched way, except for the info he got from T. Mez. And apparently he must have had T Mez check it so that any errors were caught--but I don't know that for sure, just guessing from T Mez's huge endorsement.
Click to expand...

I told this already, but then again: Sullivan is a crap journalist and his book is trash. We all agree about that. However no matter how crappy journalist you are you cannot just say "X said that" or "Y told me" because if X or Y didn't really tell you that then X and Y will sue your pants off. When journalists want to make up a quote they will just put it out as "a source said that..." That way they avoid responsibility to prove the existence of their source and the quote itself, because as per the Shield Law they cannot be forced to reveal their sources. So they can make up non existent sources and quotes this way. But once you name someone as your source that's a totally different matter because then you cannot just make up a quote by that person or else you open yourself up to lawsuits. Sullivan is not a great journalist but having worked for Rolling Stone I'm sure he knows this basic rule. And neither Schaffel or Mann or anyone else sued him claiming that they did not say what he claimed they told him.

It's another issue that Sullivan is unable or unwilling to vet the information he gets from various sources, esp. if they are salacious, and he tends to just run with them and give every lie credit without background checking them. It's yet another problem that he uses tabloids as legit sources about MJ. And yet another problem that he makes totally wrong conclusions from all the mess he collected together in his book. And yes the book is messy, not well referenced and not well written. Those are all huge problems with his book, but when he names a source it means he most probably did talk to that source and that source did tell him those things - otherwise he would open himself up to lawsuits.

Re Debbie and this claim from TMZ. First, whatever TMZ says Debbie says/thinks/does has not been confirmed. BUT if it is correct that Debbie doesn't like the environment for the kids at KJ's house, well, how can anyone not agree with that?
Click to expand...

So you think the kids would be better off living with a person like Marc Schaffel? Regardless of whether you believe he told that thing to Sullivan or not, I can bring you more stuff about him that he did to Michael. From the court documents in 2006, for example. Do you want to know about the horrible lies he made up about Michael just to try to blackmail him into a settlement? And what about Debbie Rowe sending pics to TMZ and tipping off tabloids about Paris? How is that any better than what the Jacksons do? Concerned mother, my a**.
 
Last edited:
I just think that the timing for this is really peculiar. Prince and Paris both are almost 18.... why now? I hope their inheritance isn't a motivating factor. :unsure:

How she talks about Prince lol... He's a teenager, it's pretty standard teenage behavior to start to become rebellious. It's too late to "get him back in line", he's practically a grown man now lol. This whole thing just strikes me as really weird. I've never thought that Debbie didn't care and I hate to say it but... this looks a wee bit predatory honestly.
 
Michael got full custody of the kids and DR agreed, ok. Why not seeking visitations when they were growing up? Prince not wanting to do anything with her says a lot if this crap were true. Little too late to be a mother for them.
 
Gold Pants Girl said:
They've been BFF's since 2003, before and after she testified at the trial to how much of a scum bag he is. I've always scratched my head over that one!
Click to expand...

How did she call him a vulture in the 2005 trial if they were friends? :scratch: Then Deborah is not only a backstabber, a two face as well.
 
Last edited:
respect77 said:
There could be about a million answers to the question why now - and 99% of those answers could have nothing to do with the Jacksons, but - for example - with Debbie's own financial situation. The automatic answer is not that it's the Jacksons' fault. Debbie's alleged complaints does not include anything serious, so to make up scenarios about how horribly the Jacksons must treat the kids for Debbie to threaten them is just wrong at this point.

A reminder: Debbie also did threaten Michael with custody battles from time to time. And I think we all agree that Michael was a great dad. So why did Debbie threaten him? Well, she always threatened him when the money flow from Michael to her dried up. Once Michael paid, all her so called "concerns" about the kids were gone again. Debbie is this kind of person, so I'd say it's more to do with money and/or attention seeking again than anything wrong in the Jackson household.
Click to expand...

She did more than threaten him, and whilst I will always appreciate her testimony in '05 I equally won't forget that while Michael was fighting for his innocence she started a custody battle.
 
This reaffirms my personal belief that Deborah is shady and possibly even nutty af. There was a reason Michael had nothing to do with her, and cut her off of his and his children's lives. He wasn't being selfish or a control freak, but he knew. I truly believe he knew she wasn't stable enough to deal with him. Those children were everything to him, but he went the wrong way to get them imo. But then again it is easy for me as an outsider to look in from the outside and judge, I never walked in his shoes neither did I live his life. I just wish he'd still be here to protect what he loved the most- because he did an amazing job at protecting his children - his babies. He was their shield/wall.

Nobody dared to **** around while he was still here. I know it would break his heart more than any allegations ever did, if he were here to witness whatever his children had to go thru since his demise.
 
respect77 said:
Since there are family photos with MJ, Debbie and the kids, it's safe to say they always knew Debbie was their mother.
Click to expand...

No, growing up they did not know debbie was their mother. debbie wasn't even in their lives at all anymore. once michael divorced debbie that was it. he did not want her anywhere near them. he saw her for what she truely is. the only time debbie was back in their lives was when she got her visitation rights back. michael had no choice but to let the kids see her. and they only saw her a few times. that's was it and she was gone again. michael would tell prince and paris that debbie was just a friend of his when he would send them to go see her. he wouldn't tell them that she was their mother. and debbie didn't come back into the picture until after michael's death.

also there only photos of them together when prince and paris were babies. that was the only time she was around. and they were babies. so they didn't know who the heck she was and michael wanted to keep it that way after the divorce.
 
Last edited:
I am still wondering what brought on this story and what her motivations are. Why did she/Shaffel or both call this story into TMZ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top