guys guys guys please stop with "true fan" or not posts. Remember regardless of difference of opinions you are expected to respect fellow members.
That said, let's do a recap
1. Klein wasn't necessarily that close to Michael. On TMZ Live he said he didn't see Michael at all during the trial time and that he didn't start seeing him until he came to LA. He also didn't see Michael at May 09. When added together you see that he didn't see Michael between 05-09.
2. He's writing a book.
3. His posts on Facebook is mainly copy - paste's from blogs on the Internet.
4. He has questionable actions. For example recently he said he didn't confirm that Michael was gay and he only confirmed that Jason said he had a relationship with Michael. So it basically means Jason goes to Klein and says " I had a relationship with Michael" and Klein accepts this no questions asked. He doesn't question it at all. Sorry but that's no friendship.
5. When you add the Jason's blog posts into the mix I believe that the people that Klein is attacking (Levin from TMZ and Weitzman & Branca) is most probably isn't taking his calls as Jason says and it's partially reason for this outcry. We know that Estate didn't pay Klein's creditor claims and Levin from TMZ cut Klein of during their live exchange about the gay rumors.
If you don't know. Harvey is gay but kept it as a secret for sometime as he feared that it would affect his career. When the gay rumors about Michael came out and Klein was calling TMZ Live , Levin said to Klein "even true Michael wouldn't want to be outed". I kinda felt that this was his personal experience speaking and then Klein responded to him about Michael being a (not exact words) "repressed black man" (meaning he wouldn't be able to accept and embrace being gay) , Harvey was clearly annoyed (because it's insulting to gay as well as black people) and hung up the phone on Klein.
6. I personally do not think Klein has any "evidence" about the will either because when mentioning the 2002 will he says "I was in New York and I saw no notaries". We all already know there was no notaries as there was no notary signature. What you might not know is that notaries do not generally notarize wills. Because notary and notarization only means "this person signed this document in front of me". As the wills have witnesses seeing the person sign the will, this element is satisfied. There's a separate document that is known as "self-proving affidavit" - which is basically a document/statement that says "I signed my will on this date willingly with these people as witnesses" and notarized. However neither California nor New York requires a "self-proving affidavit" with the wills. So Klein's claims "no notaries was present in 2002" is totally irrelevant to the validity of the will.
ray: .... 
