HTWF: "Hijacking the Jackson estate"

Tiny Bird · Jun 8, 2010

ivy said:
could you please provide the links to the full file rather than just one page, it should also state that Michael never asked her to register those domain names and I'll be able to provide details if I can see the whole document

I do not think there is a full file. This is where I got the page:
http://healtheworld.tv/twin-video-docs.htm

ivy · Jun 8, 2010

Tiny Bird said:
I do not think there is a full file. This is where I got the page:
http://healtheworld.tv/twin-video-docs.htm

apparently she's only disclosing what fits her purpose.. (it has got nothing to do with you)..

blueocean · Jun 9, 2010

marc_vivien said:
Branca is named in the will as executor. He's not important that he was fired or not, he had the will in his possession or not. He is named in the will as executor.

if MJ was not happy with him, he would have written an other will or a codicil naming others executors. He had 7 years to do it. Others lawyers worked for him.

The way we see it, we kbow branca is in the will . not only did michael fire branca michael had him investigated for off shore accounts and he was working against michael for sony and branca tryed to get michael to file for bankruptcy in 2006. we believe there had to be another will , michael did not trust branca and we believe that branca and team are in on michael death. we want real justice for michael, there are fans and others that are doing there homework on these matters ir, we think the will is a fraud we dont believe michael would have keep branca in the will when michael thought branca was working against him.

PaceMioDolceCuore · Jun 9, 2010

blueocean said:
The way we see it, we kbow branca is in the will . not only did michael fire branca michael had him investigated for off shore accounts and he was working against michael for sony and branca tryed to get michael to file for bankruptcy in 2006. we believe there had to be another will , michael did not trust branca and we believe that branca and team are in on michael death. we want real justice for michael, there are fans and others that are doing there homework on these matters ir, we think the will is a fraud we dont believe michael would have keep branca in the will when michael thought branca was working against him.

What homework? All I hear is the prayerlike repetition of "Branca was fired for embezzlement" and the whole LA/NY signature deal.
If Michael was so concerned (and I know I would have a hard regaining trust) than he simply would have appointed another lawyer setting up a new will and lawyers would now about another will, just in case. I was actually surprised that only one will was brought out, I expected something more contested. MJ wasn't naive.
All I hear is the constant "the will is fraud" but I have yet to see any evidence, just hearsay. I do find it strange there there was no newer will- especially after the 2005 trial. But as pointed out Michael had time since 2002 to make sure that Branca would never ever get a hand in this EVER again if he chose so.

And who is "we", I wished people would be exact. Who did what homework and what exactly was the result aside from the same 2 things repeated religiously in 500000 youtube videos?

blueocean · Jun 9, 2010

Modulation Alert said:
What homework? All I hear is the prayerlike repetition of "Branca was fired for embezzlement" and the whole LA/NY signature deal.
If Michael was so concerned (and I know I would have a hard regaining trust) than he simply would have appointed another lawyer setting up a new will and lawyers would now about another will, just in case. I was actually surprised that only one will was brought out, I expected something more contested. MJ wasn't naive.
All I hear is the constant "the will is fraud" but I have yet to see any evidence, just hearsay. I do find it strange there there was no newer will- especially after the 2005 trial. But as pointed out Michael had time since 2002 to make sure that Branca would never ever get a hand in this EVER again if he chose so.

And who is "we", I wished people would be exact. Who did what homework and what exactly was the result aside from the same 2 things repeated religiously in 500000 youtube videos?

Appointing another lawyer setting up a new will, thats what we think he did do, as I said we believe branca and team were in with dr murray, we believe dr thome thome hired branca and said michael hired him back dont believe that.and if there were another will as we believe they were not going to use that one, branca had forged michael signature thats what we believe I guess they did not know that michael was in new york when branca updated the will. malnik I had herd at one time say he had a new will, but he was involved with branca when the investigation was going on dont trust him.

ivy · Jun 9, 2010

^^
Branca's rehiring letter is filed with the court, so believe it or not it's the truth.. Plus Tohme couldn't rehire Branca as he was fired before June.

If there's another will where is it? Don't forget a will requires 1 lawyer to prepare, 3 witnesses to sign and somewhere between 1-3 executors.. that means if there was a newer will 5 to 7 people know about it. So where's the will? Where are these people?

and plus legally you are required to file a will within 30 days of the death of the person. If somebody had a will/ knew about a will they would have said so within a month..

Ashtanga · Jun 9, 2010

Well, Michael made the Will in 1995 and finished the 2002 document. Ok...

For me it's really impossible to think that Michael was 6 years and some months (2002-2009) without looking at the will and make changes. I'm sure this was changed thousands of times over the years.

earth child · Jun 9, 2010

ivy said:
^^
Branca's rehiring letter is filed with the court, so believe it or not it's the truth.. Plus Tohme couldn't rehire Branca as he was fired before June.

If there's another will where is it? Don't forget a will requires 1 lawyer to prepare, 3 witnesses to sign and somewhere between 1-3 executors.. that means if there was a newer will 5 to 7 people know about it. So where's the will? Where are these people?

and plus legally you are required to file a will within 30 days of the death of the person. If somebody had a will/ knew about a will they would have said so within a month..

If there is a letter rehiring Branca filed with the court, it should be part of the public record, so where is it? If Tohme was truly fired as the "story" goes, why was he the one doing the press conference at the hospital, and following MJ's body to the helicopter? Didn't look to me like Frank or anyone else stepped into tell him he shouldn't be there?

As far as there being another will, if there was proof, it has been well hidden! Big money and power are capable of covering up anything. They threaten and buy people off and just because none has yet surfaced, doesn't prove there isn't any.

Things just don't add up to a clear picture, so I look with my own eye and conclude what seem logical instead of just buying into the story that is fed out through the media. Being a Michael Jackson fan, I learned that lesson years ago!

Ashtanga · Jun 9, 2010

earth child said:
If there is a letter rehiring Branca filed with the court, it should be part of the public record, so where is it?

It really is a great miracle that never leaked.

earth child said:
and following MJ's body to the helicopter?

I never was sure about who that was man. :scratch:

earth child said:
Things just don't add up to a clear picture, so I look with my own eye and conclude what seem logical instead of just buying into the story that is fed out through the media. Being a Michael Jackson fan, I learned that lesson years ago!

100% :agree:

jrsfan · Jun 9, 2010

earth child said:
If there is a letter rehiring Branca filed with the court, it should be part of the public record, so where is it? If Tohme was truly fired as the "story" goes, why was he the one doing the press conference at the hospital, and following MJ's body to the helicopter? Didn't look to me like Frank or anyone else stepped into tell him he shouldn't be there?

As far as there being another will, if there was proof, it has been well hidden! Big money and power are capable of covering up anything. They threaten and buy people off and just because none has yet surfaced, doesn't prove there isn't any.

Things just don't add up to a clear picture, so I look with my own eye and conclude what seem logical instead of just buying into the story that is fed out through the media. Being a Michael Jackson fan, I learned that lesson years ago!

The letter is with the 97 will we have never seen & Malnik's will of Michael Jackson.

Apparently, Michael Jackson's signature has been forged before:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,59085,00.html

*****'s Defense: Was His Signature Forged?

Tuesday, July 30, 2002
By Roger Friedman function farkItButton(h, u, s) { if (!IsDef(h)) { if (IsDef(window.fark_headline)) { h = window.fark_headline; } else { h = ''; } } u = unescape(location.href); var img = 'FarkItButton2_16x16.gif'; imgw = 16; imgh = 16; document.write('

'); } function IsDef(variable) { return (!(!( variable||false ))) } function GetThis(T, C, U, L) { var targetUrl = 'http://www.myspace.com/Modules/PostTo/Pages/?' + 't=' + encodeURIComponent(T) + '&c=' + encodeURIComponent(C) + '&u=' + encodeURIComponent(U) + '&l=' + L; window.open(targetUrl); }

Michael Jackson | Liv Tyler
*****'s Defense: Was His Signature Forged?
So what does Michael Jackson say about the $13 million lawsuit filed by former business manager Myung-Ho Lee?
He says in a sworn statement included in court papers that he never signed an agreement last September promising that he would pay Lee the money. His assistant says the same thing in another document and another affidavit, by a bodyguard, swears that Jackson was traveling on Sept. 14 and was not in Los Angeles at all.
Lee says that he and Jackson met in Los Angeles on Sept. 14 and that Michael signed a piece of paper admitting that he owed Lee nearly $14 million. No lawyers were present.
First, Jackson: "I specifically looked at the signature that appears at the end of this document above my typed name. This is not my signature. I did not sign this document and have never seen [it] until a few weeks ago. I would never knowingly sign a document that expressly required me to pay over $13 million to Mr. Lee or anyone else, alone in a room and without review and counsel by one or more of my attorneys."

If you remember, Jackson was in New York on the morning of Sept. 11, having just completed the second of his two anniversary concerts.
When he heard that the World Trade Center was under attack, Jackson and his posse are said to have rented a bus and high-tailed it out of New York. If they drove directly back, they could have been in Los Angeles by the 14th.
Zia Modabber, Jackson's litigator in this case, includes an affidavit sworn by former Los Angeles Country Sheriff Michael Laperruque, who states that he was with Jackson on Sept. 14 and that they were not in California.
There are some interesting facts revealed in the declarations to the court on Jackson's behalf. One of them is the statement by Frank Tyson, whom this reporter met about 18 months ago in New York with Jackson.
Tyson, who's sort of a Tom Cruise type, has functioned lately as Jackson's assistant. He is often said to be his godson.
In his statement, Tyson states: "I have known Mr. Jackson almost my entire life, and I am 21 years old. During just the past five years, I have seen Mr. Jackson sign his name, or seen his signature, no less than 100 times, and perhaps as many as 500 times, or more. The signature ... does not appear to be that of Mr. Jackson."
One might wonder why a teenage boy from New Jersey was present so often to witness a 40-year-old man who is not his relative signing so many checks from the time he was a sophomore in high school. Tyson, who swore to living in a suburban New Jersey town, could not be reached.
More interesting, perhaps, is the story of how Michael borrowed the initial $140 million which he backed with his 50 percent ownership of Sony/ATV Music Publishing, aka the Beatles catalog.
According to statements included in Jackson's opposition papers, a meeting took place in attorney John Branca's suite at the swanky Waldorf Towers in New York. (This is the five-star annex to the not nearly as nice Waldorf Astoria.)
Branca met with, among others, Jane Heller, Jackson's banker from Bank of America/NationsBank since 1993. Heller is the same banker who told this column back on April 19: "I've kept [Michael] alive for 20 years. And it's not that the advice he gets is bad. It's him. He's his own worst enemy."
Heller does confirm in her new statement what this column reported back in April. "I participated in and supervised perhaps as many as five financing transactions with Mr. Jackson."
What she fails to add is that each one dug his financial hole deeper � until it was so deep he couldn't get out of it.
Even if Myung-Ho Lee's so-called signed document doesn't stand up to legal scrutiny, nowhere in Jackson's opposition papers are Lee's other assertions disputed. Jackson does not refute any of the numbers included in the many budgets and lists of accounts payable that were included in Lee's filing.
One entry in those budgets that I left out was something marked "Lennon/McCartney Royalties." Apparently Michael has been borrowing money from the Beatles catalog and still had $360,000 to pay back in October 2000.
I'm sure Paul McCartney and Yoko Ono will be thrilled to hear they are now Jackson's personal revolving credit line.

I would like to see all of the documents related to this lawsuit & the alleged "forged documents". It doesn't seem possible for Mj to have been in LA by the 14th. I believe they took a scenic route back to LA. Hmmmm.

marc_vivien · Jun 9, 2010

the Myung-Ho Lee lawsuit was settled for several millions dollars.

the "forged signature" is often used by lawyers in similar cases

riviera1992 · Jun 9, 2010

jayde123 said:
i dont see how anyone could support her..why would we wanna make HER rich.

In all fairness, if she bought these trademarks, it's because they were available for purchase, no?

If she really does charity work like the photos show, I don't mind throwing her a few bucks here and there.

Now if you show me a photo with Branca doing personal charity work with his millions of dollar in commision, I might agree with you.:cheeky:

ivy · Jun 9, 2010

earth child said:
If there is a letter rehiring Branca filed with the court, it should be part of the public record, so where is it?

Now being filed with the court doesn't make all the documents public record something are supposed to be kept private. Trust was one of them (until it leaked), the details of the children's allowance is also sealed, medical records, details of contracts etc will also be private.. So it's not supposed to be part of the public record and we'll not see it unless somebody leaks it.

If Tohme was truly fired as the "story" goes, why was he the one doing the press conference at the hospital, and following MJ's body to the helicopter?

He's friends with Jermaine and came with him. You should ask Jermaine why he was there.

earth child said:
As far as there being another will, if there was proof, it has been well hidden! Big money and power are capable of covering up anything. They threaten and buy people off and just because none has yet surfaced, doesn't prove there isn't any.

To me this doesn't make sense. Let's think about money. Now executors of Michael's estate is getting 5% per person. For example from Sony deal the executors are going to get $12.5M each. Now if I'm an executor in a new will and I'm entitled to this money what would keep me silent? Any reasonable person would want at least $12.5M or more money to keep silent.

Also seeing how even fan groups can talk about the executors in any way they like and how they are not even trying to stop them with defamation suits etc, I don't think that they seem that threating to anybody.

btw there are laws concerning the wills. Let me give you a scenario - If there's a newer will and if the executor of that will knowingly kept that will secret and took money to do it so, when they come forward with the will in a later date - will never become an executor as they participated in fraud and will most probably go to prison..

marc_vivien said:
the Myung-Ho Lee lawsuit was settled for several millions dollars.

the "forged signature" is often used by lawyers in similar cases

True. Generally speaking you'll see "I didn't know what I was signing", "I though I was signing something else" and "I didn't sign it" is a common defense strategy.

riviera1992 said:
If she really does charity work like the photos show, I don't mind throwing her a few bucks here and there.

Now first of all - the executors are not trying to stop her charity, they are trying to stop her using Michael's name. If you went to the website before all these lawsuits the website wrote "Michael Jackson's Heal the World Foundation" and listed Michael as the founder. The estate is asking them to stop using Michael's name and image as they are tricking people into donating money believing that this is the original Heal The World.

She can continue to operate her charity, collect money and help people - once again estate isn't trying to stop that - she just can't use Michael's name.

Plus I'll add this there's no reported document from her showing the actions of the charity.

riviera1992 said:
In all fairness, if she bought these trademarks, it's because they were available for purchase, no?

Not quite. Trademarks are taken in certain areas. Let me give you an example : have seen stores out there with the same name? Such as "Store ABC" that sells insurance and a "STORE ABC" that sells car parts? and it's completely fine.

Trademarks are registered on certain areas : for example Michael's name is registered in the areas of entertainment, music, performance, videos as well as merchandising items such as t-shirts etc. All relevant areas about what Michael does and what you would expect to see his name on.

This person goes and registers the name on unrelated areas. I believe I gave the example of car window shield, dog tags etc.. so her trademark registrations are quite ridiculous. and then you see the case of "MJ" registering it for something else but using it to mean Michael.

It's also important to add that some of her tries to register these trademarks are / were rejected by the trademark registration services. Even before Michael died, even before the estate opened a lawsuit , trademark office themselves thought that she was infringing on Michael's trademark and rejected her requests.

jrsfan · Jun 10, 2010

ivy said:
He's friends with Jermaine and came with him. You should ask Jermaine why he was there.

True. Generally speaking you'll see "I didn't know what I was signing", "I though I was signing something else" and "I didn't sign it" is a common defense strategy.

Phillips & Thome came together to the hospital is what it looks like in this video posted by DI. I find that odd. Thome was listed in the TII credits & is still working with the executors according to estate's court docs. That is odd. It is my understanding Jermaine introduced them, not sure - rumors that Thome related to Halima - not sure about that.

As far as the defense strategy - I am not buying in this case. The date is very fishy because of September 11 & Mj being in NY. Tyson would have to be lying as well as MJ. As far as settling - there are many reasons for settling - JC Penny settled with the Arvisos, MJ settled with Chandlers, Francia. So settling a lawsuit doesn't necessarily mean anything. People go to court to have disputes decided, hopefully fairly but that does not always happen.

BTW, does anyone know who the woman with the small child is?

http://www.youtube.com/v/YdyjGr1WDW...xd0d0d0&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1

ivy · Jun 10, 2010

jrsfan said:
Thome was listed in the TII credits & is still working with the executors according to estate's court docs. That is odd.

tohme would be listed in TII because he was working with Michael when the project was started - he was there at the announcement, he took part in the agreement so he'll get credit for that, that's just natural.

In which documents do they say they are working with Tohme? The only thing I remember is that Tohme returning them the $5M and some personal items and in the court documents they referred to him as "former" advisor. Other than returning stuff to the estate what connection do they have? In what document?

btw - returning stuff to the estate wouldn't be working together. you are legally obligated to return money, assets, properties of a person to their estate and/or heirs and the estate is legally required to find, collect, document any assets,properties etc that could be in the possession of other people.

jrsfan · Jun 10, 2010

ivy said:
tohme would be listed in TII because he was working with Michael when the project was started - he was there at the announcement, he took part in the agreement so he'll get credit for that, that's just natural.

In which documents do they say they are working with Tohme? The only thing I remember is that Tohme returning them the $5M and some personal items and in the court documents they referred to him as "former" advisor. Other than returning stuff to the estate what connection do they have? In what document?

btw - returning stuff to the estate wouldn't be working together. you are legally obligated to return money, assets, properties of a person to their estate and/or heirs and the estate is legally required to find, collect, document any assets,properties etc that could be in the possession of other people.

I thought I read it in estate's court docs - I could be wrong, hard to sometimes keep it all straight. It was long after the $5 million was returned, it is possible that it had to do with the auction. I will check around.

ivy · Jun 10, 2010

^^
True, in one estate document they mention that "they have recovered money and assets from a former advisor". Yes they are talking about Tohme , yes they are talking about the money and the auction items (I think Julien's said that they need to return the items to Tohme who later returned them to the estate). However it's just getting Michael's assets and money from Tohme , not maintaining a working relationship with him.

If there's something else , I'd like to see it.

Ashtanga · Jun 10, 2010

Delete..............

riviera1992 · Jun 10, 2010

ivy said:
Now being filed with the court doesn't make all the documents public record something are supposed to be kept private. Trust was one of them (until it leaked), the details of the children's allowance is also sealed, medical records, details of contracts etc will also be private.. So it's not supposed to be part of the public record and we'll not see it unless somebody leaks it.

He's friends with Jermaine and came with him. You should ask Jermaine why he was there.

To me this doesn't make sense. Let's think about money. Now executors of Michael's estate is getting 5% per person. For example from Sony deal the executors are going to get $12.5M each. Now if I'm an executor in a new will and I'm entitled to this money what would keep me silent? Any reasonable person would want at least $12.5M or more money to keep silent.

Also seeing how even fan groups can talk about the executors in any way they like and how they are not even trying to stop them with defamation suits etc, I don't think that they seem that threating to anybody.

btw there are laws concerning the wills. Let me give you a scenario - If there's a newer will and if the executor of that will knowingly kept that will secret and took money to do it so, when they come forward with the will in a later date - will never become an executor as they participated in fraud and will most probably go to prison..

True. Generally speaking you'll see "I didn't know what I was signing", "I though I was signing something else" and "I didn't sign it" is a common defense strategy.

Now first of all - the executors are not trying to stop her charity, they are trying to stop her using Michael's name. If you went to the website before all these lawsuits the website wrote "Michael Jackson's Heal the World Foundation" and listed Michael as the founder. The estate is asking them to stop using Michael's name and image as they are tricking people into donating money believing that this is the original Heal The World.

She can continue to operate her charity, collect money and help people - once again estate isn't trying to stop that - she just can't use Michael's name.

Plus I'll add this there's no reported document from her showing the actions of the charity.

Not quite. Trademarks are taken in certain areas. Let me give you an example : have seen stores out there with the same name? Such as "Store ABC" that sells insurance and a "STORE ABC" that sells car parts? and it's completely fine.

Trademarks are registered on certain areas : for example Michael's name is registered in the areas of entertainment, music, performance, videos as well as merchandising items such as t-shirts etc. All relevant areas about what Michael does and what you would expect to see his name on.

This person goes and registers the name on unrelated areas. I believe I gave the example of car window shield, dog tags etc.. so her trademark registrations are quite ridiculous. and then you see the case of "MJ" registering it for something else but using it to mean Michael.

It's also important to add that some of her tries to register these trademarks are / were rejected by the trademark registration services. Even before Michael died, even before the estate opened a lawsuit , trademark office themselves thought that she was infringing on Michael's trademark and rejected her requests.

Thanks for the info on trademarks. It reminded me that it's like when I go to the grocery store (Publix) and they have their own products packaged in the exact same colors and design as the most popular brand right next to it. It happened to me a few times. I bought the Publix brand by mistake when I wanted Kraft or Heinz. How come nobody's suing them for that?
Not that it did any damage. It actually made me discover a cheaper and just as tasty product one time.

kasume · Jun 11, 2010

I hope these videos can be useful in court.

Is anyone saving these??

ivy · Jun 11, 2010

riviera1992 said:
Thanks for the info on trademarks. It reminded me that it's like when I go to the grocery store (Publix) and they have their own products packaged in the exact same colors and design as the most popular brand right next to it. It happened to me a few times. I bought the Publix brand by mistake when I wanted Kraft or Heinz. How come nobody's suing them for that?
Not that it did any damage. It actually made me discover a cheaper and just as tasty product one time.

in your example they are actually working together. Publix, Walmart etc does not produce their own products, those are actually the big companies such as Kraft and Heinz producing those products but putting them in Publix, Walmart branded packages and selling them at a cheaper price.

If there wasn't such an agreement and if one manufacturer was confusing the customer with similar colors, names and logos etc, yes they could sue.

for example : you know victoria's secret - female lingerie store , they sued one company that called themselves victor's secret - a local male underwear store and won on the basis that the name was confusing the customers.

and from this example you can also see how the use of MJ and Michael Jackson (even registered in different areas) could be confusing and shouldn't be done.

kasume said:
I hope these videos can be useful in court.

Is anyone saving these??

Heal the world foundation is the one that did the videos so I think that they'll have a copy of their own videos.

kasume · Jun 11, 2010

They better be ready for a fight. Because no amount of money or power is going to insulate them from the truth.

Well, I like that woman's attitude a lot!

I PRAY they have their lawyer. And if worst comes, Katherine could probably pay for the lawyer for her son's charity that's being destroyed. Or maybe Janet, she has money. There's always a way, but I hope they can get one.

ivy · Jun 11, 2010

kasume said:
I PRAY they have their lawyer. And if worst comes, Katherine could probably pay for the lawyer for her son's charity that's being destroyed. Or maybe Janet, she has money. There's always a way, but I hope they can get one.

just so you know it's not Michael's charity.. she just registered the name after Michael closed Heal the World.

See the below post from TSCM

Heal the World, as involving Michael Jackson, was formally dissolved in 2004. Its operations had stopped in late-2002. This was made official on the tax filings from 2003. Here's an old message of mine on the issue:

------------
...I do have access to the official Heal The World Foundation tax filings through the year 2003.

The ones filed in 2003 (based on 2002 data) state, at the end:

HEAL THE WORLD FOUNDATION HAS CEASED ITS EXEMPT OPERATIONS FOR THE YEAR ENDED 10/31/2003. THERE WILL BE NO ACTIVITY FOR 2004 AND THE ORGANIZATION WILL FORMALLY DISSOLVED IN 2004.

On the form itself they also checked 'YES' to the question: "Was there a liquidation, dissolution, termination, or substantial contraction during the year?"

Thus, by all legal accounts, the foundation was dissolved in 2004.

http://www.mjj2005.com/kopboard/index.php?showtopic=43089&st=0&p=1089073&#entry1089073

riviera1992 · Jun 11, 2010

^^^
How come Michael dissolved his own charity in 2002-2003? Is it because he really had too much money problems by then?

And why at the end of This Is It movie, it shows Heal the world with the band-aid over the globe like his old charity? Was it re-instated in 2009?

mj_smile · Jun 12, 2010

^^

1. Question

Disbandment

In 2002, the Heal the World Foundation was suspended, after failing to file yearly accounting statements, required for tax-exempt organizations. Records showed that the foundation had net assets of $3,542 and reported $2,585 in expenses. The foundation did not have a director, president or other top manager besides Jackson, who was listed as chairman.[11]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heal_the_World_Foundation
plus more sources on the www .. (ask google or yahoo or whatever search engine you prefer)

2. Question

The Heal The World Foundation's logo was based on this single cover of its namesake song.

[Johnson obtained the trademark “Heal the World Foundation” according to the US Trademark Office in October 2008. source]

ivy · Jun 12, 2010

riviera1992 said:
^^^
How come Michael dissolved his own charity in 2002-2003? Is it because he really had too much money problems by then?

And why at the end of This Is It movie, it shows Heal the world with the band-aid over the globe like his old charity? Was it re-instated in 2009?

No Michael didn't reinstate the charity in 2009, they were just using the logo from the song.

Basically the REAL Heal the world was closed in 2004. This woman registered the name in 2008 and is telling everyone that this the actual Heal the World to get donations.

Vici · Jun 12, 2010

jrsfan said:
BTW, does anyone know who the woman with the small child is?

Thats Rebbies daughter Stacee with her son London Blue.

144000 · Jun 12, 2010

ivy said:
Let me add something here, you can be against the estate and the executors BUT do not support HTWF.

This Melissa Johnson has trademarked Michael's name in everything under the sun including backpacks, car window shields,bed pillows, dog tags, frames, sleeping bags, belt buckles, hair accessories etc. I hope that I made it clear that her trademark registrations are ridiculous and if the estate loses this case she can make and sell everything with Michael Jackson on it and make billions.

so once again it's okay if you're against the executors but be careful of who you are supporting.. Being against the estate/executors shouldn't make it okay to support people who clearly aiming to take advantage of Michael's name for their own monetary benefits.

also : she's known to harass Michael when he was alive. In 2003 she was told to stop registering trademarks and stop harassing Michael.

so, is it true that the executors can keep control of the estate away from Michael's children, indefinitely?

ivy · Jun 12, 2010

144 said:
so, is it true that the executors can keep control of the estate away from Michael's children, indefinitely?

No.

they start to get their shares from "trust estate" - meaning all the assets/businesses etc at 30 years old. So starting 30 years old they'll have partial decision making power, by 40 years old they'll have the full control and there will be no longer any executors.

btw today someone asked the same question at TMZ live as well and Harvey said the same thing.

Muzikfactory2 doesn't understand the wording of the trust document.

my post from another thread

---------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by elusive moonwalker
now those % mean income but what is it interms of actual control of the estate ie they take over making decisions from branca etc will that ever happen?

I have heard at other places that people claiming that they are only getting money and not the assets however this is not true. When you look to what they are getting at 30-35-40 years old the term used is "trust estate"..

the below is the explanation of legal jargon

The property that is transferred to a Trust becomes the Trust estate (also called the Trust corpus, Trust res, or Trust principal). A Trust estate consists of all of the property, rights, and obligations that are transferred to the Trust.

All real or personal assets transferred to the trustee(s) under a trust agreement as the body or object of the trust. Also called trust assets, trust corpus, trust estate, trust fund, trust object, or trust res.

so if you read the document you'll see that
- until 30 years old they get their share from "income" - meaning they only get money
- starting 30 years old they get their share from "trust estate" - meaning that they get ownership of the property and assets in the trust.

jrsfan · Jun 12, 2010

Vici said:
Thats Rebbies daughter Stacee with her son London Blue.

I thought that might be the case. She is so pretty & London Blue is adorable.

HTWF: "Hijacking the Jackson estate"

Proud Member

Proud Member

Proud Member

Proud Member

Proud Member

Proud Member

Proud Member

Proud Member

Proud Member

Proud Member

Proud Member

Proud Member

Proud Member

Proud Member

Proud Member

Proud Member

Proud Member

Proud Member

Proud Member

Proud Member

Proud Member

Proud Member

Proud Member

Proud Member

Proud Member

Proud Member

Proud Member

Proud Member

Proud Member

Proud Member