Latest on MJJC

Randy Jackson's Twitter...

StacyJ said:
I figured Randy wouldn't answer the question as to why his sisters have a habit of calling their brother a drug addict. I knew he wouldn't touch that at all.
Click to expand...

It was probably Randy that was whispering that in their ears until they believed it to....sad sad sad
 
I wouldn't be surprised at all. Janet saying that was just crazy since she admitted time and time again that she hadn't seen Mike in several years. How would she know what was going on if she hadn't seen him years?
 
xthunderx2 said:
It was probably Randy that was whispering that in their ears until they believed it to....sad sad sad
Click to expand...

I dont believe in this, the brothers are NOT the ONLY in family had/have jealousy of Michael and were pushing him make "Family Tour".

Janet and Rebbie know VERY WELL what they're talking.

If I had some doubts about Janet & Rebbie, the ex-advisor of Leonard Rowe FINISH my doubts.

They (brothers & sisters) have guys likes Brian Oxman, Leonard Rowe by their side NOT for nothing

The WHOLE Jackson Family knows very well how works the show biz, Motown taught ABSOLUTELY everything for them, nobody will go on Oprah and speak all that Janet said without being fully conscious than is saying and what you do, Janet knows very well because said those things and she has neurons and is not a thumb of Randy, but for me it is clear that they are close, until Oxman is talking in her behalf
 
Last edited:
TALK IS CHEAP.............once upon time wise man told this.
thank god i don't have twitter .
randy must be laughing at some fans that how gullible they are.
it seems he didn't know his brother at all .
he didn't throw his brother under a bus (that's what he says),but he is constantly throwing his father and other brother under a bus (that's what his action shows)
:bored::scratch:
 
999
ivy said:
He has to make Katherine agree to challenge the will. How can they do this? The signature is fake or they forced Michael to sign it and he was kept under control so that he couldn't change it. If they can't prove these theories Katherine will be out of the will.

If they can, he'll still have to invalidate the 97 will and the trust. Well don't hold your breath.


Overall no real answers IMO.
Click to expand...

the will was admitted to pobate on August 03, 2009. From this date, you have 120 days to contest the will


I'm sure that Randy is brainwashing his mother
 
Fans are against the idea of randy opening Forest Lawn on June 25th. They are tweeting the brothers..and 3T asking them to stop randy
 
StacyJ said:
I wouldn't be surprised at all. Janet saying that was just crazy since she admitted time and time again that she hadn't seen Mike in several years. How would she know what was going on if she hadn't seen him years?
Click to expand...


This has been my thought for months now.......if you are'nt in contact with someone for years, then you're basically going off of what is being said by others......but even if MJ had a dependency issue, Janet and others going to the media about it without being clear as to what they were saying was just plain wrong and thats my beef with them especially her. MJ would've never done that to them.

As per Randy, the reasoning behind this Q&A was what? 'cause I got NOTHING worthwhile from it. Oh, let me backtrack a bit, the revelation that the siblings knew NOTHING about the Gary Museum thing surprised me, so once again Joe is doing his own thing once again!:doh:

And as far as The Will is concerned, whats Randy's problem really? the people who were left out?:smilerolleyes:
 
Fans are against the idea of randy opening Forest Lawn on June 25th. They are tweeting the brothers..and 3T asking them to stop randy
Click to expand...
Interesting, i hope these aren't the same fans who wanted/want michael buried at neverland or some public place. Fans themselves are divided. Some want to be able to pay their respects to michael personally and some don't, that's fine but there is no need trying to stop it if it's going to happen. Just don't go if you are uncomfortable, I think allowing the fans to quietly and respectfully pay their respects for one day is a nice gesture.
 
Memefan said:
Fans are against the idea of randy opening Forest Lawn on June 25th. They are tweeting the brothers..and 3T asking them to stop randy
Click to expand...

Sounds like another saga in the ongoing "fan" wars. So many sides tweeting this and that, posting this and that and they all think they are right.

Fans talking to TMZ about demanding to get in and other fans actually e-mailing the grieving family tellng them what "they" want them to do. Unbelievable!

Some many "fans" have fallen so far away from the virtues Michael espoused.
 
nena said:
Interesting, i hope these aren't the same fans who wanted/want michael buried at neverland or some public place. Fans themselves are divided. Some want to be able to pay their respects to michael personally and some don't, that's fine but there is no need trying to stop it if it's going to happen. Just don't go if you are uncomfortable, I think allowing the fans to quietly and respectfully pay their respects for one day is a nice gesture.
Click to expand...

i know they want to pay respect but u have to respect others also ,it's cemetery ,not like Michael is alone there ,think about their family.going in bunch ,it is like u have no respect for others and also give that family some alone time with their son ,brother ,father .
when there is gathering trust me it's not going to be quite and respectful because some one is going to break under that high emotions then there will be drama.
 
rainny said:
To find out what the fans are thinking and questioning?
Click to expand...

I think you've hit the nail on the head.
In my opinion he was looking to find out exactly that. He is up to something. And he wanted a platform to spout off all this nonsense trying to look like the hero to the fans. Too bad we're not that stupid. Does he think we'll forget what he's done in the past and continuing to do now.

The fact he says he knows nothing about the museum, what a lovely way to announce that. Why not go to your father about that. I'm that skeptical about this that I would go so far to say he does know, but he has his own plans up his sleeve that he wants to garner fan support for, not the museum Joe is involved with.

This family is a mess, and a joke. They do nothing to help themselves. I have been more than fair and patient with them the last few years, so much so that I have barely said a word against them up until this last week with the fiasco's that they're bringing up for the anniversary. Beltgate was the straw that broke the camel's back I'm afraid. I have had it with them.

To put it simply, Michael does not deserve this, and that is where my loyalties lie. God bless those children of his, I have faith that they are strong enough and intelligent enough to recognise the BS that is going on around them. I applaud Michael for his will, his trust, and for just being him. He had this sniffed out as long ago as 1995. God bless you Michael.

To the people here questioning hard feeling towards Randy, it is well documented, on MJJC and on the internet. All it takes is a little research.
 
StaceyMJ said:
I think you've hit the nail on the head.
In my opinion he was looking to find out exactly that. He is up to something. And he wanted a platform to spout off all this nonsense trying to look like the hero to the fans. Too bad we're not that stupid. Does he think we'll forget what he's done in the past and continuing to do now.

The fact he says he knows nothing about the museum, what a lovely way to announce that. Why not go to your father about that. I'm that skeptical about this that I would go so far to say he does know, but he has his own plans up his sleeve that he wants to garner fan support for, not the museum Joe is involved with.

This family is a mess, and a joke. They do nothing to help themselves. I have been more than fair and patient with them the last few years, so much so that I have barely said a word against them up until this last week with the fiasco's that they're bringing up for the anniversary. Beltgate was the straw that broke the camel's back I'm afraid. I have had it with them.

To put it simply, Michael does not deserve this, and that is where my loyalties lie. God bless those children of his, I have faith that they are strong enough and intelligent enough to recognise the BS that is going on around them. I applaud Michael for his will, his trust, and for just being him. He had this sniffed out as long ago as 1995. God bless you Michael.

To the people here questioning hard feeling towards Randy, it is well documented, on MJJC and on the internet. All it takes is a little research.
Click to expand...


I agree! Trying to give this family the benefit of the doubt is extremely hard especially when they keep acting the way that they do. Mike is dead and they only seemed concerned about the money. I haven't heard Joe once say that he loved MJ. All he cares about is the money and what MJ the entertainer can bring him financially. It is just so sad.. RIP Michael and I will continue to keep PP&B in prayer.
 
StaceyMJ said:
I think you've hit the nail on the head.
In my opinion he was looking to find out exactly that. He is up to something. And he wanted a platform to spout off all this nonsense trying to look like the hero to the fans. Too bad we're not that stupid. Does he think we'll forget what he's done in the past and continuing to do now.

The fact he says he knows nothing about the museum, what a lovely way to announce that. Why not go to your father about that. I'm that skeptical about this that I would go so far to say he does know, but he has his own plans up his sleeve that he wants to garner fan support for, not the museum Joe is involved with.

This family is a mess, and a joke. They do nothing to help themselves. I have been more than fair and patient with them the last few years, so much so that I have barely said a word against them up until this last week with the fiasco's that they're bringing up for the anniversary. Beltgate was the straw that broke the camel's back I'm afraid. I have had it with them.

To put it simply, Michael does not deserve this, and that is where my loyalties lie. God bless those children of his, I have faith that they are strong enough and intelligent enough to recognise the BS that is going on around them. I applaud Michael for his will, his trust, and for just being him. He had this sniffed out as long ago as 1995. God bless you Michael.

To the people here questioning hard feeling towards Randy, it is well documented, on MJJC and on the internet. All it takes is a little research.
Click to expand...

All about MJ's money....the estate.

I think it is very telling that Randy is the only one creating the drama. Right after Randy, Jackie was on Twitter discussing the Lakers basketball game. go figure!!!

But Randy seems obsessed about getting rid of the executors & getting control og MJ's estate.

ETA: I am glad to see so many fans are on to Randy. And he got some really got questions yesterday...even though he did not answer any of them. So he must know, not all fans are in awe of him. And I, myself, did not even send him a single question. Imagine that. Lol
 
Ivy, I think you'll agree with me ; Randy has no standing to contest the will etc...

http://www.lawlink.com/research/CaseLevel3/48267

that only person interested may contest a will, either before or after probate, it has been held that "An 'interested person' is one who has such a pecuniary interest in the devolution of the testator's estate as may be impaired or defeated by the probate of the will or be benefited by having it set aside." (Estate of O'Brien, 246 Cal.App.2d 788, 792 [55 Cal.Rptr. 343].) In the early case of Estate of Baker, 170 Cal. 578, 586-587 [150 P. 989], it was held that the right of an interested person to contest a will is fundamentally based upon the loss of property or property rights resulting from the recognition of an invalid instrument depriving him that the purpose of a will of those rights; that the purpose of a will contest is to establish a violation of the contestant's right of property; that in its essence the contest is an action for the recovery of property unlawfully taken or about to be taken from the ownership of the contestant.
Click to expand...
http://www.lawlink.com/research/CaseLevel3/68233

An "interested person" is "defined as one who has such a pecuniary interest in the devolution of the testator's estate as would be impaired or defeated by the probate of the will or be benefited by setting it aside." (Estate of Marler (1957) 148 Cal.App.2d 30, 33 [306 P.2d 105].) Thus, a will contestant must show his or her share of the distribution will be increased if the contest is successful.
Click to expand...
http://www.lawlink.com/browse_codes.aspx?caselevel3=66263

To contest a will before or after probate, the would-be contestant must be an "interested person." (?? 370, 380.) [4] "The courts do not favor will contests." (3 Koontz, op. cit. supra, ? 22.4, p. 22-8.) [5a] Accordingly, the courts have long and steadfastly limited the right to contest the probate of a will to those who have "'such a pecuniary interest in the devolution of the testator's estate, as would be impaired or defeated by the probate of a will or be benefited by the setting aside of the will.' [Citations.]" (Estate of Molera (1972) 23 Cal.App.3d 993, 998 [100 Cal.Rptr. 696].)

In the seminal case of Estate of Land (1913) 166 Cal. 538 [137 P. 246], the California Supreme Court noted "'the statute contemplates a legal interest and not merely a grievance to the feelings of propriety or sense of justice.'" (At p. 543.) [6] The purpose of restricting who may contest probate is to avoid "delaying the settlement of the estate." (Estate of Plaut (1945) 27 Cal.2d 424, 429 [164 P.2d 765, 162 A.L.R. 837].)

[7a] As "only an interested person may properly be a contestant" (Estate of Powers (1979) 91 Cal.App.3d 715, 719 [154 Cal.Rptr. 366], italics in original), appellant must allege his standing as an interested person. [5b] That is, he must allege he would take under another will or by intestacy in the event of a successful contest to the purported will. (Id., at p. 720.)
Click to expand...
http://www.lawlink.com/browse_codes.aspx?caselevel3=66263

[12] This procedure would be in keeping with the words of Justice Traynor, who wrote in Estate of Plaut, supra: "Although the right to ask the court for an adjudication of his claim to the estate should be denied a person whose interest 'has not even the appearance of validity or substance' [citation], it should not be denied a person who, even though he may ultimately not receive any part of the estate, has at least established a prima facie interest in that estate. Since a proceeding to probate or contest a will is a proceeding in rem [citation], and at the end of the six-month period [now 120 days] during which it may be contested the probate of the will is conclusive [citations], all persons whose interests may be adversely affected should be given an opportunity to be heard." (27 Cal.2d at pp. 428-429.) In that same opinion, Justice Traynor recognized with approval that the probate court could hold a hearing on the standing question before proceeding with the trial of the contest (id., at p. 426) and the contest should be dismissed if the contestant cannot make a prima facie showing of standing (id., at p. 429).
Click to expand...
Only an interested party could challenge the will (Probate code section 48) :

http://www.zwwillcontest.com/

Under case law, the general rule is that the will or trust contestant must have an interest of a pecuniary nature which may be impaired or defeated by probate of the will or benefited by setting it aside (such as an heir or legatee under a prior will).

Case law has recognized standing in the following persons:

Heirs at law: Any person who would succeed to any portion of the estate if decedent had died intestate (without a will) has standing to contest a testamentary document which would defeat or impair that intestate interest.

Pretermitted heirs: Decedent's children, spouse, and registered domestic partner, although omitted from the will (or other 'testamentary instrument'), may have claims to a 'statutory share' of the estate as 'pretermitted heirs.'

Beneficiaries under earlier will: The beneficiaries under an earlier will, whose interests are impaired or defeated by a later will offered for probate, have standing to contest the later will.

Beneficiaries under later will: Conversely, if the interest of a beneficiary under a later will may be impaired or defeated by probate of an earlier will, the beneficiary has standing to contest probate of the earlier will.

Creditors of heirs: An heir's creditors may have an 'interest' in the estate if decedent's will disinherits the debtor-heir. However, such creditors have standing to file a will or trust contest only if they have perfected a judgment lien at the time the property would pass to the heir if the will were set aside. Conversely, an heir's general unsecured creditors (no judgment lien) apparently have no standing to file a will contest.

Executor under earlier will admitted to probate: The executor appointed under a will, duly admitted to probate, has an affirmative obligation to defend that document against subsequent contests.

Proposed executor under will offered for probate: A person designated by decedent to be executor has no 'duty' to defend a contest before admission of the will to probate and his or her appointment as executor.

Assignee or estate of proper contestant: The right to contest a will survives to the contestant's estate; similarly, it is assignable. Hence, a proper contestant's assignee or a deceased contestant's estate representative has standing to pursue the will contest in the original (assigning or deceased) contestant's place.
Click to expand...
You have 120 days to contest the will (Probate Code section 8270(a)) and 60 or 120 days to contest the trust (Probate Code section 16061.7)
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
StacyJ said:
I agree! Trying to give this family the benefit of the doubt is extremely hard especially when they keep acting the way that they do. Mike is dead and they only seemed concerned about the money. I haven't heard Joe once say that he loved MJ. All he cares about is the money and what MJ the entertainer can bring him financially. I.
Click to expand...

It's extremely difficult giving this family benefit of the doubt because they make it difficult for fans each passing day.So much drama and they are so divided,each individual has his/her own agenda.watching their actions since mike died is just like watching a bad movie and it makes me sad that this is not a work of fiction but real life events unfolding infront of me.I wonder how many times mj had turned in his tomb and the sad fact is that most of them dont even realise how avaricious they appear to the general public.

Joe,oh joe.I have never seen a dad,lose his son and never shown any form of emotion since the death of that child.I see him all over the place in ridiculous age inappropriate suits laughing and smiling as if he just won a lottery.Contast his demeanor with that of katherine [God bless her soul] whose pain is evident in her eyes and also in her conduct and appearance,you see a mother mourning .Joe saw MJ as a cash machine in life and unfortunately as a bigger one in death.
 
Vici said:
"randyjackson8: I can't promise but there's a possibility that fans will b able 2 go inside. I have 2 discuss this w/my family as well, I'm fighting for u."

"randyjackson8: The will: Me knowing my brother, Yes I believe its fake. I’d love 2 talk more in depth, but can’t. Am I doing something about it? of course."

"randyjackson8: I love my mom & dad, they r both in their 80's. My concern is mostly about the people around them and how they take advantage of them."

"randyjackson8: My siblings & I knew nothing about this foundation or museum in Gary, nor r we a part of it. I do have concerns & I will be addressing it."

"randyjackson8: How do I cope? I have a strong Christian faith & find power in prayer… although this month is hard."
Click to expand...

Why is he continuing to soup folks up, thinking that they MIGHT be able to go inside Holly Terrace. That's just wrong, in my opinion.

Why is the will "fake," because Branca's name appears in the will and not his. LOL! I'm sure the will wouldn't be "fake" if Randy's name appeared in it.

If he feels that folks are taking advantage of his elderly parents, what exactly is he and the rest of his family doing about it. (I mean, who on this board would allow anybody to take advantage of their parents, whether rich or poor?) I'm sure to him "taking advantage" means after his mother retained a new attorney, she no longer wanted to challenge the executors.

I find it very embarrassing that he has to TWEET about not knowing about the Gary project. Why not discuss that whole thing with Joe Jackson in private.

He needs to channel some of his strong Christian faith in the direction of trying to fix the relationship he has with his children.
 
Thank you Rockin for clearing this up.
 
Last edited:
How can Randy say he doesn't know about the family museum? Doesn't he know the whereabouts of his father...how do we know that more than he does..? And according to Joe's letter frm January -
I have asked our beautiful granddaughter Stevanna Jackson, who, by the way, is a student at Harvard University, to also sit on the board of directors ensuring the next generation of Jackson’s are well represented.
Click to expand...
Stevanna is Randy's daughter right?


memefan - this? -
http://twitter.com/4641Hayvenhurst
- it's not really verified.. someone just copied and pasted a tick and 'verified account' into the 'name' box.
this is what real verified accounts looks like-
http://twitter.com/randyjackson8
http://twitter.com/iamdiddy
etc...
 
Rockin. said:
How can Randy say he doesn't know about the family museum? Doesn't he know the whereabouts of his father...how do we know that more than he does..? And according to Joe's letter frm January - Stevanna is Randy's daughter right?
Click to expand...

I don't know who knows what, but I do find it strange that EVERYTIME Joe Jackson addresses this project, he is always ALONE, i.e. no other family members in attendance. I thought surely that 1 or more of the brothers would have been with him during his recent trip to Gary. Maybe even LaToya and/or Rebbie.

In my opinion, Randy "probably" does not know the whereabouts of his father, because they are ALL going in different directions, in pursuit of their own agendas.

I mean, does Joe Jackson know that Randy said he is trying to get fans INSIDE of Holly Terrace? Probaby not.
 
OldSchoolMJFan said:
Sounds like another saga in the ongoing "fan" wars. So many sides tweeting this and that, posting this and that and they all think they are right.

Fans talking to TMZ about demanding to get in and other fans actually e-mailing the grieving family tellng them what "they" want them to do. Unbelievable!

Some many "fans" have fallen so far away from the virtues Michael espoused.
Click to expand...

its called ish stiring. randy started tweeting about getting fans in in order to make himself feel important and get the fans on his side. that falls through and then we have the all fans are banned from F.L randy comes and saves the day by saying thats not the case etc. when infact it was never the case that fans were banned in the first place. all its done is cause confusion where u have fans worried that randy is letting ppl in and are tweeting the t's with their concern. i douby any fans have been in contact with TMZ saying we will go regardless because 1 they are not even banned to start with. tmz just created that story to ish stir.and frnakly id hop mj fans of all ppl wouldnt be so gulible to believe that. all these ppl are doing is trying to cause splits within the fan community
 
It's all quite sad. You see Taj just commenting on making sure his cousins are going to be ok on his anniversary. Everybody else is about something else.

Michael's will doesn't seem fake to me. Leaving it to his children and his mother seems exactly right to me. Most people leave it to their children. Regardless of anything John Branca has worked with Michael for years and he knew that he had the expertise to deal with his estate. I mean who else was he going to put in charge of such an estate? His priority was his children.

Raymone also stated that she asked Michael about his will, that it was up to date and he said it was. If you remember she stated she asked him a second time and he got annoyed with her. In other words mind your own business.

Unfortunately it's clearly is about money. Joseph Jackson is trying to do things that the estate are already in planning for down the line. It's all about ego and money.
 
Irish Flower said:
It's all quite sad. You see Taj just commenting on making sure his cousins are going to be ok on his anniversary. Everybody else is about something else.

Michael's will doesn't seem fake to me. Leaving it to his children and his mother seems exactly right to me. Most people leave it to their children. Regardless of anything John Branca has worked with Michael for years and he knew that he had the expertise to deal with his estate. I mean who else was he going to put in charge of such an estate? His priority was his children.

Raymone also stated that she asked Michael about his will, that it was up to date and he said it was. If you remember she stated she asked him a second time and he got annoyed with her. In other words mind your own business.

Unfortunately it's clearly is about money. Joseph Jackson is trying to do things that the estate are already in planning for down the line. It's all about ego and money.
Click to expand...
Very well said, you're absolutely right with what you're saying.
 
Irish Flower said:
It's all quite sad. You see Taj just commenting on making sure his cousins are going to be ok on his anniversary. Everybody else is about something else.

Michael's will doesn't seem fake to me. Leaving it to his children and his mother seems exactly right to me. Most people leave it to their children. Regardless of anything John Branca has worked with Michael for years and he knew that he had the expertise to deal with his estate. I mean who else was he going to put in charge of such an estate? His priority was his children.

Raymone also stated that she asked Michael about his will, that it was up to date and he said it was. If you remember she stated she asked him a second time and he got annoyed with her. In other words mind your own business.

Unfortunately it's clearly is about money. Joseph Jackson is trying to do things that the estate are already in planning for down the line. It's all about ego and money.
Click to expand...

Great post!!!!

And enough already trying to figure out how to capitalize on his name and finances, just focus on being each other's emotional support to get through the future. With Murray's upcoming trial, there are some very rough waters ahead where MJ is going to persecuted mercilessly all over again.
 
Well this Jackson Family Foundation has been news since December/January. Randy surfs the internet, people gossip, someone he knows would surely have seen it/heard about it if he didn't himself. He lives in Hayvenhurst now doesn't he?, well so does Katherine she knew about it, and thats where the belt thing happened. Also his daughter Stevanna was asked to be/is involved..

Randy knew about the tribute in Rome and what some random Italian woman was saying about MJ.. the JFF is a much bigger thing than that.. it's a $300 milion project.

I find it hard to think that the siblings wouldn't have heard about this from somewhere. I mean..whether families are that close or not information gets passed along and gossiped about, especially if it relates to them, which this does big time.

Maybe he knows how some fans have reacted to it..and the belt situation..and wants to be in favour with the fans. I don't know.. just thinking outloud.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top