I can't believe his parents have been given temporary custody of his kids. those kids will end up as wacko as their father and the rest of the Jackson Family. I am not convinced the kids are really Michaels. It's amazing what money can buy.
Printable View
I can't believe his parents have been given temporary custody of his kids. those kids will end up as wacko as their father and the rest of the Jackson Family. I am not convinced the kids are really Michaels. It's amazing what money can buy.
Shouldn't they consider the biological mothers?
Who knows for sure that Debbie Rowe was the bioligical mother for the oldest two plus she sold them to Michael she is as unfit as the Jackson Family. No one knows who the mother of the youngest child it is reported that the mother wasn't even told the surrogate baby was for Michael. The only way the truth will come out is through DNA.
in the paper yesterday it was saying how the kids might not be his
I hope that the same people look after the kids that did when Michael was alive, they have had enough to cope with during their childhood without people arguing about them now. They need stability in their lives, especially with all these statements and rumours around.
I read on ET online that MJ wasn't the father and that it was someone who Debbie Rowe worked with. Thing is, there is going to be so much coming out into the open, true and false, that we aren't going to be able to believe anything thats said.
Its all a very sad situation
The kids are white :hmm:
but i guess it dont matter if you're black or white :lol:
Also his dad is outta the will
And so the conspiracy theories start. Someone once said 'conspiracy theories are for people who can't accept reality.'Quote:
Originally Posted by Perdita
While it is sad that he's dead, this grief by proxy thing is pathetic. Very few people have met him and know him personally. I don't understand how people who have never met him can say they're devastated, can't stop crying etc. Get over it folks and stop putting him on a pedestal.
Michael is a brilliant singer and dancer, possibly one of the best the world has ever seen. You only have to watch his early music videos to see that. The real Michael died years ago though.
The Times estimates his estate can be milked for 100m dollars a year if its done right. There's apparently a disc floating around of unreleased songs.
Michael can be seen shopping with Elvis at your local Tescos.
He's unavailable on Tuesdays and Thursdays though
Those days he works in the chip down down the road from me
the only time im gonna believe whats true or not about his kids is if theres fact from dna tests or something, im not gonna believe any stories i read otherwise cos theres so many, most of them are gonna be made upQuote:
Originally Posted by Jojo
Michael Jackson's will has been filed in a Los Angeles court, giving his entire estate to a family trust. The document, dated 7 July 2002, also reveals the star "intentionally omitted" to provide for his former wife, Debbie Rowe.
Jackson's mother, Katherine, is named as a beneficiary of the trust and the guardian of the singer's three young children, who are named in the will.
It estimated Jackson's estate at that time to be more than $500m (£303m).
Custody rights
The Michael Jackson Family Trust would benefit his three children, his mother and unnamed charities, according to Reuters.
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/image...570053-2-1.jpg Katherine Jackson is currently looking after the children
The news agency also reported that Jackson's five-page will said: "I have intentionally omitted to provide for my former wife, Deborah Rowe Jackson."
Rowe married Jackson in 1996 but filed for divorce in 1999. She gave up custody rights to the children but sought them again in 2003.
They agreed a settlement in 2006 but the terms were never disclosed.
She is the biological mother of Jackson's eldest children - Michael Joseph Jackson Jr, known as Prince Michael, 12, and Paris Michael Katherine Jackson, 11.
The singer's youngest son - seven-year-old Prince Michael II - was born to a surrogate mother whose identity has never been revealed.
Long-time friend and singer Diana Ross is also named as guardian for Jackson's children in the event that his mother was unable to fulfil her duties.
Katherine Jackson was granted temporary guardianship of Jackson's three children on Monday.
'Remarkable legacy'
The will said Jackson's estate consisted almost entirely of "non-cash, non-liquid assets, including primarily an interest in a catalogue of music royalty rights which is currently being administered by Sony ATV, and the interests of various entities".
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/shared/img/o.gifhttp://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/...t_quote_rb.gif The most important element of Michael's will is his unwavering desire that his mother, Katherine, become the legal guardian for his three children http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/...d_quote_rb.gif
Executors John Branca and John McClain
That refers to the singer's share of the Sony/ATV Music Publishing catalogue that includes rights to the songs of The Beatles.
The will names Jackson's lawyer John Branca and John McClain, a music executive and a family friend, as co-executors of the will.
In a statement, Mr Branca and Mr McClain said: "The most important element of Michael's will is his unwavering desire that his mother, Katherine, become the legal guardian for his three children.
"As we work to carry out Michael's instructions to safeguard both the future of his children as well as the remarkable legacy he left us as an artist, we ask that all matters involving his estate be handled with the dignity and the respect that Michael and his family deserve."
Meanwhile, the Jackson family issued a statement saying that no "public or private viewing" of the singer's body would be held at Neverland.
Speculation of a viewing had prompted fans and reporters to gather outside the property, but the family said they would announce plans "regarding a public memorial" shortly.
they also mentioned on the news that he wont be able to be buried in neverland because there is no cemetery licence there
Burying him at Neverland would be a risky business anyway. There'd be issues with the body and security if Neverland was to be sold, which I imagine it will be, and also with access for the family.
Diana Ross is a random choice for reserve guardian. Taking on three young kids at her age would be a task. Why hasn't Debbie got joint guardianship with Katherine? I know she gave up her rights to the children but if I was her I'd want to be there and take care of them now that their father is dead.
But I believe that Debbie has never had any contact with the children, it will be so difficult for the kids to adapt to live with a total stranger, even if it is the biological mother, poor little mites.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ZTDe5S-HMU&feature=fvst
I think this sums up his career perfectly. A great artist has died but his music will live on.
A public memorial service for Michael Jackson will reportedly be held in Los Angeles on Tuesday morning.
According to Sky News, sources have confirmed US reports that the 'Thriller' star will be honoured in a ceremony at the Staples Centre at 10am.
The sports facility is owned by AEG Live, the company behind Jackson's comeback concerts in London.
It is understood that screens will also be installed outside the building for the thousands of fans who are expected to attend.
Jackson's family have yet to comment on the report, but recently dismissed speculation that his body would be put on public display at his Neverland ranch.
The 2,500-acre property had emerged as an early possibility to stage his funeral, but it has been suggested that his family were unable to obtain the necessary burial permit within the time limits.
From: http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/showbiz/...r-tuesday.html
E News said that Diana Ross now might be looking after his kids :confused:
From: http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/showbiz/...eman-kids.html
Michael Jackson wanted to adopt the eight babies of "Octomom" Nadya Suleman shortly before he died, it has been claimed.
The mother-of-14's ex-publicist Victor Munoz told The Mirror that Jackson's representatives had called him three times to enquire about him taking care of the babies before the singer himself got in touch.
According to Munoz, Jackson said: "Blanket would love to have more siblings. I could take care of all the babies, they could live with me and wouldn't need for anything. They would have a bright future.
"I want to take care of Nadya. She will be happy and won't have to worry about caring for her children anymore."
Munoz added: "It was creepy. He was basically offering to buy the children. I was a bit shocked. Michael clearly thought Nadya was unfit and decided he wanted to help those children.
"He sounded genuine. He was genuinely concerned about the children. He asked if they were all going to be healthy. But I just blew it off. I knew Nadya would never want to get rid of her kids so it wasn't important."
Pot calling kettle black springs to mind - another 8 kids walking the streets with scarfs over their faces :rolleyes:
But appearing in public with their faces covered allows them anonymity. Does anyone apart from close family and friends know what his children look like?Quote:
Originally Posted by Perdita
One of Michael's close friends was on This Morning on Monday saying he could take the three kids out with his own kids and nobody knew who they were. They weren't hounded by the public, followed by the press, they didn't have their photos in the papers the next day and plastered all over the internet.
Look at the Beckham's and Katie Price. Their kids have very well known faces. They can't go out with family and friends without having their photos in the paper the next day. There was kidnap threats against Brooklyn Beckham and they had to step their security up.
Its all very well papers blurring out children's faces but those pictures still exist as originals with the child's face clearly visible. It only takes one person to circulate the original on the internet or print it in another media and then its fair game for kidnappers and other paparazzi to print.
Maybe some people do think it's extreme but Michael was simply protecting his children from the glare of the camera that he experienced for five decades. Is that so abnormal?
Friends and family of the late Michael Jackson will reportedly mourn his death in a private ceremony ahead of a confirmed public tribute.
According to Access Hollywood, the singer will be remembered in an invitation-only service before next Tuesday's memorial at the Staples Centre in Los Angeles.
It is unclear where the private event will take place or who will be invited, although recent reports have suggested that Jackson will be laid to rest at the Forest Lawn Memorial Park in the Hollywood Hills.
Discussing the proposed public tribute, producer Ken Ehrlich said: "It will be a memorial service reflecting the dignity of what the family wants. It will be a fitting memorial to Michael Jackson – no dance numbers."
He added that there would be "some types of performances" but declined to reveal further details.
Keeping the kids out of the public eye is the one senisble thing Michael and the Jackson Family have done, but I still don't believe that those kids were conceived by him, Even with Michael having the skin condition that bleaches his skin his children would be born black of brown not white with blonde hair. Those kids are not his. Debbie Rowe has claimed she now wants custody of the children wow it's only taken her a week to come forward she must have been adding up all the dosh she would make, before she went to the press.
If those children are to have any hope of a normal upbringing then they need to be taken away from the Jackson circus alltogether before they become institutionalised like the rest of the family and they are institutionalised, you only have to see the way Latoyah behaved in the BB hosue and how she discussed her upbringing to know how her childhood was.
There are loads of celebrities and royals whose children's faces are unknown to the public but they did not have to walk around with their heads covered up. I am just concerned for the psychological effect this might have had on Michael's kids.Quote:
Originally Posted by AbigailBut appearing in public with their faces covered allows them anonymity. Does anyone apart from close family and friends know what his children look like?Quote:
Originally Posted by Perdita
One of Michael's close friends was on This Morning on Monday saying he could take the three kids out with his own kids and nobody knew who they were. They weren't hounded by the public, followed by the press, they didn't have their photos in the papers the next day and plastered all over the internet.
Look at the Beckham's and Katie Price. Their kids have very well known faces. They can't go out with family and friends without having their photos in the paper the next day. There was kidnap threats against Brooklyn Beckham and they had to step their security up.
Its all very well papers blurring out children's faces but those pictures still exist as originals with the child's face clearly visible. It only takes one person to circulate the original on the internet or print it in another media and then its fair game for kidnappers and other paparazzi to print.
Maybe some people do think it's extreme but Michael was simply protecting his children from the glare of the camera that he experienced for five decades. Is that so abnormal?
I can understand why he covered their faces, especially when you see what his fans/the press are like around him. Michael actually said that it meant that the children could go out to the cinema etc... without him and be undetected and be 'normal'. Sooo in that way, I think he was really trying to do what he felt was best for the children...Quote:
Originally Posted by PerditaThere are loads of celebrities and royals whose children's faces are unknown to the public but they did not have to walk around with their heads covered up. I am just concerned for the psychological effect this might have had on Michael's kids.Quote:
Originally Posted by AbigailBut appearing in public with their faces covered allows them anonymity. Does anyone apart from close family and friends know what his children look like?Quote:
Originally Posted by Perdita
One of Michael's close friends was on This Morning on Monday saying he could take the three kids out with his own kids and nobody knew who they were. They weren't hounded by the public, followed by the press, they didn't have their photos in the papers the next day and plastered all over the internet.
Look at the Beckham's and Katie Price. Their kids have very well known faces. They can't go out with family and friends without having their photos in the paper the next day. There was kidnap threats against Brooklyn Beckham and they had to step their security up.
Its all very well papers blurring out children's faces but those pictures still exist as originals with the child's face clearly visible. It only takes one person to circulate the original on the internet or print it in another media and then its fair game for kidnappers and other paparazzi to print.
Maybe some people do think it's extreme but Michael was simply protecting his children from the glare of the camera that he experienced for five decades. Is that so abnormal?
Undetected?
His method was not very successful then, I am afraid.
Why are people now wanting to help him death but didn't help him in the last stages of his life?
I think it would have been better if the children went out without covering their heads and Michael and the kids went to a place separately, if he wanted anonymity. Covering them with scarves and blankets only drew attention and everybody knew who's kids they were.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Perdita
Never going out in public with your father might be quite damaging and pretty sad. Anyway, maybe wearing a mask or something over their face was like a game to them.. who knows. I think there are much worse, damaging things he could have done, neglecting them etc...
Actually it was, I would say, in that no one, until recently saw their faces... so therefore they could go out undetected without him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trinity
Anyway surely the press are to blame for him having to cover up his kids' faces, not him???
just in case anyone wanted to know/watch it, my grandad said that michael jacksons memorial will be on tv tonight. i dunno what time or what channel (my grandad told my mum it was on every channel but i think hes got that slightly wrong!) but thought id let you all know :)
bbc2 or five now if u have sky, sky news are showing it in hd on sky art 1 channel 258
i hope this helps
My nine year old niece has summed it up well after counting the number of newspaper pages dedicated to his death.
''Michael Jackson is dead. So what. Get over it''
Out of the mouths of babes...........................
A US congresswoman has just announced he's to be made a posthumous world humanitarian.
WTF? He was a good musician and dancer. He died. If you did not like him before his death, don't pretend to like him now. If you believe some press, he was a saint, if you believe other press, he was a pervert. I never met him, so will keep an open mind. Fact is, he is dead. I will leave it at that. Wish everybody else would too.
I missed the memorial service, does anybody know if there will be a repeat, and if so, on which channel, at what time?
thanks
It will be on iPlayer soonQuote:
Originally Posted by pretty65
I caught the bit where Paris spoke and then it all came out :( I missed the majority of it though so will need to catch it up!
I watched most of it, didn't mean to... just thought I'd watch a bit to say I'd seen it. Wasnt expecting Jackoooo to turn up (thought they had his burial service before the memorial service - so how does that work then???) :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by .:SpIcYsPy:.
It wasn't at all what I was expecting... though was rather concerned that he was being put on par, by many a speak, with Jesus... it seemed to me. Lets get some perspective on this... he was a very talent bloke, but like all of us he had human failings... he was noooo saint.
i didnt watch any of it but i saw some of it on the news. i wondered why after all the effort michael jackson made of keeping his kids hidden that his daughter would then be allowed to speak at his memorial in front of millions of people worldwide. maybe she wanted to, i dunno, but it looked very upsetting/destressing for her and i just thought it might have been better if she spoke at their private funeral rather than letting her speak there. but as i said maybe she wanted to do it
also, and im not being horrible here, but im getting fed up of my local radio station constantly playing michael jackson songs. yeh it was nice the day after he died to have a tribute show to him on there, but still having 1hr dedicated to him everyday and playing his songs almost every other song throughout the day is a bit ott. some of the songs i can hear 4 or 5 times within a few hours and its really starting to annoy me!
I think that will reduce now, but as long as his songs are in the charts you are bound to hear his hits for a little while longer.