Joe Jackson's uses his son's death to plug new label
- Thread starter Mao Tse Tongue
- Start date
Courts dont care about farces, they tend to follow the letter of the law.Toke said:True, but what's the alternative. (I'm sure there are many, but for Ms. Rowe to step in now would be a farce IMHO)
So if Rowe has some kind of legal right to the kids, she probably gets custody
IMO the best person would be Janet Jackson. She seems the only semi-normal one of the bunch
haha yeah semi-normal... i cringe thinking about her obsession with fake boobs and exposing them nipples to live audienceThe LoLRus said:only semi-normal one of the bunch
I agree with what you're saying; but what does that say about the courts? I would have suggested Janet too (not like it matters as I don't know her or any of the other siblings), but we're talking about someone who walked away. Granted many others would have done the same, but should this not say something about their character when they show up looking for custody. She didn't care last Wednesday, and now she's ready to speak up (let alone, fight 'tooth-and-nail')?The LoLRus said:Courts dont care about farces, they tend to follow the letter of the law.
So if Rowe has some kind of legal right to the kids, she probably gets custody
IMO the best person would be Janet Jackson. She seems the only semi-normal one of the bunch
btw getting back to the main topic... I think Joe Jackson plugging his new label on national tv while being asked about Michael's death, might've been his way of getting back at his son for whatever reason. We all know Michael had confessed on an interview with Oprah years ago of being beaten and abused by his father as a kid, of being robbed off his chidhood years and made fun of his long nose.
You can tell there is a rift between the two. Reports regarding Michael's WILL suggest that he did not leave anything for his father, but only his mother, kids and charities.
You can tell there is a rift between the two. Reports regarding Michael's WILL suggest that he did not leave anything for his father, but only his mother, kids and charities.
Don said:I feel bad for the kids. My gut tells me that Michael's parents wanted custody of them so that they can somehow find a way to get all of Michael's estate and eventually get the kids out of the picture.
Mike Jackson's parents while not formally separated or divorced have lived separately for the last 15 years. Joe has been estranged not only from his wife but his other children, notably Janet, for even longer. In fact Joe wasn't even aware that Janet was also at the BET event.
Despite all the nonsense in the media, Michael Jackson had a clear flare for business and I'm sure he left an iron clad will and custody agreement for his children.
Guy was in tons of debt and spent money on personal zoos and amusement parks among other expenses....sibannac said:Michael Jackson had a clear flare for business
Michael knew the end was near... no desire to live anymore and financially would be better off dead.
Being loaded up on prescription drugs certainly didn't help his state of mind or body either.
Being loaded up on prescription drugs certainly didn't help his state of mind or body either.
We just may never know the total happenings surrounding Michael and his second wife and/or agreements or even if there was threats or anything surrounding the children. The news is just feeding us many different stories as oft. it does. They do not care to get facts straight even in the case of the downed plane the found girl survivor was first stated to be merely 5 years old and now is 14.
We have to look at things with an open mind and for me to do this I would like to thing that any mother of children does care about her children. I can do this further after reading that when MJ was going to court for the sex scandals that she did attempt to get them back even then. I even read that she has had contact with the children over the years. Lord only knows how much. Is it only the amount that MJ would allow? I do believe he wanted children and where children are concerned he was a selfish greedy man. As for the children being covered in public it is to my understanding that this was her request because she was afraid of the children being kidnapped or harmed in any way.
Who knows why she agreed to accept money, maybe he said accept this deal or you will never see them at all or I will set it up that people will believe you are crazy or something else. Maybe not those exactly but let's face it Jackson did have money and power to the full extent at that time of his life and could have hired anyone, maybe even to cause her an accident. Who really knows. We were not the ones in the relationship with him and we do not know if she also feared him too.
Anyhow my point is we were not there so how can we judge that she would be such a bad mother or her reasonings behind it. We do not even know if Michael has named her as the one to receive custody of the children yet, and she could very well be the one he named.
Non the less this whole story is bizarre and twisted as I pretty much expected from anyone in show business. Especially entailing MJ's life. My vote still goes to Ms. Rowe and hopefully that will bring them away from spot light eventually and bring some normality to thier lives.
We have to look at things with an open mind and for me to do this I would like to thing that any mother of children does care about her children. I can do this further after reading that when MJ was going to court for the sex scandals that she did attempt to get them back even then. I even read that she has had contact with the children over the years. Lord only knows how much. Is it only the amount that MJ would allow? I do believe he wanted children and where children are concerned he was a selfish greedy man. As for the children being covered in public it is to my understanding that this was her request because she was afraid of the children being kidnapped or harmed in any way.
Who knows why she agreed to accept money, maybe he said accept this deal or you will never see them at all or I will set it up that people will believe you are crazy or something else. Maybe not those exactly but let's face it Jackson did have money and power to the full extent at that time of his life and could have hired anyone, maybe even to cause her an accident. Who really knows. We were not the ones in the relationship with him and we do not know if she also feared him too.
Anyhow my point is we were not there so how can we judge that she would be such a bad mother or her reasonings behind it. We do not even know if Michael has named her as the one to receive custody of the children yet, and she could very well be the one he named.
Non the less this whole story is bizarre and twisted as I pretty much expected from anyone in show business. Especially entailing MJ's life. My vote still goes to Ms. Rowe and hopefully that will bring them away from spot light eventually and bring some normality to thier lives.
I thought the same thing. That is why I only mentioned Katherine (in regards to custody) and not Joe.sibannac said:Mike Jackson's parents while not formally separated or divorced have lived separately for the last 15 years. Joe has been estranged not only from his wife but his other children, notably Janet, for even longer. In fact Joe wasn't even aware that Janet was also at the BET event.
Despite all the nonsense in the media, Michael Jackson had a clear flare for business and I'm sure he left an iron clad will and custody agreement for his children.
Joe = scum
Katherine = Loving mother
Granted, she was watching the abuse go on, but let's remember the time (1950's-1960's). She was just trying to be a 'good' wife/mother.
TMZ reports Debbie Rowe is listed as their mother, that means she will likely get custody
http://www.tmz.com/2009/06/30/michael-jackson-deborah-rowe-child-michael-jr-paris/
http://www.tmz.com/2009/06/30/michael-jackson-deborah-rowe-child-michael-jr-paris/
The LoLRus said:TMZ reports Debbie Rowe is listed as their mother, that means she will likely get custody
http://www.tmz.com/2009/06/30/michael-jackson-deborah-rowe-child-michael-jr-paris/
Nope, apparently the will excluded her and left custody to Jackson's mother and if she can't do *shudder* Dianna Ross. The money has been left to a Trust.
I doubt the Trust document will ever be made public, so we will never know what he left to whom.
sibannac said:Nope, apparently the will excluded her and left custody to Jackson's mother and if she can't do *shudder* Dianna Ross. The money has been left to a Trust.
I doubt the Trust document will ever be made public, so we will never know what he left to whom.
Jackson's will has been leaked: http://www.docstoc.com/docs/8016703/Michael-Jacksons-Will
stinkynuts said:Jackson's will has been leaked: http://www.docstoc.com/docs/8016703/Michael-Jacksons-Will
Yeah I knew that, but who gets money or not is not in that will. That info will be in a Trust document that most likely will never be released.
