Janet Jackson Won't Stop
Janet Jackson is like that villain at the end of the movie who you think is dead but suddenly springs up again and tries to kill you one last time. You would think after the events of the past week that Janet and Rebbie and Randy Jackson would back off their vicious fight against the rest of the family and Michael's estate. Nope. They are not going to stop until they either get rid of the executors or get a nice big fat check to shut up and go away. That is what they want. There is nothing else they can gain by their actions. They just want to be the biggest pains they can and hope they get some money for going away. Apparently they are thinking of numbers in the $2M-$5M range to go away. I say forget them because all they are doing is making themselves look crazy and LaToya probably can't wait to show all of this on her new show.
Restraining order.
ReplyDeleteHell, that lot need a re-training order!
DeleteOf course they won't, they have to try and save face somehow.
ReplyDeleteIt's like blackmail. They always swear it's the last time they'll ask for money. Give them 5M each, a year from now they'll be back asking for more.
ReplyDeleteDamn girl, what happened to you?
ReplyDeleteThey are in no position to replace the executors or contest the will, Michael did not name them in the will and was clear that they were not to benefit.
ReplyDeleteIf they were to contest the will there was a set period of time to do that and it has long past.
As for the executors not doing a good job...ARE THESE CRAZIES KIDDING ?
I wouldn't give them one cent and let the idiots just run up legal fees...
Stupid Greedy Pigs..
i read something this morning that said the jackson folk slresdy took the will to court. went to appal and the californis supreme cout that the will is valid. (how did i miss that?). maybe if they don't even get their attorney's fees paid they will go away.
ReplyDeleteJanet and Randy have always been close, so I'm sure she's given a huge chunk of her cash to that loser. Rebbie's 'Centipede' money is long spent and I'm sure the royalties for 'Centipede' stopped coming in over 20 years ago...just a sad situation.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Robert that they need restraining orders against the relatives who agreed with kidnapping Katharine J., the legal guardian of the children, and lied to her that they were being taken care of. They tried to make her look incompetent.
ReplyDeleteThe children were left in the position of being so afraid that they felt forced to tell the public what was going on. Some of them should be charged with child endangerment.
make your own damn money! you have skills! stop being a freeloader!!
ReplyDeleteWhat a clusterfuck this has turned out to be.
ReplyDeleteThose poor kids. I never thought I would say this but thank goodness for twitter!
I'm trying to figure out why Janet is so involved in this. She's got tons of her own money, so why is she going after Michael's?
ReplyDeleteI was reading that she spends more than she has made in the last few years.
DeleteI don't know what any of them hoped to gain by stealing moms. I would imagine, she lost some of her custodial money because she's sharing custody time now. I have an odd feeling their antics won't stop until their poor moms is dead. At this point, they'll be willing to share the scraps left from her will.
ReplyDelete@Texshan Me, too. She is the piece that I cannot factor in to the big picture.
ReplyDeleteInteresting that Prince said his father had warned him about some family members.
I also felt that the kids were using social media to gain attention to a matter that certain family members wanted to purposefully keep mum. I rather admire their spunk.
I'm also glad that they've got each other.
It's funny how Janet is such a villain when all she is doing is looking out for her mother. She don't need the money the child is set for life. I could see paying the others off (although Rebbie has been out of the spotlight for a reason) they don't have the money Janet has but to call her a villain? Really?
ReplyDeleteAny resemblance between that photo of Janet Jackson and the monster from Alien is purely coincidental. Or not.
ReplyDeleteDidn't Rebbie raise Janet's secret love child? I didn't think that shit was true but the past few weeks made me stop and blink.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.forbes.com/sites/trialandheirs/2012/07/18/michael-jacksons-siblings-promise-new-fight-over-his-estate/
ReplyDeleteIn addition to explaining a bit of the legalese, I find it interesting that Katherine contested the will a few years ago. I'm glad the grandchildren love her, but I no longer trust her ability to reason if she keeps getting sucked into her children's greed.
It's all about money Janet doesn't want to give her sibs any more, and what better way than to take it from Michael's kids ( who they do not consider family, when have these aunts and uncles done anything positive for these kids ?)
ReplyDeleteAnd Katherine is just as bad....I think they're aware that the kids are coming of age, Grandma is getting really old and time is running out..
These blackmailers better not win, not a penny.
I honestly think there is something going on that none of us know about. Katherine is quite elderly and from her statement about the trip to the spa, sounds like she may be in the earlier stages of alzheimer's or dementia. It can't be easy raising 3 young children, and something tells me they can be quite the handful when they don't get their own way, especially the teenagers. In all fairness, LaToya probably has her fingers in this mess somewhere cause she is just a big of a mess as her brothers.
ReplyDeleteI'm surprised those kids had the fortitude to withstand all that crap. It has got to be mentally exhausting.
ReplyDeleteAs for Janet, she has her own money, and any time she wanted to, she could make some more by making another album and doing a tour. But I agree that her brothers and their various families have probably been bleeding her dry for years and she sees this as a way to get them off her back. So I don't think she is the villian of this piece. The brothers are.
If she's leading the band.......she's just as bad.
ReplyDeleteAll she had to say is NO MORE.
I hope those kids take the money and run as soon as they can. Go somewhere far, far away and live a happy life out of the spotlight. Sever all ties with the Jackson's and watch them twist in the wind. No sympathy for any of them now. Children should not have to deal with these issues.
ReplyDelete@Texshan, if she has 100-150m and has to support her siblings various lifestyles , how long would that last? She does not want to be stuck with that $$ responsibility.IMHO.
ReplyDeleteI don't know why everyone just assumes Janet is rolling in money. Not many hits in the past few years. Her brother was one of the richest men in the world and died broke. I guess it's just natural to assume that she is wise with her money, but her actions say otherwise.
ReplyDeleteHonestly, I think Randy has been the one leading the charge on this, going back to when Michael died. He was the one who tried to get the executors removed and he was the one who screamed the loudest about the will not being valid.
ReplyDeleteEven after Katherine returned home, Randy's tweets were full of anger and accusations. As far as Janet and her money goes, the real money to be made comes from touring, and she cancelled her last two tours partway through, for all sorts of reasons.
As long as Katherine is around and getting her stipend from the estate, you can bet she's still giving some of her kids $$$.
The threat of a suit to overturn the will is meaningless. The will was probated years ago and is not going to be abrogated. The only person who would have standing to challenge the will at this point would be a newly-discovered biological child of MJ.
ReplyDeleteThe article is poorly written. The threat is to challenge the handling of the estate by the trustees (who were the executors of MJ's will, of course). Well, only beneficiaries of the estate--the kids & MomJax--have standing to sue the trustees.
And it's nonsense to talk as if the trustees might be blackmailed into paying off the sibs. They cannot do that. It would violate their fiduciary duties as managers of the trust. They might have the leeway to payoff nuisance suits for a hundred grand or so, but not millions.
JaxSibs are doing this now 'cuz Prince and Paris are getting close to old enough to sue for emancipation. Pathetic and pointless.
BTW, a probate attorney--or any attorney, for that matter--would never confuse executors with trust trustees. The ghosties should really not blog about this kind of thing, because they keep getting obvious details like that wrong.
ReplyDeleteWhen Janet's tour came through here last year, tickets popped up on Groupon...I think they were $20 or $30 for 2 tickets. I couldn't tell you the last time I heard her on the radio. Hardly the best selling powerhouse she used to be.
ReplyDeletePeople keep throwing around the $150 million figure; that was in 2007. As someone pointed out, Michael made a shitload of money and died broke. Having that much money 5 years ago doesn't mean she still has most, or any of it.
Most people don't realize that the executors are regularly scrutinized by the courts, they voluntarily submit large deals to the court for approval (even though they don't have to) and have their pay set by the court. To claim that the executors are up to something nefarious is to also implicate the California family court (and therefore the judge) that oversees the estate.
I'm not sure the terms of the will ever converted the estate to a trust, so executor would be the proper designation. Based on the actions thus far of the "estate", and the fact that in legal correspondence (that has been made public) and legal proceedings it is referred to as "the estate" it seems as unlikely it converted to a trust. In any case, if all or part has been converted into a trust, it is likely that the executors are also the trustees. So, again, "executor" is appropriate.
ReplyDeleteIn any case, I'm not quite sure what's up with the continued pursuit of proving Enty is something other than what he claims. Who cares?
Good points, Janet was worth 100M in 2010. The figure now might be lower?
ReplyDeleteThe children have a good guardian ad litem.Perhaps that will help.
Back when I was a legal secretary, the estates our law firm handled had to submit an accounting to the court and have it approved every year where there was a situation that the estate couldn't be closed within one year. Since the Jackson estate has been going on for three years, you can bet the executors have filed at least two accountings. As far as Janet, since she's now doing ads for a weight loss plan, that can't be a good sign for her finances.
ReplyDelete"I'm not sure the terms of the will ever converted the estate to a trust...."
ReplyDeleteIt did. That was widely reported at the time.
Granted, full probate for a large, highly complex estate such as MJ's can take years, but the executors were highly motivated to wrap it up ASAP in order to squelch challenges.
"The children have a good guardian ad litem."
That JaxCuz or whoever was named co-legal guardian for the kids. A guardian ad litem is a legal advocate (usually a lawyer but not always) appointed by the court to represent the kids through a legal action, usually a custody fight. Different things.
Janet has a shit ton of money, but She got to live her own life because Michael paid for everyone. When he died, Katherine and he executors made sure that the estate continues to make money, and she and the kids are taken care of. Now the family is coming to Janet to foot the bills and she aint having it.
ReplyDeleteMicheal did not die broke! He did in debt! Now that the debts have been paid hie estate will return to making money.
ReplyDeleteCould Janet be the answer to the MV blind? This is quite a bitchy thing to do. I never saw this side of her.
ReplyDeleteWasn't there a rumor awhile back about Janet and her siblings breaking down the door of one of their wives? I think it was the one that Jerhighness and Randy both married. That doesn't make her look good.
ReplyDeleteOT- saw Total Recall, Collin F. is hot and Jessica "I'm too beautiful for this world" was meh.
She told us back in the 80s that she's Nasty...now she's showing us.
ReplyDeleteAfter looking, it appears as though the trusts for the kids and Kathrine were put in place fairly immediately. Because MJ did not set up living trusts, it remains a probate estate because of the continued earning power of the estate. Money is transferred into the trusts at regular intervals. Branca and McClain are both executors and trustees. Referring to them as either (or both) is entirely appropriate (however, it is "the estate" that makes the deals; not being an expert in wills and trusts, I'm not sure trusts even have the ability to make "deals" beyond investments).
ReplyDeleteIf Janet was worth $150m in 2007, $100m in 2010...-$50m net worth/3 years...it's not difficult to see she's eventually going to need a new income source.
@kim butler...maybe "broke" is not entirely accurate. How about "not at all liquid" and "severely in debt" (although I would argue that when your debt exceeds your assests by some $500m, your ass is, for all intents and purposes, "broke").
Does no one remember how deep in debt Michael Jackson was at his death? He was on the verge of losing Neverland, among other things. In fact there are whole conspiracy theories that he faked his death to get out of the debt. (The NYT reported three years before his death that at THAT time he was $270 million in debt and paying $4.5 million a month on the interest alone.)
ReplyDeletePlease note that about a year before Michael died, Janet bought a house for Katherine assuming Neverland was going to be lost. But that there were all sorts of news reports that, like Michael, Janet was as big a deadbeat and hadn't paid staff in months and months.
It's about the fucking money.
"Branca and McClain are both executors and trustees. Referring to them as either (or both) is entirely appropriate..."
ReplyDeleteNo. Your understanding of probate law is wrong. The probate estate of a deceased person cannot endure indefinitely. The role of an executor is a finite one, that being to settle up the estate, usually per the terms of a will, and then close it out. The executors fully probate the estate of the deceased, then it is dissolved and they are discharged from their duties.
There is no such thing as a "probate trust." A trust set up under the terms of a will is just a trust, like any other trust, with beneficiaries, trustees, etc. The trust will be created and trustees named during the process of probate, but it is a separate entity from the estate of the deceased.
Even if MJ's estate hasn't been fully probated, the role of the executors is mostly irrelevant at this point. The vast bulk of MJ's property has been legally transferred to the trust set up for MomJax & the kids at this point. Even if the JaxSibs got themselves named executors of the rump estate, they can't order the trust to return MJ's fortune. That just gives them standing to sue the trust. They couldn't even get money from the trust to manage the probate estate without suing.
These sorts of details are required knowledge to pass the bar exam anywhere, thus the actual Enty would know them.
Any good will I may have felt for Janet is gone, and I'm pretty sure others feel the same way. She has done irreparable damage to her reputation.
ReplyDeleteIf you read the statement of Blair G. Brown on Janet, Randy & Rebbie's behalf it says they want to carry out the wishes of their brother Michael.
How would they know what Michael wanted ? He had nothing to do with any of them...
You're right, there is no such thing as a probate trust which is why I said probate estate.
ReplyDeleteAn estate can stay in probate until the trust is assumed by its beneficiaries; there is no legally set time limit on a probate (although, granted, even the most complicated don't drag on past 2-3 years). (As an aside, MJ could have avoided all of this legal wrangling if he would have set up living trusts or funded current trusts [which were set up prior to the last will] additionally, he should have set the amount the executors/trustees were getting paid.)
The vast majority of the wealth has not been distributed into the trusts. The executors (proper reference because the "estate" has not finished being probated) go to court at regular intervals to request permission to transfer funds to the trusts. That is not legal knowledge, it is 5 minutes spent looking up the Jackson court proceedings.
Branca and McClain are STILL executors. They are ALSO trustees. Referring to them as executors does not show a lack of legal knowledge or having taken the bar...it shows knowledge that an estate still exists and has not been fully probated.
In any case, I suspect the attorney for MJ's estate, Howard Weitzman is very aware of whether or not the estate still exists. In the email that Weitzman sent to TJ's lawyer last week (barring Janet Rebbie, et al from the house), he refers to Branca and McClain as the executors. Again, Enty's use of "executors" to refer to Branca and McClain is proper.
As an interesting side note (at least to me), MJ's kids and mom actually end up getting less than 40% each of the estate. Their parts are paid out after all outstanding debts, fees, etc. are cleared (net). The trust for the charities is funded at 20% PRIOR to any outgoing payments; so off of the top (gross). Huh.
ReplyDelete"I know more about the law!" "No, I know more about the law!" "No me!" "No me!" Blah blah blah blah blah blah
ReplyDeleteB. Profane ftw!
@seaward...whatev. I am not positive, but very close, that no one twisted your arm to read any of the legal crap.
ReplyDeleteAnd, I guess you are also on the, "Enty is a fraud...a FRAUD, I tell you!!!!" boat. Talk about blah, blah, blah....
Wow, why so defensive? You're right, no one twisted my arm. Give yourself a pat on the back. I didn't read any of your shit, just saw the general gist of the "argument" and left my comment because I love B.P. And I couldn't give a shit who Enty is, or who Enties are.
ReplyDeleteNow I bid you adieu, Saturday night's calling my name!
@Amy
ReplyDeleteYes, I remember. The people handling things have sure made some good moves.
When we were at the fair this summer the merry-go-round from neverland was one of the rides. (at least they said that was were it was from). wouldn't need to sell it all off now.
In common law, the terms "executor" and "trustee" are interchangeable. In fact, most wills refer to "my Executor and Trustee" - the "executor of my estate and trustee of the trusts created by my estate". So, lawyers often do use these terms interchangeably. I rarely use the term "executor", other than to clients because they understand that.
ReplyDeleteIf I came across as defensive, I would certainly like to correct that misconception because I have nothing to defend. You state that you have no idea what I said and yet you're jumping all over my shit.
ReplyDeleteI'll let that speak for itself.
Interesting the excuses people are making for Janet's actions. I said it before - Janet should have lots of money stashed away. If she doesn't, and from her actions it appears that she doesn't, she wants to get her hands on MJ's money for her own selfish reasons.
ReplyDeleteAfter this I can't imagine anyone paying money to see her. If she wanted to put herself back in the conversation this wasn't the way to do it.
Sad.
No one fights this hard to get at money when they don't need it. Janet Jackson obviously needs it now (she hasn't had a hit record in years and is aging rapidly out of the pop music milieu). Her professional freeloader brothers and sister Rebbie have always lived off MJ's money, and now that the tap is turned off they're desperate. And you know what desperate people do: ANYTHING.
ReplyDelete@BProfane. thanks for the insight. i dont do probate but that is a quick trust and estates probate 101 for laypeople. i assume all of the legal doings are public knowledge or reported in some fashion. and BTW i dont believe for a minute Enty does probate and certainly none of the Enty lites are lawyers
ReplyDeleteThis whole thread is just another nail in the coffin that the original ENTY is no longer this FAUX-ENTY...
ReplyDelete@B. Profane
ReplyDeleteIm super impresed at your knowledge of the law ( I guess its your profession)
thanks for sharing and translating all the jargon to common language :)