The will has not been filed with the court

[mjaliveomg]

No Second Jackson Will
Originally posted Jul 1st 2009 6:45 PM PDT by TMZ Staff



There are all sorts of reports of a second Michael Jackson will -- we're told a second will does NOT exist.

We do know Jackson signed several wills prior to the one that was filed today in court. The will was signed in July, 2002 -- almost five months after Prince Michael Jackson II was born. We're told Jackson had wills before that but updated them after the birth of the third child.

The prior wills became null and void when Jackson signed the 2002 will.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Jackson Showdown in Court Today
Originally posted Jul 5th 2009 10:20 PM PDT by TMZ Staff



Today we'll know if Katherine Jackson will fight over Michael Jackson's will -- or at least we'll know if her lawyer plans a fight.

We've learned lawyers for John Branca and John McClain -- the two men named co-executors in Michael Jackson's will -- will ask the judge to put them in charge of the estate, at least until the will is formally presented in court.

But here's the wild card -- last week, before the will was filed, Katherine Jackson's lawyer, Londell McMillan, went to court and got the judge to temporarily make Katherine the administrator of the estate. That power expires today.

The question -- will McMillan object to putting Branca and McClain in control of the estate? Jermaine Jackson has said he wants everyone to respect Michael's wishes. Sources tell us Jermaine's feelings are shared by the other siblings, but McMillan may have a different agenda. We're told many members of Michael's family are upset with McMillan and believe he's grandstanding. Lawyers for the named co-executors are bracing for a fight.

Ironically, the will names Katherine the guardian of Michael's children.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

this is offtopic i know, but take a look at this 2 pics of "mike"..sure its not the same person..the first is the 02 mj..look at his nose, chin.. :?
take a good look and compare both pics..

[Lonelynation]

I'm sorry I'm really slow on the pick up.

Has the will still not been filed, or are you saying that TMZ messed up their own timeline of when things went down?

[teine21]

The text about the will is just put in there, that article is a recap of the past year & at one point when they discovered the will they didn't file it right away. So TMZ included it in their recap, that's all it is. Although I think they put it there on purpose because they knew something like this would happen, that people would go   the will hasn't been filed?! When actually it has & like I said, this article is just a RECAP of events from June 25th 2009 until June 25th 2010.

[simplyme]

MO - if the will has not been filed, does that mean that Branca et al are also in on this "hoax"? Is Michael then really making all of the financial decisions? I'm really confused now.

The will was filed.  The link MO posted is for events COVERING THE PAST YEAR which includes a time when the will had yet to be filed.  Here is the link to the original story where that text is.  It's dated June 30, 2009 which is about the same time that Mr. Branca came forward with a WILL he shouldn't have been in possesion of to begin with.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I posted articles saying the will had yet to be filed and articles stating the will had been filed.  Yesterday, on June 25th, TMZ states in the article "One Year Later: Michael Jackson's Kids" at You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login that the will has NOT been filed.

The article you refer to:


Compare the text to the article TMZ posted yesterday:



They did not quote the June 30 article, except for the line "The will has not been files with the court".  Yesterday's article was a retrospective view of what happened then and stating what did happen.  

In my opinion the line "The will has not been files with the court" was put in there again for the obvious reason.

The text for the one of the children accepting the award is not identical either.  It's still just a recap.  I guess you believe it wasn't filed?  In my opinion, that's ludicrous.  But if this is the case we will agree to disagree and leave it at that.

[*Mo*]

MO - if the will has not been filed, does that mean that Branca et al are also in on this "hoax"? Is Michael then really making all of the financial decisions? I'm really confused now.

The will was filed.  The link MO posted is for events COVERING THE PAST YEAR which includes a time when the will had yet to be filed.  Here is the link to the original story where that text is.  It's dated June 30, 2009 which is about the same time that Mr. Branca came forward with a WILL he shouldn't have been in possesion of to begin with.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I posted articles saying the will had yet to be filed and articles stating the will had been filed.  Yesterday, on June 25th, TMZ states in the article "One Year Later: Michael Jackson's Kids" at You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login that the will has NOT been filed.

The article you refer to:


Compare the text to the article TMZ posted yesterday:



They did not quote the June 30 article, except for the line "The will has not been files with the court".  Yesterday's article was a retrospective view of what happened then and stating what did happen.  

In my opinion the line "The will has not been files with the court" was put in there again for the obvious reason.

The text for the one of the children accepting the award is not identical either.  It's still just a recap.  I guess you believe it wasn't filed?  In my opinion, that's ludicrous.  But if this is the case we will agree to disagree and leave it at that.

In my opinion - Had it been a complete recap, it would have said: At that time the will had not been filed with the court yet.

[UTisNUM1]

When it came to my grandfathers will, it was not properly filed in the courts since he had debts that needed to be payed off and he was in a legal battle with former doctors. You can't file a will for an estate when the estate's worth is dependent on legal factors that may arise.

My two cents.

[*Mo*]

When it came to my grandfathers will, it was not properly filed in the courts since he had debts that needed to be payed off and he was in a legal battle with former doctors. You can't file a will for an estate when the estate's worth is dependent on legal factors that may arise.

My two cents.

Thank you for sharing UTisNUM1, that makes a lot of sense!  

The latest creditor's claim was filed on 06-22-2010.  In an interview with ABC News on June 27 Howard Weitzman said:

"Weitzman: A lot of claims we've been able to resolve because they were less than meritorious. Some claims were accepted and paid out. Others may end up at trial. I do expect more lawsuits to be filed in the future because Michael was and still is a big target."

They still haven't sorted it all out, and it looks like it's going to take some time to sort it all out.

Is there a lawyer among us who can shine some light on this subject..?

[CC]

COULD BE "THE WILL" SOMETHING LIKE BANKRUPTCY FILING OF A COMPANY, CALL OF CREDITORS ??
SOMETHING LIKE THAT???
I ALWAYS THOUGHT THAT THE MICHAEL JACKSON STATE IS A COMPANY AND THE MICHAEL JACKSON NAME IS A TRADE MARK SO... I HAVE TO TALK WITH A FRIEND ABOUT THAT, SHE IS A LAWYER BUT I DON´T KNOW IF THE LAW IS THE SAME IN ALL THE COUNTRIES...

[shelby61]

I thought there was a dispute about the signing of the Will and the location but that sort of fell through the media cracks.  If the family is disputing the validity of the Will, then the Executors cannot file the Will in Court because the Executors have to file an Affidavit with the Will swearing that this is the last will of testament of whoever....blah blah blah...so if there is a problem with it not being the correct Will, then it will not get filed, that is why in my opinion, they applied for letters of special administration, so they could proceed with the funeral, burial etc. while the validity of the Will gets settled.  However, being that they are Executors, I don't know why they applied for Letters of Special Administration, unless the Will is in fact not the correct or the most recent Will.  There was also the issue of the children that had to be settled and it was obvious that they do stay  with Katherine (per the Will's wishes) and of course we know that the Will may not be the correct one, so again are the children with Katherine??  

The court did not appoint a neutral person, they appointed Branca who, in my opinion, is in direct conflict in alot of dealings with the Estate.  


A. LETTERS OF SPECIAL ADMINISTRATION

Petitions for letters of special administration ordinarily will not be granted on less than 24 hours' notice to the surviving spouse or registered domestic partner, to the nominated personal representative, or to any other person who, in the opinion of the Court, appears to be entitled to notice. In making the appointment, preference is given to the person entitled to letters testamentary or of administration, but if it appears that a bona fide contest exists between these persons, the Court will usually appoint a neutral person or corporation as special administrator. The petitioning party is advised to ascertain whether a bond must be posted prior to the issuance of letters of special administration.

(Eff. 1/01/05)

B. PETITION FOR PROBATE OF WILL OR CODICIL

When a petition for probate of will or codicil is filed, the original of the document being offered for probate must be filed prior to, or concurrently with, the petition. If the will or any part thereof is handwritten, a typewritten copy of the handwritten portion must also accompany the petition.

If the will is in a foreign language, a translation by an expert must be submitted at the time of filing the petition for probate. An affidavit or declaration as to the expertise of the translator must accompany the translation.


Also, being that Katherine has custody, it seems the children are spending alot of time away from her lol....for example, the kids meeting their grandma for lunch and she was not very affectionate with them (remember that) and this last stunt having the kids go to Hawaii instead of honouring and remembering their Dad on June 25th.  Things just don't add up...but can't put my finger on it yet... :?

[sweet1]

IMHO! Nothing will ever add up in this case. Everything is a lie! I strongly believe that is why MJ went back to his attorneys from the eighties to show him how he could do things legally but not binding. There's no way for any of us to figure this out. Also, why would the kids go to Hawaii instead of Gary, IN to pay tribute to their dad. It's obvious that there was no validate reason.Their dad isn't dead like the world believes. Katherine being in Gary was more or less a pony/dog show. It was for all of the world that believes MJ is dead. Give me a break! The Will papers will never be filed. Keep the Faith!

P.S. Dr. Murray killed the King of Pop and keeps his medical license. Right! I guess he kept it because perhaps he didn't kill him afterall!

[2ndStarTheRight]

IMHO! Nothing will ever add up in this case. Everything is a lie! I strongly believe that is why MJ went back to his attorneys from the eighties to show him how he could do things legally but not binding. There's no way for any of us to figure this out. Also, why would the kids go to Hawaii instead of Gary, IN to pay tribute to their dad. It's obvious that there was no validate reason.Their dad isn't dead like the world believes. Katherine being in Gary was more or less a pony/dog show. It was for all of the world that believes MJ is dead. Give me a break! The Will papers will never be filed. Keep the Faith!

P.S. Dr. Murray killed the King of Pop and keeps his medical license. Right! I guess he kept it because perhaps he didn't kill him afterall!

I completely agree. Michael was the one that brought his team back together. Branca has been apart of every major deal Micahel has made. I know they had a falling out but Michael chose to bring him back on board. I agree with you. He knows Michael's legal history and he knows the buiness legalities inside and out. I think he was the only one for this job. I know some bring up his tie to Sony but this could also make him an asset. Sony would trust him and that could make him a powerful advocate for Michael; they could use that relationship with Sony to their benefit.

[MissG]

The more I read, the more I think that there was an impersonator getting debts and deals here and there in the name of Michael.
Michael was asked if he signed documents when being on medication, but I strongly believe more and more that there is something fishy, another person pretending to be him.

[*Mo*]

The more I read, the more I think that there was an impersonator getting debts and deals here and there in the name of Michael.
Michael was asked if he signed documents when being on medication, but I strongly believe more and more that there is something fishy, another person pretending to be him.

Yep, that's what Souza and I have been trying to say for months...hence all the differences between the signatures on several documents.  Do I need to post those again?

[chappie]

Yes Mo please.......
Chaps

[*Mo*]

Okay, here we go again:


Full size image here: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

1: Marriage license Lisa Marie Presley
2: The Chandler settlement
3: Letter concerning participation in project "The Way of the Unicorn/The Endangered Ones"
4: The will
5: Moonwalk
6: Passport issued in 1987
7: Letter firing John Branca
8: Letter to Diane Williams, cease and desist from signing for his certified mail
9: Letter to Judge Melville substitution of Tom Mesereau in place of Geragos
10: Passport issued in 1993
11: Drivers license
12: AEG contract signature "Michael Jackson"
13: AEG contract signature "The Michael Jackson Company LLC, Name: Michael Jackson"
14: Contract mayor city of Gary concerning The Michael J Jackson Performing Arts Center