Michael Jackson Death Hoax Investigators
Hoax Investigation => Hoax Videos => Topic started by: SimPattyK on July 30, 2012, 08:29:01 PM
-
Please post in this thread all the videos that you will find about Michael's WILL !! the old one, the new one... valid or fake!
I think we should try to learn ore about this.... fells like this WILL is a key-piece in the hoax-puzzle! :icon_e_wink:
View Feb 2003 letter of Michael firing the current Estate Executor, John Branca
http://s845.photobucket.com/albums/ab13/MJMedia09/Michael%20Jackson/?action=view¤t=jacksonfiringbrancaletter1.jpg
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnsLv5Ur3tw&feature=channel&list=UL[/youtube]
http://i845.photobucket.com/albums/ab13/MJMedia09/Slide22.jpg
^^Howard Weitzman said in a TMZ interview dated October 22, 2009, that the Will signed under PERJURY as "Correct" had the wrong location of LA and MJ signed it in in NYC. They changed the location after TMZ photos showed MJ in NYC from 07-6-02 to 07-09-02
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pe1o3_iO6II&feature=g-all-u[/youtube]
-
The will is obviously important. We're hearing about it (again) over 3 years later from Jackson family members themselves. One of the most obvious signs for me that the will is fake, or a hoax prop (besides the 7 numerology), is the use of "Joseph" as Michael's middle name. I'll have to take a closer look at the document again, when I have more time to focus properly on it.
http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/Michael_Jackson_Will_Statement_7_1_09.pdf
-
I believe the will is fake and has since the beginning being that Michael was no where near where that will was “signed” on the date he was said to have signed it. My gut feeling is that there was no will only a trust. However, the trust that they have presented for Michael is very general for someone with the assets and money that is attached to his name. His trust should have been much, much more involved. That being the case I don’t even know if the trust that is being referenced is real. I cannot see a reputable attorney filing a trust like that, leaving out so much and so open to one’s own interpretation, not for a person of Michael’s standing. It is too vague and not specific enough. Michael surely will have a real will and a real trust that will be presented when he “dies”.
-
Great thread...there is so much new it's hard to keep up. I did find this video on You Tube....it touches on some of the same, but also has some additional great footage, and points about the will:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pe1o3_iO6II[/youtube]
Thanks Sim.....
Blessings Always
-
The will is obviously important. We're hearing about it (again) over 3 years later from Jackson family members themselves. One of the most obvious signs for me that the will is fake, or a hoax prop (besides the 7 numerology), is the use of "Joseph" as Michael's middle name. I'll have to take a closer look at the document again, when I have more time to focus properly on it.
http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/Michael_Jackson_Will_Statement_7_1_09.pdf
Since spending time on the forum comparing Front's handwritten notes with Michael's writing samples, I'm thinking... this is not MJ's signature, and signed 5pm in Los Angeles when he wasn't there. Fake will was planned.
-
Unless Branca is a part of the hoax, it almost seems like a snub for Branca to have signed the will on the very date that Michael was putting it to Sony. Surely the astute businessman that Branca is KNEW what that date represented. It feels like he’s saying to Michael the jokes not on Sony, but on you, because we are all powerful. So rather than July 7, 2002 being remembered for the day that he read Sony and did good business, it will go down in history as the day Branca did.
From a different point of view it could be seen as showing how much clout public opinion has in that we KNOW that Michael was in Harlem during this time period, and now everyone else does; but if the public isn’t completely outraged by it in huge numbers, even the courts will turn their eyes as if they don’t see the fraud that was committed. And that is exactly what happened to Michael during all those years he was ostracized and torn apart in the media. That the public basically turned their backs on Michael allowed the media to have a field day with nothing done about it. The same would have probably happened in the 2005 trials if we had not stood up and made some noise and brought global attention to it. Even though Michael was innocent, without the support of people who were willing to rally for him and make a fuss, there’s no telling what would have happened. The courts can be bought and they will work only as hard as they have to. If it is found that the public is “okay” with Branca presenting a will that is obviously a fraud, nothing will happen to change it. Nothing.
-
The will is obviously important. We're hearing about it (again) over 3 years later from Jackson family members themselves. One of the most obvious signs for me that the will is fake, or a hoax prop (besides the 7 numerology), is the use of "Joseph" as Michael's middle name. I'll have to take a closer look at the document again, when I have more time to focus properly on it.
http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/Michael_Jackson_Will_Statement_7_1_09.pdf
Since spending time on the forum comparing Front's handwritten notes with Michael's writing samples, I'm thinking... this is not MJ's signature, and signed 5pm in Los Angeles when he wasn't there. Fake will was planned.
Ya I've always thought the sig looked off, I guess he could've done it that way on purpose, or just never signed it.
For some reason, Randy bringing up the will again reminds of TS' levels in 2011, where we went over so many little details of the events on June 25th even though that had been done many times over prior to the levels.
-
Unless Branca is a part of the hoax, it almost seems like a snub for Branca to have signed the will on the very date that Michael was putting it to Sony. Surely the astute businessman that Branca is KNEW what that date represented. It feels like he’s saying to Michael the jokes not on Sony, but on you, because we are all powerful. So rather than July 7, 2002 being remembered for the day that he read Sony and did good business, it will go down in history as the day Branca did.
From a different point of view it could be seen as showing how much clout public opinion has in that we KNOW that Michael was in Harlem during this time period, and now everyone else does; but if the public isn’t completely outraged by it in huge numbers, even the courts will turn their eyes as if they don’t see the fraud that was committed. And that is exactly what happened to Michael during all those years he was ostracized and torn apart in the media. That the public basically turned their backs on Michael allowed the media to have a field day with nothing done about it. The same would have probably happened in the 2005 trials if we had not stood up and made some noise and brought global attention to it. Even though Michael was innocent, without the support of people who were willing to rally for him and make a fuss, there’s no telling what would have happened. The courts can be bought and they will work only as hard as they have to. If it is found that the public is “okay” with Branca presenting a will that is obviously a fraud, nothing will happen to change it. Nothing.
I get what you're saying but I think the point of having the "will" "signed" that day was to create the 7/7 then 7 years later the Memorial on 7/7. The NY/LA debate should tell people that something fishy is going on and make them notice the "coincidence". And those paying attention did notice. It's an indicator of the hoax and it's planning, almost sort of in your face.
-
Unless Branca is a part of the hoax, it almost seems like a snub for Branca to have signed the will on the very date that Michael was putting it to Sony. Surely the astute businessman that Branca is KNEW what that date represented. It feels like he’s saying to Michael the jokes not on Sony, but on you, because we are all powerful. So rather than July 7, 2002 being remembered for the day that he read Sony and did good business, it will go down in history as the day Branca did.
From a different point of view it could be seen as showing how much clout public opinion has in that we KNOW that Michael was in Harlem during this time period, and now everyone else does; but if the public isn’t completely outraged by it in huge numbers, even the courts will turn their eyes as if they don’t see the fraud that was committed. And that is exactly what happened to Michael during all those years he was ostracized and torn apart in the media. That the public basically turned their backs on Michael allowed the media to have a field day with nothing done about it. The same would have probably happened in the 2005 trials if we had not stood up and made some noise and brought global attention to it. Even though Michael was innocent, without the support of people who were willing to rally for him and make a fuss, there’s no telling what would have happened. The courts can be bought and they will work only as hard as they have to. If it is found that the public is “okay” with Branca presenting a will that is obviously a fraud, nothing will happen to change it. Nothing.
I get what you're saying but I think the point of having the "will" "signed" that day was to create the 7/7 then 7 years later the Memorial on 7/7. The NY/LA debate should tell people that something fishy is going on and make them notice the "coincidence". And those paying attention did notice. It's an indicator of the hoax and it's planning, almost sort of in your face.
I get that connection also, but there is something still to be said about the ability for a person or persons to have so much clout that no matter what else is said or done it goes unheard or in this scenario unprosecuted.
-
Unless Branca is a part of the hoax, it almost seems like a snub for Branca to have signed the will on the very date that Michael was putting it to Sony. Surely the astute businessman that Branca is KNEW what that date represented. It feels like he’s saying to Michael the jokes not on Sony, but on you, because we are all powerful. So rather than July 7, 2002 being remembered for the day that he read Sony and did good business, it will go down in history as the day Branca did.
From a different point of view it could be seen as showing how much clout public opinion has in that we KNOW that Michael was in Harlem during this time period, and now everyone else does; but if the public isn’t completely outraged by it in huge numbers, even the courts will turn their eyes as if they don’t see the fraud that was committed. And that is exactly what happened to Michael during all those years he was ostracized and torn apart in the media. That the public basically turned their backs on Michael allowed the media to have a field day with nothing done about it. The same would have probably happened in the 2005 trials if we had not stood up and made some noise and brought global attention to it. Even though Michael was innocent, without the support of people who were willing to rally for him and make a fuss, there’s no telling what would have happened. The courts can be bought and they will work only as hard as they have to. If it is found that the public is “okay” with Branca presenting a will that is obviously a fraud, nothing will happen to change it. Nothing.
I get what you're saying but I think the point of having the "will" "signed" that day was to create the 7/7 then 7 years later the Memorial on 7/7. The NY/LA debate should tell people that something fishy is going on and make them notice the "coincidence". And those paying attention did notice. It's an indicator of the hoax and it's planning, almost sort of in your face.
I get that connection also, but there is something still to be said about the ability for a person or persons to have so much clout that no matter what else is said or done it goes unheard or in this scenario unprosecuted.
I just re-read your initial post hes, I'm pretty sure the day MJ lambasted Sony was on July 6, 2002 so it wasn't the same day.
-
^^Howard Weitzman said in a TMZ interview dated October 22, 2009, that the Will signed under PERJURY as "Correct" had the wrong location of LA and MJ signed it in in NYC. They changed the location after TMZ photos showed MJ in NYC from 07-6-02 to 07-09-02
(http://i845.photobucket.com/albums/ab13/MJMedia09/Slide22.jpg)
-
This is copied from someone elses blog...I accept no credit for it... thought it maybe appropiate considering we are talking about a will...........
The problem is it was improperly signed, the will makes the witnesses both Executors and Trustees. The California Probate Code allows anyone to witness a will, but is an interested party witness it two disinterested parties have to also witness it, or it will be consider writing under duress among other this unless the devise or plan was made solely a fiduciary purpose as in one, but the will named them both Executors and trustees. There is a difference between an executor and a trustee. This is a matter for the interpretation of the court.
An executor is listed on a will and the trustee is listed in the trust.
An executor is a person appointed by the probate court to administer the estate of a decedent. A trustee is a person who enters into an agreement to hold – and sometimes manage – assets for beneficiaries of a trust. Today, many people create what are frequently called ‘living trusts’ or ‘inter vivos (in-ter VEE-vose) trusts’ to hold their assets while they are living and to avoid the administration of their assets through the probate process after they die. Trustees owe fiduciary duties to the beneficiaries of the trust just as executors and administrators owe fiduciary duties to the beneficiaries and creditors of estates. If you believe that an executor, administrator, trustee, or other fiduciary has deprived you of assets, contact an attorney.
The Question of Law: Can all three witnesses be both the executors and trustees of the estate assigned by the will they witnessed solely. The exception to the rule is to act in a fiduciary capacity and not two separate and distinct fiduciary capacities. I do not think the law was intended for all three witnesses to act as both executors and trustees to the same estate.
From the California Probate Code
6112. (a) Any person generally competent to be a witness may act as
a witness to a will.
(b) A will or any provision thereof is not invalid because the
will is signed by an interested witness.
(c) Unless there are at least two other subscribing witnesses to
the will who are disinterested witnesses, the fact that the will
makes a devise to a subscribing witness creates a presumption that
the witness procured the devise by duress, menace, fraud, or undue
influence. This presumption is a presumption affecting the burden of
proof. This presumption does not apply where the witness is a
person to whom the devise is made solely in a fiduciary
capacity.
(d) If a devise made by the will to an interested witness fails
because the presumption established by subdivision (c) applies to the
devise and the witness fails to rebut the presumption, the
interested witness shall take such proportion of the devise made to
the witness in the will as does not exceed the share of the estate
which would be distributed to the witness if the will were not
established. Nothing in this subdivision affects the law that
applies where it is established that the witness procured a devise by
duress, menace, fraud, or undue influence.
I've come to the conclusion it is truly invalid, that does not invalidate the trust, just the trustees.
I am just curious about something and will be straight to the point. They say Michael Jackson owes about $80 Million in estate taxes known as death taxes. This mean he has about 10 months for his estate to pay this to the federal government. This also mean that Michael’s estate exceeds a net figure of a minimum of $3.5 Million, but more like $200 Million after debts are paid.
In his Final will they are now going by it requires that his debts to be paid prior to his beneficiaries are to receive their settlement, which is a very good protection mechanism. Here is my question why are they being offered a stipend while all the wheeling and dealing takes place to settle the estates debts, when the death tax exempts $3.5 Million from taxes.
Here is my point if they owe death taxes his estate exceeds $3.5 Million net after taxes and other debts. Therefore Michael’s child and his mother who are the beneficiaries already have $3.5 Million that belongs to them minus 20% to charity. This comes out to 40% to the children and 40% to Mother Katherine or $1.45 Million to the Children and $1.45 to Mother Katherine and $600,000 to a charity to be held in escrow. I might be wrong but I doubt it, the Jackson Family has a RIGHT to $2.9 Million immediately after it is established Michael owes even one dime in estate taxes, because it is therefore established his estate exceeds $3.5 Million after all debts are paid. They (the court) has no right to withhold this money from this family. And Katherine has the right to do with her share of the money as she pleases this is about control and it is wrong
-
Michael Jackson was in Harlem July, 6th, 2002.
Michael Jackson speaks out against the then CEO of Sony Music, Tommy Mottola, in Harlem, New York on July 6th 2002 – Video with Al Sharpton
July 7, 2002] Michael calls Tommy Mottola a racist
Multi=platinum singer Michael Jackson, already feuding with his record company, charged Saturday that the recording industry was a racist conspiracy that turns profits at the expense of performers — particularly minority artists.
Michael was in New York City with Johnnie Cochran Jr. and Al Sharpton on 6 July 2002. If a will was made in fear of these battles with Tommy Mottola and Sony, why make a will with incompetent people and he when had Johnnie in his corner. He had to consult with him. Trace Michael from New York City on 6 July 2002. This is 2:00 pm New York City time and he had to take a 6 hour flight which means he had to leave New York City by about 6 am Monday to California to go straight to them. Do you buy this? I smell a fish.
The alleged will was executed 7 July 2002 at 5:00PM in Los Angeles
The alleged will was executed 7 July 2002 at 5:00PM in Los Angeles
July 6th 2002
Speech against Sony
Michael attended Rev. Al Sharpton’s National Action Network in Harlem today and in a speech to fans and members of the public, Michael called the Sony Music Corporation “racist” and launched a verbal attack on Sony Music as a company that conspires against its recording artists for profits. Michael stated the recording companies really, really do conspire against the artists – they steal, they cheat, they do everything they can, (Especially) against the black artists.” Jackson has teamed up with Sharpton and attorney Johnnie Cochran Jr., in recently forming a coalition to investigate whether artists are being financially exploited by their record labels. Of Tommy Mottola, the Sony Music chief he said was “mean, he’s a racist, and he’s very, very, very devilish.” He also accused the Sony Music chief of using “the n-word” when speaking about an unidentified black Sony artist. In addition to himself as a victim of the industry, Michael also mentioned several other artists as falling victim, including James Brown, Mariah Carey, and Sammy Davis Jr. “If you fight for me, you’re fighting for all black people, dead and alive” Michael said to the crowd.
The Jackson Family Must Hire Estates, Trust & Wills Specialist
Part of Section VIII of MJJ Last Will
Each of us is now more than eighteen (18) years of age and competent witness and resides at the address set forth after his name.
Each of us is acquainted with Michael Joseph Jackson. At this time, he is over eighteen (18) years and, to the best of our knowledge he is found of sound mind and is not acting under duress, menace, fraud, misinterpretation and undue influence.
Anyone with a reasonable legal background can see this will is not legally binding, Michael never stated he was of sound mind and memory and all that other stuff about not acting under duress, menace, fraud, misinterpretation and undue influence creates suspicions, because it was not necessary.
Meanwhile Mother Katherine Jackson was denied her request to continue to control Michael’s estate and two of the three men named in the will were name trustees until Aug 3rd, 2009 when another hearing will take place, Berry Siegel resigned and I think he should be questioned as to the day of the creation and validity of said will. For all we know Michael could have been high on anything; he never said he was of sound mind and memory. And Michael is said to have has serious drug problems at the time.
However, “An attorney for Katherine Jackson said the pop star’s mother was not contesting the validity of the 2002 will, but was “concerned” that the men named as executors, lawyer John Branca and music executive John McClain, might not be “the proper people.” “Her concern is about handing over the keys to the kingdom this quickly to this group,” said lawyer John E. Schreiber.”
-
Thanks Wishingstar for posting the video, and 2good2btrue for more info.
All of this info is still under the belief that MJ is dead, which we know is not true. The family are publicly saying MJ is dead, but are 'hoaxily' saying he's alive. So where does that leave us with the Will's authenticity? Somehow I cannot believe that Branca, Mclaine and Weitzman would be as stupid as to fake the Will without verifying the whereabouts of MJ, and at least making sure he's not far away. Why did MJ not make any effort for 7 years to make sure his Will for his children was current? They say he may have been drugged out, but we have learned these 3 years that MJ was NOT addicted to drugs, and that it was part of the hoax started 20+ years ago. I have a copy of my family's will in my possession and one is at the lawyer's. Just as after June 25,09 the Pepsi fire video was released by someone likely MJ, perhaps the real Will will be leaked or be found.
I remember that KJ and the kids were seen totally supporting the HTWF, yet Branca did not support it. The Estate apparently said to KJ, "I am Michael Jackson now", which might mean MJ is involved there. Lastly at the X-factor show, John Branca was sitting with KJ and the kids, as well as someone (Hatman) that we think might have been MJ dressed to look like Branca's brother. This hoax has plenty of mind-games/twists/pitfalls for money-sharks, media, fans and public. I guess I'll 'keep watching'!
-
These are the articles of local NY press:
http://search.nypost.com/search?q=Michael+Jackson+Harlem+July+2002&entsp=a&sort=date%3AD%3AS%3Ad1&entsp=a&client=redesign_frontend&entqr=0&oe=UTF-8&ie=UTF-8&ud=1&getfields=*&proxystylesheet=redesign_frontend&output=xml_no_dtd&site=default_collection&filter=p&num=10&search_submit=Search (http://search.nypost.com/search?q=Michael+Jackson+Harlem+July+2002&entsp=a&sort=date%3AD%3AS%3Ad1&entsp=a&client=redesign_frontend&entqr=0&oe=UTF-8&ie=UTF-8&ud=1&getfields=*&proxystylesheet=redesign_frontend&output=xml_no_dtd&site=default_collection&filter=p&num=10&search_submit=Search)
July 6, 2002
"At about 8:30 p.m. [New York Eastern day time], Jackson showed up at Webster Hall on East 11th Street, where he took the dance-hall's stage to get an award from his U.S. fan club."
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/jacko_wild_ride_hits_town_racist_IeAgAEnkGdyMnnN5AMFozH (http://www.nypost.com/p/news/jacko_wild_ride_hits_town_racist_IeAgAEnkGdyMnnN5AMFozH)
July 7, 2002
Al Sharpton calming waters.
"I didn't know that Michael planned to personally attack Tommy - but nobody tells Michael Jackson what to do," Sharpton said, adding that he "stands firmly behind" Jackson's view on the industry overall."
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/jacko_got_off_tracko_rev_al_says_2bxHACYbofvq4W7xf3mXAJ (http://www.nypost.com/p/news/jacko_got_off_tracko_rev_al_says_2bxHACYbofvq4W7xf3mXAJ)
July 9, 2002
Michael Jackson releases additional statements.
"Michael Jackson yesterday lashed out at accusations that he's a gay child molester who bleaches his skin so he won't look black, saying they're part of a "conspiracy" to "turn the public against him." "
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/no_freak_jackson_lashes_out_at_race_kcIAGF13FAeka3YCUAoiTI (http://www.nypost.com/p/news/no_freak_jackson_lashes_out_at_race_kcIAGF13FAeka3YCUAoiTI)
Only remaining question is: was MJ seen in New York after July 6, 2002 and when exactly?
Michael was seen in New York on July 6, 2002, 8:30 pm Eastern day time (EDT).
A flight takes a duration of 6h 4 min. - let's say take off on July 6, 2002 10:00 pm EDT -> arrival time + 6 hrs July 7, 2002 4:00 am EDT which corresponds to July 7, 2002 1:00 am PDT in Los Angeles.
The will was executed July 7, 2002 at 5:00 pm PDT in Los Angeles.
That leaves a good couple of hours for a nap, breakfast, managing, talking, preparing or whatever was due.
Meanwhile, Al Sharpton took the outrage and an MJ statement could be released from anywhere when everything was in dry sheets.
-
Grace, I agree it gives enough time.
But why would Weitzman be so quick to say there was a mistake that a witness wrote down the wrong location? Sounds like panicky back-pedaling or hoax detail created by :Michael_Jackson_dancing_smile. "One of the witnesses forgot where he was." :thjajaja121:
And I love 'Threatened', from 'Invincible' that was released the year before. He was giving the sharks a message, and is perfect for the Will situation. It can't be coincidental.
[ROD SERLING INTRO]
Tonight’s story is somewhat unique and calls for a different kind of introduction
A monster had arrived in the village
The major ingredient of any recipe for fear is the unknown
And this person or thing is soon to be met
He knows every thought, he can feel every emotion
Oh yes, I did forget something didn’t I? I forgot to introduce you to the monster.
You’re fearing me, ‘cause you know I’m a beast
Watching you when you sleep, when you’re in bed
I’m underneath
You’re trapped in halls, and my face is the walls
I’m the floor when you fall, and when you scream it’s ‘cause of me
I’m the living dead, the dark thoughts in your head
I heard just what you said
That’s why you’ve got to be threatened by me
[CHORUS]
You should be watching me, you should feel threatened
While you sleep, while you creep, you should be threatened
Every time your lady speaks she speaks of me, threatened
Half of me you’ll never be, so you should feel threatened by me
You think you’re by yourself, but it’s my touch you felt
I’m not a ghost from Hell, but I’ve got a spell on you
Your worst nightmare, it's me, I'm everywhere
In one blink I’ll disappear, and then I’ll come back to haunt you
I’m telling you, when you lie under a tomb
I’m the one watching you
That’s why you got to be threatened by me
[CHORUS]
[ROD SERLING VERSE]
The unknown monster is about to embark
From a far corner, out of the dark
A nightmare, that’s the case
Never Neverland, that’s the place
This particular monster can read minds
Be in two places at the same time
This is judgement night, execution, slaughter
The devil, ghosts, this monster is torture
You can be sure of one thing, that’s fate
A human presence that you feel is strange
A monster that you can see disappear
A monster, the worst thing to fear.
[CHORUS x 3]
[ROD SERLING OUTRO]
What you have just witnessed could be the end of a particularly terrifying nightmare.
It isn’t. It’s the beginning.
-
In my opinion, not one of these initials look alike...Even I have had to initial pages of documents... and they almost always looked alike...these look like someone has tried to copy it, not once, but over and over again...The signature is not exactly how we remember it.
(http://www.michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/hoaxpic/images/initials.jpg)
(http://www.michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/hoaxpic/images/willsig.jpg)
Do not forget, that Howard Weitzman has been an actor as well...
Maybe it's just McLain/ or Weitzman we need to be concerned about...That is if Branca is working for Michael...Maybe to help catch the other two cats.. :icon_geek: :icon_geek:
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0919388/
(http://www.michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/hoaxpic/images/hw.jpg)
-
Yes, his will is fake and invalis. The reason I think it is invalid is because it does not state his true birth name which is Michael Joe Jackson. Even in his trust that was signed in 1995 does not state his true birth name. When you are filling out a will and trust, you are supposed to state your true birth name and all other names you were known as.
-
In order to understand the circumstances surrounding July 6 speech at Harlem, it might be helpful to get back to 2001/2002.
This is the period of 9II aftermath, the presence of Marc Schaffel, Michael wanting to release "What more can I give", Sony's reluctance to release the single as a 9II charity fund raiser and the marketing issues with "Invincible".
This gives a rough timeline of events (not always correct in detail though).
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:AU6lq1E4pxsJ:blackfedora.galeon.com/news.html+Michael+Jackson+Press+Releases+2002&cd=7&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=serp (http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:AU6lq1E4pxsJ:blackfedora.galeon.com/news.html+Michael+Jackson+Press+Releases+2002&cd=7&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=serp)
Interview with Marc Schaffel:
http://mjhideout.com/forum/noticias-y-rumores/10726-entrevista-what-more-can-i-give.html (http://mjhideout.com/forum/noticias-y-rumores/10726-entrevista-what-more-can-i-give.html)
Frank Cascio adds some memories about that period in his book "My friend Michael" in chapters 17/18:
http://jetzi-mjvideo.com/books-jetzi-02/11mfm/11mfm01.html (http://jetzi-mjvideo.com/books-jetzi-02/11mfm/11mfm01.html)
Playing a "business is racist" card on this background of 9II was a smokescreen IMO.
It was however indicating a frontline and who was on whose side.
That's enough to be clear about potential consequences and getting things orchestrated - including a will signed and flying back and forth playing the signature in hiding. At least this makes some sense to me.
-
Published on Aug 5, 2012 by LunaJo67: "An educational video about how wills work and what the law in California says about it.
Part one is about wills in general. Part 2 will be about Michael Jackson's will in particular."
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xORL6CSFdns&feature=share[/youtube]