0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Statement on Janet's website...
August 04, 2012, 10:41:00 AM
Slightly off topic .... 

Is anyone else wondering how long it will be before the death certificate is challenged?   :animal0017:   Just kid of a feeling only at the moment.  After all we have been thiking the will was fake for 3 years!  :icon_e_geek:


 :icon_eek:
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

*

Andrea

Re: Statement on Janet's website...
August 04, 2012, 10:48:19 AM
Maybe they're trying to point out that this is the death hoax will and not the actual will of Michael JOE Jackson. 
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Re: Statement on Janet's website...
August 04, 2012, 11:00:21 AM
Here's a 'summary' of the will....not sure how qualified the author is.  Maybe something will 'pop out' at someone in helping to connect some dots...

Quote
When Michael Jackson died unexpectedly on June 25, 2009, he left behind three minor children, Michael Joseph "Prince" Jackson, Jr., Paris Katherine Michael Jackson, and Prince Michael "Blanket" Jackson II, and, fortunately for them, an estate plan including a Last Will and Testament and a Revocable Living Trust.

Because Michael Jackson's estate plan is a "trust-based estate plan," as opposed to a "will-based estate plan," his Last Will and Testament, referred to by estate planning attorneys as a "Pour Over Will," is a relatively short document consisting of only five pages. The King of Pop signed his Last Will and Testament on July 7, 2002, and below you will find a summary of its brief contents.

Summary of the Provisions of the Last Will and Testament of Michael Joseph Jackson

1. As mentioned above, Michael Jackson signed his will on July 7, 2002.

2. All prior wills made by Michael Jackson are revoked in their entirety.

3. Michael Jackson's estate is left to the "Trustees of the Michael Jackson Family Trust, an amended and restated Declaration of Trust executed on March 22, 2002." This is the "pour over" aspect of Jackson's trust-based estate plan - in other words, the will "pours over" the assets of Jackson's estate into the hands of the Trustees of the Michael Jackson Family Trust. Note that the Michael Jackson Family Trust is a revocable living trust, not a special type of irrevocable trust that is sometimes referred to as a family trust and is used by married couples to reduce estate taxes.

4. A long time attorney for the Jackson family, John Branca, music executive John McClain, and accountant Barry Siegel are named to serve as Co-Executors of the will. Since Mr. Siegel signed a letter on August 26, 2003, in which he declined to serve as an executor, only John Branca and John McClain were appointed to serve as the Co-Executors and are still currently serving as such.

5. Michael Jackson's former wife and mother of Prince Jackson and Paris Jackson, Deborah Jean Rowe Jackson, is intentionally omitted as a beneficiary of the will. Jackson and Rowe were married in November 1996 and divorced in October 1999.

6. Michael Jackson's mother, Katherine Jackson, is named to serve as the guardian for Jackson's minor children.

7. If Katherine Jackson is unable or unwilling to serve as the children's guardian, then Diana Ross (yes, that Diana Ross) is named to serve as the back up guardian. What about Debbie Rowe, who is the natural parent of two of Jackson's three children? She and Katherine Jackson reached an agreement in August 2009 which allowed Katherine Jackson to serve as the guardian for all three of the children, and she still serves as their guardian today.

8. The will appears to be signed by John McClain and Barry Siegel as two of the three witnesses.

9. As required by California law, the related "Petition for Probate" lists all of the beneficiaries and fiduciaries named in the will and in the Michael Jackson Family Trust. Blatantly omitted from the list is Michael Jackson's father, Joe Jackson.

10. Contrary to popular belief, a will is not required to list anything about the nature of the testator's assets or net worth, and such is the case for Michael Jackson's will.

Who Will Inherit Michael Jackson's Estate and When?
OK, so Michael Jackson's will "pours over" his estate into the hands of the Trustees of the Michael Jackson Family Trust - what does this mean? With a trust-based estate plan, it is the trust agreement, not the pour over will, that dictates who will inherit what and when they will inherit it. Thus, if you want to know who stands to inherit Michael Jackson's estate, then you will need to read a copy of the 21-page Michael Jackson Family Trust. If you do not want to read the agreement for yourself, then fortunately I have also taken the time to create a summary of the contents of the trust: What Does the Michael Jackson Family Trust Say?

And here's a 'summary' of the trust:

Quote
Summary of the Provisions of the Michael Jackson Family Trust

1. Michael Jackson signed the original trust agreement on November 1, 1995. Regardless, the governing trust agreement that existed at the time of Jackson's death back in June 2009 was a fully amended and restated version signed by him on March 2, 2002.

2. A long time attorney for the Jackson family, John Branca, music executive John McClain, and accountant Barry Siegel were named to serve as Co-Trustees of the trust. Nonetheless, Barry Siegel signed a letter on August 26, 2003, in which he declined to serve as a Co-Trustee, leaving Branca and McClain to serve as the Co-Trustees. Both still serve in this capacity today as well as Co-Executors of Michael Jackson's estate.

3. The first 20% of Michael Jackson's estate is to be left to one or more children's charities selected by a committee consisting of Jackson's mother, Katherine Jackson, and Co-Trustees John Branca and John McClain. The committee can choose among existing charities or establish one or more charities in order to satisfy this bequest.

4. The balance of the trust assets remaining after the payment of estate taxes, medical bills, funeral expenses, attorney's fees, and other costs incurred in settling Jackson's estate is to be distributed 50% equally among Jackson's three children, Prince, Paris and Blanket, and 50% to Katherine Jackson.

5. Katherine Jackson's 50% share is to be held in a lifetime trust for her benefit with John Branca and John McClain serving as Co-Trustees. The Co-Trustees have the complete discretion as to when income and principal may be distributed to provide for Katherine Jackson's "care, support, maintenance, comfort and well being." Upon Katherine Jackson's death the balance of her trust is to be divided equally among Prince, Paris and Blanket.

6. The children's shares will be held in separate trusts also with John Branca and John McClain serving as Co-Trustees. Until each child reaches 21, distributions are left in the complete discretion of the Co-Trustees. At 21, each child will receive all of the net income from his or her own trust and principal if the Co-Trustees determine that the net income is not sufficient to provide for the child's "reasonable care, support, maintenance and education." Each child will receive 1/3 of the remaining trust principal outright at 30, another 1/2 outright at 35, and the remaining balance outright at 40. In addition, the Co-Trustees are given discretion to accelerate principal distributions if a child is in need of funds to buy a home, start a family, or start a business. This will leave Katherine Jackson, who was named as the children's guardian in August 2009, at the mercy of the Co-Trustees when it comes to asking for funds to support the children.

7. If Michael Jackson was not survived by his mother or any children or other descendants (such as grandchildren or great grandchildren), then after the 20% carved out for children's charities the balance was to be divided equally among three of Jackson's cousins - Levon Jackson, Elijah Jackson and Anthony Jackson - and three of his nephews (the children of his brother, Tito) - Taj Jackson, Taryll Jackson and T.J. Jackson. These shares were to be held in separate trusts in the same manner as provided for Jackson's children.

8. If Branca, McClain and Siegel were all not available to serve as Trustees, then NationsBank, now known as Bank of America, was named to serve as the successor Trustee. Since Branca and McClain were available to serve and are in fact serving, they have the power to name one or more individuals to serve as their successors, thereby eliminating Bank of America's right to serve as the successor Trustee.

With L.O.V.E. always.
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
The beauty of Michael Jackson is found in his heart and soul...his enormous talent is a bonus and what a bonus it is.

~PLAY the moments...PAUSE the memories...STOP the pain...REWIND the happiness~

Re: Statement on Janet's website...
August 04, 2012, 11:41:26 AM
The will is invalid. The trust thought might be vaild or invalid. Both documents do not contain Michael Jackson's true birth name which is Michael Joe Jackson. Now, Michael Jackson might have a will and trust under the name Michael Joe Jackson. Who ever finds those can turn those in to the court and those would override the previous will and trust. Since the 2002 will is connected to the trust, saying this will is invalid might implicate that the the trust is invalid as well. I hope not though.

Anyways, I hope all gets worked out between John Branca and John McClain and Michael Jackson's siblings.

friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Re: Statement on Janet's website...
August 04, 2012, 12:46:19 PM
It is my belief that after the 2005 trials, Michael probably re-wrote or amended the 2002 will which would nullify this one.  The 2002 will in question is used only for the hoax because Michael is not dead.  But to make the hoax death work, something has to be executed for the children’s care, the Estate, etc. to make it appear he is dead.  Once the will is examined in court and found to be fraudulent, no one will be at fault, the executors will no longer be needed so they will be discharged and the care of Michael’s children will naturally revert back to him. 
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
"Don't stop this child, He's the father of man
Don't cross his way, He's part of the plan
I am that child, but so are you
You've just forgotten, Just lost the clue.”

MJ "Magical Child"
Still Rocking my World…
   and leaving me Speechless!

“True goodbyes are the ones never said

Re: Statement on Janet's website...
August 04, 2012, 12:56:47 PM
I am attempting to attach a copy of Farrah Fawcett’s Revised Trust for comparison purposes.  I hope it works.  So much more detail as I would think Michael’s would be with all the assets attached to him. 
 :icon_e_confused: Well that didn’t work. Let me try it this way.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Last Edit: August 04, 2012, 01:06:04 PM by hesouttamylife
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
"Don't stop this child, He's the father of man
Don't cross his way, He's part of the plan
I am that child, but so are you
You've just forgotten, Just lost the clue.”

MJ "Magical Child"
Still Rocking my World…
   and leaving me Speechless!

“True goodbyes are the ones never said

*

blankie

  • Registered users
  • Hoaxer
  • View Profile
  • It's all for L.O.V.E.
  • 2350
Re: Statement on Janet's website...
August 04, 2012, 02:41:45 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
@mindseye:
Quote
I'm thinking... that the negative media campaign was started by MJ and family to draw attention to the fake will and executors.

Oh my I think you're right.

 :suspect: :ghsdf: :beerchug:
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
LOVE YOU MORE

*

Love4MichaelTopic starter

Re: Statement on Janet's website...
August 04, 2012, 04:28:50 PM
Just a few quick points (and lots of copy/paste)...little time at the moment.

1.  I saw somewhere (trying to locate it again) what was supposed to be the final page of the Will where the witness signatures weren't redacted.  McClain and Siegel appeared to have signed as witnesses on that page.  I'm thinking that it's not real kosher to have parties named IN such an important document to also be the witnesses to the signing of such.  Not to mention that more of the description of the document that they are witnessing to should be listed on the same page as the witness signatures.  Without that who's to say WHAT document was witnessed as signed and by whom.  The witness signature page could be part of any other 5 page document and the actual witness signatures to this Will could be totally different.  Pretty sloppy compared to what I've seen personally...but then again who's to say any of it was authentic?

2.  While the Trust doc that some claim is real did name a financial institution as a successor Trustee...the Will that's been floating all over the internet only names the 3 (Branca/McClain/Siegel) as Executors without naming a Successor should ALL THREE become unable to serve.  Siegel already removed himself years ago and now the push is to get the other two bounced.  Theoretically (if fraud was proven and the appointments were nullified) anyone related with a possible interest in the Estate could then produce another Will and/or petition for new Letters of Appointment to take control of the Estate prior to everything being funneled into the Trust.  Here's what the CA Probate Code says...



PROBATE CODE
SECTION 8500-8505

8500.  (a) Any interested person may petition for removal of the
personal representative from office. A petition for removal may be
combined with a petition for appointment of a successor personal
representative under Article 7 (commencing with Section 8520). The
petition shall state facts showing cause for removal.

   (b) On a petition for removal, or if the court otherwise has
reason to believe from the court's own knowledge or from other
credible information, whether on the settlement of an account or
otherwise, that there are grounds for removal, the court shall issue
a citation to the personal representative to appear and show cause
why the personal representative should not be removed. The court may
suspend the powers of the personal representative and may make such
orders as are necessary to deal with the property pending the
hearing.
   (c) Any interested person may appear at the hearing and file a
written declaration showing that the personal representative should
be removed or retained. The personal representative may demur to or
answer the declaration. The court may compel the attendance of the
personal representative and may compel the personal representative to
answer questions, on oath, concerning the administration of the
estate. Failure to attend or answer is cause for removal of the
personal representative from office.
   (d) The issues shall be heard and determined by the court. If the
court is satisfied from the evidence that the citation has been duly
served and cause for removal exists, the court shall remove the
personal representative from office.

8501.  On removal of a personal representative from office, the
court shall revoke any letters issued to the personal representative,
and the authority of the personal representative ceases.

8502.  A personal representative may be removed from office for any
of the following causes:
   (a) The personal representative has wasted, embezzled, mismanaged,
or committed a fraud on the estate, or is about to do so.
   (b) The personal representative is incapable of properly executing
the duties of the office or is otherwise not qualified for
appointment as personal representative.
   (c) The personal representative has wrongfully neglected the
estate, or has long neglected to perform any act as personal
representative.
   (d) Removal is otherwise necessary for protection of the estate or
interested persons.
   (e) Any other cause provided by statute.


8503.  (a) Subject to subdivision (b), an administrator may be
removed from office on the petition of the surviving spouse or a
relative of the decedent entitled to succeed to all or part of the
estate, or the nominee of the surviving spouse or relative, if such
person is higher in priority than the administrator.
   (b) The court in its discretion may refuse to grant the petition:
   (1) Where the petition is by a person or the nominee of a person
who had actual notice of the proceeding in which the administrator
was appointed and an opportunity to contest the appointment.
   (2) Where to do so would be contrary to the sound administration
of the estate.

This ^^^ is why I'm guessing that attempts were shot down before.
But even more time has passed so nothing changes unless fraud can be proven.


8504.  (a) After appointment of an administrator on the ground of
intestacy, the personal representative shall be removed from office
on the later admission to probate of a will.
   (b) After appointment of an executor or administrator with the
will annexed, the personal representative shall be removed from
office on admission to probate of a later will.

8505.  (a) A personal representative may be removed from office if
the personal representative is found in contempt for disobeying an
order of the court.
   (b) Notwithstanding any other provision of this article, a
personal representative may be removed from office under this section
by a court order reciting the facts and without further showing or
notice.


PROBATE CODE
SECTION 8520-8525

8520.  A vacancy occurs in the office of a personal representative
who resigns, dies, or is removed from office under Article 6
(commencing with Section 8500), or whose authority is otherwise
terminated.

8521.  (a) Unless the will provides otherwise or the court in its
discretion orders otherwise, if a vacancy occurs in the office of
fewer than all personal representatives, the remaining personal
representatives shall complete the administration of the estate.
   (b) The court, on the filing of a petition alleging that a vacancy
has occurred in the office of fewer than all personal
representatives, may order the clerk to issue appropriate amended
letters to the remaining personal representatives.

8522.  (a) If a vacancy occurs in the office of a personal
representative and there are no other personal representatives, the
court shall appoint a successor personal representative.
   (b) Appointment of a successor personal representative shall be
made on petition and service of notice on interested persons in the
manner provided in Article 2 (commencing with Section 8110) of
Chapter 2, and shall be subject to the same priority as for an
original appointment of a personal representative. The personal
representative of a deceased personal representative is not, as such,
entitled to appointment as successor personal representative.



8523.  The court may make orders that are necessary to deal with the
estate of the decedent between the time a vacancy occurs in the
office of personal representative and appointment of a successor.
Those orders may include appointment of a special administrator.

8524.  (a) A successor personal representative is entitled to
demand, sue for, recover and collect all the estate of the decedent
remaining unadministered, and may prosecute to final judgment any
suit commenced by the former personal representative before the
vacancy.
   (b) No notice, process, or claim given to or served on the former
personal representative need be given to or served on the successor
in order to preserve any position or right the person giving the
notice or filing the claim may thereby have obtained or preserved
with reference to the former personal representative.
   (c) Except as provided in subdivision (b) of Section 8442
(authority of administrator with will annexed) or as otherwise
ordered by the court, the successor personal representative has the
powers and duties in respect to the continued administration that the
former personal representative would have had.


8525.  (a) The acts of the personal representative before a vacancy
occurs are valid to the same extent as if no vacancy had later
occurred.
   (b) The liability of a personal representative whose office is
vacant, or of the surety on the bond, is not discharged, released, or
affected by the vacancy or by appointment of a successor, but
continues until settlement of the accounts of the personal
representative and delivery of all the estate of the decedent to the
successor personal representative or other person appointed by the
court to receive it. The personal representative shall render an
account of the administration within the time that the court directs.


I found this interesting though in light of reports of personal profits made on deals cut that's been alleged

9657.  The personal representative shall not make profit by the
increase, nor suffer loss by the decrease or destruction without his
or her fault, of any part of the estate.


Obviously a huge unknown in all of this and a key component is how much of his interests or holdings did he title over into the Trust when he initiated it.  It's my understanding that anything already held in the Trust would not be subject to probate or control of the Estate exactly...but under the control of the Trustee.  It's a little harder to maneuver assets in a Trust I think.  I know that Branca & McClain wear both hats but they are slightly different in responsibility.

friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
Always reach out to lend support and to help bear a heavy burden. 
There is no greater gift that you can give than your caring and love. 
Spread laughter and joy in your travels and carry love with you in abundant supply. 
Share life...share the world.

*

2good2btrue

  • Hoaxer
  • View Profile
  • FORGIVENESS IS THE KEY TO YOUR HAPPINESS
  • 4210
Re: Statement on Janet's website...
August 04, 2012, 10:32:06 PM
But didn't the executors claim there wasn't a will....and them couldn't find the last page (5) and only came up with it much later on....??You can clearly see that the witness signatures have to be on the same !!!  :affraid: :affraid:

This is the original copy of Whitney Houstons Will.....I can see how the signatures have to be on the same page.........and the dates are typed, not handwritten





You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Last Edit: August 04, 2012, 10:41:43 PM by 2good2btrue
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

*

2good2btrue

  • Hoaxer
  • View Profile
  • FORGIVENESS IS THE KEY TO YOUR HAPPINESS
  • 4210
Re: Statement on Janet's website...
August 04, 2012, 10:37:30 PM
This is the last page of James Brown's will...the rest of the pages (7) are available on the link below..



You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

*

Love4MichaelTopic starter

Re: Statement on Janet's website...
August 04, 2012, 11:16:41 PM
To be honest, when all the probate stuff started coming out back then I wasn't focusing on the financial aspect so the scenario you outlined could be true I guess.  I remember the media saying that no will had been presented for a few days but don't remember any claims that he may have "died" intestate.  But you have pointed out great examples of what I was talking about in regard to the witness statement and signatures for legal documents.  The fill-in-the-blank for the date forms usually only are used in one of two instances...

1.  To save time and money - but I doubt these high priced firms are shy of racking up billable hours...lol.  They could obviously afford to have someone prepare and reprint the necessary pages of the document for final signatures with the correct dates inserted.

2.  The document is prepared well in advance and its unknown exactly when it will be formalized with signatures.  Especially in this scenario I would think that it's inappropriate for the witness signatures alone to be on the trailing page with no part of the witness statement.

Bottom line though...the dates being handwritten in rather than typed doesn't change the validity of the document.
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
Always reach out to lend support and to help bear a heavy burden. 
There is no greater gift that you can give than your caring and love. 
Spread laughter and joy in your travels and carry love with you in abundant supply. 
Share life...share the world.

*

curls

Re: Statement on Janet's website...
August 05, 2012, 01:23:10 AM
IMO the will is simply another prop in this giant production, along with the death certificate and autopsy report.  All with intentional 'mistakes' to lead enquiring minds to the same conclusion ...... nothing's real ...... because .......he's not dead!
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

*

MJonmind

Re: Statement on Janet's website...
August 05, 2012, 02:34:15 AM
BeTheChange quoted
Quote
5. Michael Jackson's former wife and mother of Prince Jackson and Paris Jackson, Deborah Jean Rowe Jackson, is intentionally omitted as a beneficiary of the will. Jackson and Rowe were married in November 1996 and divorced in October 1999.
Lisa Marie was not mentioned.   And the marriage to Lisa was with the wrong name Michael Joseph Jackson, as was the 3 children's birth certificates.
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Re: Statement on Janet's website...
August 05, 2012, 04:11:30 AM
My brain is disturb by Janet taking part in this "3 years after". I really wonder. I don't know what to think.
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
Do not push the carebear in the nettles

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

*

sweetsunsetwithMJ

  • Hoaxer
  • View Profile
  • 2626
  • Michael I am looking forward to your BAM!!
Re: Statement on Janet's website...
August 05, 2012, 09:02:41 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
My brain is disturb by Janet taking part in this "3 years after". I really wonder. I don't know what to think.

Why? what is disturbing you? I think everybody has their role at their own time.
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
I WANNA BE WHERE YOU ARE!!

 

SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal