medilen, а откуда информация, что Джермейн не хотел платить алименты, он сам в интервью каком-то заявлял об этом?

medilen, а вы можете подтвердить Ваши слова ссылками на достоверные источники (интервью, копии документов), или всё это Вы прочитали в ЖП?

medilen, мне по большому счету не интересно, сколько у кого денег, больше волнует, где предел человеческой подлости и бесконечной клеветы? Это вопрос глобального масштаба, это то, что происходит сейчас с людьми в Америке, с нами.

Shortly after Michael’s burial I received a call from his younger brother, Randy Jackson.

He said, “Rowe, I need to talk to you for a minute.”
I said, “About what?”
He said, “About the will that John Branca has presented.”
I replied, “What about the will?”
He said, “I truly believe that the will is a fake.”
I asked the question, “What would make you think that?”
He said to me, “The will was allegedly signed by Michael on July 7th, 2002, at 5 p.m. in Los Angeles, California.”
I replied, “What is wrong with that?”
He said, “I don’t think Michael was in Los Angeles on July 7th, 2002.”
I asked, “Where was he?”
He said “I think he was in New York. If I’m not mistaken, I think this was the week when Michael and Al Sharpton were picketing Tommy Mottola (ex-president of Sony Records).” He then said, “I have asked Rev. Al Sharpton for a copy of the tape so that I could be sure.”
We began discussing and investigating this on a daily basis. About three days later, Randy said he had received the tape, and Michael was indeed in New York on July 7, 2002. He was not in Los Angeles where John Branca and John McClain reported he signed the will. Randy told me that he had gotten attorney Brian Oxman to assist us in the investigation.
On July 7th, 2002, Michael Jackson was in New York City, not in Los Angeles at five o’clock to sign the alleged will. Branca and McClain have hidden from the court a material fact, that Michael Jackson did not sign the purported will dated July 7th, 2002 as they claimed he did. Concealing this information is a fraud, and should disqualify them from being the executors of Michael’s estate. Branca and McClain had a duty to inform the court that Michael Jackson was not in Los Angeles on July 7th, 2002, but he was instead in New York. This fact concerning the alleged will has been concealed from the public and the court. Branca and McClain have violated their duties by testifying under penalty of perjury on at least seventeen occasions. They testified that the purported will of July 7th, 2002, was correct.
They testified on July 1st, 2009, for a petition to probate the will.
July 23rd, 2009, application for family allowance.
July 29th, 2009, application for proposed book deal.
July 31st, 2009, response and objection to petition for letter of administration by Joseph and Katherine Jackson.
July 31st, 2009, first supplement to petition for probate.
August 3rd, 2009, supplement to probate petition.
August 3rd, 2009, petition to make payment to Michael Laperruque for contract with Michael’s Jackson Company dated May 30th, 2008.
September 17th, 2009, application for order authorizing supplement agreement.
September 20th, 2009, application to enter publishing agreement.
September 20th, 2009, application to enter merchandising agreement.
September 20th, 2009, application to enter business agreement Opus.
September 22nd, 2009, application to enter business transaction Bravado.
September 28th, 2009, application to enter business transaction.
September 28th, 2009, application to enter contract with Columbia Pictures.
September 28th, 2009, application to enter into publishing agreement.
September 28th, 2009 motion to enter book publishing agreement.
September 29th, 2009, application to enter agreement digital distribution of audio.
Branca and McClain were grossly negligent in their statements to the court. They have concealed information from the court that should have them removed as trustees. They have also conducted themselves in a fraudulent and deceptive manner. In my opinion, they should not be trusted to oversee the Michael Jackson Estate. Both of them should be disqualified and charges should be brought against them for fraud. My reasoning is Michael Jackson terminated John Branca as his attorney on February 3, 2003. In a written termination letter (see Letter in this chapter), Michael Jackson instructed John Branca to resign from all positions he had in Michael’s personal and business life. Branca failed to follow Michael Jackson’s instructions and neglected to remove himself as executor of Michael Jackson Family Trust.
On February 3rd, 2003, Michael instructed Branca to turn over to his new attorneys all records, files, and papers dealing with his personal and business life. While Branca turned over his other files, Branca secretly refused to turn over the purported July 7th, 2002, will and March 2002 trust. No will was ever turned over to Michael’s new attorney. This was a total violation of Branca’s fiduciary duty as Michael’s lawyers. Branca concealed the will, and concealed his refusal to resign as executor. Branca’s concealment and failure to resign continued for many years despite Michael’s numerous demands that Branca turn over all documents and resign from all positions. Conduct of this nature should not be allowed by the courts. This was a total violation not only to Michael Jackson, but to his children. In 2003, Michael Jackson launched an investigation into Branca’s alleged embezzlement activities, regarding Michael’s money. The investigators, the firm of Interfor in New York reported in February, March, and a final report on April 15th, 2003, that there was an improper relationship between Tommy Mottola and John Branca whereby Branca and Mottola were allegedly funneling Michael’s money to offshore accounts in the Caribbean. The Interfor report caused Michael Jackson great anguish and Michael demanded that Branca was never to have anything to do with him, his business, his family, or his personal life again.
Michael terminated John Branca because of his belief that Branca had committed crimes against him. Branca never gave Michael an accounting of whether this report was true or false, nor did he disclose his books and records to Michael.
Michael Jackson’s belief that this occurred was the basis for Branca’s termination. Branca never complied with Michael’s demand that he make an accounting and resign.
For many years, John Branca entered into thousands of licensing agreements with the public for music and songs on behalf of Michael Jackson and the Sony/ATV Trust. Michael terminated Branca because he believed Branca was embezzling money from these licensing arrangements. Neither Branca nor his firm has been audited concerning the multi-million dollar proceeds and receipts of these transactions. Branca cannot make an independent audit of himself while serving as executor. When Branca filed the petition for probate on July 1st, 2009, less than a week after Michael passed, he failed to disclose his prior business relationship with Michael Jackson regarding licensing and the Sony/ATV Trust. It is not a question of the truthfulness or accuracy of the investigators report or even Michael Jackson’s belief. Rather, it is a matter of following Michael’s instructions to resign, turn over all documents, and terminate all relationships. Branca refused to obey his client Michael Jackson’s instructions. Branca should now be made to follow his instructions, resign as executor and he should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
Michael Jackson also signed various attorney retainer agreements with his law firm from 1993 to 1995. In those agreements Branca took five percent of the proceeds of Michael Jackson’s businesses and performances, and then, without further entitlement, a five percent ownership in Michael’s Sony/ATV Catalogue royalties, all of which were the subject matter of his representation.
These contracts for representation not only constitute a conflict of interest, but also violate Branca’s duty as a lawyer by taking an interest in the subject matter of the representation without his client’s authorization. Michael told me, in 2004 that his Sony/ATV Catalogue was valued in excess of $1 billion. A 5% interest represents $50 million. There was no conflict of interest disclosure in the retainer agreement. Michael did not have independent counsel to review this transaction. Branca’s representation thereafter was tainted by the continued conflicts of interests and concealment of his actions that allowed him to continue taking advantage of Michael.
In April 2006, Michael Jackson paid Branca $15 million to get back his five percent interest in the Sony/ATV Catalogue. When Branca filed his petition to be the executor of Michael’s estate, he conveniently concealed this multi-million dollar transaction and material profiting from, what I truly believe to be, the stolen 5% interest in Michael’s business. Branca had a duty to disclose to the court the nature, amount, and details behind this transaction. He violated his duty as an attorney to give full disclosure to the court of Michael’s payment of $15 million dollars to Branca in 2006 to reclaim his 5% interest in the Sony/ATV catalogue is a total conflict of interest with the Estate of Michael Jackson. Because Branca is the special administrator and designated executor, Branca has not and will not seek sanctions against himself; thereby perpetrating an intentional fraud upon the court. And now, he sits at the “throne of Michael’s estate”. What kind of world are we living in? I truly feel that this is being accomplished because of a corrupt judicial system in Los Angeles County, California. I am sure that Michael would not approve of John Branca and John McClain being co-executors of his estate. Barry Siegel was also listed as an executor to Michael’s will. On August 26th, 2003, Siegel resigned as executor of Michael’s will. He sent his letter of resignation to Branca. John Branca concealed that document until he filed the July 1st, 2009, probate petition, and this is in violation of Michael’s instructions to resign all positions and turn over all documents as he requested him to do in February 2003.
When Branca filed the probate petition on July 1st, 2009, he attached the August 26th, 2003, Siegel letter. Barry Siegel resigned pursuant to the termination letter from Michael similar to the letter Branca received. However, while Siegel complied with Michael’s instructions and resigned, Branca did not. When Branca filed his probate petition he concealed the fact that Barry Siegel had followed Michael’s instructions but he had not. Branca had a duty to disclose to the court and to present the Siegel resignation letter of August 26th, 2003. Branca’s petition to be executor violates Michael Jackson’s termination letter of February 2003. When Michael terminated Branca on February 3rd, 2003, and requested that he turn over all documents to his new attorney, Branca never turned over a reported July 7th, 2002, will. This is a complete violation and my true opinion is that John Branca should be removed from Michael Jackson’s estate and immediately be prosecuted.
On October 21st, 2009, Randy Jackson called a meeting at his sister Janet’s home in the Century City area of Los Angeles. This meeting was to present to everyone involved (which was just a few) the evidence that we had uncovered that proved the will was fraudulent. Attending the meeting were family members Katherine, Rebbie, Jackie, Janet, and Randy, five other probate attorneys, Brian Oxman (who was presenting the evidence), and myself. This meeting lasted approximately two hours. Brian Oxman did a superb job presenting all of the evidence that we had uncovered. He first showed us how the signatures were different. He then presented Michael’s hotel bill to show that Michael was in New York from July 5th, to July 10th, 2002. He also presented evidence from interviews he had conducted with members of Michael’s security where they stated that Michael did not sign a will on July 7th, 2002, while they were in New York. We all concluded after seeing additional pieces of evidence that the will is fraudulent and a fake.
John Branca is a lawyer, licensed to practice law in the State of California. This privilege subjects him to the Rules of Professional Responsibility of the State Bar of California. There are certain things that a lawyer is prohibited from doing. One of the prohibited activities is a breach of fiduciary duty which occurs when a lawyer uses his position to steal from a client.
Keeping in mind the foregoing, let’s add another fact for your consideration. Sometime in February 2003, Michael Jackson fired John Branca. The first sentence of that letter states, “I am terminating the services of you and your firm….” Further in the letter, Michael Jackson states, “…you are commanded to immediately cease expending effort of any kind on my behalf….” Michael continued, “you are further demanded to execute any and all documents reasonably required of you…to transfer control over any and all files of mine (or any business of mine)….” Additionally, Michael Jackson said, “You are to deliver the original of all such documents to Mr. LeGrand, immediately….” Michael Jackson made the foregoing statements to Attorney John Branca in order to “have an immediate and orderly termination of your services….”
Now the very first thing that comes to mind is that if Michael Jackson ordered Branca to turn over all original documents, why did Branca not turn over the original “Last Will of Michael Joseph Jackson,” along with the Michael Jackson Family Trust, that he was required and demanded to turn over to Michael’s new attorneys?
The second thing that we need to focus on is that John Branca, as noted above, was allegedly fired by Michael Jackson because he breached his fiduciary duty to Michael by wrongfully inserting himself into the documents and contracts that addressed Michael Jackson’s publishing catalogue without Michael’s knowledge or authorization.
After Michael became informed of this despicable act by Branca, Michael fired him but not before Michael had to pay John Branca another $15 million dollars to recoup something that was already his. And to settle potential claims and lawsuits that surely would have emerged, if Michael Jackson was forced to sue John Branca to remove him from those contracts and documents.
The “Last Will and Testament of Michael Joseph Jackson” is alleged to have been executed on July 7th, 2002. However, the evidence shows that Michael Jackson was not even in Los Angeles on July 7th, 2002, because he was in New York City with the Reverend Al Sharpton protesting the actions and conduct of Tommy Mottola and Sony Records.
Another aspect of the so-called will is the fact that none of the witnesses have been made known publicly. Now, the whole purpose of having a witness (and in this case there were three witnesses), is to come forward and acknowledge that Michael Jackson was there with them at the time and on the day that this document was executed. Not a single one of the witnesses has come forth.
What still bothers me is that on several occasions, Michael Jackson told me that he never wanted to do business ever again with John Branca, Frank DiLeo, or Dr. Tohme Tohme. And now when I see John Branca, a man who Michael had grown to distrust, reigning over all of Michael Jackson’s property, estate, and business holdings, it angers me to the highest degree. It is nothing short of one of the most despicable crimes that has ever happened in American history, that John Branca, a man who I believe stole from Michael Jackson and who breached his duties as a lawyer while working for Michael, is now sitting at the helm of the empire that Michael Jackson built.
In the discussions that I had with the lawyers at Janet Jackson’s home, all of whom are noted specialists in the field of wills, trusts, and estates, I learned a few things about what makes a will legitimate. One of the primary requirements is for at least two witnesses to attest to the competency of the person making the will. In addition they are able to note whether the person is under duress, or the victim of fraud or undue influence. The witnesses can also assure that the will is being executed of his, or her, own free will. If an issue comes up on any of these matters, then the witnesses are supposed to be available for the court to determine if the will was freely executed and the person who made the will was not the victim of fraud or other misdeeds. But in Michael Jackson’s case, the will that was shown to the public omits both the names and addresses of the witnesses. And there is no indication that the witnesses have ever been called into court under oath to testify to the truth of the so-called execution of the Michael Jackson will.
Another matter that bothers me tremendously is, that the judge in the Probate Court matter handling the Estate of Michael Jackson, made a ruling that Joe Jackson, Michael’s father, did not have standing to challenge the legality of the so-called will. Now, just stop and think for a second, ladies and gentlemen, if Barbra Streisand had passed and someone outside of her family presented a will that left her entire estate in the hands and under the control of someone that is not a member of her family, and, let’s say, Barbra Streisand’s father or mother petitions the Probate Court to intervene and challenge the legality of the will, do you think that the court would tell them that they had no standing? It is both ludicrous and absurd. Fortunately, Joe Jackson and his attorney, Brian Oxman, are challenging this absurd decision on appeal where we hope that a panel of appellate court judges are not under the influence of John Branca as the Probate Court judge, in my opinion, clearly seems to be.
The public would like to know who these witnesses are and where they are located. For some reason, this is being kept a secret. We would like for these witnesses to come forward and admit under oath that they actually witnessed the signing of this will. We obviously know that if they put their signatures down on a legal document that is being used to defraud the Courts of the State of California this would be a very serious crime, punishable by imprisonment. John Branca knows this and so does John McClain.
I believe the Probate Court is a friend and confidante of John Branca, and they are doing all in their power to keep a lid on this powder keg issue. If the truth comes out that one, two, or all three of the witnesses knew that they were participating in a “fraud upon the court” in conjunction with John Branca, John McClain, and AEG, they would probably be seeking a way to get immunity from prosecution in exchange for their testimony which would implicate the remaining guilty parties in this tragic hoax.
For instance, wouldn’t you want to know why these witnesses would claim to have witnessed Michael Jackson sign a will in Los Angeles? Especially when the evidence conclusively shows that Michael Jackson was in New York on the date and at the time John Branca claims that the will was executed? Secondly, you will recall that Michael Jackson fired John Branca at the same time that he fired Barry Siegel. Now Barry Siegel did the right thing and refused to participate in this fraud upon the court regarding Michael Jackson’s estate. And in the letter that fired John Branca, Michael Jackson made it clear that Branca was not to be involved in any of Michael’s business or personal dealings and affairs. There is no way that Michael Jackson would approve of John Branca being in total control of his estate.
Now while the legal challenge of Joe Jackson in the California Court of Appeals is continuing to play out, John Branca, John McClain, and AEG are draining the assets of the Michael Jackson Estate in my opinion. I truly believe the longer the officials in the State of California and the California components of the U.S. Department of Justice wait to take action against this gang of thieves, the longer it will take for Michael Jackson, his children, and his family to get the justice that they are entitled to. It is hard for me to believe as a life-long citizen of the United States that our government would sit by and allow this blatant, outright theft of Michael Jackson’s estate to go without scrutiny and prosecution of those responsible.
On a final note, knowing Michael as I knew him, there is no way he would have ever stood for his final will and testament, to have the names of his children, misspelled. This was one of the main indicators, which I believe is further proof that the will is a total fake.
(Leonard Rowe. What Really Happened to Michael Jackson The King of Pop)

Бранка сам совершенно запутался в своей лжи, этого не видит только тот, кто не хочет видеть. http://teammichaeljackson.com/archives/6004#.UEParMjYG10.twitter

But the three scions of the star have to live on a tightly-controlled allowance overseen by a judge and the estate's executors.

Katherine Jackson, the 82-year-old matriarch of the clan, has also not received any money from the trust.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2197610/Pa...s-money.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

Аноним, я никогда не читаю ЖП. Издание Форбс, насколько я помню не является таковым. Вообще я начинаю жалеть о публикации этого поста, почему-то за исключением нескольких челвыек, большинство людей вынесло из него совсем не то, о чём он. Ссылки даны в конце поста. Но могу дать ещё вот эти:
http://wills.about.com/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/17005603/Michael-Jackson-Last-Will-and-Testament