Validity of Michael Jackson’s will may be aired in court

MaryKMaryK Posts: 1,732
edited January 1970 in News
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/08/michael-jackson-will-lawsuit.html<br /><br />[size=14pt]Validity of Michael Jackson’s will may be aired in court[/size]<br />August 7, 2012 |  1:59 pm<br /><br />The validity of Michael Jackson’s will could get a court airing next month if a business associate of the pop star’s mother gets his way.<br /><br />Lawyers for a Canadian businessman who works with Katherine Jackson wrote in a filing Monday that he was “in possession of evidence that casts substantial doubt on the validity of the will” and wants to present it at federal trial set for September.<br /><br />The business partner, Howard Mann, is locked in a copyright battle with the executors of the singer’s estate largely over a tribute book that he produced with Jackson’s mother.<br /><br />In a filing in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles, Mann’s lawyers wrote he wanted to present an attack on the will’s authenticity as part of a defense to copyright infringement claims brought by executors John Branca and John McClain.<br /><br />“Defendants will argue that the estate cannot produce any evidence indicating they own the assets, thereby failing the first prong of a copyright action,” the attorneys wrote.<br /><br />The probate court presiding over Jackson’s estate accepted the 2002 will shortly after his death and an appellate court subsequently said the window for challenging the will had closed. The document put Jackson’s assets into a private trust run by Branca and McClain, music industry veterans and longtime Jackson advisors. The trust benefits Jackson’s three children, his mother and charities.<br /><br />In recent weeks, some of his siblings, who inherited nothing, have said the will was faked and called on Branca and McClain to resign. The executors have condemned “false and defamatory accusations grounded in stale Internet conspiracy theories.”<br /><br />Their attorney urged a judge last month to bar any attack on the will in front of jurors, writing that it was a settled legal issue and irrelevant to the copyright claims.<br /><br />“None of this evidence would constitute a legal defense to any of the claims in this lawsuit, and are offered solely so that defendants may point to their relationship with Mrs. Jackson and argue that the estate is somehow being unfair to her,” the attorney wrote.<br /><br />A hearing is set for Aug. 27.
«13

Comments

  • paula-cpaula-c Posts: 7,221
    And now,  that  have to see Howard Mann in all this?
  • AdiAdi Posts: 1,834
    ^^^ Indeed...interesting. Reminds me of the really interesting discussion here on the forum regarding The Mann Act, which arose quite a while ago the 1st time this dude Howard Mann came into the picture. I will have to search for the thread.<br /><br />Here's the wiki article on The Mann Act for a refresher: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mann_Act<br /><br />
  • becbec Posts: 6,387
    Interesting.<br /><br />Very interesting.
  • AndreaAndrea Posts: 3,787
    Mann is like a blast from hoax past.  It was him who was running that secret vault website, right? And released Opis None.  He's been against the executors for quite a while now.
  • GraceGrace Posts: 2,864
    For the big picture, we still have to wait until April 2, 2013, at least, which is the first date in court for Katherine Jackson's lawsuit against AEG.
  • 2good2btrue2good2btrue Posts: 4,210
    Yeh, the Michael Jacksons secret vault...which required a password login "ALIVE" <br /><br />There was another wierd video on that site, that seemed so irrelevant at the time..about a dispute regarding MJ's possesions...<br /><br />This is great news for everyone involved.<br /><br />What really puzzles me , is that nobody is bringing up the fact that the childrens names are incorrect and that Michaels real middle name is  JOE, not Joseph.  It is a legal document and has to be accurate..<br /><br />Why haven't the family used that as proof/ evidence that the will is fraudulent as well???<br /><br />I so glad something might be moving finally in regards the the will saga.  Up until now, its been all talk and no action... :abouttime: :abouttime:
  • Australian MJ BeLIEverAustralian MJ BeLIEver Posts: 2,349
    Just wondering if we can get a brief Howard / vault / opis rundown for newbies to the hoax, and oldies that are unfamiliar. Pleeeease with a cherry on top someone....<br /><br />If not, a point in the direcection of where to research and what I should be looking for. Gotta fill these gaps in my hoaxy career  :icon_e_wink:
  • Australian MJ BeLIEverAustralian MJ BeLIEver Posts: 2,349
    Meanwhile Canadian business associate... Wonder who that is.<br /><br />This is getting interesting! "evidence the will is fake" <br /><br />We sure have been building up to something the past few weeks :)<br /><br /><br /><br />EDIT: @ 2good, you'd also like to think that when they eventually do pick up on the incorrect names in the will, that this will draw attention to the death cert and AR too :)
  • becbec Posts: 6,387
    Opis None aka what it's real title is "Confusion". Great mix. I really dig it.<br /><br />Aussie just search Michael Jackson Secret Vault or Opis None. You can find all the stuff that's worth picking up a trail for Mann there.<br /><br />That site never required a password for me. But the Coupon Code for Ms. Katherine's book was MJLIVES:<br /><br />mjlivescou.jpg<br /><br />mjlivescro.jpg<br />
  • MJonmindMJonmind Posts: 7,290
    Watch here at 4:00 on the Mann Act concerning slavery.<br /><br />
    <br /><br />Here’s some threads on Howard Mann.<br />http://www.michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/index.php?topic=16476.msg280267#msg280267<br />http://www.michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/index.php?topic=18436.msg322706#msg322706<br /><br /><br />2good2btrue<br />
    What really puzzles me , is that nobody is bringing up the fact that the childrens names are incorrect and that Michaels real middle name is  JOE, not Joseph.  It is a legal document and has to be accurate..
    <br />But then there's also his marriage licence to Lisa, and all 3 children's birth certificates.  Perhaps there will be a proverbial collapse of the house of cards.
  • 2good2btrue2good2btrue Posts: 4,210
    on 1344408320:
    <br />Watch here at 4:00 on the Mann Act concerning slavery.<br /><br />
    <br /><br />Here’s some threads on Howard Mann.<br />http://www.michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/index.php?topic=16476.msg280267#msg280267<br />http://www.michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/index.php?topic=18436.msg322706#msg322706<br /><br /><br />2good2btrue<br />
    What really puzzles me , is that nobody is bringing up the fact that the childrens names are incorrect and that Michaels real middle name is  JOE, not Joseph.  It is a legal document and has to be accurate..
    <br />But then there's also his marriage licence to Lisa, and all 3 children's birth certificates.  Perhaps there will be a proverbial collapse of the house of cards.<br />
    <br /><br />Do you think all this attention to the will, talking about how Michael was in Harlem on 7.7.02, will get people looking at the evidence??  The speech about "Black artists being used as slaves", and then the speech about Sony and Tommy Mattola being racist and devilish??<br /><br />Maybe this is what Michael wants.  For everyone to see those videos again.or for the first time.<br /><br />This fits in with the Mann Act...<br /><br />
    <br /> />
  • Australian MJ BeLIEverAustralian MJ BeLIEver Posts: 2,349
    I'm immersed in vault / Mann research. Thanks folks  :icon_e_wink:
  • guestforthedayguestfortheday Posts: 29
    on 1344401126:
    <br />For the big picture, we still have to wait until April 2, 2013, at least, which is the first date in court for Katherine Jackson's lawsuit against AEG.<br />
    <br /><br />that's right, this fact cannot be ignored and definitely not the part of the hoax. 
  • everlastinglove_MJeverlastinglove_MJ Posts: 2,884
    on 1344394917:
    <br />Interesting.<br /><br />Very interesting.<br />
    <br /><br />+1
  • curlscurls Posts: 3,111
    on 1344411256:
    <br />
    on 1344401126:
    <br />For the big picture, we still have to wait until April 2, 2013, at least, which is the first date in court for Katherine Jackson's lawsuit against AEG.<br />
    <br /><br />that's right, this fact cannot be ignored and definitely not the part of the hoax. <br />
    <br /><br />When was that date announced - I thought it was due in September.
  • GraceGrace Posts: 2,864
    http://wavenewspapers.com/arts_and_entertainment/article_5dc28c8a-9eba-11e1-aa14-001a4bcf6878.html<br /><br />"Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Yvette Palazuelos ruled there was good reason to postpone trial from Sept. 10 until April 2 because of AEG Live's challenge in obtaining all the information it needs from the opposing side to prepare a proper defense."
  • MaryKMaryK Posts: 1,732
    Here´s something I found on Twitter. Posted by MJJJusticeProject (@MJJJusticePrjct).<br /><br />There are some interesting informations but I don´t know what to think about it bc I am not very knowledgeable regarding this whole Mann thing (yet).<br /><br />So I am posting this as information, not saying that this is "da troot". I´d appreciate some "input" and opinions from people here that know more about the Mann case. <br /><br />http://www.twitlonger.com/show/inpd83<br /><br />MJJJusticeProject (@MJJJusticePrjct)<;br /><br />Posted Wednesday 8th August 2012 from Twitlonger<br /><br />Allright .. this recent La Times article with Howard Mann attempting to question the validity of the 02 Will as some kind of defense is LUDICRIOUS - but what is even more disgusting and shocking is the fact that it was all nicely and neatly set up.<br /><br />By whom, you may ask?<br /><br />Well, let's harken back just a few short weeks ago shall we?<br /><br />Jackson sib letter was leaked to the media, regarding their concerns over their mother's health, even lied and said she had a "mini-stroke" that was later downgraded to mere "high blood pressure"<br /><br />Then removing Katherine from the grandchildren she is legally responsible for and prohibiting ALL contact with the outside world so Katherine knew naught what was occuring. Held her so long that TJ, another grandson felt it necessary to take legal steps to PROTECT Michael's children. Later, Katherine comes back to make a court deposition contradicting everything that that sibs had fed to the media to get her guardianship back.<br /><br />Fueding tabloid stories back and forth disagreed on details but ONE thing was clear - the Siblings of Michael want the ouster of John Branca and will pretty much do anything to get that done, even though they have not taken one LEGAL STEP in that direction. They have submitted NOTHING to the Court .. only used the MEDIA- but that would seem untowardly enough until THIS LA Times Article.<br /><br />Howard Mann and his business partner Henry Vaccaro are being sued by the MJEstate regarding items in a warehouse they have in their possession due to a bankcruptcy by some Jacksons- not Michael mind you. Both Michael and Janet sued Vacarro at the time of trial to get those items back but because Michael was otherwise busy trying to prove himself innocent - this case slipped through the cracks. No information on janet's case but suspect it fell though too, since Mann and Vacarro HAVE possession.<br /><br />The details of the lawsuit filed by MJEstate really don't matter but rest assured THEY are trying to PROTECT Michael's image and his copyrights.<br /><br />What matters?<br /><br />What does matter is that COURT documents show that Henry Vaccaro handed over to Sneddon items during the 2005 trial in an attempt to facilitate a conviction of Michael.<br /><br />I repeat -- Henry Vaccaro handed over to Tom Sneddon items during the 2005 trial in an attempt to facilitate a conviction of Michael. Remember how gleefully Dimond held up a pair of briefs she supposed to be MJ's? Vaccarro even wrote a little letter saying he hoped it would all work out for Sneddon.<br /><br />Now one must ask themselves why would any of the Jacksons be dealing with Howard Mann & Henry Vaccaro?<br /><br />We can hypothetically hear the discussion Howard Mann had with Katherine:<br /><br />Mann - "Look .. we've got some potentially damning items in a warehouse. We sure don't want to have anythng brought out in the open that might EMBARASS You, Joe, Janet, Tito, Jackie, Marlon, Jermaine, Latoya, Randy and Rebbi - do we? You wanna keep it quiet - dontcha??<br /><br />Kath- "of course"<br /><br />Mann- " What I am prepared to do for you Katherine is give you these items IF you - Do business wth me.. SIGN a contract that enslaves Michael's children to PR stints for me and I'll throw a little cash your way.. .. and ALSO help me hawk MJ memorabliia items from the warehouse .on a site called MJVault .. ..and you, Well,,, out of the kindness of our hearts - WE gonna let you write a book about ur boy"<br /><br />Kath- "and you will turn over the incriminating items?"<br /><br />Mann- "sure sure.. here Katherine .. let me get you a pen .. just sign on the dotted line.. and oh by the way .. the profits from the book .. We will take 2/3 of it .. for helping your promote it ..dontcha see"<br /><br /><br />Yep.. that in OUR opinion is how that all went down. And NOW .. everybody knows once you accept being blackmailed ...the blackmailers got you by the shorthairs.. so to speak...<br /><br />Howard Mann needed the siblings to make a MEDIA fuss about the validity of the O2 Will .. right at the opportune time that the MJEstate VS Howard Mann Henry Vaccaro case was due to be heard.<br /><br />TIMING IS EVERYTHING ..<br /><br />and also don't forget - The love of Money will make curious bedfellows ...<br /><br />What is at stake in the Mann case? Copyright .. Yep you heard it right .. Who ever gets their hot little hands on the Copyrights have a way to make MINT on Michael.<br /><br />So now go read that LA Times article just one more time .. slowly and truly absorb what went down right in front of our eyes.<br /><br />A ruse of sorts .. all the while we were thinking this was about the health and welfare of Katherine Jackson and the protection of Michael's HEIRS apparent but in actuality it was all staged for Howard Mann's case.<br /><br />So we can only assume that Mann and Vaccarro did NOT turn over all of the skeletons in the Jackson warehouse, if you get our drift. We want to assume that he is holding those items over their heads ONCE AGAIN ... because we don't want to believe that the Jacksons are willingly working in conjunction with Vaccaro who worked openly and with great gusto AGAINST Michael to bring a guilty conviction.<br /><br />To assume that they freely participated in such an abomination when their "fundamental family relationship" with Mkchael's children is so delicate is to suggest that they are in fact really demons and not loving aunts and uncles at all. .<br /><br />Details and background - <br />http://articles.latimes.com/2010/dec/12/entertainment/la-ca-michael-jackson-20101212<br />LA Article-http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/08/michael-jackson-will-lawsuit.html<br />Rest in Peace, dear brother Michael.. rest assured God and your fanbase are watching over your children.
  • AdiAdi Posts: 1,834
    The Mann Act and Michael Jackson - as I mentioned previously, I recall it being discussed back when Howard Mann 1st "appeared" on the "scene".<br /><br />The Blog by Charles Thompson posted on 3rd JANUARY 2010: "FBI File Reveals Attempt to Convict Jackson with Racist Law"  the link to which, I remember, was posted during those discussions and reading at the time and thinking  >:(  >:(  >:(<br /><br />Here is the link to C.T.'s Blog article about Michael Jackson being targeted under the Mann Act:<br /><br />http://charlesthomsonjournalist.blogspot.com.au/2010/01/fbi-file-reveals-attempt-to-convict.html<br /><br />Things that make you go  :WTF:  <br /><br />
  • MissGMissG Posts: 7,403
    LunaJo (youtube) made an excellent video about legality of a will.<br /><br />How to prove a will invalid?<br /><br />1- the deceased was incompetent when the will was made<br />2- "        "        "    under undue influence or fraude when the will was made<br />3- the will was improperly executed<br />4- there is a later valid will<br /><br />Now, go and figure which is the case... <br /><br />
  • SweetangelSweetangel Posts: 259
    Hello everyone,<br /><br />I love GOOOGLE because you can figure out everything.<br />Someone did ask a Lawyer two Years ago about Michaels Will.<br /><br />Here is the Link<br /><br />http://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/last-will-valid-despite-wrong-location-and-wrong-n-361975.html<br /><br />The only Thing I can see that the Will is maybe invalid is because they used the wrong<br />middle Name. Anyone here with a better english than mine and with more courage<br />is interested to ask one of the Lawyer? This Site says its for free. But than you should<br />use another Name for example Tom Joe Smith at legal Documents (passport Driver Licence) and in the Will Tom Joseph Smith. <br /><br />Much Peace and Love to everyone<br />
  • 2good2btrue2good2btrue Posts: 4,210
    on 1344465639:
    <br />Hello everyone,<br /><br />I love GOOOGLE because you can figure out everything.<br />Someone did ask a Lawyer two Years ago about Michaels Will.<br /><br />Here is the Link<br /><br />http://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/last-will-valid-despite-wrong-location-and-wrong-n-361975.html<br /><br />The only Thing I can see that the Will is maybe invalid is because they used the wrong<br />middle Name. Anyone here with a better english than mine and with more courage<br />is interested to ask one of the Lawyer? This Site says its for free. But than you should<br />use another Name for example Tom Joe Smith at legal Documents (passport Driver Licence) and in the Will Tom Joseph Smith. <br /><br />Much Peace and Love to everyone<br />
    <br /><br />Last will valid despite wrong location and wrong names?<br /><br />Asked almost 2 years ago - Los Angeles, CA<br /><br />Question:  Estate Planning Will<br />There's a will, signed by the deceased and three witnesses. <br />But there's a problem: the deceased AND the witnesses signed, that the will was signed in Los Angeles, while it is proven, that the deceased wasn't in Los Angeles at the time the will was signed. <br />Also all names of the deceased's children are misspelled. <br /><br />Is that will valid? Wouldn't the witnesses have to prove beyond their signatures, that they had been in the same place with the deceased, when the will was signed? The will specifically says, that they were all present at the same time. <br /><br />What would be the procedure in this case? <br />Btw, two of the witnesses are also named as the executors of the will and it's a pretty huge estate to be taken care of.<br /><br /><br />Answer 1:  Licensed in CA<br /><br />Robert Miller<br />Los Angeles Probate Attorney<br /><br />Lawyer agrees<br /><br /><br />Answered about a year ago. The short and simple answer is that minor errors and discrepancies will generally be ignored. If it can be determined that the decedent signed the document, that the decedent's signature was witnessed by at least 2 adults not named as beneficiaries in the will, and the intent of the testator can be determined, most courts would accept the document. Whoever possesses the will should lodge it with the court having jurisdiction over the decedent's place of residence, or, alternately, where the assets are located. A named executor may file a petition to probate the will but if he or she fails to do so, then other interested persons may file such a petition, including surviving spouse, children, and others according to statutory priorities.<br /><br /><br />Answer 2:  Licensed in CA<br /><br />Henry Daniel Lively<br />Costa Mesa Tax Lawyer<br />Answered about a year ago. <br /><br />First, it this is a "pretty huge estate" you should retain counsel immediately to begin the probate process and lodge this will with the court to determine if it is the valid last will of the decedent. Having the will not signed in LA and misspelled names are probably not enough to determine that this will is not valid. It is the intent of the testator that is important. <br /><br />Any individual seeking legal advice for their own situation should retain their own legal counsel as this response provides information that is general in nature and not specific to any person's unique situation. Circular 230 Disclaimer - Advice given in this response cannot be used to eliminate penalties with the IRS or any other governmental agency.<br /><br />I've just opened the link for you.....<br /><br />Well according to these lawyers, there really nothing wrong other than the wrong middle name, but that MJ's intent was obvious... :over-react-smiley: :over-react-smiley:
  • leilani81leilani81 Posts: 484
    on 1344502976:
    <br />
    on 1344465639:
    <br />Hello everyone,<br /><br />I love GOOOGLE because you can figure out everything.<br />Someone did ask a Lawyer two Years ago about Michaels Will.<br /><br />Here is the Link<br /><br />http://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/last-will-valid-despite-wrong-location-and-wrong-n-361975.html<br /><br />The only Thing I can see that the Will is maybe invalid is because they used the wrong<br />middle Name. Anyone here with a better english than mine and with more courage<br />is interested to ask one of the Lawyer? This Site says its for free. But than you should<br />use another Name for example Tom Joe Smith at legal Documents (passport Driver Licence) and in the Will Tom Joseph Smith. <br /><br />Much Peace and Love to everyone<br />
    <br /><br />Last will valid despite wrong location and wrong names?<br /><br />Asked almost 2 years ago - Los Angeles, CA<br /><br />Question:  Estate Planning Will<br />There's a will, signed by the deceased and three witnesses. <br />But there's a problem: the deceased AND the witnesses signed, that the will was signed in Los Angeles, while it is proven, that the deceased wasn't in Los Angeles at the time the will was signed. <br />Also all names of the deceased's children are misspelled. <br /><br />Is that will valid? Wouldn't the witnesses have to prove beyond their signatures, that they had been in the same place with the deceased, when the will was signed? The will specifically says, that they were all present at the same time. <br /><br />What would be the procedure in this case? <br />Btw, two of the witnesses are also named as the executors of the will and it's a pretty huge estate to be taken care of.<br /><br /><br />Answer 1:  Licensed in CA<br /><br />Robert Miller<br />Los Angeles Probate Attorney<br /><br />Lawyer agrees<br /><br /><br />Answered about a year ago. The short and simple answer is that minor errors and discrepancies will generally be ignored. If it can be determined that the decedent signed the document, that the decedent's signature was witnessed by at least 2 adults not named as beneficiaries in the will, and the intent of the testator can be determined, most courts would accept the document. Whoever possesses the will should lodge it with the court having jurisdiction over the decedent's place of residence, or, alternately, where the assets are located. A named executor may file a petition to probate the will but if he or she fails to do so, then other interested persons may file such a petition, including surviving spouse, children, and others according to statutory priorities.<br /><br /><br />Answer 2:  Licensed in CA<br /><br />Henry Daniel Lively<br />Costa Mesa Tax Lawyer<br />Answered about a year ago. <br /><br />First, it this is a "pretty huge estate" you should retain counsel immediately to begin the probate process and lodge this will with the court to determine if it is the valid last will of the decedent. Having the will not signed in LA and misspelled names are probably not enough to determine that this will is not valid. It is the intent of the testator that is important. <br /><br />Any individual seeking legal advice for their own situation should retain their own legal counsel as this response provides information that is general in nature and not specific to any person's unique situation. Circular 230 Disclaimer - Advice given in this response cannot be used to eliminate penalties with the IRS or any other governmental agency.<br /><br />I've just opened the link for you.....<br /><br />Well according to these lawyers, there really nothing wrong other than the wrong middle name, but that MJ's intent was obvious... :over-react-smiley: :over-react-smiley:<br />
    <br /><br />http://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/middle-names-being-shortened-make-a-will-invalid--864771.html?callable=false&published=true<br /><br /><br />Joseph Jonathan Brophy<br /><br /> White Plains Probate Attorney <br /><br />
    If the proper formalities are followed in executing the Will, it is presumptively valid. Witnesses are required to eliminate any question of who the testator was or whether he or she was competent to make a Will (I am skipping over holographic, unwitnessed wills which a few states recognize). Wills use variations in peoples' names all the time. If there is a serious question about identifying a beneficiary, that is an issue for interpretation of the Will but should not invalidate it.
    <br /><br /><br />
  • MaryKMaryK Posts: 1,732
    So what I understand from all this is that all the "inconsistencies" in the document itself will not invalidate the will. <br />Hm....<br />However, "Joseph" is used deliberately I guess.  :icon_mrgreen:
  • curlscurls Posts: 3,111
    The fact he's not dead kinda makes the will invalid at this time!  It's a prop - even if the mistakes would not invalidate a genuine will in the case of a genuine death, they are serving their purpose of drawing attention to it and keeping MJ in the news. It's genius - just enough to say 'look closer' but not enough to be too blatant about not being dead!
  • MaryKMaryK Posts: 1,732
    on 1344514712:
    <br />The fact he's not dead kinda makes the will invalid at this time!  It's a prop - even if the mistakes would not invalidate a genuine will in the case of a genuine death, they are serving their purpose of drawing attention to it and keeping MJ in the news. It's genius - just enough to say 'look closer' but not enough to be too blatant about not being dead!<br />
    <br /><br />Agree. Fake in this case = scripted...literally  :icon_e_wink:<br />Simply beautiful  :bowdown:  :icon_lol:
Sign In or Register to comment.

© 2024 Michael Jackson Death Hoax Investigators | All Rights Reserved