Michael’s Burial Was Delayed Because Janet Wanted Her Burial-Plot Deposit Back

MaryKMaryK Posts: 1,732
edited January 1970 in General Hoax Investigation
Warning: contains some not so nice statements  :icon_e_wink:<br /><br />Was just wondering why this popped up in the news NOW after more than 3 years...well probably because someone has been writing a book  :icon_e_wink:<br />Contains already known info as well. <br /><br />So here goes:<br /><br />[size=14pt]<br />Michael Jackson’s Burial Was Delayed Because Janet Wanted Her Burial-Plot Deposit Back[/size]<br />by Vanity Fair 5:24 AM, OCTOBER 4 2012<br /><br />Michael Jackson’s burial was delayed for nearly three months due to wrangling between Janet Jackson and her brother’s estate, a detail revealed in a November Vanity Fair–exclusive excerpt of Untouchable, Randall Sullivan’s Michael Jackson biography, which will be published next month. According to Sullivan, Janet put up the $40,000 deposit at Forest Lawn to secure a spot for Michael but refused to let the funeral take place until the money was repaid.<br /><br />Ronald Williams, of Talon Executive Services—a private-security company that dispatched a team to Michael Jackson’s rented château in Holmby Hills on the night of his death—tells Sullivan that hours after Jackson died, La Toya and her boyfriend, Jeffre Phillips, arrived at the house demanding to be admitted. “We’re family and we should have access to the house,” they reportedly said.<br /><br />Sullivan reports that mother Katherine Jackson also arrived that night and entered the house, where she telephoned Grace Rwaramba, the recently terminated longtime nanny to Michael’s children. According to Rwaramba, Katherine said, “Grace, the children are crying. They are asking about you. They can’t believe that their father died. Grace, you remember Michael used to hide cash at the house? I’m here. Where can it be?” Rwaramba described Michael’s standard practice of hiding his cash in black plastic garbage bags and under the carpets. Talon describes seeing La Toya and her boyfriend loading black plastic garbage bags into duffel bags and placing them in the garage. (La Toya insists that nearly all of Michael’s money was gone by the time she arrived at the Holmby Hills house.)<br /><br />The next morning, Janet Jackson arrived with a moving van and demanded to be admitted. A few hours later, the truck exited through the front gate with Jeffre Phillips at the wheel. Katherine Jackson and her daughters made it clear that they wouldn’t be leaving anytime soon. “They camped out for most of a week,” Williams tells Sullivan, leaving and returning “whenever they felt like it.”<br /><br />Katherine Jackson’s representatives shared details of her recent “abduction” with Sullivan, who describes what happened from her perspective for the first time. One of Katherine Jackson’s representatives tells Sullivan that it was Janet Jackson who on July 14, 2012, arranged for Dr. Allen Metzger to go to the Calabasas mansion, where her mother had been living with Michael’s three children. Metzger was introduced as an associate of Mrs. Jackson’s longtime Beverly Hills physician and told that her doctor wanted her to have a physical before she went to Albuquerque for her sons’ Unity Tour. After a brief examination, Metzger told Katherine Jackson that her blood pressure was elevated and that it would be best for her not to make the trip to New Mexico by car as she had planned. Katherine left the next morning with her daughter Rebbie and her granddaughter Stacee Brown and Mrs. Jackson’s personal assistant. It wasn’t until they arrived at the airport that Katherine realized they weren’t headed to Albuquerque but rather to Tucson, where she was booked at the Miraval Resort & Spa. Janet Jackson was there when she arrived.<br /><br />The representative tells Sullivan that Dr. Metzger had no association with Mrs. Jackson’s physician and that she had not sent him to see Mrs. Jackson. Dr. Metzger was, in fact, the same doctor who had been called as a defense witness at the trial of Conrad Murray, the physician convicted of providing the drugs that killed Michael Jackson. He had also been reprimanded by the state medical board for writing prescriptions for Janet Jackson under false or fictitious names.<br /><br />Katherine’s grandson T. J. Jackson, and others who were looking after Michael’s children at his Calabasas home, soon deduced that the five Jackson siblings—who that same week had sent a letter to Michael’s executors asking them to resign and claiming that their mother had suffered a mini-stroke—now reportedly with Katherine in their custody were, in the view of Mrs. Jackson’s representatives, attempting to gain a conservatorship over her, possibly by demonstrating her incompetence to serve as guardian of Michael’s children. They hoped to gain control of their brother’s fortune, which would follow Prince, Paris, and Blanket wherever they went.<br /><br />Sullivan explores the question of how John Branca, a lawyer who was fired by Michael Jackson in 2003—and is now earning tens of millions of dollars as an executor of the Michael Jackson estate—managed to retain possession of a will he should have handed over with all of Jackson’s papers to a new attorney, David LeGrand. “I had access to every file and I had to go through them,” LeGrand tells Sullivan. “And I did. There was no will. There was no trust. It just showed up after he died.” (Branca, though his attorney, declined to comment.)<br /><br />John Branca, has said that the will he presented to the Jacksons in July 2009 was greeted by the family with applause, but Katherine Jackson remembers the meeting differently. “According to her, the atmosphere went from quiet to glum,” Sullivan reports. “She personally was offended that John Branca never once said how sorry he was for her loss. The man was cold, Mrs. Jackson thought, just as Michael had described him: ‘My son had told me and the kids that he never wanted Branca to be any part of his business ever again.’”<br /><br />http://www.vanityfair.com/online/oscars/2012/10/michael-jackson-burial-delayed-janet-jackson-deposit
«134

Comments

  • diggyondiggyon Posts: 1,376
    Oh my God! What's this? This is sooo bad!
  • ok i can't say that this can't be true and i can't say that it is, but there is one thing i have noticed that lately janet seems to be under the tabloid attack. just in recent weeks i have seen covers with stories like her being an addict ( with pic holding pill bottles) and her secret life as a Muslim ( with pic with covering on her head), so i just want to put that out there as something to keep in mind.
  • GINAFELICIAGINAFELICIA Posts: 6,506
    All this money talk makes me sick...I don't want to believe any of these above.
  • MaryKMaryK Posts: 1,732
    Burial-plot deposit?<br /><br />Is that a common thing?<br /><br />Does anyone know?<br /><br />And: wouldn´t a deposit be paid back by a contracting party (Forest Lawn in this case) anyway after the "business transaction" has been determined?<br /><br />Because that would have been a contract between Janet and Forest Lawn and not the Estate and Forest Lawn. Right?<br /><br /><br /><br />
  • on 1349352600:
    <br />Burial-plot deposit?<br /><br />Is that a common thing?<br /><br />Does anyone know?<br /><br />And: wouldn´t a deposit be paid back by a contracting party (Forest Lawn in this case) anyway after the "business transaction" has been determined?<br /><br />Because that would have been a contract between Janet and Forest Lawn and not the Estate and Forest Lawn. Right?<br />
    <br /><br />i think the deposit requirement may be true. seems i have heard mention ( just for a average person $1000.00) . i guess what they are suggesting is that she put it down and was promised it back by someone , perhaps before they found out about the executor situation.
  • For Janet to be wrestling with the Estate for REIMBURSEMENT for monies she paid to Forest Lawn would be NO REASON for the burial to be delayed.  Forest Lawn had been paid for their services.  Her ordeal woul not be with them but with the Estate.  So this story as Front so eloquently put it is 'BALONEY".  :judge-smiley:  in every story of late about Janet, it is made to appear that she is geedy and unreasonable.  No time before this has Janet been so alligned in the media.  Maybe its 'GREED BY THOSE WHO DON'T NEED IT" that they are trying to emphasize with these stories.  And Janet is the vessel they are using to bring it home.
  • This article gives me the feeling that some very powerful people are annoyed with her fighting the Estate, and maybe even her sister LaToya and brothers speaking out. They been telling there's a conspiracy behind MJ's death from the start ( some of them) and that pissed a lot of people off, i'm sure. And now, recently, taking action against the people running the Estate. Another reason to piss those people off even more.<br />And we know from MJ's life and others like him that when you try to "them", whoever they are, you WILL pay the price. Michael did and now it seems it's Janet's turn. From all the brothers and sisters of Michael, she is the most famous and with an impact to the public, so ...go after her, her credibility, make her look bad and you destroy not only her credibility but that of anyone who stands by her. <br />So, personally, I'm keeping a very open mind about all of this. They do that with too many people, for me to believe it just because it's in print ;)
  • A deposit required is pretty common for planning and selection of services to begin.  Most businesses won't do anything unless you've made an initial investment.  After the deposit was placed though I don't see how she could control or delay the services unless other fees became due/necessary and weren't paid.  If that was the case it would technically be FL refusing to proceed and not Janet personally delaying.  Most wills direct (as did this one I think) that all expenses for final arrangements be paid from the Estate so FL's hand should have been reaching in that direction (as would Janet's for her reimbursement of her deposit money).  Seems like someone is throwing a few extra slices of Oscar Meyer into this "fact sandwich"...lol. 
  •   This sounds bad,hope nothing of it is true.  ::)
  • RKRK Posts: 3,019
    Poor Janet does seem to be coping it in the media lately. But I must say that this article reeks of bull doo-doo to me. <br />So Janet's wrangling with the Estate lasted just long enough for the numerology of the hoax to be perfect. What a coincidence. <br />I had to go back and look at TS post about the timing of the hoax and what do we have...77 and 7 days from death and burial to the resurrection, which according to TIAI was on the 9/9/09.<br />Here's the link to TIAI and the 7 steps in the timing of the hoax....http://www.michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/forum/index.php/topic,7010.0.html<br /><br />I think this story's real purpose is to direct attention to Branca, and the will. <br />
  • Ronald Williams, of Talon Executive Services—a private-security company that dispatched a team to Michael Jackson’s rented château in Holmby Hills on the night of his death—tells Sullivan that [size=14pt]hours after Jackson died, La Toya and her boyfriend, Jeffre Phillips, arrived at the house demanding to be admitted[/size]. “We’re family and we should have access to the house,” they reportedly said.<br />
    <br /><br />
    Sullivan reports that [size=14pt]mother Katherine Jackson also arrived that night and entered the house, where she telephoned Grace Rwaramba[/size], the recently terminated longtime nanny to Michael’s children. According to Rwaramba, Katherine said, “Grace, the children are crying. They are asking about you. They can’t believe that their father died. Grace, you remember Michael used to hide cash at the house? I’m here. Where can it be?” Rwaramba described Michael’s standard practice of hiding his cash in black plastic garbage bags and under the carpets. Talon describes seeing La Toya and her boyfriend loading black plastic garbage bags into duffel bags and placing them in the garage. (La Toya insists that nearly all of Michael’s money was gone by the time she arrived at the Holmby Hills house.)<br /><br />
    <br /><br />
    [size=14pt]The next morning, Janet Jackson arrived with a moving van and demanded to be admitted[/size]. A few hours later, the truck exited through the front gate with Jeffre Phillips at the wheel. Katherine Jackson and her daughters made it clear that they wouldn’t be leaving anytime soon. “They camped out for most of a week,” Williams tells Sullivan, leaving and returning “whenever they felt like it.”<br />
    <br /><br />It is known that no one can access the crime scene "access denied" lol so how come there were so many movement of people hours after Michael's "death"? How come the house was not sealed? Sorry but this has no sense to me.<br /><br />ps: I do think too that this article is hinting Branca to be the bad guy of the story.
  • RKRK Posts: 3,019
    I thought the loop-hole to allowing the family access to the Carolwood residence was because at first it was considered a natural death scene and not foul play. So it wasn't until police decided that Conrad's alleged actions were questionable and it became a potential  crime scene well after the site had been tampered with. This whole scenario makes the keystone cops look competent in comparison. Just another aspect of this whole 'death' that makes me wonder how the general public can swallow this as factual. 
  • becbec Posts: 6,387
    Talon describes seeing La Toya and her boyfriend loading [size=14pt]black plastic garbage bags[/size] into duffel bags and placing them in the garage.
    <br /><br />It's all trash.
  • YoungMackYoungMack Posts: 347
    Well ill start off by saying this is most certainly non sense!!! We have to realize EVERYTHING that comes out in the media is for a reason<br />clues, secret messages etc..... In this one for me these words are what I think are important<br /><br />"John Branca, has said that the will he presented to the Jacksons in July 2009 was greeted by the family with applause, but Katherine Jackson remembers the meeting differently. “According to her, the atmosphere went from quiet to glum,” Sullivan reports. “She personally was offended that John Branca never once said how sorry he was for her loss. The man was cold, Mrs. Jackson thought, just as Michael had described him: ‘My son had told me and the kids that he never wanted Branca to be any part of his business ever again.’”<br /><br />The man was COLD, Mrs. Jackson thought,JUST AS MICHAEL DESCRIBED HIM: ‘My son had told me and the kids that he never wanted Branca to be any part of his business ever again.’”<br /><br />My son had told me and the kids that he NEVER WANTED BRANCA to be any part of his business ever again.’”<br /><br />The will is the key!!! Somehow we have to get those dudes to step down!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!<br /><br /><br />@Gina....... Your right I dont care who you are for a crime scene it should be locked down for the investigation purpose so that in itself <br />shows that its not legit!!! <br /><br />Om just glad we get more to look through and decipher. Makes this game for fun!! Hopefully we will start seeing how its all coming together and for what reasons SOON!!!!<br />
  • on 1349364538:
    <br />
    Talon describes seeing La Toya and her boyfriend loading [size=14pt]black plastic garbage bags[/size] into duffel bags and placing them in the garage.
    <br /><br />It's all trash.<br />
    <br /><br />Yes, plus I don't see Michael hiding his cash money that way being a so wealthy man and being able to hide his cash in underground safes.
  • was it considered a crime scene before miss lee's bringing the propofol into the equation at all?  that bottle murray is trying to get tested to see if they put in the other stuff(sorry don't know the name) , was it ever actually tested at all? 
  • Before Ms. Lee relinquished this story to the world, I had never even heard the term propofol  :icon_e_geek:  I believe her part was to initially introduce the hoax to the world.  Mr. Jackson was hot on one side and cold on the other...  Of course he was.  Figuratively speaking opposites attract and one usually cancels out the other, so in other words, perhaps the message is he was just fine
  • MaryKMaryK Posts: 1,732
    I found this article about Randall Sullivan and his book:<br /><br />http://www.showbiz411.com/2012/10/04/new-michael-jackson-book-looks-like-clip-job-read-original-stories-here<br /><br />[size=14pt]New Michael Jackson Book Looks Like Clip Job: Read Original Stories Here[/size]<br />10/04/12 11:18amRoger Friedman<br /><br />The new Michael Jackson book excerpted in Vanity Fair looks like a clip job. As well, author Randall Sullivan seems to have depended on the most questionable of the Jackson so called “insiders” as his sources. They include Brian Oxman, who was never Michael’s lawyer, was fired by Tom Mesereau during the 2005 criminal case, and is now disbarred finally after many sanctions by the California Bar Association; Howard Mann, a Toronto online gaming entrepreneur who recently lost a major case to the Jackson estate; and Tohme Tohme, Michael’s short-lived manager currently being sued by the estate.<br />No one I’ve talked to associated with the Jackson estate, or the real “inner circle” has spoken to Sullivan. His book is being published by Grove Press, which sold the rights to Vanity Fair. The magazine can’t know that Sullivan’s sources are highly suspect, or that much of the material they’ve got from him comes other sources including this column. Sullivan never covered Jackson during his life, wasn’t around during his trial or its aftermath, but now pitches himself as an expert.<br />Sullivan also seems to be, at least in the Vanity Fair excerpt, on the side of the Will-doubters. This is the group that thinks Michael Jackson’s Will was forged or invented. I liken them to the Obama birthers.<br />Sullivan cites this column toward the end of his excerpt in the new Vanity Fair, but really–most of the stuff in this story comes from other places. It’s a clip job. I suspect his book will be much the same. Look for the fingerprints of other disgruntled ex-Jacksonians.<br /><br />Anyway, here are some links to stories I wrote where Sullivan may have found inspiration:<br /><br />http://www.showbiz411.com/2009/06/26/20090626michael-jacksons-last-will-was-completed-in-2002<br />http://www.showbiz411.com/2009/06/28/20090628jackson-family-where-theres-a-will-theres-a-way<br />http://www.showbiz411.com/2009/06/27/20090627michael-jackson-burial-neverland-ranch\<br />http://www.showbiz411.com/2009/06/29/20090629michael-jackson-katherine-mom-custody-john-branca-legal-mistake<br />http://www.showbiz411.com/2009/06/26/20090626jacko-michael-jackson-will-beatles-sony-atv-lennon-mccartney-debt-400-million-neverland-mijac-aeg-tohm
  • MaryKMaryK Posts: 1,732
    Oh yes and here we go. Response from the Estate:<br /><br />http://www.twitlonger.com/show/jhftqj<br /><br />Amended - From the Estate Of Michael Jackson<br /><br />Michael Jackson’s Wembley Concert is the No. 1 selling DVD in the world. Spike Lee’s Bad 25 documentary is drawing rave reviews from film critics and will air on ABC Thanksgiving night. Entertainment Weekly gave Bad 25 album an “A” calling it “a potent reminder of just how much Bad's pulsing pop holds up.” Cirque du Soleil’s “Michael Jackson the Immortal World Tour” was Pollstar’s top selling North American concert tour in the first six months of 2012, debuts this month in Europe and recently received Billboard’s Creative Content Award. And "This Is It" is the most successful concert film…EVER.<br /><br />The world loves Michael Jackson. Rest assured that every action the Estate takes will continue to endeavor that fans experience exciting new projects that further build upon and enhance his incredible legacy as an artist and humanitarian, while securing the financial future of those he specifically named as his beneficiaries.<br /><br />Sadly the full potential of Michael’s legacy continues to be hindered by a small handful of people who recklessly spread false rumors and obsess over stale, internet-fueled conspiracy theories much as they did when Michael was alive. These rumors have long since been debunked and have no legal or factual foundation.<br /><br />This week, some of these baseless theories appeared yet again in an article in Vanity Fair in the form of an excerpt from a book written by Randall Sullivan that will rehash these tired theories. While we do not want or need to respond to all of the nonsense, we do want to remind everyone of at least a few truths. <br /><br />The suggestion that John Branca or Howard Weitzman have a conflict of interest when it comes to AEG, and for that reason did not join Katherine Jackson in suing AEG, is not only false but reckless and noticeably unsupported by any facts. The Estate chose not to join in the lawsuit because it saw no evidence that AEG was culpable in Michael's tragic passing. Eventually, should the case proceed to trial any decision on AEG’s liability will be decided by a jury. That said, the Executors are troubled by the unfortunate and distasteful information being brought out in those proceedings which could sully and damage Michael's reputation and our memory of him.<br /><br />Another outrageously false claim is that Michael’s burial was delayed by any action of the Estate.<br /><br />As for the Will filed in the Probate Court, let's be clear: IT IS LEGALLY VALID, and the court properly appointed John Branca and John McClain as co-Executors. Those who wished to contest Michael’s wishes had every opportunity to challenge his Will. It should be noted that the 2002 will is consistent with Michael’s wishes as expressed in three prior wills.<br /><br />Sitting in the cheap seats and perpetuating tired cloak and dagger theories as Mr. Sullivan has done is not journalism, it's gossip mongering for profit. Look no further than some of the sources Sullivan relied upon for much of the incorrect information he chose to include in this book. <br /><br />Our commitment is and always has been to Michael’s legacy, his beneficiaries, his fans and to the spirit of an extraordinary artist and humanitarian who continues to touch the world.<br />
  • paula-cpaula-c Posts: 7,221
    on 1349363428:
    <br />
    Ronald Williams, of Talon Executive Services—a private-security company that dispatched a team to Michael Jackson’s rented château in Holmby Hills on the night of his death—tells Sullivan that [size=14pt]hours after Jackson died, La Toya and her boyfriend, Jeffre Phillips, arrived at the house demanding to be admitted[/size]. “We’re family and we should have access to the house,” they reportedly said.<br />
    <br /><br />
    Sullivan reports that [size=14pt]mother Katherine Jackson also arrived that night and entered the house, where she telephoned Grace Rwaramba[/size], the recently terminated longtime nanny to Michael’s children. According to Rwaramba, Katherine said, “Grace, the children are crying. They are asking about you. They can’t believe that their father died. Grace, you remember Michael used to hide cash at the house? I’m here. Where can it be?” Rwaramba described Michael’s standard practice of hiding his cash in black plastic garbage bags and under the carpets. Talon describes seeing La Toya and her boyfriend loading black plastic garbage bags into duffel bags and placing them in the garage. (La Toya insists that nearly all of Michael’s money was gone by the time she arrived at the Holmby Hills house.)<br /><br />
    <br /><br />
    [size=14pt]The next morning, Janet Jackson arrived with a moving van and demanded to be admitted[/size]. A few hours later, the truck exited through the front gate with Jeffre Phillips at the wheel. Katherine Jackson and her daughters made it clear that they wouldn’t be leaving anytime soon. “They camped out for most of a week,” Williams tells Sullivan, leaving and returning “whenever they felt like it.”<br />
    <br /><br />It is known that no one can access the crime scene "access denied" lol so how come there were so many movement of people hours after Michael's "death"? How come the house was not sealed? Sorry but this has no sense to me.<br /><br />ps: I do think too that this article is hinting Branca to be the bad guy of the story.<br />
    <br /><br /><br />question unanswered :icon_lol:<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />
    Sadly the full potential of Michael’s legacy continues to be hindered by a small handful of people who recklessly spread false rumors and obsess over stale, internet-fueled conspiracy theories much as they did when Michael was alive
    <br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Who is referred by this? :-[ :suspect:
  • MaryKMaryK Posts: 1,732
    on 1349393011:
    <br /><br />
    Sadly the full potential of Michael’s legacy continues to be hindered by a small handful of people who recklessly spread false rumors and obsess over stale, internet-fueled conspiracy theories much as they did when Michael was alive
    <br /><br />Who is referred by this? :-[ :suspect:<br />
    <br /><br />I believe they are not referring to hoaxers but rather to those who claim that the Estate are the bad guys and to those who support the "MJ was in bad shape and AEG killed him by forcing him to do the concerts" theory (or any other murder theory for that matter).
  • scorpionchikscorpionchik Posts: 2,669
    "John Branca, has said that the will he presented to the Jacksons in July 2009 was greeted by the family with applause, but Katherine Jackson remembers the meeting differently. “According to her, the atmosphere went from quiet to glum,” Sullivan reports. “She personally was offended that John Branca never once said how sorry he was for her loss. The man was cold, Mrs. Jackson thought, just as Michael had described him: ‘My son had told me and the kids that he never wanted Branca to be any part of his business ever again.’”<br /><br />[size=8pt]if Katherine was not among those who appplause will and was offended by john, and remembers that MJ did not want Brance have relation to his busines, why she is not among/with her children who is trying to contest will?[/size]
  • marumjjmarumjj Posts: 1,027
    Maryk Thanks, I think this is more of the same, I mean there are people who still squeezing the name of MJ, and apparently, Sullivan, not even he met MJ. I agree with RK in the home was closed after the case became possible homicide.
  • Janet is being attacked by media and is being portrayed very negatively by false stories.<br /><br />I seem to think that it is deliberate. Drawing a parallel perhaps.<br /><br />It wouldn't be the first time in the hoax that parallels to MJ have been deliberately made.<br /><br />I think that when it all comes out in the wash post Bam (the entire hoax I mean) things such as Janet, Estate, family members and other false media stories will be unveiled.<br /><br />For now I think, its collateral damage. But it will clear up.<br /><br /><br />So YES upon reading this, it is not good and "is soooo bad" to quote Diggy. Lucky for us though, we have the bigger picture.<br />
  • MJonmindMJonmind Posts: 7,290
    <br />Is it just me or do you sense a note of desperation in the Estate’s attitude?  They could have just ignored the criticisms, but they seem on the defensive which makes me suspicious. They do a lot of mudslinging without much factual substance actually giving solid reasons why.<br /><br />I thought it was only Tom Sneddon that was a “cold man”.  I hide extra cash in an envelope under the carpet.  And wouldn’t EVERY high profile wealthy person’s young death be considered suspicious automatically before ruling it a natural death?<br /><br />Taking this as an ARG however, the controversy of good or bad will, and offering of 2 sides people can choose to be on, encourages involvement and keeps up excitement and MJ’s name in the news. <br />
Sign In or Register to comment.