Thread: Katherine Jackson Fails In Court To Keep Allowance Details Private

QUOTE (MJOutsider @ Sep 10 2009, 09:41 AM) [b]This judge has ruled against Katherine every chance he has gotten. Nothing wise about appointing the children a lawyer.. DUH its done in EVERY case! He obviously was quick to appoint who he wanted, so no need kissing his @ss for doing something basic and common. You don't know what this judge would have done in regards to Debbie, so the dramatics can obviously go both...

QUOTE (Armet's Mother @ Sep 10 2009, 04:32 PM) It ain't gonna work! And Jermaine should be ashamed of himself, for putting his mother on the spot like that. Things are not working out well and putting Mrs. Jackson in the spotlight like that ain't gonna change that fact. He needs to just face the fact that this is not going to work out. Time to pull the plug and stop the madness. Maybe MTV will let him...

The judge's reasoning makes no sense at all. Why should the fact that people are interested mean that you have to divulge such none-of-your-dayum-business-are-you-paying-the-bills information? Of all the things that have happened with regard to the handling of the estate... this... this is the craziest thing I've heard. This post has been edited by Cage : Sep 10 2009, 02:25 PM

QUOTE (nutterpartofme @ Sep 10 2009, 03:15 PM) You are indeed correct. Probate is a public process and when there is a will, by law it must be probated. MJ could have still set up executors under a blanket trust and all details could have been privately handled. If you look at the big picture, the will and the trust seem to have been set up fairly well. I'm guessing that no one sat down and thought of every single...

Why should the public have the right to know how much money is going to Katherine and the kids...does she have the right to know how much I make? That is a ridiculous rulling. I hope it was not the correct rulling since it is from Radaronline...the same folks who claimed that MJ's memorial is charging folks $20 each to attend at Staples. This post has been edited by BigBoi999 : Sep 10 2009, 06:59 PM

QUOTE (fred @ Sep 10 2009, 09:25 PM) If you look at the big picture, the will and the trust seem to have been set up fairly well. I'm guessing that no one sat down and thought of every single problem that might arise. It's hard to plan for every contingency. Yes, for someone who is not scutinized in the public's eye, it's fine. But I believe strongly that MJ would not have wanted the details of his assets...

Maybe MTV will let him sit in the front row, so he can watch Janet give her tribute. [/quote]

QUOTE (Armet's Mother @ Sep 10 2009, 09:01 AM) Ah raise up homie! I ain't the one and if you don't know: NOW YOU KNOW! Am I not allowed to have my OWN opinion or must we all just agree with everything you say? You can say everything you need to say, without being so nasty. Your message would be better received, if you did so! I wonder if you sounded as cartoonish as this came across.

The judge is just being a media .oO(ooops). He is the one inviting attention to this matter (as if anything MJ needs any more attention) by giving that horrendous reasoning.

"But Judge Mitchell Beckloff ruled against Levitch stating, "There is public interest in this." Now that' a damn lie! That is Mrs. Katherine Jackson's personal business! It's not our business! QUOTE (cecilia @ Sep 10 2009, 01:48 PM) Don't like this judge, he is biased against Jacksons children and Katherine, I think he rules against Katherine most of the...