thank god grandmom took them because if debbie tooked them michael come from the dead kick her ass by moonwalking all over her ass lol jk but thank god grandmom haves them
i want those bad ass mother fucking kids! paris and the rest of them are getting a good sitting on with my big butt. bunch of crazy kids if you ask me!!!!!!!!!!!!
Debbie Rowe IS NOT the Biological Mother. Debbie Rowe was only a surrogate and has never proved DNA. I say provide the Proof...because DNA does not lie.
NO SHE CANT SHE GAVE UP HER PARENTAL RIGHTS TO MICHAEL! SHE SAID HERSELF SHE GAVE THOSE KIDS TO MICHAEL AS A GIFT! AND SHE DOESNT WANT THEM TO CALL HER MOMMY! okay plz leave it alone they're staying with the jackson so SHUT UP!
who ever Micheal wanted to have his children should have them, Debbie most likely will be able to see them but she will likely never have them. I think the Courts will see she gave up that right a long time ago. Then not to mention she may not even be the real mother and had eggs implanted.
It's pretty sad that she doesn't want her kids for ten years, and now all of a sudden she wants them??? She profited from the marriage to MJ in more ways than one. She wants to keep that money rolling in. Imagine that??????
I think things are not that black and white. She agreed with Michael that he needed to be a father more than she needed to be a mother. These were supposed to be his children before everything else, that's why she didn't saw any problem in letting them with him. She had no way to know that he would end up dying, and in this case, they are still her children, after all, and, if I'm not very much mistaken, Michael put in his will that the children should stay with her if he died.
Idon't think she should have custody because she never spent time with the kids. She made a deal with michael that she would give him the kids and in return she would get paid millions of dollars.
Debbie does not seem like a bad person. Michael could have invited her to visit sometime, who knows what happened? I do think the kids should stay with the family.
The only problem I see it's that Blanket can't be separated for his siblings. I do think that she should take them all. But if you watch Living with Michael Jackson, Take 2 , I think it clarifies a lot of what happened. I think she cares about her children, but she sees them as Michael's children before all.
Stop fucking arguing on Youtube, you two sound more childish than the 3 children involved in this case. Grow up and stop fighting in a virtual world where your opinions are your own opinions, you don't have to agree with someone else. Just agreee to disagree, you both are fucking hypocrites, therefore, BOTH of you are trolls!
There's always gonna be a daftheaded ignorant third part like you coming in and whining about someone argueing, and not contribute a damn thing to the subject yourself. If you don't like the comments don't read them and stop accusing people you don't know of being hypocrites, basically STFU you make it sound like people are not allowed to voice their opinion here, why can't outsiders just QUIT WHINING, and I'm not fucking childish you don't look at the comments I said I flagged this clip
If you have "flagged" this clip, why then are you still posting on it?
Ogtoshi:
Come on post some thoughts on the subject, it is "easy" to sit back and say what you said, or do nothing.
While I don't agree at all with MoonwalkerWorshiper and think that he is fucked in the head, I give him the right to espouse his opinions, regardless of how fucked up they are
Fucked up opinions, such as family cares for children more than cash? See, you've posted your obsessive opinions about taxpaying too many times. Few respond to ya. An attention-seeker, not a debater.
LMFAO, I already told you I have raised my children, but appears that your parents are still trying to raise you. I am not a spammer, but I have got you figured out and flagged as a troll.,
I saw a post of yours on a user's page abjobjenkins, containing personal abuse "dummies, child molester, druggie, makes me feel smart to remind you about it"
ihope she dos,nt get them anyone who can sell there flesh and blood cos lets face thats what she did.dos,nt desreve to be a mum, parents spilt all the time but you dont sell your kids to each other ,they should with the family they know that loves them and cares for them and thats the jackson,
nobody cares who were on the side of Michael Jackson. No one realizes, as some may think that children would be better in the hands of that woman womb for hire, only cared that the money and not done being a mother. It was one of its maternity business and a very dirty business
Jackson's will doesn't mean crap regarding the kids. One cannot under CA law "will children" to someone. The court looks at the best interest of the children and how that would be served.
Rockybigone can I ask you, do you have mental distorders? Or are you simply a desperate attention-seeking internet troll trying to rain on the MJ parade. Anyone can look in this comment box and find your repetitive posts since 2 weeks back. Your comments about money grabbing never ends, your comment about Janet Jackson is also disturbing. You refuse to listen to anything anyone tells you, wich is a sign of autism. You are a spammer Rockybigone.
Not a spammer, not a troll. All I do is present the issue and the facts. The problem is people just seem to look at one side of the issue, namely u and others.
All I have said all along is that whoever gets the kids is also in it for the money. That includes LaToya Jackson, Mama Jackson, Papa Jackson, Debbie Rowe, Janet Jackson.
Yes you have said that a few times on this board. You seem to get a boner talking about greed.
What I've said in response was, those people you reeled off are people who cares for the children because they are a FAMILY. Debbie Rowe however, is not a part of the family, that was the issue WE debated. You haven't listened and your continued posts resemble trolling. You're obviously not a parent so you don't understand how an adult person can love a child more than cash. Your problem, not others.
On the contrary I have raised my children. But in any case, we will see what happens this week or what is worked out. Either Rowe will get money and or Rowe will get kids and money. Mama Jackson may get some money and/or the kids.
The judge will make his ruling on the best interest of the children, not on what some will says, because remember you can't will your kids,
BTW I love my children very much. All you have to do is look at everyday life. Parents get divorced everyday, and one of the issues if they have children is who gets the kids, and how are those kids going to be supported.
Face it, if cash were not an issue in divorce cases or even cases like this there would be no debate. The kids are merely pawn pieces in this game, the underlying theme is CASH
Who are you to say they're in it for the money? Ya it's one way to look at it but to call it a fact is ludicrous, the way you fail to realize how your arguments fall on their own lack of reasonableness is very sad indeed, as you continue to post here in attempt to feed your own hearsay.
It has now been revelead Rowe reject the custody and Janet is more likely to take Michael's children. Janet Jackson is ALREADY stone rich since she's a successfull pop star aswell. Your argument - failure.
We'll see, and hey how about Mama Jackson? How is she going to take that? After all she was pissed off that she didn't get total control of Jackson's estate.
You and others say that Rowe is in it for money. you point to the fact that she settled for 8 million before that she will do it again. Perhaps she will, but Mama Jackson, or whoever takes the kids also gets some money to raise those kids. I don't think you would be naaive enough to say that this is going to be done for free.
Everything I said just went through your head without anything in between to stop it. LOL
Mama Jackson will be happy that the children will be with someone they can trust. She can always visit.
Get lost, you don't have any children. A liar aswell eh? You are a spammer Rockybigone. I'm gonna flag this comment box for continued misleading writings. You basically just need to stop argueing and if you can't realize that you have to suffer from some sort of autistic distorder.
I think Debbie is just following the money thats all.... and i think it was good parenting how she never came to see the kids nd now their father dies and they get like a million dollars she all of a sudden wants to come back into their lives..... nd i think the children do look like Mj Paris & Prince have the same shaped head as him nd Blanket just plain old looks like him..... i dont think this case should even go to court and it's not a tough decision ask the kids wat they want plain n simple
Okay I will ask the kids where they want to go. Paris, Prince Michael where do you want to live? Answer from both of them. "We want to live at Neverland".
Debie Rowe never be with children say Latoya Debbie Rowe, who said he does not inspire confidence and the children never knew her mother she was never in any part of your life if you felt bad or she never knew it ever wanted to know anything of them, let alone children to call her "Mama"
Debie Rowe never be with children say Latoya Debbie Rowe, who said he does not inspire confidence and the children never knew her mother she was never in any part of your life if you felt bad or she never knew it ever wanted to know anything of them, let alone children to call her "Mama"
LaToya Jackson is really a good expert to speak on this subject. Here is a woman that has done nothing with her career musically, the only thing she is best known for is taking off her clothes in Playboy.
debbie was in the circle who were planning MJ death..if you don't interested about what kind of person is debbie.. by letting you keep up appearances, it seems you are superficial, not as you realize who is Debbie Rowe
Saying Rowe was in the circle who were planning Jackson'd death is like saying Obama will send you a check for 1 million dollars tommorrow. Is NOT going to happen.
Rowe is out for money and possibly the kids, but hey so is everyone else, Mama Jackson, Joe Jackson, LaToya Jackson, Jeremiah Jackson. They know with the kids, money comes along with it
Latoya Jackson said that will never stop going to live with her biological mother, Debbie Rowe, which was accused of being part of the type of people who "stood for Michael because he was interested in her money."
Debbie Rowe plain and simple is out for money, that cow needs to go back to the barn where she belongs. She wants to act like mother of the year now after not being in their lives for so long. How dear she be given a chance to get the kids back when she was paid un undisclosed amount. If she wins the Jackson should sue her for the money she received from Michael.
Well it must be just as good as believing in Katherine Jackson and Joe Jackson. Hell that is like believing that Obama is going to fix the unemployment problem\
Why not ask them Paris and Prince where they want to live? Come on now anyone that has a brain knows the answer to that question. They will say Neverland.
Rowe will get something out of this, either Money and the Kids, or just Money. Mama Jackson you must also remember is out for money, just look how upset she was when she lost in estate. And now that Papa Joe Jackson is in the mix.
It's easy to love a child when there's money involved in the whole deal >:( . She does not deserve to get the custody of those kids, she seems like a bitter person, she may not be capable of treating them the way Michael used to treat them. I hope she doesn't get the custody.
usually I would say that the children should go with the mother however because she was never involved with the children emotionally or physically to tear them away from the only family they know would be like them going through another death- heartbreaking
I think they should go to michael jacksons mother because Debbie rowe actually gave up all rights to take care of the children so i really dont think from the start she really cared about them anyways cuz if she did she wouldnt have gave them away to michael soo she shouldnt get them thats what i think
Paris and Prince Michael I should go to their biological mother, right, that same woman who gave them away to Michael on her free will because she actually didn't care much, or if she did, she just couldn't handle it. Very nice. And as for that sweet little thing, Blanket, who knows... maybe they should send him overseas to get to his real mother as well. After all it doesn't matter how Michael and his family LOVE them. Of course some unknown women will make a better job.
that is a stupid law what if the mother didn' t tell the natural father he was going to be a daddy and if he knew it was alright with him when he found out? then you mean a man that she spitefullly married gets the first say crazy law. Look at Larry Birkhead, he was the natural father of dannylynn and Nicole was going to cut him out of the childs life and left her boyfriend in charge of the child.
Dr. Stein admitted on video that he did donate sperm, although not to or for Michael Jackson. So your assumptions about the effect of whatever his religious practices may be on his behavior are misplaced. Not that this necessarily has anything to do with the parentage of the two older Jackson children, but incorrect statements don't help people who are, for whatever reasons, trying to understand what the future holds for these children in the real world.
Under the law in most states, no matter who is the biological father of a child, a man who is married to the legal mother when she gives birth is the legal father. That does not mean the legal father then has the right to unilaterally decide in his will who gets custody of the children in the event of his death unless the mother's parental rights have been permanently severed. So Ms. Rowe most likely has the right to custody of the two older children. Grandparents can't "inherit" custody.
that's bs i don't care who is married to the biological mother at the time of the childs birth that is a stupid law and should be abolished. The natural should be given a chance to tell his side of the story. that's like saying the woman is the only creator of the child. it takes equal dna to create a child. even in abortion situations the man should be aloud to say whether or not he wants the child if the woman wins out on keeping the child and carrying it to term then she ould be only provider
debbie was screwing dr klein who was married and was told to give it up, she made $off those kids. period ...I dont buy the artificial insemination part, orthodox jews dont ever donate sperm it is an abomination, so there is definately more to this story.
I respect your opinion dreadlockextensions , however think about the fact the Debbie did have a choice simply not having Michael kids, but she was sold ... yip she sold her kids ...for money... I hope she doesnt get them back ! wat a bad mother
The kids Should stay with Katherine but I think you guy forget that Michael's control and Power sincerely gave Debbie no choice in the matter..It was a contract from day one and YES she signed it but I don't believe she felt she had a choice..Just my opinion !!
Thus far the media has been one sided in regards to the custody battle. Attorneys who appear on tv are either MJ's previous attorneys or has some sort of relationship with him. But Rockybigone you tell the truth what this custody battle is all about - money. The kids are secondary issue and they are being used as pawns of the game. It is disgraceful that the Jacksons are now parading them in front of tv cameras - it is all part of the game.
Rockybigone...you've done a heck of job explaining this custody battle than any attorney appearing on tv. So hats off to you. By the way, I am guessing you are an attorney; but don't tell me.
i saw on tv she was like 'dont fucking touch me! you just did! are you ready to get your ass kicked? shut the fuck up!" are you really gonna give three kids who are traumatized by the loss of there father to a cold hearted bitch who just wants the money and fame tht comes along with them? honor michaels wishes and give them to mjs mom. tell me if you agree! this is outragous!
Did you also see Mama Jackson's respone the other day when it was announced that she was not going to be in control of his estate? She bawled, she pleaded for mercy. She is just as greedy. Hell she gets 40%, she is just like Rowe and others, they all want MONEY, and more of it
That is true. she did, but as been discussed the court will look at best interest of the children. and that involves biolgical matters as well. Diana Ross never gave birth to the kids.
As I illustrated before, its like the deadbeat dad whose parental rights were never terminated coming home after 10 years of no contact and all of a sudden wanting custody of his children when he hears that there may be a possible payday on the horizon.
yes, you have a good point. the court will favor her due to her biological ties, but if i think they should ask the kids what they think, and if they decide its in there best interest, go with that. i just dont think that a hostile bitch is gonna be the best road for them right now.
Krzylautnerfan: Boy I can see the answer the kids give if the court asks them where they want to go. I bet they say Neverland.
That is why I think settlement talks are going on between the parties. As ticklemeoj and I have kept saying, the kids are merely the pawn pieces in this game of chess, the big overall picture is the money.
i never thought of it htat way. your right. which i think is no way to treat the children. they are traumatized enough without all of this, not to mention everyone hatin on michael. u present a good point, you should be a lawyer :)
Well I didn't said you were wrong, I said you were pathetic. But my take is you're gonna be wrong too. What makes you pathetic is that you wish people take these youtube posts about money into account.
Why isn't Janet, or Jermaine or any of the other siblings of Michael's stepping up to take the kids...Mom is 80..not good..but Rowe has already said she didn't want them, hasn't seen them..I will be more than shocked if the judge gives her more than some visitation if she really wants it..Please don't give that Debbie those kids..she's tough, mean
All characters playing the money game with MJ's will are greedy. There is no doubt about that. In regards to Debbie Rowe not wanting to have contact with the children, and I already explained this before, is because her TERMS OF SETTLEMENT with MJ prevented her from doing so; otherwise, she will forfeit the money and give it all of it back to MJ or the Jacksons, now that MJ is dead.
Ticklemeoj: As I have said before, I bet there are settlement talks ongoing right now between Rowe camp and Mama Jackson Camp. Think about one other aspect also, judge in the estate matter, gave control of Jackson's estate to the executors NOT to mama Jackson. Sure he went by the will, but if you note the breakdown of his will 40% to mama Jackson, 40% to kids, 20% to charities. I think in essence the judge is saying "I don't want just one person having control of this estate"
Dermatologist assistant Debbie Rowe walks in and has not release one single record to this day and has recieved 8.5 Million dollars for what??? she is already set for life, how greedy can people get?
Debbie Rowe = first lady of Gold Digging!!! she was paid 8.5 Million and said she did not want anything to do with them and now she suddenly wants them back so she can CARE FOR THEM??? I am not sure what to make of Debbie Rowe? maybe give her visitation and that's it. NO MORE LOOT!!!! and of course Katherine deserves Money, she is the MOTHER, without her there would have not been no King of Pop.
Problem with your logic is that Mama Jackson didn't give birth to the kids. Rowe apparently did and that is going to be a tough haul for Mama Jackson to overcome. Morally you may not like what Rowe is doing, but under CA law she has NOT terminated parental rights.
Like tickemeoj has said all the players in this game, Rowe, Mama Jackson, Joe Jackson, are all out for the money. Heck did you notice Katherine Jackson's response when she wasn't given total control of Jackson's estate?
Debbie and Joe= out to get MONEY!!! Katherine, no she is not one of those spotlight HOGS like JOE, she is a lady and she loves those kids, that damn Debbie , she walked out of them kids lives for over 10 years, what does that tell you about her??? she deserves nothing more than a Debbie Snack! Send her AWAY!!!!
I will ask you a question that I have asked before and that is if Katherine Jackson is NOT out for money, then why was so visibly upset the other day when she DID NOT gain control or was appointed executor over Jackson's will?
I think that the children should stay within the Jackson Family, in order to ensure that Micheal's legacy is maintained. Their mother has barely had any contact with them since birth, and their Grandmother is a constantt figure in their life. The Jackson family have lost a dear loved one, and we've lost an icon. The only ones who can console them would be the Jackson Family. RIP MJ, You will be missed.
As I told everybody before, mama Jackson's intention was get all of MJ's will. Rockybigone you are right. It is all about " the money" and now the Jacksons are parading the kids in front of tv cameras to gain sympathy from the public - "Hey Debbie Rowe they belong to us"
I think a lot of people are not understanding that part of Debbie Rowe's settlement with MJ was to stay away from the kids which means no contact or even to hang pictures of them at her house. It was not Debbie Rowe's wishes not to have contact with her kids, it was Michael Jackson. Who do you think is the most SELFISH person? Michael or Debbie? MJ bought the kids and Debbie Rowe sold them to him.
You are right, MJ's kids need to stay with his family. They have money and they can provide them with an environment in which they are accustomed to living. Debbie Row refused to let the children call her mom. She never sent them cards or letters. She just wants the 40 million Michael left to them.
And you don't think Katherine Jackson, Joe Jackson, and others don't want the kids for the same reason? Come on now. If Katherine Jackson doesn't want money, then how come she is so pissed off for losing control over the estate? Hell she gets at least 40%. Damm she is greedy just like all of them are
Regarding money, this should be taken out of the equation so it is not an influence, any money due to the children should be put into a trust and apart from welfare needs and education this should only be released to them when the youngest is 21 yrs old.
I feel that these kids are old enough to express thier own wishes with proper qualified caring child therapists, If they have not been 'allowed' to spend enough time with thier mother, then they should be given the opportunity, to spend time with her over a reasonable period sufficient for them to decide.
If I have to choose the lesser of the two evils, I will choose Debbie Rowe. She can give the kids (all 3 of them) the normal life the deserve, living in a farm with horses and dogs. The Jacksons will continue to expose them to a hectic show business life and especially now that Joe Jackson has a new record company.
news flash my friend Katherine jackson has sole custody of the kids and she and joseph have been separated since the 80s Debbie rowe was paid by michael to have tose kids and gave them up as a gift only wanting them back when money for joint custody was involved during the trial Can you say MONEY GRUBBING HOEBAG!!!!
According to MJ's will, 40% to kids, 40% to Katherine, 20% to charities. The 40% that is going to kids is what the Jacksons are fighting tooth and nail to get. It is said to be worth billions of dollars in future earnings. Imagine Debbie Rowe getting a hold of those billions of dollars? AsI said before, she is greedy and willing to sell her kids for money. I bet she will fight to get that money;but first she needs to get custody of the kids. This is all about money. Mo' money, mo' money.
Well now it is strike 1 for Katherine Jackson in that the judge ruled that she has no control over the estate of Jackson. He based his decision on the contents of the will, and which was the correct ruling under CA law. Rowe not going to Tuesday's events.
You also have to remember on 2 separate occasions, Rowe saved Jackson's ass from going to jail. First instance was the Shamir incident, second time was the child molestation charge where the prosecution called her as a witness.
the kids need time to get over their fathers death and lead a life as it was, with the help of people they are familiar with. Once 18 they can make their own decsions. Introducing Rowe at this stage would confuse them after all a human beings can only take so much. Please have consideration for their tender hearts and give them time.
Debbie now is the time to step up to the plate and get custody of your children since Michael is gone. As hard as it will be to keep the children out of the public eye, it will be extremely hard for you since you are not use to that lifestyle. But, as their Mother you need to go to court and try to get custody of all three of them. I can understand why you let Michael raise them. He was so worried about them and their safety. But overlook all the fans, media and get custody! Good luck!!
needs take your negative thoughts somewhere else. if you dont care "stop commenting". i think its child abuse to abandon your kids for 10 years. it's still up to the judge.
Well fortunately the law doesn't agree with you comments that abandoning kids for 10 years is child abuse. What negative thoughts are we espousing? we are just presenting our views, and the law as it currently resides in CA.
You also can't tell me or anyone else on here that Katherine Jackson, Joe Jackson, Sister Jackson, Brother Jackson, or anyone else doesn't have money motives behind wanting to take the kids
These 3 kids should be kept together & with someone that they have bonded with. .No matter what kind of agreement her and the King had...... I would want to see my kids now & then. I believe MJ's wishes should be fullfilled. MJ's Family should get the kids, though Diana Ross being a possible prospect in kind of unlikely due to the size of the Jackson Family. I do know MJ loved her & respected the way she loved & protected her kids. Please Deb.... Back off
fuck you debbie row !!she only cares about her horses!she never cared about her kids !!but when she learned about the huge legancy of michael jackson she remember that she has kids !!
I admit to you that Debbie Rowe is motivated by money and that is the reason why MJ used her body as a baby machine. Debbie Rowe, however, does not have prior allegations of or involve in child abuse, drug abuse, alcohol abuse, etc. That's the reason I think she make a good mother to all 3 kids, not just 2.
whoever adop[ts the kids, it shouldn't be this selfish monster: Debbie Rowe. She gave them away for mony, and now she is goonna wanna take them back for money. More money fr that monster?
There are plenty of motives why everybody want to adopt the children. Where ever the kids go, MJ's money and his estate will follow and that is the primary motive why everybody - Debbie Rowe, the Jacksons, the former nanny, attorneys are after - MONEY. I think the kids are secondary issue here because if the Jackson clan gets custody of them, they will surely give them to a nanny. I think Debbie Rowe can at least care for the kids herself, not some paid nanny.
Debbie will not & should not get those kids. they dont know her and I think they should be raised with the Jacksons. Katherine doesnt even live in the same house as Joe so she is more than capable of taking care of them with the help of her 8 kids. they will have a fabulous child hood, his mom is a sweet heart and I'm sure they love her
Is Katherine Jackson an unfit mother? According to media reports, Joe Jackson was a mean father to their 9 children, especially to Michael. That's the reason why MJ left him out of his will. As a mother, wont you care if you knew your son was doing drugs, especially if front of his children? It seems to me that there is plenty of "abuse" on the Jackson clan. If I'm the judge, I will never allow any kids to live in that kind of environment.
You say, but so far we haven't heard the children complain about their dad Michael. I think they will do fine with for ex their nanny (whatever her name) if she wants to take them and yes Debbie is unfit cuz she think of herself as their surrogate not family, Debbie Rowe is not a part of the Jackson family or the community surrounding those children
MoonwalkerWorshiper...c'mon the Jacksons are shielding them from public and these children will never be allowed to speak at all. Debbie Rowe stated that she did not give up her parental rights that the kids are with their father. Does that mean she continues to be their absentee mother? We can only speculate. I think the courts will look whether or not she is a fit mother for her own kids. Think of it as an adoption process. Childless couples adopt kids all the time w/no pass relationships.
So far nobody had discussed if Debbie Rowe is going to be an UNFIT mother of her own kids. There is no history of her abusing drugs or alcohol. No child molestation allegations against her either. She needed money and MJ gave her plenty of that. In return she gave up the kids. The BIG QUESTION IS -- IS DEBBIE ROWE AN UNFIT MOTHER?
I agree with Rockybigone. The Jacksons will certainly use "money" as an enticement for Debbie Rowe to go away. I hope Debbie Rowe does not buy into this. She needs to put side her own "greed" for money and think of the kids. They deserve a normal life. There is no way in hell an 80 year old woman can take care of kids, soon to become teenagers. San47di, get real - Mrs Jackson can drop dead at anytime. The kids do not deserve another pain in their lives.
How WRONG you are!! My mother lived to be 92 and she was still driving her car, travekling and wearing her 2.5 inch high heels until 2 weeks before she died. Had she not developed cancer, she probably would have lived to be 100+ Katherine Jackson is a strong woman, and not the apparent typical "old lady" that you perceive her to be. We can ALL drop dead at any time. Death is a part of life. We'll all see it. Katherine Jackson will probably outlive you and me. They need her love and care.
Michael Jackson is dead. There is no need to discuss if MJ took care of his kids or not, The question here is what is the best interest of the kids? I think the best interest of the kids is for them to have normal lives - going to regular schools, living in a house where there are no chaos - in other words, your normal average family life. I don't think an 80 year old woman can provide that nor Diana Ross, who is too busy with her career. They belong to Debbie Rowe.
They don't belong to Debbie Rowe. She never wanted them, sold them for 8.5 million dollars, and only wants them now because she's broke and wants money. There is no chaos in Katherine Jackson's home. You know nothing about this woman if you think that. Those kids will never be "average" nor attend regular schools. They're rich and will attend private schools just like other rich children. Debbie knows nothing about raising children as she only raises dogs and horses. Money is her concern
They did a feature of her on CNN last night and her finances were reviewed by her accountants who are in the know. They said she had to move out of the mansion that Michael gave her because she spent money with no restraints and could no longer afford to live there. They showed the property where she lives now, the unkept state of it, she has 8 dogs and they all swim in her pool. A guy who was friends with her for the last 8 years says she'll be broke in a few years.
Katherine Jackson is wealthy in her own right. The Jasksons are the only true "family" those kids know. Debbie squandered her support system, has no family enviornment condusive to raising children. Katherine Jackson loves those children and they adore her. She is their grandmother. Debbie doesn't give a shit about them and never has. That's the difference.
We will see (if in fact she proceeds with custody issue). I have said all long that there are settlement talks going on behind the scene. She won't simply go away without something either money or the kids.
I really think she'll end up with neither. The Judge postponed the Hearing another 30 day, enough time for the kids to adjust with the Jacksons. He's not gonna split them up and Rowe has no claim to Blanket. He will ask them who they want to live with, and they certainly won't pick Rowe, therefore she's "Toast!" LOL Katherine will not barter money over those children. This is an upright devout Christian in the true sense of the word, and will not be reduced to "Hollywood" games.
Judge only postponed hearing till July 13. As far as asking children where they want to live, they will say Neverland. Remember CA law on the issue, Rowe gave birth to children, parental rights were NEVER terminated. She still has standing.
Katherine not barter money over children? We will see when it all pans out. Frankly I don't care who get the children.
Rockybigone listen up, you're STILL going about Rowe giving birth to them, no matter how many posts you get replied where I say Rowe filled a function as merely a surrogate mother and not a mother in law, she signed documents where she gave up her rights for her children, You couldn't refer to where you've seen a court told she didn't gave up the rights. Your comments are going round and round, so if you don't care who gets the kids stop posting on the issue. Good luck with your taxpayer dollars
MoonwalkerWorshiper: We have discussed that issue already. CA Court of Appeals said SHE NEVER gave up her parental rights, her RIGHTS were never TERMINATED. The document you speak of was irrelevant in the courft's eyes. As I have told you go to findlaw website and look at CA court of Appeals decisions on the matter.
It's hard to navigate on that website but according to CA Court of Appeals way of thinking, the best interest of the children is something they take very seriously.
There's only speculation about what will happen, and it clearly points out Debbie Rowe really tried to be square with Michael's children (because they are his, not hers) just like I've tried to point out to you. Then you answer back either with "everyone wants their piece of the pie" or something about a deadbeat father
no she loves her children..
why money..she has got money
HeroGirl94 1 year ago
thank god grandmom took them because if debbie tooked them michael come from the dead kick her ass by moonwalking all over her ass lol jk but thank god grandmom haves them
babyl0vewazhere 2 years ago
If she wants to give somone children she has to be ready to be their mother too!
desasterz 2 years ago
i want those bad ass mother fucking kids! paris and the rest of them are getting a good sitting on with my big butt. bunch of crazy kids if you ask me!!!!!!!!!!!!
debbierowe101 2 years ago
Debbie Rowe IS NOT the Biological Mother. Debbie Rowe was only a surrogate and has never proved DNA. I say provide the Proof...because DNA does not lie.
musiclyriclovers 2 years ago 3
Debbie wanted the dollars and not the kids, it was a "gift"
carolinesmen 2 years ago
This is a good post. Learn how EVDense Digital Diary can help you for FREE in this type situation. Please visit our page.
EVDenseCorporation 2 years ago
Comment removed
VickiR2 2 years ago
Comment removed
VickiR2 2 years ago
Comment removed
VickiR2 2 years ago
NO SHE CANT SHE GAVE UP HER PARENTAL RIGHTS TO MICHAEL! SHE SAID HERSELF SHE GAVE THOSE KIDS TO MICHAEL AS A GIFT! AND SHE DOESNT WANT THEM TO CALL HER MOMMY! okay plz leave it alone they're staying with the jackson so SHUT UP!
zachey210 2 years ago 2
ew, debbie rowe is such a gold digger.
roobear133 2 years ago
She only wants money! To think she never wanted the kids for ten years and nw she wants them for the friggen mney
glamergirl188 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Now this cow can pay her $100,000 back taxes
CircusMaximus09 2 years ago
CircusMaximus09:
Could be and maybe Jackson's will now pay back Bro Jackson's 500 million tax bill.
Rockybigone 2 years ago
Glad that she didn't get the custody. She was aiming for the money. Now that the children got the cut she wants a piece of it.
OTAKUJHE 2 years ago
the third child might be the brother of the rapper of mj's secreat child
hernandezcruz101 2 years ago
sad how the 3rd child just gets tossed up as nothing and his poor Mother is no where to be found.
jonie1515 2 years ago
who ever Micheal wanted to have his children should have them, Debbie most likely will be able to see them but she will likely never have them. I think the Courts will see she gave up that right a long time ago. Then not to mention she may not even be the real mother and had eggs implanted.
jonie1515 2 years ago
It's pretty sad that she doesn't want her kids for ten years, and now all of a sudden she wants them??? She profited from the marriage to MJ in more ways than one. She wants to keep that money rolling in. Imagine that??????
Tassle101 2 years ago 2
I think things are not that black and white. She agreed with Michael that he needed to be a father more than she needed to be a mother. These were supposed to be his children before everything else, that's why she didn't saw any problem in letting them with him. She had no way to know that he would end up dying, and in this case, they are still her children, after all, and, if I'm not very much mistaken, Michael put in his will that the children should stay with her if he died.
CJMStarlight1992 2 years ago
i hope that stupid ass bitch doesnt get the kids.... she only wants them cuz her sluty ass wants money...
she never gave a damn for the kids untill now...
anthonybetha803 2 years ago
Idon't think she should have custody because she never spent time with the kids. She made a deal with michael that she would give him the kids and in return she would get paid millions of dollars.
SuperBabyboo2 2 years ago
MIZA DUNT EVER TALK BOUT RELiGiON MANNNNN FUCK YU MA PARENTS R WiTNESS THEY ARE THA EASiEST PPL TO TLK TOO!
OJLuscious 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
By all means, Debbie should seek to remove those kids from the Jehovah's Witnesses.. Google them. they are a cult!
misaz124 2 years ago
LOL! and what the hell is every other religion on this earth???
jonie1515 2 years ago
Debbie does not seem like a bad person. Michael could have invited her to visit sometime, who knows what happened? I do think the kids should stay with the family.
LawMal 2 years ago
The only problem I see it's that Blanket can't be separated for his siblings. I do think that she should take them all. But if you watch Living with Michael Jackson, Take 2 , I think it clarifies a lot of what happened. I think she cares about her children, but she sees them as Michael's children before all.
CJMStarlight1992 2 years ago
Stop fucking arguing on Youtube, you two sound more childish than the 3 children involved in this case. Grow up and stop fighting in a virtual world where your opinions are your own opinions, you don't have to agree with someone else. Just agreee to disagree, you both are fucking hypocrites, therefore, BOTH of you are trolls!
ogtoshi 2 years ago
There's always gonna be a daftheaded ignorant third part like you coming in and whining about someone argueing, and not contribute a damn thing to the subject yourself. If you don't like the comments don't read them and stop accusing people you don't know of being hypocrites, basically STFU you make it sound like people are not allowed to voice their opinion here, why can't outsiders just QUIT WHINING, and I'm not fucking childish you don't look at the comments I said I flagged this clip
MoonwalkerWorshiper 2 years ago
MoonwalkerWorshiper:
If you have "flagged" this clip, why then are you still posting on it?
Ogtoshi:
Come on post some thoughts on the subject, it is "easy" to sit back and say what you said, or do nothing.
While I don't agree at all with MoonwalkerWorshiper and think that he is fucked in the head, I give him the right to espouse his opinions, regardless of how fucked up they are
Rockybigone 2 years ago
Fucked up opinions, such as family cares for children more than cash? See, you've posted your obsessive opinions about taxpaying too many times. Few respond to ya. An attention-seeker, not a debater.
MoonwalkerWorshiper 2 years ago
Comment removed
MoonwalkerWorshiper 2 years ago
this is so split,,,,,she was a business deal to MJ AND GOT PAID,,,,,,,,,I DON,T GET IT,,,,,,
screenonme 2 years ago
MoonwalkerWorhiper:
LMFAO, I already told you I have raised my children, but appears that your parents are still trying to raise you. I am not a spammer, but I have got you figured out and flagged as a troll.,
Rockybigone 2 years ago
Because you are a hypocrite, you need to accuse others of being what you are?
MoonwalkerWorshiper 2 years ago
I saw a post of yours on a user's page abjobjenkins, containing personal abuse "dummies, child molester, druggie, makes me feel smart to remind you about it"
That is what makes you a troll buddy
MoonwalkerWorshiper 2 years ago
ihope she dos,nt get them anyone who can sell there flesh and blood cos lets face thats what she did.dos,nt desreve to be a mum, parents spilt all the time but you dont sell your kids to each other ,they should with the family they know that loves them and cares for them and thats the jackson,
choclatetruffles 2 years ago
look let me say this sirs....Debbie is the mommas baby's and that's allright by me...
johnsmdm 2 years ago
what a scary woman
ROClast4ever 2 years ago
say no to partition of Jackson family
eulex10 2 years ago
these kids have never belonged to debbie. she only smell money in those kids.
Why she wants these children now?.
she is a bitch
litacaro 2 years ago 2
dam right
eulex10 2 years ago
Debbie ugly bad woman.. she only smell money in the kids
litacaro 2 years ago 2
nobody cares who were on the side of Michael Jackson. No one realizes, as some may think that children would be better in the hands of that woman womb for hire, only cared that the money and not done being a mother. It was one of its maternity business and a very dirty business
litacaro 2 years ago
Jackson's will doesn't mean crap regarding the kids. One cannot under CA law "will children" to someone. The court looks at the best interest of the children and how that would be served.
Rockybigone 2 years ago
Still going on? Seriously?
Rockybigone can I ask you, do you have mental distorders? Or are you simply a desperate attention-seeking internet troll trying to rain on the MJ parade. Anyone can look in this comment box and find your repetitive posts since 2 weeks back. Your comments about money grabbing never ends, your comment about Janet Jackson is also disturbing. You refuse to listen to anything anyone tells you, wich is a sign of autism. You are a spammer Rockybigone.
MoonwalkerWorshiper 2 years ago
MoonwalkerWorshiper:
Not a spammer, not a troll. All I do is present the issue and the facts. The problem is people just seem to look at one side of the issue, namely u and others.
All I have said all along is that whoever gets the kids is also in it for the money. That includes LaToya Jackson, Mama Jackson, Papa Jackson, Debbie Rowe, Janet Jackson.
Rockybigone 2 years ago
Yes you have said that a few times on this board. You seem to get a boner talking about greed.
What I've said in response was, those people you reeled off are people who cares for the children because they are a FAMILY. Debbie Rowe however, is not a part of the family, that was the issue WE debated. You haven't listened and your continued posts resemble trolling. You're obviously not a parent so you don't understand how an adult person can love a child more than cash. Your problem, not others.
MoonwalkerWorshiper 2 years ago
On the contrary I have raised my children. But in any case, we will see what happens this week or what is worked out. Either Rowe will get money and or Rowe will get kids and money. Mama Jackson may get some money and/or the kids.
The judge will make his ruling on the best interest of the children, not on what some will says, because remember you can't will your kids,
Rockybigone 2 years ago
BTW I love my children very much. All you have to do is look at everyday life. Parents get divorced everyday, and one of the issues if they have children is who gets the kids, and how are those kids going to be supported.
Face it, if cash were not an issue in divorce cases or even cases like this there would be no debate. The kids are merely pawn pieces in this game, the underlying theme is CASH
Rockybigone 2 years ago
Who are you to say they're in it for the money? Ya it's one way to look at it but to call it a fact is ludicrous, the way you fail to realize how your arguments fall on their own lack of reasonableness is very sad indeed, as you continue to post here in attempt to feed your own hearsay.
It has now been revelead Rowe reject the custody and Janet is more likely to take Michael's children. Janet Jackson is ALREADY stone rich since she's a successfull pop star aswell. Your argument - failure.
MoonwalkerWorshiper 2 years ago
We'll see, and hey how about Mama Jackson? How is she going to take that? After all she was pissed off that she didn't get total control of Jackson's estate.
You and others say that Rowe is in it for money. you point to the fact that she settled for 8 million before that she will do it again. Perhaps she will, but Mama Jackson, or whoever takes the kids also gets some money to raise those kids. I don't think you would be naaive enough to say that this is going to be done for free.
Rockybigone 2 years ago
Everything I said just went through your head without anything in between to stop it. LOL
Mama Jackson will be happy that the children will be with someone they can trust. She can always visit.
Get lost, you don't have any children. A liar aswell eh? You are a spammer Rockybigone. I'm gonna flag this comment box for continued misleading writings. You basically just need to stop argueing and if you can't realize that you have to suffer from some sort of autistic distorder.
MoonwalkerWorshiper 2 years ago
We will see what happens this week. And to help educate you further, the court will have to approve any settlement before it can come to pass.
With the kids being given to Mama Jackson, you run the bigger risk of having Papa Joe Jackson involved in the picture
Rockybigone 2 years ago
I think Debbie is just following the money thats all.... and i think it was good parenting how she never came to see the kids nd now their father dies and they get like a million dollars she all of a sudden wants to come back into their lives..... nd i think the children do look like Mj Paris & Prince have the same shaped head as him nd Blanket just plain old looks like him..... i dont think this case should even go to court and it's not a tough decision ask the kids wat they want plain n simple
nymamii 2 years ago 2
mymamii:
Okay I will ask the kids where they want to go. Paris, Prince Michael where do you want to live? Answer from both of them. "We want to live at Neverland".
There you go I ask them and you got your answer.
Time to move on,
Rockybigone 2 years ago
Debie Rowe never be with children say Latoya Debbie Rowe, who said he does not inspire confidence and the children never knew her mother she was never in any part of your life if you felt bad or she never knew it ever wanted to know anything of them, let alone children to call her "Mama"
litacaro 2 years ago
Debie Rowe never be with children say Latoya Debbie Rowe, who said he does not inspire confidence and the children never knew her mother she was never in any part of your life if you felt bad or she never knew it ever wanted to know anything of them, let alone children to call her "Mama"
litacaro 2 years ago
Litacaro:
LaToya Jackson is really a good expert to speak on this subject. Here is a woman that has done nothing with her career musically, the only thing she is best known for is taking off her clothes in Playboy.
Rockybigone 2 years ago
debbie was in the circle who were planning MJ death..if you don't interested about what kind of person is debbie.. by letting you keep up appearances, it seems you are superficial, not as you realize who is Debbie Rowe
litacaro 2 years ago
Saying Rowe was in the circle who were planning Jackson'd death is like saying Obama will send you a check for 1 million dollars tommorrow. Is NOT going to happen.
Rowe is out for money and possibly the kids, but hey so is everyone else, Mama Jackson, Joe Jackson, LaToya Jackson, Jeremiah Jackson. They know with the kids, money comes along with it
Rockybigone 2 years ago
Latoya Jackson said that will never stop going to live with her biological mother, Debbie Rowe, which was accused of being part of the type of people who "stood for Michael because he was interested in her money."
litacaro 2 years ago
Debbie Rowe plain and simple is out for money, that cow needs to go back to the barn where she belongs. She wants to act like mother of the year now after not being in their lives for so long. How dear she be given a chance to get the kids back when she was paid un undisclosed amount. If she wins the Jackson should sue her for the money she received from Michael.
innocenteyes27 2 years ago
iF BELIEVE IN THAT KIND OF WOMAN..THEN BELIEVE IN SANTA CLAUS.
litacaro 2 years ago
Well it must be just as good as believing in Katherine Jackson and Joe Jackson. Hell that is like believing that Obama is going to fix the unemployment problem\
Rockybigone 2 years ago
she just want Michael's money that's why she want the kids........fuck Rowe
zhazha05 2 years ago 3
rowe want those kidz because she smell dollars in them, this Rowe is unfit to be mother .. cause those kids dont even know her..
kutielai 2 years ago 3
she is only after the money! she is not the childrens MOTHER! she just gave birth to them! NOTHING MORE NOTHING LESS! she is nobody!!
its like a surragate mother asking for her kids back 10 years down the road when the parents hit the lottery or something..
forget it.. DEbbie will lose in court!!
she is not gonna get her hands on Michaels Billions! also...
paris and prince are old enough to decide where they want to live! why not ask them!! ???
seoulman101 2 years ago 5
Why not ask them Paris and Prince where they want to live? Come on now anyone that has a brain knows the answer to that question. They will say Neverland.
Rowe will get something out of this, either Money and the Kids, or just Money. Mama Jackson you must also remember is out for money, just look how upset she was when she lost in estate. And now that Papa Joe Jackson is in the mix.
Rockybigone 2 years ago
neverland who will look after them i think janet should look after them i saw how she was the only one comforting her niece
jblive1985 2 years ago 2
It's easy to love a child when there's money involved in the whole deal >:( . She does not deserve to get the custody of those kids, she seems like a bitter person, she may not be capable of treating them the way Michael used to treat them. I hope she doesn't get the custody.
SarahBathory 2 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Debbie deserves the kid for a mothers love is numero uno....
johnsmdm 2 years ago
lol..XD
litacaro 2 years ago
Ummm...I think it's a little too late for her to get those kids...just a little...People make me sick sometimes. Those kids don't even know her.
dad0 2 years ago 3
usually I would say that the children should go with the mother however because she was never involved with the children emotionally or physically to tear them away from the only family they know would be like them going through another death- heartbreaking
nicklebaby 2 years ago 2
I think they should go to michael jacksons mother because Debbie rowe actually gave up all rights to take care of the children so i really dont think from the start she really cared about them anyways cuz if she did she wouldnt have gave them away to michael soo she shouldnt get them thats what i think
kimmykim12 2 years ago 3
Paris and Prince Michael I should go to their biological mother, right, that same woman who gave them away to Michael on her free will because she actually didn't care much, or if she did, she just couldn't handle it. Very nice. And as for that sweet little thing, Blanket, who knows... maybe they should send him overseas to get to his real mother as well. After all it doesn't matter how Michael and his family LOVE them. Of course some unknown women will make a better job.
-.-
Tecnho 2 years ago
that is a stupid law what if the mother didn' t tell the natural father he was going to be a daddy and if he knew it was alright with him when he found out? then you mean a man that she spitefullly married gets the first say crazy law. Look at Larry Birkhead, he was the natural father of dannylynn and Nicole was going to cut him out of the childs life and left her boyfriend in charge of the child.
donnylovesayesha 2 years ago
Dear Oceanus12,
Dr. Stein admitted on video that he did donate sperm, although not to or for Michael Jackson. So your assumptions about the effect of whatever his religious practices may be on his behavior are misplaced. Not that this necessarily has anything to do with the parentage of the two older Jackson children, but incorrect statements don't help people who are, for whatever reasons, trying to understand what the future holds for these children in the real world.
thatmanley55 2 years ago
Under the law in most states, no matter who is the biological father of a child, a man who is married to the legal mother when she gives birth is the legal father. That does not mean the legal father then has the right to unilaterally decide in his will who gets custody of the children in the event of his death unless the mother's parental rights have been permanently severed. So Ms. Rowe most likely has the right to custody of the two older children. Grandparents can't "inherit" custody.
thatmanley55 2 years ago
that's bs i don't care who is married to the biological mother at the time of the childs birth that is a stupid law and should be abolished. The natural should be given a chance to tell his side of the story. that's like saying the woman is the only creator of the child. it takes equal dna to create a child. even in abortion situations the man should be aloud to say whether or not he wants the child if the woman wins out on keeping the child and carrying it to term then she ould be only provider
donnylovesayesha 2 years ago
debbie was screwing dr klein who was married and was told to give it up, she made $off those kids. period ...I dont buy the artificial insemination part, orthodox jews dont ever donate sperm it is an abomination, so there is definately more to this story.
oceanus12 2 years ago
I respect your opinion dreadlockextensions , however think about the fact the Debbie did have a choice simply not having Michael kids, but she was sold ... yip she sold her kids ...for money... I hope she doesnt get them back ! wat a bad mother
cristeguz 2 years ago
The kids Should stay with Katherine but I think you guy forget that Michael's control and Power sincerely gave Debbie no choice in the matter..It was a contract from day one and YES she signed it but I don't believe she felt she had a choice..Just my opinion !!
dreadlockextensions 2 years ago
umm she could jus not sign it
mila203 2 years ago
The children do know Debbie Rowe. The visits were done in secret.
artsIlike 2 years ago
Thus far the media has been one sided in regards to the custody battle. Attorneys who appear on tv are either MJ's previous attorneys or has some sort of relationship with him. But Rockybigone you tell the truth what this custody battle is all about - money. The kids are secondary issue and they are being used as pawns of the game. It is disgraceful that the Jacksons are now parading them in front of tv cameras - it is all part of the game.
ticklemeoj 2 years ago
Rockybigone...you've done a heck of job explaining this custody battle than any attorney appearing on tv. So hats off to you. By the way, I am guessing you are an attorney; but don't tell me.
ticklemeoj 2 years ago
i saw on tv she was like 'dont fucking touch me! you just did! are you ready to get your ass kicked? shut the fuck up!" are you really gonna give three kids who are traumatized by the loss of there father to a cold hearted bitch who just wants the money and fame tht comes along with them? honor michaels wishes and give them to mjs mom. tell me if you agree! this is outragous!
krzylautnerfan 2 years ago
Did you also see Mama Jackson's respone the other day when it was announced that she was not going to be in control of his estate? She bawled, she pleaded for mercy. She is just as greedy. Hell she gets 40%, she is just like Rowe and others, they all want MONEY, and more of it
Rockybigone 2 years ago
well true...what about diana ross? didnt she say somehting aboiut shed always be ther? idk...those poor kids
krzylautnerfan 2 years ago
That is true. she did, but as been discussed the court will look at best interest of the children. and that involves biolgical matters as well. Diana Ross never gave birth to the kids.
As I illustrated before, its like the deadbeat dad whose parental rights were never terminated coming home after 10 years of no contact and all of a sudden wanting custody of his children when he hears that there may be a possible payday on the horizon.
Rockybigone 2 years ago
yes, you have a good point. the court will favor her due to her biological ties, but if i think they should ask the kids what they think, and if they decide its in there best interest, go with that. i just dont think that a hostile bitch is gonna be the best road for them right now.
krzylautnerfan 2 years ago
Krzylautnerfan: Boy I can see the answer the kids give if the court asks them where they want to go. I bet they say Neverland.
That is why I think settlement talks are going on between the parties. As ticklemeoj and I have kept saying, the kids are merely the pawn pieces in this game of chess, the big overall picture is the money.
Rockybigone 2 years ago 2
i never thought of it htat way. your right. which i think is no way to treat the children. they are traumatized enough without all of this, not to mention everyone hatin on michael. u present a good point, you should be a lawyer :)
krzylautnerfan 2 years ago
"I bet they say Neverland."
Hey buddy, you're actually starting to come off as pretty pathetic. You know what I mean?
MoonwalkerWorshiper 2 years ago
Hmm, pretty pathetic huh? Well I guess I wasn't wrong with regards on who got control for now of the Jackson estate was I?
Rockybigone 2 years ago
So you don't know what I mean.
Well I didn't said you were wrong, I said you were pathetic. But my take is you're gonna be wrong too. What makes you pathetic is that you wish people take these youtube posts about money into account.
MoonwalkerWorshiper 2 years ago
Why isn't Janet, or Jermaine or any of the other siblings of Michael's stepping up to take the kids...Mom is 80..not good..but Rowe has already said she didn't want them, hasn't seen them..I will be more than shocked if the judge gives her more than some visitation if she really wants it..Please don't give that Debbie those kids..she's tough, mean
kimber202 2 years ago
All characters playing the money game with MJ's will are greedy. There is no doubt about that. In regards to Debbie Rowe not wanting to have contact with the children, and I already explained this before, is because her TERMS OF SETTLEMENT with MJ prevented her from doing so; otherwise, she will forfeit the money and give it all of it back to MJ or the Jacksons, now that MJ is dead.
ticklemeoj 2 years ago
Ticklemeoj: As I have said before, I bet there are settlement talks ongoing right now between Rowe camp and Mama Jackson Camp. Think about one other aspect also, judge in the estate matter, gave control of Jackson's estate to the executors NOT to mama Jackson. Sure he went by the will, but if you note the breakdown of his will 40% to mama Jackson, 40% to kids, 20% to charities. I think in essence the judge is saying "I don't want just one person having control of this estate"
Rockybigone 2 years ago
Dermatologist assistant Debbie Rowe walks in and has not release one single record to this day and has recieved 8.5 Million dollars for what??? she is already set for life, how greedy can people get?
PAYBACKiszaB2 2 years ago
Debbie Rowe = first lady of Gold Digging!!! she was paid 8.5 Million and said she did not want anything to do with them and now she suddenly wants them back so she can CARE FOR THEM??? I am not sure what to make of Debbie Rowe? maybe give her visitation and that's it. NO MORE LOOT!!!! and of course Katherine deserves Money, she is the MOTHER, without her there would have not been no King of Pop.
PAYBACKiszaB2 2 years ago
Problem with your logic is that Mama Jackson didn't give birth to the kids. Rowe apparently did and that is going to be a tough haul for Mama Jackson to overcome. Morally you may not like what Rowe is doing, but under CA law she has NOT terminated parental rights.
Like tickemeoj has said all the players in this game, Rowe, Mama Jackson, Joe Jackson, are all out for the money. Heck did you notice Katherine Jackson's response when she wasn't given total control of Jackson's estate?
Rockybigone 2 years ago
Comment removed
PAYBACKiszaB2 2 years ago
Debbie and Joe= out to get MONEY!!! Katherine, no she is not one of those spotlight HOGS like JOE, she is a lady and she loves those kids, that damn Debbie , she walked out of them kids lives for over 10 years, what does that tell you about her??? she deserves nothing more than a Debbie Snack! Send her AWAY!!!!
PAYBACKiszaB2 2 years ago
PaybackiszaB2:
I will ask you a question that I have asked before and that is if Katherine Jackson is NOT out for money, then why was so visibly upset the other day when she DID NOT gain control or was appointed executor over Jackson's will?
Go back and read my deadbeat dad analogy
Rockybigone 2 years ago
I think that the children should stay within the Jackson Family, in order to ensure that Micheal's legacy is maintained. Their mother has barely had any contact with them since birth, and their Grandmother is a constantt figure in their life. The Jackson family have lost a dear loved one, and we've lost an icon. The only ones who can console them would be the Jackson Family. RIP MJ, You will be missed.
JazzieeLyricist 2 years ago 2
As I told everybody before, mama Jackson's intention was get all of MJ's will. Rockybigone you are right. It is all about " the money" and now the Jacksons are parading the kids in front of tv cameras to gain sympathy from the public - "Hey Debbie Rowe they belong to us"
ticklemeoj 2 years ago
I think a lot of people are not understanding that part of Debbie Rowe's settlement with MJ was to stay away from the kids which means no contact or even to hang pictures of them at her house. It was not Debbie Rowe's wishes not to have contact with her kids, it was Michael Jackson. Who do you think is the most SELFISH person? Michael or Debbie? MJ bought the kids and Debbie Rowe sold them to him.
ticklemeoj 2 years ago
she just wants them now cause they bout to be paid.
she already SOLD them for 8 million dollars before like they were a piece of property.
what a bitch
jamesmalik 2 years ago
Hah i hope she doesnt.
What a terrible life those children would have after that.
more like horrendus.
ganymedeIV4 2 years ago
You are right, MJ's kids need to stay with his family. They have money and they can provide them with an environment in which they are accustomed to living. Debbie Row refused to let the children call her mom. She never sent them cards or letters. She just wants the 40 million Michael left to them.
5yearplan1 2 years ago
And you don't think Katherine Jackson, Joe Jackson, and others don't want the kids for the same reason? Come on now. If Katherine Jackson doesn't want money, then how come she is so pissed off for losing control over the estate? Hell she gets at least 40%. Damm she is greedy just like all of them are
Rockybigone 2 years ago
you are exactly right.
lets not forget the fact that she SOLD them for 8 million dollars before like they were a piece of property.
jamesmalik 2 years ago
And like I said before, isn't it also sad that Mama Jackson, Joe Jackson, and others are also wanting the kids because of the money.
Remember Katherine Jackson is pissed off because she wasn't granted total control of the estate
Rockybigone 2 years ago
Regarding money, this should be taken out of the equation so it is not an influence, any money due to the children should be put into a trust and apart from welfare needs and education this should only be released to them when the youngest is 21 yrs old.
oldskoolchopperboy 2 years ago
How are they then going to have monthly needs then provided? The people of California pay for it?
Face it, the kids are only the game pieces in the game. If there were no money involved we wouldn't have a custody battle over the kids.
Rockybigone 2 years ago
I feel that these kids are old enough to express thier own wishes with proper qualified caring child therapists, If they have not been 'allowed' to spend enough time with thier mother, then they should be given the opportunity, to spend time with her over a reasonable period sufficient for them to decide.
oldskoolchopperboy 2 years ago
Debbie Rowe shouldn't get custody because she's a fat ugly bitch
scottspeaksfnsucks 2 years ago
If I have to choose the lesser of the two evils, I will choose Debbie Rowe. She can give the kids (all 3 of them) the normal life the deserve, living in a farm with horses and dogs. The Jacksons will continue to expose them to a hectic show business life and especially now that Joe Jackson has a new record company.
ticklemeoj 2 years ago
news flash my friend Katherine jackson has sole custody of the kids and she and joseph have been separated since the 80s Debbie rowe was paid by michael to have tose kids and gave them up as a gift only wanting them back when money for joint custody was involved during the trial Can you say MONEY GRUBBING HOEBAG!!!!
skinnyminny25 2 years ago
According to MJ's will, 40% to kids, 40% to Katherine, 20% to charities. The 40% that is going to kids is what the Jacksons are fighting tooth and nail to get. It is said to be worth billions of dollars in future earnings. Imagine Debbie Rowe getting a hold of those billions of dollars? AsI said before, she is greedy and willing to sell her kids for money. I bet she will fight to get that money;but first she needs to get custody of the kids. This is all about money. Mo' money, mo' money.
ticklemeoj 2 years ago
hells yeah
skinnyminny25 2 years ago
Well now it is strike 1 for Katherine Jackson in that the judge ruled that she has no control over the estate of Jackson. He based his decision on the contents of the will, and which was the correct ruling under CA law. Rowe not going to Tuesday's events.
Rockybigone 2 years ago
debbie should think like a mother and leave them at peace. Please dont be gold digger debbie Michael filled your pockets
shaziaa786 2 years ago
You also have to remember on 2 separate occasions, Rowe saved Jackson's ass from going to jail. First instance was the Shamir incident, second time was the child molestation charge where the prosecution called her as a witness.
Rockybigone 2 years ago
the kids need time to get over their fathers death and lead a life as it was, with the help of people they are familiar with. Once 18 they can make their own decsions. Introducing Rowe at this stage would confuse them after all a human beings can only take so much. Please have consideration for their tender hearts and give them time.
shaziaa786 2 years ago
she should have to give back the 8.5 mil before getting the kids.
redmtal 2 years ago
Debbie now is the time to step up to the plate and get custody of your children since Michael is gone. As hard as it will be to keep the children out of the public eye, it will be extremely hard for you since you are not use to that lifestyle. But, as their Mother you need to go to court and try to get custody of all three of them. I can understand why you let Michael raise them. He was so worried about them and their safety. But overlook all the fans, media and get custody! Good luck!!
fourreelgut 2 years ago
Debbie Rowe do everyone a favor and disappear forever.U GREEDY BITCH
insearchooof 2 years ago 2
rockybigone,ticklemeoj both of you hatters
needs take your negative thoughts somewhere else. if you dont care "stop commenting". i think its child abuse to abandon your kids for 10 years. it's still up to the judge.
lashellausin 2 years ago 2
lashellausin:
Well fortunately the law doesn't agree with you comments that abandoning kids for 10 years is child abuse. What negative thoughts are we espousing? we are just presenting our views, and the law as it currently resides in CA.
You also can't tell me or anyone else on here that Katherine Jackson, Joe Jackson, Sister Jackson, Brother Jackson, or anyone else doesn't have money motives behind wanting to take the kids
Rockybigone 2 years ago
These 3 kids should be kept together & with someone that they have bonded with. .No matter what kind of agreement her and the King had...... I would want to see my kids now & then. I believe MJ's wishes should be fullfilled. MJ's Family should get the kids, though Diana Ross being a possible prospect in kind of unlikely due to the size of the Jackson Family. I do know MJ loved her & respected the way she loved & protected her kids. Please Deb.... Back off
2tough4tv 2 years ago 4
Debbie Rowe can stop a truck. Is she the best Jackson can do ???
k3304 2 years ago
fuck you debbie row !!she only cares about her horses!she never cared about her kids !!but when she learned about the huge legancy of michael jackson she remember that she has kids !!
viviangrr 2 years ago
I admit to you that Debbie Rowe is motivated by money and that is the reason why MJ used her body as a baby machine. Debbie Rowe, however, does not have prior allegations of or involve in child abuse, drug abuse, alcohol abuse, etc. That's the reason I think she make a good mother to all 3 kids, not just 2.
ticklemeoj 2 years ago
Hi felow MJ fans. Do not worry. If MJ's will on the kids is not fulfilled we will unite and appeal. what do u think?
mrcuteblackie 2 years ago
mrcuteblackie: Make sure that you and your followers have enough money to pay for an attorney to represent your position.
Rockybigone 2 years ago
whoever adop[ts the kids, it shouldn't be this selfish monster: Debbie Rowe. She gave them away for mony, and now she is goonna wanna take them back for money. More money fr that monster?
mrcuteblackie 2 years ago
There are plenty of motives why everybody want to adopt the children. Where ever the kids go, MJ's money and his estate will follow and that is the primary motive why everybody - Debbie Rowe, the Jacksons, the former nanny, attorneys are after - MONEY. I think the kids are secondary issue here because if the Jackson clan gets custody of them, they will surely give them to a nanny. I think Debbie Rowe can at least care for the kids herself, not some paid nanny.
ticklemeoj 2 years ago
Ticklemeoj:
What you say about the players in the game and MONEY is so true.
Rockybigone 2 years ago
Debbie will not & should not get those kids. they dont know her and I think they should be raised with the Jacksons. Katherine doesnt even live in the same house as Joe so she is more than capable of taking care of them with the help of her 8 kids. they will have a fabulous child hood, his mom is a sweet heart and I'm sure they love her
GeorgiaPeach87 2 years ago
Is Katherine Jackson an unfit mother? According to media reports, Joe Jackson was a mean father to their 9 children, especially to Michael. That's the reason why MJ left him out of his will. As a mother, wont you care if you knew your son was doing drugs, especially if front of his children? It seems to me that there is plenty of "abuse" on the Jackson clan. If I'm the judge, I will never allow any kids to live in that kind of environment.
ticklemeoj 2 years ago
You say, but so far we haven't heard the children complain about their dad Michael. I think they will do fine with for ex their nanny (whatever her name) if she wants to take them and yes Debbie is unfit cuz she think of herself as their surrogate not family, Debbie Rowe is not a part of the Jackson family or the community surrounding those children
MoonwalkerWorshiper 2 years ago
MoonwalkerWorshiper...c'mon the Jacksons are shielding them from public and these children will never be allowed to speak at all. Debbie Rowe stated that she did not give up her parental rights that the kids are with their father. Does that mean she continues to be their absentee mother? We can only speculate. I think the courts will look whether or not she is a fit mother for her own kids. Think of it as an adoption process. Childless couples adopt kids all the time w/no pass relationships.
ticklemeoj 2 years ago
Well maybe it could be fun for the children to come and play with the dogs and horses home at Debbie's house.
I hope Blanket will turn out to be Michael Jackson 2 don't you? Or maybe not
MoonwalkerWorshiper 2 years ago
With regards to Blanket, I hope not. One was enough
Rockybigone 2 years ago
Comment removed
ticklemeoj 2 years ago
So far nobody had discussed if Debbie Rowe is going to be an UNFIT mother of her own kids. There is no history of her abusing drugs or alcohol. No child molestation allegations against her either. She needed money and MJ gave her plenty of that. In return she gave up the kids. The BIG QUESTION IS -- IS DEBBIE ROWE AN UNFIT MOTHER?
ticklemeoj 2 years ago
I agree with Rockybigone. The Jacksons will certainly use "money" as an enticement for Debbie Rowe to go away. I hope Debbie Rowe does not buy into this. She needs to put side her own "greed" for money and think of the kids. They deserve a normal life. There is no way in hell an 80 year old woman can take care of kids, soon to become teenagers. San47di, get real - Mrs Jackson can drop dead at anytime. The kids do not deserve another pain in their lives.
ticklemeoj 2 years ago
How WRONG you are!! My mother lived to be 92 and she was still driving her car, travekling and wearing her 2.5 inch high heels until 2 weeks before she died. Had she not developed cancer, she probably would have lived to be 100+ Katherine Jackson is a strong woman, and not the apparent typical "old lady" that you perceive her to be. We can ALL drop dead at any time. Death is a part of life. We'll all see it. Katherine Jackson will probably outlive you and me. They need her love and care.
San47di 2 years ago 2
Michael Jackson is dead. There is no need to discuss if MJ took care of his kids or not, The question here is what is the best interest of the kids? I think the best interest of the kids is for them to have normal lives - going to regular schools, living in a house where there are no chaos - in other words, your normal average family life. I don't think an 80 year old woman can provide that nor Diana Ross, who is too busy with her career. They belong to Debbie Rowe.
ticklemeoj 2 years ago
They don't belong to Debbie Rowe. She never wanted them, sold them for 8.5 million dollars, and only wants them now because she's broke and wants money. There is no chaos in Katherine Jackson's home. You know nothing about this woman if you think that. Those kids will never be "average" nor attend regular schools. They're rich and will attend private schools just like other rich children. Debbie knows nothing about raising children as she only raises dogs and horses. Money is her concern
San47di 2 years ago
How do you know she is broke? Do you have documented facts that support that?
Rockybigone 2 years ago
They did a feature of her on CNN last night and her finances were reviewed by her accountants who are in the know. They said she had to move out of the mansion that Michael gave her because she spent money with no restraints and could no longer afford to live there. They showed the property where she lives now, the unkept state of it, she has 8 dogs and they all swim in her pool. A guy who was friends with her for the last 8 years says she'll be broke in a few years.
San47di 2 years ago
Your last words are the key "She'll be broke in a few years", that doesn't mean she's broke now
You can't tell me that Joe Jackson, Mama Jackson or anybody else merely keeps these children for free and doesn't want money for "their support."
Heck it's all about money.
Rockybigone 2 years ago
Katherine Jackson is wealthy in her own right. The Jasksons are the only true "family" those kids know. Debbie squandered her support system, has no family enviornment condusive to raising children. Katherine Jackson loves those children and they adore her. She is their grandmother. Debbie doesn't give a shit about them and never has. That's the difference.
San47di 2 years ago
We will see (if in fact she proceeds with custody issue). I have said all long that there are settlement talks going on behind the scene. She won't simply go away without something either money or the kids.
Rockybigone 2 years ago
I really think she'll end up with neither. The Judge postponed the Hearing another 30 day, enough time for the kids to adjust with the Jacksons. He's not gonna split them up and Rowe has no claim to Blanket. He will ask them who they want to live with, and they certainly won't pick Rowe, therefore she's "Toast!" LOL Katherine will not barter money over those children. This is an upright devout Christian in the true sense of the word, and will not be reduced to "Hollywood" games.
San47di 2 years ago
Judge only postponed hearing till July 13. As far as asking children where they want to live, they will say Neverland. Remember CA law on the issue, Rowe gave birth to children, parental rights were NEVER terminated. She still has standing.
Katherine not barter money over children? We will see when it all pans out. Frankly I don't care who get the children.
Rockybigone 2 years ago
Typical males generally don't care. LOL I believe in justice and what's right. I'll vote "Love and Care" over money and greed any day. :-)
San47di 2 years ago
Rockybigone listen up, you're STILL going about Rowe giving birth to them, no matter how many posts you get replied where I say Rowe filled a function as merely a surrogate mother and not a mother in law, she signed documents where she gave up her rights for her children, You couldn't refer to where you've seen a court told she didn't gave up the rights. Your comments are going round and round, so if you don't care who gets the kids stop posting on the issue. Good luck with your taxpayer dollars
MoonwalkerWorshiper 2 years ago
MoonwalkerWorshiper: We have discussed that issue already. CA Court of Appeals said SHE NEVER gave up her parental rights, her RIGHTS were never TERMINATED. The document you speak of was irrelevant in the courft's eyes. As I have told you go to findlaw website and look at CA court of Appeals decisions on the matter.
Rockybigone 2 years ago
It's hard to navigate on that website but according to CA Court of Appeals way of thinking, the best interest of the children is something they take very seriously.
There's only speculation about what will happen, and it clearly points out Debbie Rowe really tried to be square with Michael's children (because they are his, not hers) just like I've tried to point out to you. Then you answer back either with "everyone wants their piece of the pie" or something about a deadbeat father
MoonwalkerWorshiper 2 years ago