Skip to content

Michael’s mother and kids on Oprah’s show

November 10, 2010

I’ve been fighting the need to address several different issues all at once and for some reason Oprah’s show with Katherine and Michael’s kids took the upper hand over the rest.

So let me post the videos of that interview and select only a couple of things which struck me most while I was beating back tears that kept breaking all the time and was scribbling the text (sorry for the mistakes). There will be very little comment as I hope things are speaking for themselves  in this conversation:

OPRAH: I spoke to Lisa Marie Presley recently. It was a beautiful interview because I felt for the first time that she really-really loved him.


OPRAH: Really-really loved him…

KATHERINE: My heart dropped. They called me and said, “Go to the hospital. Michael is in hospital”. He was dead but they didn’t tell me.

OPRAH: Did you know in your heart?

KATHERINE: I’ve kind of felt it.

OPRAH: Who told you at the hospital?

KATHERINE: They made the doctor tell me. He didn’t want it either… The doctor had to tell us – Dr. Murray.

OPRAH: Dr. Murray told you?


KATHERINE: And he came out, and he was talking. It took him so long, and I say, “Well, what happened?” He kept saying–and I said, “Well, how is he? How is he? Did he make it? Or how is he?” And he said, “No. He’s gone.” That’s all I remember. I’m sorry.”

KATHERINE: The children were there. They were in another room. They were crying. I thought Paris would pass out. She was just saying, “I can’t make it without you.”

KATHERINE: Paris was saying, “I want to be with you”.

OPRAH (with her legs crossed): Uhuh. Who told the children?

KATHERINE: Somebody had told the children. When they came in they were crying.

OPRAH: So somebody had told them. And Paris was saying… “I want to be with you”?

KATHERINE: “I want to go with you. I don’t want to live without you”.

OPRAH: Uhuh. That’s very, very, very hard.

OPRAH: Were you aware that he had been taking prescription drugs?

KATHERINE: Remember when he got burned in the head? He had been taking these drugs and it was a long time before I knew he was addicted to them.

OPRAH: Pain-killers.

KATHERINE: Pain-killers, [that’s what it was].

OPRAH: When Janet was on she said there had been an attempt to have an intervention with him. Were you aware about it?

KATHERINE: Yes, they had told me about it… Take and put him in a rehab or some kind of clean him up. …I spoke to him about it once, when I had heard it and he denied it. I was telling him I didn’t want to one day hear that he had overdosed because it would break my heart and kill … He kept saying, ‘My own mother don’t believe me.’ He kept saying me that. But I had heard that they would be in denial when they tell you that. …Part of me wanted to believe him, but I didn’t believe him.

Well, with all my due and really great respect for Katherine I think she is both correct and wrong here. At the initial stage of taking those painkillers Michael didn’t really know that the addiction was forming (he was probably never told by his doctors about a possible dependency) and when she finally learned about it he could have already been fighting the habit and could be quite right in denying it.

Let us remember that the drug-taking period of Michael’s life started only after the allegations in 1993 and it was a way to dull his horrible mental and psychological pain. He eventually managed to beat the habit as the autopsy report showed that his system was fully clean of Demerol or any other opiate containing drugs. The only thing which remained was that damned Propofol taken for his insomnia…

Haters sometimes imply that Michael could have been ‘stoned’ in the 90s and thus could not have realized what he was doing, but let me stress it again that the addiction to Demerol (which Dr. Klein openly admits he prescribed to Michael) started only after the 1993 allegations – and this was something he desperately tried to check, control and fight, and fight so successfully that most people who were around him at the time remember him as “a very controlled addict”. Beginning with 1996 he was already having his own children by his side and this was a tremendous incentive for him to shake over his life and start it anew.

Dieter Wiesner sued Michael Jackson for $40 million

Only today I’ve read Dieter Weizner’s story about Michael who actually sued him for $40 mln. and so is no friend of Michael’s, but as regards the drugs issue he is being quite emphatic in denying it:

„The fans should know one thing. Michael wasn’t a drug dependant. Sure, there were times when he took painkiller in the 90ties and during the trial he also had to take medicine to soothe his pain. But those were painkillers. This doctor had given to him a anesthetic. This is absolutely another kind of story!”

In the media you can clearly read that Michael was addicted to medicine/drugs, so that many fans got it as a matter of fact. Is that wrong?

„Absolutely. Michael wasn’t addicted to medicine/drugs. Of course, the fans hear about it and they hear about it again. They hear it and they forgive him because they love him. But there’s nothing to forgive – as he never was that way!

You should know, there are some doctors – and I have some of their names in my mind – they come to you and say: Oh, you don’t feel good? I have something for you and you feel better. There’s no big deal. You cannot sleep? Here, take this. You will sleep well. Sleep is important!“

Wasn’t Michael strong enough to decline?

„You must not forget, what this man had dealt with in his life. He was such a sensitive, vulnerable and proud person. And he had been humiliated and ridiculed from the whole world. And at the end he was all alone. Nobody was there by his side. The best person among us would get weak then.“

KATHERINE: I know he was innocent. The hardest thing was – would the jury believe it? And I prayed for the truth. If only they knew the truth he would walk out of the court house. And it happened. …I can’t talk about it, it was a trying time. All his life he had to go through stuff like this.

OPRAH: Did you ever for one instant, ever think of a possibility that he might be guilty of m-g a child?

KATHERINE: No. I never thought. Because I knew he wouldn’t. He loved children, and he was around children all the time, and that’s the only way that these people, the ones out there that did it.

They know who they are. I’m not calling any names – they know who they are. That’s the only way they can make people believe that he did something, because he was around those children all the time. And Michael would always say, “Mother, why are they accusing me of something I love the most? I’d rather slit my own wrist than to hurt a child.” He would always say that.

KATHERINE: You know what broke my heart more than anything else in this world? When people at the hospital told us “You can leave now”, Paris said, “Grandma, where are we going?” That tore my heart. It tore me up. I said, “You’re going home with grandma. Don’t you want to do that?” She said, “Yes. That’s where we want to go.” When she said, “Grandma,” oh, God, I couldn’t take it.

OPRAH: Do they talk about their father?

KATHERINE: What they talk about is, “Daddy would do this, daddy would do that”, they would always say. “Well, that’s how daddy did it”.

OPRAH: Do you think he was afraid of you?

JOE: I don’t think he was afraid of me. I never beat him. That never happened.

OPRAH: He told me you were beating him.

JOE: Beat or whip?

KATHERINE: You might as well admit it, that’s the way black people raised their children. He used a strap.

JOE: I don’t [regret the beatings].  It kept them out of jail and kept them right. My kids have never been in jail.

WINFREY: Do you think it`s good for the children to be out in public and not veiled? Do you think that`s good?

KATHERINE JACKSON: I didn’t approve of that. But I didn’t say anything about it to him. But then I heard that their mother – their biological mother – she told me it was her idea, not Michael’s.

OPRAH: To cover them?


WINFREY: What is it you love to do?

PRINCE JACKSON: Videogames and sports.

KATHERINE JACKSON: Tell her what you’d like to do when you grow up.

PRINCE: Produce movies and direct.

PARIS: I`d like to be an actress when I`m older.

OPRAH: Really? Good. Are you going to study it, take it seriously?

PARIS JACKSON: Yeah. I sometimes do improvs.

OPRAH: Oh, do you? Where?

PARIS: Well, I used to do them with my dad.

PARIS: My friend, she didn`t know – she didn`t know who I was until we went on after…

OPRAH: And then what happens? What happens when people discover who you are?

PARIS JACKSON: She didn`t care.

OPRAH: Don’t you like that?

PARIS: Uhuh.

OPRAH: Did you know at the time why you were putting on the mask?



PRINCE: Because then when we did go out without our dad, then nobody would really recognize us.

PARIS: He tried to raise us without knowing who he was, but that didn’t really go so well.

OPRAH: It didn’t really go so well. Did you appreciate or like being behind the veil or mask at the time?

PARIS JACKSON: I appreciated it.

OPRAH: What kind of dad was he? Was he a strict disciplinarian or could you get away with anything with him?

PARIS: He was strict.

BLANKET: He could get away with anything (pointing at Prince).

OPRAH: He could get away with things? You could get away with it?

BLANKET: Uh-huh.

PARIS: I kind of felt like no one understood what a good father he was. He was like – I`d say he was the best cook ever.

OPRAH: A cook, really?

PARIS: Yes. Everyone is all – a cook? Like they`re surprised to hear it.

OPRAH: Yes, I am.

PARIS: He was just a normal dad. He was like the best dad. He made the best French toast in the world.

OPRAH: Dipped in egg, right?

PARIS: Yes. He just made the best breakfasts in the world.

OPRAH: Would he cook for you guys a lot?


OPRAH: What do you miss the most?

PARIS JACKSON: Everything.

OPRAH: Everything?


Here are the first responses to the interview:

CNN, November 8, 2010

A.J. HAMMER: The world today got to hear new music from Michael Jackson, a song called “Breaking News” that made for plenty of breaking news. And that`s because there is a great debate over whether that really is Michael Jackson singing or an imposter.

And at the very same time, Michael`s mother Katherine and his children made their own breaking news today in an unbelievable tell-all interview with Oprah Winfrey. Michael`s mother making revelations to Oprah about his addiction to drugs and plastic surgery, his kids revealing their struggles to live a normal life.

Katherine`s now raising Michael`s three children, Prince, Paris and Blanket. She`s doing things differently from her son, who had his children wear veils to hide them from the public. Katherine Jackson tells Oprah she wants Jackson`s kids out in the world.

And in their first-ever television interview, Jackson`s kids were shocking in their own right, in how normal they seemed. They told Oprah what they want to do when they grow up.

But one thing is clear. No matter how happy these kids seem with their lives and family, they really miss their father.

PARIS JACKSON: I kind of feel like no one understands what a good father he was. He was just a normal dad. He was the best dad.

I think that is so cool. Michael Jackson, the pop star, simply known as the best dad to his three kids. And this is really the first time we`re actually hearing from Michael`s kids since he died over a year ago. This leads to our SHOWBIZ Flashpoint, Michael Jackson`s kids on Oprah – do you think Michael would have approved?

With me, right now, in New York, Midwin Charles who is an attorney with the law firm, Midwin Charles and Associates. And in Hollywood, it`s Jim Moret, who is the chief correspondent for “Inside Edition” and author of a great book – check it out – it`s called “The Last Day of My Life.”

JIM MORET, SENIOR CORRESPONDENT, “INSIDE EDITION”: I have to admit I hate to say I did not expect Michael`s kids to appear so normal. Obviously, I`m happy that they are. And hearing Michael`s daughter Paris explain to Oprah that she feels no one really knew how great a father Michael was to his kids, I thought it was just heartbreaking. Take a look.

HAMMER: Yes. No question, it`s great for us to see that. We love it. But Jim, to the SHOWBIZ Flashpoint, do you think Michael would have approved of his kids being on “Oprah”?

JIM MORET:  Maybe at this age. You know, he did his best to protect them. We know that he veiled them when they went out because he really wanted to cloister them.

But you know, you look at what Katherine is doing, their grandmother, and really exposing them to the world and they look normal. And what a fitting tribute. They love their dad. They love the silly little things like making French toast. What a sweet tribute.

Yes, I think he would not be unhappy to see how well they`re turning out.

HAMMER: I agree with you on that but I`ve got to say I doubt he would have been thrilled on them going on “Oprah.” You know, we never saw much of the kids at all until after he died.

I can only presume that he would have continued to shield them from the public for better or worse had Michael lived. So Midwin, what do you think? Would he have been happy with this appearance?

MIDWIN CHARLES, ATTORNEY, MIDWIN CHARLES AND ASSOCIATES: Listen, I think Michael Jackson is rolling over in his grave right now. I mean, remember, let`s face it, we had no idea what these kids looked like until he died. It had to take him dying for us to see what they looked like at all.


CHARLES: And so I don`t think he`d be happy with this. You know, I understand Katherine`s reasoning for doing it. Perhaps she feels, you know what? They`re old enough now. They`re more comfortable with being out in the public.

HAMMER: And it`s showing Michael in a different light, which is terrific. I do want to get Brooke Anderson`s take on this. Brooke, what do you think? You know, we`ve been following this story all along. Do you think he would have been OK with this appearance?

BROOKE ANDERSON, CO-HOST: I do, actually. Listen, they`re not toddlers anymore. And I think, like Jim, you know, it was a fitting tribute. And it was really an outlet for these kids to speak openly and speak lovingly of their father.

And if nothing else, Michael Jackson always wanted his kids to be happy. So if this made them happy, then, yes, I think he definitely would have approved.

Thanks to our David Edwards we can read some other parts too:


KATHERINE JACKSON: He didn’t want to start looking like a spotted cow, he said, so he just had everything done. I don’t know how he did that, but he had everything–but except under his clothes. They were still, you know, changing, his legs and things.

OPRAH WINFREY: Were spotted?

KATHERINE JACKSON: Yes. But he got it on this part of his body and his arms and things. He changed that. But what–I don’t know what in the world he did to do that, to change it, but he did.

OPRAH WINFREY: But as his look, you know, as a person in the public, we saw him transform himself, and what it looked like to us is that he was continuing to have surgeries, and I think when I interviewed him, he told me he’d only had two. I think he said…

KATHERINE JACKSON: He had more than two.

OPRAH WINFREY: I know. I thought…

KATHERINE JACKSON: He was just embarrassed.

About marriage to Lisa Marie Presley:

KATHERINE JACKSON: It was a surprise to me. He called me after he had married her. He called me, and he said, “Well, I’m going to put her on the phone.” And he put her on the phone. I said, “That’s not her.” “Oh, yes, it is. Honest to goodness it’s her,” he said. It didn’t sound like her. She has a heavy voice, and I didn’t know that. And she sounded like a black girl.

OPRAH WINFREY: Sounded like a black girl. You can say that out loud.


OPRAH WINFREY: She sounded like a black girl.

KATHERINE JACKSON: Yeah, when she was–but I said, “That’s not Lisa Marie.” He said, “Oh, yes, it is, Mother.”

OPRAH WINFREY: Did that trial change him?


OPRAH WINFREY: Tell me how.

KATHERINE JACKSON: Because he used to trust people. His problem was he trusted too much. And after that trial, he didn’t trust anybody.


KATHERINE JACKSON: He would always tell me, “Mother, I don’t trust anybody. The only person I trust is you.”

OPRAH WINFREY: Yeah. So you brought them home. You already had some of Jermaine’s children and some of Randy’s children were living here in the house. And so how were you able to integrate them? Was that just something that just happened…


OPRAH WINFREY: Just happened.

KATHERINE JACKSON: They just bonded the minute they got here. The children bonded. They had a lot of fun, and they did a lot of things that the kids hadn’t done before. They wanted to–they call it going camping, and so we went and bought tents for them, and they camped out on the yard. They did a lot of things together. And whatever they wanted to do at the time, I did for them because their father, their whole world was gone. They only knew Michael, and the whole world was jerked out from under them. It just tore my heart up.

OPRAH WINFREY: Mrs. Jackson, I think it’s incredible that you have these children who have literally lived in their own Michael Jackson world. So was it you who decided that they should be integrated into regular school and not home school?

KATHERINE JACKSON: Yes. Well, they talked to me about it. We talked about that, and we talked to the children about it. And Paris had said she didn’t want to go. And Prince was the one that wanted to go. And then after Prince decided he wanted to go, then she went to see the school, and she fell in love and she wanted to go. So now the youngest, which is Blanket, he’s never going. That’s what he said. And now the kids come back and talk about what a good time they’re having and all their friends, and the friends come over, and now he wants to go. So maybe next year he’ll be going.

OPRAH WINFREY: What grade will he be in next year?

KATHERINE JACKSON: Blanket? Blanket will be in fourth next year.

OPRAH WINFREY): Do you think it’s time for him to go? Would you want him to go?

KATHERINE JACKSON: I don’t think it’s time for him to go, because he’s still shy, very shy.

OPRAH WINFREY: Do they talk about missing their father? Are they able to share that with you, or do they think it would make you too sad?

KATHERINE JACKSON: Well, what they talk about is, Daddy would do this, and Daddy would do that, and they always say, “Well, that’s how Daddy did it.” Paris, she’s very emotional, and she talks about him all the time, and she’s a strong one. All the pictures on her walls in her bedroom are Michael. I don’t see how she could sit, look at him like that without crying. I can’t…

OPRAH WINFREY: What are you most proud of about Mrs. Jackson?

JOE JACKSON: She’s a wonderful person, you know? I think she’s too easy with people, you know? She’s just like Michael.

OPRAH WINFREY: What do you miss most about Michael not being here?

JOE JACKSON: I think about him every night, you know, look like this, and I just keep picturing him gone, and then every time I go into some place, a restaurant or a casino or something, his music is playing. … It brings back memories because I remember the songs. I was at every recording session he ever did, and it just brings back memories.

OPRAH WINFREY: He told me–you know, I did that interview with him in 1993, and he told me that you beat him.

JOE JACKSON: Well, I’m glad that he was raised in such of a way he was liked all over the world. He could’ve been like some of the other kids from Gary, either dead or doing a lot of drugs and in jail or something.

OPRAH WINFREY: So let’s just establish this. I was raised–I was beaten as a kid because that was the culture. That was the way we were raised, and so was that the way you raised your children?

JOE JACKSON: Beat or whipping?


OPRAH WINFREY: It’s the same thing when you have welts on your back.

JOE JACKSON: It don’t sound right when you said “beat.”

OPRAH WINFREY: I know. So you’re taking issue with the word “beat,” right?

JOE JACKSON: I’m taking it with the word “whip.”

OPRAH WINFREY: With the word “whip.”


OPRAH WINFREY: So what would you say that you used to discipline your children?

KATHERINE JACKSON: You might as well admit it. That’s the way black people raised their children.

OPRAH WINFREY: Yes. I’m just asking you. You can answer that for me, can’t you, whether or not he used…

KATHERINE JACKSON: He used a strap. Yes.

… OPRAH WINFREY: Let me just ask you this. Knowing what you know now, would you do it differently? Do you think you would be a different kind of father?

JOE JACKSON: I would’ve punished them by whipping them with a strap or something when they did something wrong. It would’ve kept them out of trouble and out of jail. My kids never been in jail before. Nine kids never been to jail.

OPRAH WINFREY: That’s a good.

JOE JACKSON: And that’s great.

OPRAH WINFREY: Do you regret those strappings on your children?

JOE JACKSON: No, I don’t.

OPRAH WINFREY: What is your favorite memory of your father?

PARIS: That’s really hard.

OPRAH: I’ll let you think about it while I ask you the same question, yourfavorite memory.

PRINCE: When we were on Bahrain, we used to wake up early and walk the beach.

OPRAH: When you were in Bahrain?

PRINCE: With a Coke.

OPRAH: Yeah?

PRINCE: Yeah, Coca-Cola and Skittles or Snickers.

OPRAH: Waking up and walking the beach.


OPRAH: That’s a good one.

PARIS: I just have to say spending some “quality time” away from the two, just me and him. The one time we went on the roof when we were in Las Vegas–of our house–and we just saw the Luxor lights. We just saw all the city of lights. We were eating Snickers, and we had some soda, and…

PARIS JACKSON: Sometimes he would take me to an art museum because we both loved art, and we would do a lot as a family. We would play tag outside, and he got us Kenya four years ago.

OPRAH: Kenya the dog, the lab?

PARIS: Come here, Kenya. Here you go, baby.

(thanks a lot, David for more transcriptions!)

98 Comments leave one →
  1. lcpledwards permalink
    November 10, 2010 8:29 pm

    Helena, check your email ASAP! I sent you the entire transcript of the interview in a PDF format!! And when I get it converted to Word, I’ll send it to you too!!


  2. November 10, 2010 8:50 pm

    “Helena, check your email ASAP! I sent you the entire transcript of the interview in a PDF format!!”

    Yes, David, I remember you saying that you have ordered it, but this is what women are like – impatient and unpredictable (a joke). Sorry I didn’t wait for the transcript – when I finally watched the show today I cried and just couldn’t think of anything else, and so decided to do something about it before this turmoil turned into something unbearable for me.

    I am very grateful to you for your generous contribution and have already attached the pdf file to the post – for everyone to see and read this absolutely exclusive material.


  3. lcpledwards permalink
    November 10, 2010 8:56 pm

    I just sent it to you in Word format, so now you can cut and paste it into future posts!


  4. Dialdancer permalink
    November 10, 2010 9:12 pm

    Oprah Winfrey – Top Psychologist Heaps Praise On Oprah For Relaxed Interview With Jackson’s Kids

    My only comment is….No comment.


  5. lcpledwards permalink
    November 10, 2010 9:20 pm

    Well, looks like it’s “Mission Accomplished” for Oprah! She had her highest rated show of the year yesterday! Let’s see Oprah’s checklist: Interview MJ’s first ex-wife? Check! Interview MJ’s parents and kids? Check! Interview MJ’s second ex-wife? That’s next!

    If Oprah gets an interview with Debbie Rowe, it will be the ultimate MJ trifecta! Although it’s unlikely due to her confidentiality agreement, though.


  6. November 10, 2010 9:47 pm

    “Oprah Winfrey – Top Psychologist Heaps Praise On Oprah For Relaxed Interview With Jackson’s Kids”

    I don’t give a damn for Oprah – I think I didn’t even notice it was she who was interviewing the kids. But the psychologist who wrote this nonsense should be smashed on the head with something heavy. The ridiculous things he/she says make me ashamed I am coming from a family of psychologists:

    “But the doctor did spot one thing that concerned (concerned!) her about the chat – Jackson’s daughter is growing up too fast.

    The talkative 12 year old did the bulk of the chatting while her brothers seemed shy and reluctant to be a part of the interview, and Walfish says, “Paris appears to be a smart young, sincere, articulate, and mature girl. In psychological terms, Paris seems to be pseudo-mature – that’s fancy talk for grown-up too young.”

    Pseudo-mature? It is some psychologists who are pseudo-professional and should shut up not to ask for too much trouble!


  7. November 10, 2010 9:50 pm

    “Well, looks like it’s “Mission Accomplished” for Oprah! She had her highest rated show of the year yesterday!”

    David, let us regard it in a different way – she had her highest rated show not due to her skills but due to Michael Jackson, his kids and his mother.

    So all the glory should go to them and not Oprah.


  8. lcpledwards permalink
    November 10, 2010 10:08 pm

    @ Helena
    Yes, of course MJ get’s the credit! But what I meant was that Oprah’s only motivation to do the interview was to get ratings, and from that standpoint it is “mission accomplished”! I don’t know who’s idea it was to do the interview, but its rumored that Oprah would only do it on the condition that she briefly got to speak with the kids.

    A few weeks ago it was said that Katherine wanted to “set the record straight”, but NOTHING was set straight! The headline coming from the interview was “MJ’s Mom Admits He Was Addicted To Drugs and Plastic Surgery!“, which is a shame, and I blame Oprah 100% for steering the interview in that direction. And to think she had the audacity to ask Katherine if she ever thought MJ could be guilty! The nerve of her!

    Here are Raven’s thoughts:


  9. Suzy permalink
    November 10, 2010 10:12 pm

    Why do the media have to analyze everything to pieces that’s connected to Michael? Paris is 12, at this age some girls are still little girls, but some are growing fast. Geez, leave the kids alone, they are just kids!


  10. lynande51 permalink
    November 10, 2010 10:22 pm

    Where did that Psychologist go to school???!!! That IS the field that determined that girls mature faster than boys by about 2 years.Well we have now heard it all, I guess everything they were taught in school just went flying out the window!


  11. November 10, 2010 10:30 pm

    A few weeks ago it was said that Katherine wanted to “set the record straight”, but NOTHING was set straight! Here are Raven’s thoughts:

    I didn’t know that they were going to ‘set the record straight’. If this was the goal it was highly naive to go to Oprah or to any media outlet for that matter.

    However one goal has been achieved – it is humanizing the audience. The situation with people in general, their ethics and human qualities is disastrous, and something has to be urgently done for us not to turn into monkeys again. Showing normal people like Katherine and Michael’s kids and making the audience sympathize with them is just a little step in stirring a little feeling in people and planting in them some seeds of humanity at last.

    Raven puts in different terms but it is just another way of saying it:

    “As always with these interviews, I try to look at them from the perspective of what a non-fan might take away from it. Certainly there is something to be said for hearing what his grieving mother and children have to say. These are the things that help to humanize him, and after all of the damage that the media has done throughout the years in de-humanizing him, that is never a bad thing”.

    Raven’s post is so great that I need to get back to it tomorrow for careful study. Now it is 1.30 am here again.


  12. November 11, 2010 10:53 am

    About the drugs addiction, recently David Nordahl has done an interview with Deborah L. Kunesh on Reflections on The Dance site

    and Nordahl who knew Michael for 20 years, had said:

    “I never saw Michael with the effects of doing any kinds of drug or alcohol or anything like that, and I saw him all different times of the day. Early in the morning, late at night, all during the day. He was always totally normal. Totally there. So I don’t know.”


  13. November 11, 2010 1:20 pm

    Did any one else see the vitiligo on Prince? When he leaned back in his chair it was on his arm and side of his neck.


  14. lcpledwards permalink
    November 11, 2010 1:51 pm

    @ Helena
    I think you should just cut and paste the transcript into the post, because I tried to open it using that link you gave, but Google Docs is saying that it can’t find the file, and a “404 Error” occurs.


  15. Julie permalink
    November 11, 2010 2:26 pm

    What I came away from this interview as with the Lisa Marie interview is that Oprah seems to have fallen prey to being sucked in by what the media said about Michael as opposed to actually researching for herself. What is odd about that is the fact that she has access to the same if not more information than the average person and could have checked out some of these stories herself. She said things like, “Out in the world it seemed like,” or “To us it seemed like…” as if she were lumping herself into the public and what was being thrown at the public by the slanted media. Things like the “pajama” story are well documented if she would have taken the time to listen to anything Thomas Mesereau had to say when he fully explained it. Further, I am so very tired of references to the baby dangling incident. I have thought so much about that and while it wasn’t the smartest thing to do — the man DID NOT DANGLE his baby over the balcony. He had a tight grip on that child and just leaned over for a split second and then went back inside. The media, in Michael’s own words, slowed it down when it aired to make it look worse than it was. That’s exactly what they did to him and continue to do to him. I was glad when Mrs. Jackson made the statement that Michael had to put up with things like that all his life when she was referencing people lying on him. I hope Oprah listened. I hope Oprah walked away from that interview and her Lisa Marie interview with a better perception of someone she just looked away from and condemned and considered to be guilty based on what was being put out in the media. My heart absolutely broke for the children, especially Paris. She was a daddy’s girl!

    I made the comment on another post about Joy Behar (who I don’t find to be the least bit funny) and her panel talking about Michael and she started off with repeating what Paris said about her Dad being normal and then said, “Yeah right…elephant man’s bones, hyperbaric chamber, bubbles — yeah that’s normal.” That’s what I mean — these so called people supposedly in the know (given they are on talk shows) don’t know anything and someone gives them a microphone and airtime to say whatever they want and they continue to demean and make fun of him for no reason whatseover.


  16. visitor permalink
    November 11, 2010 3:09 pm

    Em, can i ask something? That lady, Winfrey, is not the only one in the Media who hates Michael.There are plenty of them.Why are you considering her opinion so important? She doesn’t like him, fine. She is like those “hater” of Michael.You can not change their mind whatever you do.


  17. Paulie permalink
    November 11, 2010 5:08 pm

    Ophra sounds so fake and phony. It is so obvious she has no kids. She has no idea how a mother would feel losing a child. Katherin didn’t lose Michael Jackson, The Entertainer, and subject for televised interviews, but her baby, Micheal.


  18. November 11, 2010 7:40 pm

    “a “404 Error” occurs”

    Guys, sorry for the error. Now the post has been updated with the most interesting parts of the show added to it.


  19. Olga permalink
    November 11, 2010 9:05 pm

    This psychologist is out of her right mind to say the least. I wonder where the hell did she find that crap she said. There is a rapid development during adolescense in every aspect and the only thing that a psychologist could notice here is that Paris has been brought up in a privilliged environment with all the right stimuli. So kudos to Michael Jackson. The psychologist should check her developmental and educational ps books AGAIN!!


  20. Julie permalink
    November 11, 2010 9:45 pm

    vindicatemj — Joy probably wouldn’t get it. She tries to be funny and what she said was not funny! She and a majority of others in the media are too lazy to actually research anything. They just regurgitate what they’ve heard in the media — which is what my concern was about Oprah. She was repeating junk that has been out in the media for too long and this coming after his 1993 interview with her where he clearly stated to her that he was lied on repeatedly and she seemingly agreed with him at that time. And years later, she’s doing the very thing that he was speaking to her about that she agreed with him on. “If a lie gets told often enough, people begin to believe it.” Those were his words and she nodded as if she agreed with him. Once again, I do hope that she has walked away from a few of these interviews with a different perspective of him. He deserved better, especially from her. Joy’s just an idiot that was given a talk show!


  21. November 11, 2010 11:51 pm

    Helena, Jodi Gomes (she knows the Jackson family) She tweeted about that “P” book she had came across online. She couldn’t believe what she was seeing. I replied and agreed its outrageous! Of course I was think of all the research you bravely stomached thru about this subject and stated to Jodi. This very thing is being taught in college courses here in the US. People spreading this propaganda.

    This is beyond sick! and none of these knuckleheads on tv. Or those abuse groups (not all just those who stoop low to use MJ’s name) that pop up at their own convenience come without any ounce of out cry about books like this found on amazon and are recommend my sick professors. These talking heads are all deaf, blind, and dumb. And there’s no excuse at all for what they fail to do, research, fact check and present the truth.


  22. November 11, 2010 9:28 pm

    “Joy Behar started off with repeating what Paris said about her Dad being normal and then said, “Yeah right…elephant man’s bones, hyperbaric chamber, bubbles — yeah that’s normal.”

    Julie, it is the book found by David on the Amazon (called “A P’s guide to love and pleasure”) which should be shoved in the face of this Joy Behar with a question: “Do you consider THIS normal? That books like that are written, published and sold openly? Isn’t your attention a little misdirected if you don’t see the gross abnormality of such publications and think instead that having a pet monkey at home is something wrong?”


  23. Hayat permalink
    November 12, 2010 11:20 pm

    I feel that Mrs Jackson let her son down. She let his fans down. She has, at least, let me down.
    And I feel, that when the kids’ll grow up and know just how evil Oprah was towards their father, they’ll hold it against their grandparents. I just – I don’t – I can’t comprehend what happend, all for the benefit of a vile woman that publicly attacked Michael J. Jackson.
    You know, when Mrs Katherine said that Michael told her he didn’t trust anyone anymore, except her, you know what thought went trough my mind? ‘No Mrs Jackson, with all do respect.. You betrayed his trust, by sitting with that serpent, and letting his children in her presence. This did NOT need to happen. And I agree with the statement; that Michael is turning in his grave. This is MY opinion – anyone can disagree.
    I feel betrayed, and upset and hurt.
    All that’s been disguised was Michael’s ‘addiction’ – ‘plastic surgery’ and his ‘allegations’.
    It couldn’t have been more shallow.
    Nothing about his humanitarian efforts.
    Not one single word.
    I’m sorry, this whole interview was a blow too my face.
    And seriously Oprah… ‘What do you miss about your father’??? Seriously???


  24. Amerie permalink
    November 13, 2010 4:40 am

    Someone in Katherines camp set up this interview to promote her book and to show the world that the kids are good and normal. The only thing I didint like was the talk about drugs– she referenced the past. Many in the present have said that wasnt the case.


  25. November 13, 2010 7:59 am

    “I feel that Mrs Jackson let her son down. She let his fans down. She has, at least, let me down.”

    Hayat, Katherine is an honest, sincere and trusting woman (and Michael went after her).

    She is very far from all the tricks played by dishonest journalists as she herself is different.

    She is still grieving and she is over 80.

    Like many mothers she doesn’t know a lot about her son as he evidently didn’t confide in her too much sparing her feelings and knowing how worried she would be, so she is making up for what she doesn’t know by what ‘they told her’.

    Sometimes she may be even under the spell of the media gossip. Michael’s incredulous response “My own mother doesn’t believe me” which he kept and kept repeating is very much tale-telling. This is a typical response of a son who is telling the truth and is offended that he is not being able to explain it to his own mother.

    Mothers who care for their children tend to exaggerate their worries and are often fearful of something which in fact never happened in their children’s lives.

    If you are a parent you know how it is. If you still have parents you also know how it is.

    Katherine was telling the version of a worried mother who doesn’t know what to think and is somewhat lost with so many rumors (of drugs) circulating around.

    She was also feeling uncomfortable and was still very sad.

    Oprah should have realized that she was talking to a grieving mother and orphaned children. She should have been much more considerate but she wasn’t. She was relaxed and sitting with her legs crossed and was asking questions the way she would do it with all others.

    And this is Oprah’s big mistake – despite looking ‘interested’, she showed herself to be actually indifferent to persons she is interviewing.

    And though the ratings of the show are high and probably millions of people have seen it, there is still a chance that the audience will see the difference between good and trusting people with genuine feelings and a cold and calculating host who is squeezing revelations from a worried mother for the sake of extra banknotes.

    Let us not wish that ‘something should have never taken place’ – it won’t work anyway.
    Let us use it instead for learning to see people’s true worth.


  26. Hayat permalink
    November 13, 2010 9:41 am

    I’m sorry, I really feel that Mrs Jackson has let him down, I know its a bit harsh for me to say that. But I understand why Michael kept distant from his family. Oprah was the LAST woman on earth that had to to this interview. The LAST. The feeling I have is hopelessness. Believe me, I KNOW how much Michael loved his mother, I’m a fan of over 21 years now, since I was 6. This was supposed to set things straight. Right? In a way, it has done so for me, in the case of setting MY record straight in knowing what I know now. The damage is done, so there’s nothing else I can say about this all. It doesn’t matter anymore.


  27. November 13, 2010 10:58 am

    “The damage is done”

    Yes, I know. But we cannot know the end result yet. What seems to be negative now may turn out to be completely different later. Sincerety and truth have a different way of working with people and I very much believe in the power of both.


  28. Dialdancer permalink
    November 13, 2010 10:05 pm

    A Visitor said:

    “Em, can i ask something? That lady, Winfrey, is not the only one in the Media who hates Michael.There are plenty of them.Why are you considering her opinion so important? She doesn’t like him, fine. She is like those “hater” of Michael.You can not change their mind whatever you do”

    It is not that the majority of the Media hate or believe Michael was guilty, it is because as time went on with reporting the stories the Owners and Sponsors found there was a great deal more money (tens of billions) to be made keeping the reporting salacious reporting and creating lurid accounts and comments. If you go back to the early days the reports for the most part were questioning as they should be, the reporters still use words like “vendetta” when speaking of Sneddon.

    Then suddenly there were “legal pundits” who were deliberately or ignorantly providing misleading and sometimes false information on the laws, what was and wasn’t done during the investigation, on the rights of the plaintiff and defendant. None ever mentioned that there was no child pornography or child exploitation material found, there was no kidnapping, because if there had been the FBI and Fed DOJ would have charged Michael and the “unnamed co-conspirators” both are Federal offense. They withheld information from a public who is ignorant about such things and planted askew and/or a false picture.

    As for Oprah initially I was one who wanted her to stop listening to the reports of others, all those Media talking heads and so called insiders and to do her own fact finding. Most believe if she were to do this with the same legal documents out here she would stop her subtle, but effective caricaturing of Michael. I no longer believe she will, she has made her mind up or is not publicly willing to admit she could be wrong, and I for one do not have time to waste on her. Personally I think it feeds her ego to have millions of people pleading with her to be objective about Michael. There was a feeling she was necessary to help show the truth to show something about Michael besides him being a target. I do not hate Oprah I just deplore how she continually exploits Michael for ratings and to advance her own platform. Oprah is friends with people like Whoopi Goldberg and Gerald Hughes so she is not ignorant.

    There is the other side of this coin for Oprah and many journalists. How do they convince the real molestation victims and the organizations which support them that Michael is not a molester when they have spent years telling them otherwise????? What can be said to explain to those who believed this was a case about molestation it wasn’t?

    Michael Jackson: ‘Guilty’ verdict after acquittal?


  29. Dialdancer permalink
    November 15, 2010 6:01 am


    This is what I meant to pass on earlier. No wonder we cannot keep people like MacKenzie from saying the stupid and inappropriate even our professionals are idiots. This sounds like the children were traumatized cave dwellers who Oprah was able to wrest complete and normal sounding sentences from. These children are intelligent and articulate persons who to my eyes did not seem particularly impressed with Oprah nor had difficulty handling her. There is that projecting false images again. That need to lessen Michael Jackson.

    Oprah Winfrey Praised Over Her Relaxed Interview With Michael Jackson’s Kids


  30. visitor permalink
    November 15, 2010 11:06 am

    I don’t live in America so can i ask something? I had seen the other day a tv program, i think it was call E biography or something like that.They had the life of Winfrey. What impressed me was that they were referign to this woman like she was some kind of saint. And in fact there was a man who said “she is a saint”. So what i would like to ask is this: Ιn America is she consider some kind of very important person that is immune by the Media? Do they criticize her or her tv program when she does something wrong or because of her fame and money no one dares to say something? I ask this because the same program, if i am not wrong, had a special about Michael and i have to say it really made me very angry. Almost the entire program was dedicated to the controversial things of his life and no one mentioned his enormous philanthropic work, no one mentioned the contribution to this man in the music hystory. The difference between the two “tributes” was so obvious and so disappointing. Total adulation regarding Winfrey and absolute Bias regarding Michael.


  31. lcpledwards permalink
    November 16, 2010 6:43 am

    Here is a story that analyzes the body language of MJ’s kids in their interview with Oprah. Prince was very confrontational and defensive! Very interesting!!!


  32. Despina permalink
    December 19, 2010 2:53 am

    Ahhh! I’m so relieved you posted this.
    In order to be totally honest, I haven’t read all of your comments, ‘cuz i didn’t want to be influenced and not share the exact thoughts in my head when I watched the thing. In case you say very good things for Kathreen or Oprah. I can’t take it any more. I have to say what’s in my head, even if I sound cruel to some.
    I found the “show” disgusting. I kept thinking: This woman (Kathreen) is she dropped with a parachute from another planet? After her son’s interview in 1992 didn’t she watch Oprah’s approach to the matter?Her having a show with Priscilla and Lisa Marie, trashing and totally making fun of Michael?What about Oprah’s clear suggestions that Michael was a paedophile?
    Michael would be vomiting for seeing his kids there like that around her.
    Kathreen’s comments…her smiling…saying that Michael kept having surgery on his nose, until it became like a toothpick…
    Her comments about his vitilligo…that woman is in ignorance!!! I’m not suggesting she doeasn’t love her son!I could see…all we could…that she was in deep pain!!!!Definetely she is a mother in moarning…But then again…
    I don’t think she knows her son. I don’t think she had the time to ever know him.And me, the no one, would never dare to express an opinion, if she didn’t act like that. About the drugs, about him in general. She’d better be silent. We all know that when Michael said he was physically abused by his dad, she refused that. Now she admits it. NOW???She practically made her son a liar then.
    I think his mother was spent into many things and lost prospective. I think that she loves him in her own way, but not the way Michael deserved to be loved by his mother. I think that these kids are thrown into the lions, and Kathreen wants-for one more time-to make everybody happy.
    The saying that a mother loves all of her kids the same is an oldie. But is a bunch of BS too(according to me). She had some no-good-jerk kids as well and a hell of a jerk hubby, but I guess she’s been busy all these years with her most important duties. It’s enough for me that Mike loved her. Then again…he HAD to love a parent.
    but that show with Michael’s kids….ts ts ts…guys…think…would MJ EVER do that show with Oprah and his kids?
    If you love Michael, would you ever agree to that show?for all the money in the world???


  33. lcpledwards permalink
    January 5, 2011 1:56 am

    Last week, Oprah had an episode devoted to previewing her new network, OWN, and on this episode she showed clips of a documentary series that goes behind the scenes of the final season of her talk show, and there will be an episode that includes behind the scenes footage of the interview with the Jackson family!

    In that clip, they had a part where the producers are telling Katherine how to act when she sees Oprah for the first time (when Katherine greets her outside of the door), and they show another part where Oprah is in her SUV waiting to star the interview, and Oprah asks a producer “She says we can talk about anything?”, and the producer says “Yes”, and Oprah puts on this disgusted look on her face, and says to the producer “including the sexual abuse charges?” You should have SEEN the look on Oprah’s face!! It makes you wonder why she even bothered to do the interview if she felt that strongly about it! Nevermind, I know why! Ratings! This was the highest rated episode of the season!

    Later on in this episode, Oprah spoke to members of her production staff who were responsible for booking the Jackson family, and they all acknowledged how difficult it was to get the Jacksons to agree to do the show, particularly getting them to approve the kids being interviewed! This confirms that it was Oprah who requested the interview, not Katherine! It was rumored that Mann, Schaffel, and their ilk reached out to Oprah, and that Oprah initially declined, until they offered the kids as bait, but judging from the following excerpt, it appears as if it was Oprah who tried desperately to get them to agree to the interview!

    Here is a transcript of what was said:

    Oprah: I’m here with my HARPO team talking about something we’ve never done before, allowing cameras to document our farewell season. It’s called “Season 25”. There’s a whole department that does nothing but just make calls and try to get people to say yes. The booking department has been in overdrive this season, and we’ve had a lot of exclusive interviews: Michael Jackson’s mother and children, Ricky Martin coming out, Marie Osmond. Andrea, Cindy, and Erin lead that team, and that is so hard!
    So, what’s the hardest part?

    Andrea: Well, I will start by saying it’s an honor to book for you! And I wouldn’t say the “hardest” part, I would say what might be the most surprising is that everyone doesn’t “yes”! What people always think is it’s easy to book for the Oprah show, because it’s the Oprah show, but sometimes people who you might think would say yes, end up saying “no”.

    Oprah: And my rule is I never want anyone to be here unless they really want to be here. So by the time they say yes, it’s a full yes. But the Jacksons were hard, and particularly hard to get the Jacksons to agree to let the children talk………

    Andrea: It was a process!!

    Oprah: That’s what we use when we say “It was a proooooooooccccccceeeeeeesssssssss!!

    Erin: There are some things you can never do again, and that was a one time event!

    I have already set my DVR to record this series on OWN, and I will buy the transcript of that episode as soon as it airs! Well, this proves that our friend Vanity Goddess was right: Oprah really is two-faced!! 🙂


  34. Lynette permalink
    January 5, 2011 2:06 am

    So when Oprah airs programs related to child abuse just prior and immediately following these shows about Michael it is Deliberate? She is nothing more than another Diane Dimond. A dumb broad that wants to make money anyway that she can.


  35. visitor permalink
    January 5, 2011 2:25 am

    Lord knows how much i detest that woman. She is so fake to me.I think that all the money and the power that she has gained, have really corrode her. Recently i learned that she had done a maggior donation in Australia, she gave compiuters to a school or something like that.Of course all the media reported that.But what they didn’t reported was that she didn’t donated those PCs, in fact the goverment paid for them. But she got all the pubblicity and the praises for that “donation”. I think the same thing was with her giving to her audience some cars. If i am not wrong that wasn’t true either. How fanny it is that this woman is always doing her charity work in front of the cameras, while Michael, the person who she so openlly despises, was the oposite. And of course Ms Winfrey is always on the press as the most charitable celebrity ever, but Michael, who was a true humanitarian isn’t getting any recognition for that. How sad and irritating.


  36. January 5, 2011 6:09 pm

    Oprah: But the Jacksons were hard, and particularly hard to get the Jacksons to agree to let the children talk………
    Andrea: It was a process!!

    David, thank you for this “insider” view. I’ve never doubted that the Jacksons were not seeking any publicity for themselves through Oprah’s show. They are so sick and tired of the media and are so distrustful of it (rightfully so!) that any talk about them doing it, for example, for promoting Katherine’s book – should be regarded as not-too-clever gossip. The lesson the Jacksons have learned is never to trust the media.

    As to Oprah’s question about the abuse charges and her “disgusted” look (I wish I saw it) – I am sure that she was preparing a kind of an alibi for herself to be able to explain later that she was not really willing to ask but since they allowed it, why not? It is all just theatre play for the public and part of the show.


  37. lcpledwards permalink
    January 27, 2011 11:58 pm

    Here is Rebbie Jackson on “The View” today! Hurry up and watch before it’s deleted!

    She was there to “set the record straight”, and she did, to a certain extent. However, she said something that the media and Murray’s defense will surely pounce upon: she said there were “many interventions”, so you know that will be exploited to the fullest!


  38. Anna permalink
    January 28, 2011 12:33 am


    Yeah I think she has already said that about the interventions in an interview she did last year with Matt Lauer. Janet and Katherine also said the same thing on Oprah. I think you’re right that it’s a safe bet that the media and Murray’s defense will pounce on those claims and use that to their advantage during the trial.


  39. Dialdancer permalink
    January 28, 2011 7:22 am

    “Oprah: But the Jacksons were hard, and particularly hard to get the Jacksons to agree to let the children talk………
    Andrea: It was a process!!”

    Wasn’t it eluded to that the Jackson beg “her” for the interview?


  40. Lisa MJJ1111 permalink
    January 28, 2011 10:27 am

    Oprah only cares about OPRAH! She makes me sick..I lost respect for her years before I realized her bias, jealousy, and obssesion for Michael..Yes, Oprah is emushed in Michael! Every change she gets she brings ups his name… Michael is LOVE..Michael was and IS one the greatest gifts of God we will ever encounter in this life time..I truly believe oprah, with all her power, and billions, still can not seemed to accept that Michael is the ANGEL/Prophet, that Michael is the CHOSEN ONE..that he is truly LOVED and HONORED by MILLIONS of people around the world..and all the lies and hell he went through ..only glorifies his TRUTH.his LOVE..Oprah tells on herself..over and over again..what she is not seeing because her ego will not allow her straddling the fench about Michael only shows that Michael to her is nothing but ratings… her mind as long as WE see her face and hear her voice in a daily bases..we can not ignore her-that is where her power comes from: fame and money..well, for those of us who sees is only backfiring..RIP–my king, Michael is THE KING OF HEARTS..forever…


  41. visitor permalink
    January 28, 2011 1:22 pm

    Yeah, what happened to that “beg” thing that O.W’s friend had told on her radio programm. What a hypocrite and arrogance individual.


  42. lcpledwards permalink
    January 28, 2011 10:44 pm

    There was a rumor that Gayle King said on her radio show that Katherine, Schafel, Mann, and Vicarro wanted the interview, and when Oprah initially declined, they offered the kids as bait. But obviously that isn’t true because Oprah and her staff clearly stated that it was THEIR decision to convince Katherine to do the interview, and allow the kids to be interviewed.

    This is highly consistent with Oprah’s willingness to do anything for ratings!


  43. Suzy permalink
    January 29, 2011 7:45 am

    Here is the behind the scenes from Oprah’s Katherine interview. In part 1 you can see clearly how much Oprah wanted this interview and how big it was for them – especially with the children.


  44. January 29, 2011 11:34 am

    Hello my friends,
    I was reckless enough to go to a skating rink. The bad news is that I have a brain concussion + a partial memory loss and am now in a hospital. The good news is that I still remember I have a blog. If my co-ads are nowhere around please contact them and tell them to go ahead with their posts. I hope to be with you when my doctors allow me to get to the computer.

    Hugs to you all,


  45. Suzy permalink
    January 29, 2011 11:39 am


    I’m sorry to hear that. Get well soon!


  46. shelly permalink
    January 29, 2011 12:00 pm


    I hope you get better soon.


  47. Denise permalink
    January 29, 2011 6:25 pm

    I’m so incredibly sorry to hear that! Please get better. I’ll be praying for you.

    Your blog is such an inspiration.


  48. January 29, 2011 6:52 pm

    So sorry to hear about your accident Helena, i’ll be praying for your recovery.


  49. Anna permalink
    January 29, 2011 7:46 pm


    That’s sounds awful, I’ll be wishing you a speedy recovery!


  50. Raven permalink
    January 29, 2011 9:37 pm


    Sorry to hear about your accident. I don’t envy you; sounds painful (ouch!).

    Hope you are feeling better soon.


  51. ares permalink
    January 29, 2011 10:25 pm

    Get well soon Helena.I really hope it’s not something serious.


  52. lcpledwards permalink
    January 30, 2011 12:38 am

    Get well soon Helena! I’ll upload my next post tomorrow!


  53. lcpledwards permalink
    January 30, 2011 1:10 am

    Well, well, well, here is our enemy’s response to my ultimatum! As you can see below, she totally sidestepped my proposition and instead has labeled us as “homophobes” for defending MJ’s sexuality. She knows that she cannot present the facts as I have asked her to, so instead she tried to bait me into going to her blog to debate her, which I refuse to do.

    By the way, her comment went straight into the spam folder, which is why it wasn’t posted.

    @ Blaine Edwards and my other detractors:

    If you disagree with me as much as you do, by all means, come to my site and refute me. If my arguments are faulty and you think I’m ‘evil’ and that I am too whatever to be a college student, prove all of this. Refute me at my turf. Otherwise, stop with the ad Hominem attacks. It only makes you look as though you have low IQs, which may be true.

    This whole blog reads like a cult website, by the way. Pretty scary. Michael Jackson was a human with flaws; he was not God. And all of you are homophobes. You’d think someone being gay wouldn’t matter anymore. I love Michael Jackson gay. It just works. I don’t see what the problem is.


  54. Dialdancer permalink
    January 30, 2011 1:12 am


    Please get well soon. I will wait until you are fully recovered before sending provocative photos of MJ….lol


  55. shelly permalink
    January 30, 2011 1:26 am

    “And all of you are homophobes. You’d think someone being gay wouldn’t matter anymore. I love Michael Jackson gay. It just works. I don’t see what the problem is.”

    It’s funny because she is the only one who are linking homosexuality to pedophilia and she loves Michael Jackson and worse she thinks kids liked being molested.


  56. visitor permalink
    January 30, 2011 2:24 am

    I hope you are alright helena.Get well soon!


  57. shelly permalink
    January 30, 2011 2:57 am

    I don’t know where to post that but this is what Kiki Fournier said about Frank Cascio

    “BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Did you see Frank Tyson
    22 and Michael Jackson together at Neverland Ranch.
    23 A. Yes.
    24 Q. Over that ten-year period, which you
    25 previously stated that Mr. Tyson was — began and
    26 was a guest of the ranch when you left, how often
    27 did you see them together.
    28 A. When Frank was at the ranch, they would be 2515

    1 together often.
    2 Q. And how often was he a visitor at the ranch.
    3 A. He could not be there for six months and
    4 then he could show up for a month, or — you know,
    5 as an example. And — or he could not be there for
    6 weeks, and then just come for a couple of days,
    7 and —
    8 Q. Okay. Now, in the period of 2000 — early
    9 2003, did Mr. Tyson visit the ranch.
    10 A. Yes, I believe he did.
    11 Q. Do you know if that was one of these
    12 month-long periods, or a couple of day periods, or
    13 something in between.
    14 A. I think he stayed for a while.
    15 THE COURT: Counsel, we’ll take our break.”

    “Q. And isn’t it typical that visitors will make
    10 a request, “Can we see the main house.”
    11 A. Sometimes they have, yes.
    12 Q. And is it your understanding that quite
    13 often Mr. Jackson will allow someone to take them
    14 through.
    15 A. Yes.
    16 Q. He allows that a lot, doesn’t he.
    17 A. Yes.
    18 Q. Sounds like you don’t think he should,
    19 right.
    20 A. No.
    21 Q. Do you think he’s too nice to a lot of
    22 people who visit Neverland.
    23 A. Sometimes, yes, I — sometimes I got a
    24 little concerned, but it’s not my place.
    25 Q. Okay. You thought he was being too generous
    26 and nice to visitors, right.
    27 A. Yes. And sometimes — yes.

    Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: When you said — you used
    3 the term “Pinnochio’s Pleasure Island” in response
    4 to the government prosecutor. Were you suggesting
    5 that you thought Michael Jackson himself should
    6 supervise kids more personally.
    7 A. No, I don’t think that he should. I mean,
    8 how could he supervise that many children. There
    9 needed to be more people to supervise them, or their
    10 parents.
    11 Q. So were you — excuse me. Let me rephrase
    12 it. Were you meaning to be a little more critical
    13 of their parents when you talked about kids being
    14 out of control.
    15 A. Well, yes, that too. Because some kids —
    16 I mean, well, some parents won’t discipline even
    17 their own children, so sometimes the parents didn’t
    18 even help. But I think it’s just sometimes the
    19 character of the person, too, because some of them
    20 were just crazy.
    21 Q. Yeah. Did you ever voice your concerns that
    22 parents should be paying more attention to their
    23 kids at Neverland.
    24 A. I might have, over the years, to some of my
    25 co-workers. But I can’t think of anything right
    26 now.
    27 The thing that really worried me that I can
    28 say that I thought about, too, is that there’s a 2612”

    I think this testimony is important because it explains lots of things about the children and Neverland.


  58. Anna permalink
    January 30, 2011 3:28 am


    Yeah I was a bit boggled by that statement since I think we all explained it was the linking being gay w/p-lia that we were against. Does she really love him now, or just love the idea of him being gay as opposed to being straight. It’s odd that she would suddenly love him now if she still believes he’s a p-file.

    This whole thing with our adversary keeps getting stranger and also seems to be going in circles. Anyway, I think we all explained ourselves and our stance over at the Dirty Linen posts very well. Going to her blog to debate this arguement would be pointless and it would only cause more harsh sentiment than already exists. I’m glad David declined.


    I am looking forward to your next post!


  59. Dialdancer permalink
    January 30, 2011 3:33 am

    “This is highly consistent with Oprah’s willingness to do anything for ratings”

    This is an excellent example of what TV personalities & News/Opinion types do for ratings. It was widely reported & believed by Fans that the family ran begging to exploit the kids and Oprah’s statement show that not to be true, but she did not make any attempt to let it be known during the program how desirous she was to interview them.


  60. Suzy permalink
    January 30, 2011 6:15 am

    @ David

    Like I said before Desiree is a hypocrite when she calls us homophobes. She very obviously uses the label “gay” as an insult – not only to Michael, but now to David as well. She calls him Blaine Edwards because that was apparently some gay character in a comedy television series. If she thinks she can insult Michael and other people by calling them gay, then that means she is very clearly a homophobe. If she wasn’t a homophobe she wouldn’t waste her time on trying to “prove” MJ was gay and wouldn’t be so obsessed with the subject. It’s clear she thinks this is something with that she can insult Michael, and now David. I’m not surprised, of course, that once again she didn’t take up David’s challenge. She never does.


  61. Alison permalink
    January 30, 2011 10:11 am

    @ Helena,
    Very sorry to hear about your accident, I wish you a speedy recovery.


  62. Alison permalink
    January 30, 2011 10:47 am

    @ Suzy,
    i agree with what you just said – also, there’s an element of making it personal – the David thing – because she has no logical argument to pit against David’s obvious intelligent one and so reverts to childish name calling type behaviour.
    She cannot even distinguish between the concepts of homophobia and simply asserting truth and a man’s true identity. if they were saying he was a thief, refuting that would not be “thiefophobia” !! , just asserting his true identity.
    As for her own homophobia, its an interesting one. i don’t understand why she would put so much energy into it, especially when she should be getting on with her college work, sounds like its a sensitive issue for her and she has a need to fight against ‘it’ that has nothing to do with Michael Jackson.


  63. Anna permalink
    January 30, 2011 11:14 am


    That is such an an excellent point and I totally get what you’re saying. I know would be annoyed if someone was spreading rumors that I was a lesbian. It wouldn’t mean that I’m homophobic, I would be annoyed because it simply isn’t true. Anyone remember the famous Seinfield line “I’m not gay….. not that there’s anything wrong with that”. Yeah, anyway….I’m really looking forward to David’s next post when we can finnally change the subject on this.


  64. lcpledwards permalink
    January 30, 2011 8:32 pm

    @ Anna
    Thanks! I’m currently transcribing the Oprah Behind The Scenes episode that aired Friday. Unforunately, official transcripts for that episode are not for sale, so I have to do it myself, and it will take a few days. Once that’s done, I will post transcripts of the 2005 Harvard Law seminar, and then Martin Bashir’s “Michael Jackson’s Secret World”, which was a slanderous documentary that aired before the trial in 2005.

    There will be other posts coming soon from Olga, Lynette, etc., so stay tuned everyone! I can’t wait either to just MOVE ON from Desiree’s crap!


  65. okunuga permalink
    February 1, 2011 7:11 am

    I have only one comment to make can’t the jacksons just stop all this stupid interviews and wait until after the murray trial before all this talk about their suppose intervensions.


  66. lcpledwards permalink
    February 1, 2011 9:00 am

    @ okunuga
    You’re right! When the Jacksons speak about the intervention that they tried on MJ, it makes MJ look bad in the court of public opinion, and they should be more careful.

    By the way everyone, I just finished transcribing Oprah’s behind the scenes of the Katherine Jackson interview, and I will double check it and post it later today.


  67. okunuga permalink
    February 1, 2011 12:18 pm

    I think the jackson family should stop granting interviews until after the trial because they are doing more damage to michael than all the tabliods ever did.


  68. February 5, 2011 5:31 pm

    “Please get well soon. I will wait until you are fully recovered before sending provocative photos of MJ….lol”

    Dial, please don’t wait – let me see them now, you know how curious I am.


  69. February 5, 2011 5:39 pm

    “This whole thing with our adversary keeps getting stranger and also seems to be going in circles. Anyway, I think we all explained ourselves and our stance over at the Dirty Linen posts very well. Going to her blog to debate this arguement would be pointless and it would only cause more harsh sentiment than already exists. I’m glad David declined.”

    Yes, Anna. This sudden gay/homophobia/love issue is so utterly artificial and far-fetched that I am surprised it is going from page to page with no seeming end to it. It surely has been given much more attention than it deserved. It isn’t even a mountain out of a molehill – it is a mountain out of a speck of dust.


  70. February 22, 2011 12:12 am

    Diana Ross is scheduled to be on Oprah this Friday. Another person where O can sneak in her 3 favorite topics regarding: MJ. Well, hopefully this time it will be different and Miss Ross will refuse to entertain O’s 3 tired old questions.


  71. lcpledwards permalink
    February 25, 2011 9:00 pm

    For those of you who haven’t seen this yet, here is Katherine and the kids’ interview with Good Morning America. We all have our opinions on whether or not they should be interviewed like this, especially when it’s in association with Howard Mann & Vintage Pop, but we can ALL agree that the incessant so-called compliments of the kids being “normal”, “well adjusted”, “happy”, “not wearing veils”, etc. is a slap in MJ’s face because it implies that they are better off without him!


  72. February 25, 2011 9:15 pm

    I agree David, I find it very annoying the way reporters in the media keep harping on “they’re normal” As I said on Debbie’s fb: I’m sure it has to be or will be annoying for the kids themselves when media folks constantly throw that up in their faces. From the preview, it kinda looked to me when the interviewer said that. Paris had this look on her face like “ummm…why wouldn’t we be normal?” The medialoids created a cottage industry out of verbal abusing their dad. Their lies are so thick they look completely ridiculous and dumbfounded when they speak to or about Michael’s kids. His kids are another testament to the kind of person he was/is. The medialoids don’t want to give credit to Michael where credit is do. Michael Jackson was terrific father who raised his kids well…period


  73. Chris permalink
    February 25, 2011 11:13 pm

    Completely agree David.
    I just watched the short clip heard the surprise/shocked “normal” expression and that was enough for me. How many times have we heard that now?

    I don’t wanna open a debate thats needless and none of our business but these kids aren’t mindless infants and whatever they choose to do with their lives is gunna recieve no critism from me.

    On a side note: David you unravelled the mystery of Raven’s blog dissapearance. Well here’s the other MJ community mystery that maybe you can solve.
    Where has Rev Catherine Gross gone?


  74. lcpledwards permalink
    February 26, 2011 12:23 am

    @ Chris

    Rev. Gross will be back soon! She had a health scare that required hospitalization and medical treatment, but she’s fine! She just needs to rest and recover. I don’t know the details, unfortunately, but when she returns I’m sure she’ll be glad to share it with us.

    Hopefully Raven will back online in a few days as well! She’s going through personal problems, but is anxious to get her site back up and running!


  75. Chris permalink
    February 26, 2011 12:28 am

    Thank you for clearing that up. I hope they will both recover with there issues and wish em the best. I was beginning to go conspirator crazy thinking they been targeted lol.

    Rev Gross is best thing on BlogRadio.


  76. Anna permalink
    February 26, 2011 12:38 am


    I absolutely agree with you! I get so tired of these journalists and their back-handed compliments. Yes the kids are normal! How do they think the kids turned out that way? Obviously Michael must have been doing something right. Ofcourse they’d never go as far to say that. In fact it suits them better to imply that the children are better off without Michael and with Katherine instead. I think they do this on purpose to somehow justify the years the mainstream media spent destroying Michael and (in my opinio)n contributing to his death in some ways.

    I keep seeing and hearing this “MJ worth more dead than alive” and “MJ’s children are fine now even without their father” type propoganda being perpetuated through media outlets now. In my opinion it’s pretty obvious the media as a whole is aware of the role they may have played in Michael’s premature death and this is how they downplay that role.


    I agree the medialoids have wasted so much time over the years with their anti-MJ propaganda that now journalists continue playing up this “shock” at how normal the kids turned out. If they didn’t act shocked then would probably have to admit how much the medialoids lied and twisted the truth about Michael.


  77. lcpledwards permalink
    February 26, 2011 4:10 am

    Well guys, you knew someone was going to write an article like this, and honestly I can’t say I disagree with Friedman on this one……………

    And I don’t disagree with this article either…………………..


  78. Dialdancer permalink
    February 26, 2011 4:23 am

    I do not watch Oprah, but I received word there were no questions asked about Michael at all. As for this word normal I’d advice the children if they have any question as to who is the more normal to find footage of reporters gleefully telling of alleged molestations smiling as if they had won a great prize or those TV female jackals who act as if they were raised in castles, but conduct themselves in front of a camera worst than any $2.00_____.

    Their father was not a normal man. No “normal” could have withstood decades of what he did without becoming a hermit or taking his own life and their father did neither. Most “normal” people do not possess that amount of strength. Michael made good and bad judgments, was part saint and sinner, and that is as normal as anyone gets.


  79. Suzy permalink
    February 26, 2011 6:36 am

    Michael’s kids are normal because of how Michael raised them! I’m more worried about the impact they are getting now, after Michael’s death from people like Howard Mann, Joe Jackson etc. I hope they can cling on to the values their father taught them – and that is NOT the love of money!


  80. lcpledwards permalink
    February 26, 2011 8:38 am

    Here is the aptly titled article “Michael Jackson, Do You Know Where Your Children Are” from MJ News Alerts? I give it 2 thumbs up!…-do-you-know-where-your-children-are/


  81. February 26, 2011 10:57 pm…-do-you-know-where-your-children-are/

    I read the article, and I couldn’t agree more. Here are my thoughts. How are Michael Jackson’s kids going to be normal and fit in in their school if they are on TV all the time? How many other students from that school make tv appearances on Oprah & GMA? There was always going to be a public interest in the children, but that does not mean it has to be fostered. I watched both their interviews, and in each Blanket looked liked he would rather be someplace else; the kid hardly says two words. If the family wants them to be charitable and follow in their father’s footsteps then they should do so QUIETLY like Michael, and without fanfare. Let me suppose for a minute, what if Paris tries out for that play, and she gets the role beating out other auditioners. What do you suppose they are going to say? High school kids can be mean. To be honest the Oprah interview wasn’t that bad, but GMA’s was a waste of time.

    My humble opinion on the Jackson family vs the Estate. These two will always be at war because the family believes they should be running the estate much like the families of Elvis Presley and Johnny Cash. Two hugely profitable entities.


  82. lcpledwards permalink
    February 27, 2011 5:55 am

    A friend of mine on facebook left wrote this comment, which succinctly describes the mess that’s going on between Katherine and The Estate:

    Ms. Katherine’s contract was drawn up without her legal counsel present. Surely we can’t be reading the same contract because the one I read specifically uses the term exploit…something that Momma K has agreed to do in that contract. Furthermore, given the fact that Michael tried suing this man in 2004 should have been indication enough for Momma K to refrain from doing any business with him. Not to mention the fact that Michael did NOT want this man using his image and likeness while he was alive. If you seriously think Momma K’s contract guarantees her any rights or control over the memorabilia VPM claims they already owned, then you’re gravely mistaken.

    This contract has nothing to do with granting ANY control to Momma K. The contract is her agreement to render certain rights over to VPM and her agreement to promote and EXPLOIT anything VPM produces or holds interests in granted they come to a mutual agreement of how such actions are to be carried out.

    What’s even more disturbing is Momma K bounded the children to that same contract.

    That GMA interview was not to “speak up’ about Michael’s legacy or to set any records straight. Katherine was under contractual obligation to appear with the children to promote the fraudulent HTW foundation and the “Never Can Say Goodbye” book because Howard Mann and VPM hold interests in such ventures. People don’t realize that Howard Mann was deposited to the estate’s suit against Melissa Johnson. He is due in court on Monday to deliver his deposition…do you really think this GMA interview was just a convenient coincidence?

    It was staged. A year ago, Melissa Johnson was tweeting up a storm crying out to people to help her afford legal counsel and now all of a sudden she has $10k to donate?

    What’s completely unfair is the majority of the focus was placed on the HTWF while the other charity that is actually active in the community doing their part to make the world a better place took back seat.

    This entire interview was to do damage control for Mann and Melissa Johnson’s benefit. How many other charity events have these children done before that didn’t have cameras rolling on it?

    I completely support Momma K wanting the children to continue Mike’s legacy, but I hardly doubt placing the children in the middle of this legal battle between Mann, Melissa Johnson, and the estate does anything to promote Michael’s legacy…look at the bad press it has brought thus far.

    The fact that everybody except for Michael’s children are benefiting from this by either personal gain or profit makes it down right EXPLOITATION.

    I’d like to add, Melissa Johnson has yet to provide any accounting of exactly what and how the donations she collected since Michael’s death were being administered.

    I forgot to mention that the contract makes it abundantly clear that VPM’s interest in Katherine is strictly based on her relationship to Michael and her guardianship over the children.

    Recall, Howard Mann is the one that set up the interview with Oprah as well. Any and all media appearances that Katherine makes with the children(as per contractual obligation) renders a revenue of $5,000.00 per appearance per day.

    That money is not going into the trust…its directly being given to Katherine. Why is 40% of her son’s estate and the $80k allowance not enough?

    I’m tempted to say it may have to do with Momma K taking care of the rest of her LIVING CHILDREN’S offspring…but that’s a whole other discussion.

    Momma K didn’t have legal counsel present because any attorney in their right mind would have advised against her doing anything that would bring on legal action from the estate. An attorney would have read the contract and advised Momma K of just how downright shady and illegal some of the things VPM was trying to get her to sign into was. She had no authority or right to bind the children to that contract because its an act of exploitation. No legal counsel would EVER allow their client to enter such a contradictory put together contract.

    I’m sorry I misunderstood what you were saying, but I’m just so disappointed at how some of the fans are engaging their hollywood blinders and ignoring what is right in front of their face.

    They’re buying into what Mann is saying about the estate going after Katherine when no such thing is true. They have NOT named Momma K in ANY suits.

    I’m not sure if you’ve read up, but according to Mann, Michael couldn’t sue him because he couldn’t prove that Masnn didn’t have legal rights to his image and likeness. So you tell me, why did he need Momma K to sign a contract to grant him those same rights he claims he already owned?


  83. February 27, 2011 3:51 pm

    That’s not all those kids are in the middle of. There is still the brewing war between Katherine, the Estate & Alajandra Jackson. Technically the estate owns Hayvenhurst.


  84. lcpledwards permalink
    February 28, 2011 5:22 am

    Here’s a tweet by someone who further explains the Mann vs. The Estate fiasco:

    And here’s a new blog that I found (and added to the blogroll) called Michael Jackson Accountability Network. Judging by the title, its easy to see that their mission is to hold Sony, The Estate, and most importantly the Jackson family ACCOUNTABLE for their actions regarding Michael Jackson and his kids! Here is their mission statement:

    Mission statement
    The primary purpose of the Michael Jackson Accountability Network (M.J.A.N.) is for rational presentation of ideas, critique, and discussion, concerning the welfare of Michael Jackson’s children. As Mr.Jackson has often expressed, we do not wish to see these children damaged by premature celebrity or any other form of exploitation. Further, we will monitor the release of Michael Jackson’s music and other, related products, for the quality-control that befits his legacy as musician, artist, and humanitarian. We will attempt to counteract negative portrayals of Michael Jackson in the media with truth.

    Who we are.

    We are a diverse group of people united for common purposes, of caring and concern for Michael Jackson’s children, and for the preservation of Michael’s legacy in the ways he deserves, after his forty-year career of bringing joy and delight to his audiences through his music, dancing, short films, and his writing. Michael Jackson should be honored and respected for his artistry, for his excellence as a parent, and for his philanthropy.

    We are of a variety of ages, nationalities, and professions. Some of us are fans, and some are not, but we all share concern for what we now feel is the exploitation of Michael’s children, and a lack of care about the music that is being released from his archive of artistic production. We deplore the continuing negative media portrayal of Michael Jackson, at the expense of his great achievements, and his legacy as a cultural icon.

    Here is their recent post about the GMA interview!


  85. February 28, 2011 7:00 am

    @ David, thanks for the new MJ site you found.


    This post on MJAN’s really caught my eye written by Sarrah, she had previous posted this in her tweet.


    February 28th, 2011 at 3:23 am

    “The following are my previously posted feelings and observations about all of this.
    I would just like to say, I haven’t seen ANYBODY say anything about the estate controlling the children’s lives. What HAS been said is the estate is taking proper legal action against Mann and Melissa Johnson for their blatant exploitation of Michael’s name, likeness, image, and legacy. Its too bad they can’t sue for the exploitation of Michael’s children as well.

    Just as so many of you have pointed out that Michael wanted his children to be with his mother and how his decision shouldn’t be questioned and how his last wishes should be respected, I must point out that within the SAME WILL where this is stated, it is documented that Michael wanted his named EXECUTORS to administrate his estate…NOT his family. Therefore, its time to realize that on that front, Michael’s decision shouldn’t be questioned and his last wishes should be respected!
    You don’t get to pick and choose to your convenience which terms of the will should and shouldn’t be enforced. Anything pertaining to Michael’s image, name, likeness, and legacy is the responsibility of the estate because of the substantial revenue these things grant…not Momma K. She is listed strictly as a beneficiary and candidate for guardianship…and technically wasn’t Michael’s only choice as a guardian. Diana Ross was named as a potential candidate and I have to say, perhaps we narrowed our sights as to Katherine’s health being the only factor that would prevent her from becoming the guardian. However, its plausible that Katherine’s inability to care for her grandchildren could be found if certain government authorities deem her unfit as a guardian because of the poor choices being made that do not promote the best interest of Michael’s children. Do we all recall the stun gun incident? I’m not saying I would like for any such thing to happen because I’d rather such measures be avoided by removing the greedy leeches that are using Katherine for her status as Michael’s mother and guardian of his children than to ever see those children be ripped away from their grandmother. Its not meant to be rude or disrespectful either…just being honest.

    The estate isn’t suing Katherine Jackson. They aren’t suing for Mann’s unjust exploitation of the children. They’re suing Mann and Melissa Johnson for their illegal actions. Any and everything that can or is potentially taking away financial gains that rightfully belong to Michael’s estate IS their business…because, (pay close attention) their job is to ensure Michael’s estate continues to garner revenue to assure the best interests of Michael’s beneficiaries are met and upheld.
    Please be advised, Katherine signed into her contract without her legal counsel present. Do you not question why that is? Look at the contract, VPM and Mann are binding her into a contract and making her waive and grant rights that are not hers to begin with. Her attorney, and any **** good attorney for that matter, would NOT have condoned their client signing into a contract that is set up to go against Michael’s estate and exploit his children. I beg of you, read the contract. Its written specifically with the term EXPLOIT as part of the terms and conditions that KJ agreed to and must carry out to garner any revenue beyond her up front payments and payments for her media appearances.

    Do you people not recall that Howard Mann was the one responsible for going behind Momma K’s back and posting that supposedly “unheard” track, only to later retract, after he was caught red-handed, and state that he meant it was a “remake”? Who do you think would have the most to gain by leaking a supposed “unheard” track to TMZ? More than likely…it would be the one who is getting the bigger cut of profits because Momma K is only entitled to 25% of the actual profits made off selling VPM’s products.

    Think about it. Mann is claiming that the right to use Michael’s image and likeness was granted since 2006. If that’s true…then why did they need to include the following in the contract:
    Grant of Rights:

    9) The exclusive right to use, commercialize and EXPLOIT for the purposes of profiting, the name, likeness, images, and any intangible assets governed herein in conjuction and combination with the programming and related assets contemplated herein.

    Click to access 1111_jackson_2.pdf

    Why would they need Momma K to grant them(VPM & Mann) rights they already supposedly own?
    The fact of the matter is, Mann has mislead people into believing that he, more specifically his “company” was already sued by Michael for the same thing back in 2004. I was among those who were mislead, but as it turns out, the person who was actually being sued was Henry Vaccaro, the previous owner of the memorabilia Mann now owns.

    “Howard Mann DOES NOT have the right to use ANY likeness or image of Michael’s, period. Mann believes this to be true because before Mann bought the memorabilia from Vaccaro, a judge dismissed a case against Vaccaro “with prejudice”, meaning that Michael could never sue VACCARO again for the same thing (i.e. memorabilia) HOWEVER, the case was LIMITED to the items Vaccaro owned at the time, and now Mann owns. This DOES NOT give Mann the right to post images of Michael, his likeness, his trademarks, WHICH THE ESTATE NOW OWNS.”

    As of now, there is nothing that has surfaced that would stipulate Mann couldn’t be sued for the same thing Vaccaro was sued for. The “prejudiced” dismissal granted Vaccaro,alone, the immunity to not be sued again for the same thing. There is nothing that has indicated that immunity would apply or transfer to Mann once he bought the memorabilia from Vaccaro.

    Point blank, Momma K really doesn’t have the need nor should she want to pursue gaining anything beyond what Michael dictated in his will. If he wanted his mother managing his name, likeness, and image, then I’m quite certain she would have been named as an executor…but she wasn’t and its high time many of you stop condoning anybody going against Michael’s last living testament as to how HE wanted things to be done once he was no longer here to do so himself.
    On my last note, I leave you with the statement given by the estate.
    In a statement issued to GMA on Friday (25Feb11), they say:

    “The current Heal the World Foundation has no relation to Michael Jackson’s charity that touched so many lives before becoming inactive several years before Michael’s death… The estate does not believe Michael’s children should be used to exploit a foundation that a federal judge found was not associated with Michael Jackson.”

    Howard Mann recently met with the estate on February 16, 2011. Do you really believe its coincidence that a little over a week later, Mann arranged the GMA interview? All 3, Katherine, Howard, and Melissa Johnson KNEW and were completely aware of the pending lawsuit against Melissa’s fraudulent HTWF. It is because of this, that I solely believe having the children appear on camera, wearing HTWF t-shirts that represent Melissa’s charity, and having them present a check on behalf of the HTWF was a pathetic and cowardly battle tactic orchestrated by Mann to get people to view him and Melissa as the victims of the “big ol bad wolf”…the estate. Boy did they ever hit their mark. Who would have the heart to oppose any associations Michael’s children have with certain matters regardless of the fact that they’re being deceived and used by sheep in wolves clothing? And for those of you who claim that Branca and team’s only motive is to make sure the estate gains as much income as possible so they can get a bigger piece of the pie. You’re both right and wrong about that. It is the estates duty to put forth all efforts possible to keep the best interests of Michael’s estate and its beneficiaries upheld and secured. That includes bringing any and all who jeopardize the incoming revenue to Michael’s estate and those who seek to simply exploit rights that exclusively belong to the estate to the greatest extents of the law possible. Brance and Mc Clains “cut” is a percentage that is not any more significantly greater than what it would be for anybody else acting as executors to such a substancially-sized estate.

    The most despicable of all this is, Mann has naive fans convinced that the estate is attacking and going after Katherine Jackson. To the best of my knowledge, there is no pending legal action against Katherine on the behalf of her son’s estate. They’ve simply expressed how they do NOT condone Michael’s children being exploited.

    Anybody who reads this is well within their rights to tell me I’m wrong…BUT if they do so…then they better be prepared to prove they’re right.”


  86. Okunuga permalink
    February 28, 2011 9:59 pm

    I think it’s high time the Estate ask a judge to remove margaret Lodise as court appointed guardian to the MJ’s kids because she has been ineffective so far and appoints a new one


  87. Dialdancer permalink
    March 1, 2011 5:31 am

    This must one of the few places in which I haven’t made my feelings known about the new site and one of its missions. Most that come here are looking for answers have a genuine respect for Michael Jackson, but we do see things differently and work well together anyway.

    Katherine Jackson is an 80 year old woman who lost a son and inherited the responsibilities of rearing 3 active young people who are also the children of the most famous entertainer in the world. That means she also inherited all the baggage that come with it. (lying manipulative Media, snooping staff, traitorous insiders, fractious family members and millions of people, fans of her son who think it is their right to judge what and how she coping, and dealing with HER grandchildren)

    It is my opinion that Michael’s mom is dealing with sleazey not to be trusted people (Shaffel & Vaccaro)…. it is also my opinion that Weitzman, Branca & McCain are also sleaze and not to be trusted, they just happen to be A-list sleaze, a socially acceptable sleaze, but sleaze nevertheless. Sleaze appointed by a court in a system that allowed a legalize lynching of her son. One that may allow his murderer to walk free.

    Regardless of my personal feeling about Michael’s childhood and other things he loved his mother and he respected her. Katherine is doing what single mothers all over the world do, working with what she has dealing with people who sometimes they prefer not to deal with. What we know has NOT been investigated or verified. There are no YouTubes of her or the children discussing THEIR business which means we are gaining information from a source WE denounce under other circumstance.

    The children have MJ Community contacts and they know what to do if something is hurting them. They know they have the largest family in the world.

    Any fan of Michael Joe Jackson that would use the word DCFS in connection with his kids was UNACCEPTABLE by him. All of his fans know of his fear and how many times he was threatened with losing his children. We BELIEVE we know what Michael wanted and intended for the children at this age, but we DO NOT KNOW for sure. He was going to introduce them to the concert tour scene.

    I am going to ask the same question here: What happens if we whip up enough controversy or belief that “all” of MJ’s fans are disproving of his Mom continued guardianship? Where exactly do you believe they should be raised and by whom?

    Dimond must be laughing her ass off right about now and Allred is licking her jowls in anticipation since she believes they belong in the system where it would be her ultimate revenge against Michael.

    There is a belief that we have a right to sit at home and pass judgment (you should the names some of the “so called” fans called her in an article) using the Media stories as a truth stone. Isn’t this the very thing we are fighting against? Or do you think they only lied and manipulated stories on Michael? Only meant Michael harm?

    Last word on this subject, any “Fan” who causes this woman anymore grief, brings DCFS to her door because of their actions is going to undo a lot of good. This 80 yr old woman has another trial to prepare in which her son is going to be the DEFENDANT do you really think she needs this?


  88. Dialdancer permalink
    March 1, 2011 5:39 am

    I enjoy work with most of you, envy the clarity of your comments and hope that will continue. I don’t intend to make any with contrary opinions uncomfortable, but as a mother who had to skip many school functions and be away on birthdays and have my children sacrifice so I could get the job done I feel strongly about judging from the outside looking in.


  89. March 1, 2011 7:18 am


    Well said. I just want to let you know. I should have made it clear in my last post. I don’t agree with Sarrah on that DCFS at all! The thing I agree with her on is the fact that Howard Mann & Melissa Johnson are basically manipulating and taking advantage of Mrs. Katherine. From the way I looked at her post, which I saw she had specifically tweeted to a few other people was a way to put them in check. There are quite of few people that spent better half of their time attacking Michael’s mother soon as it was known Michael’s kids would be on GMA. As well, as tweeting ignorant tweets to the Jackson family twitter account. I can understand people having a hissy fit over Howard Mann. However, what some people are doing out in social networks is pitching a fit at Mrs. Katherine, which is completely uncalled for.

    Seriously, speaking for myself I never knew Michael’s kids had so many “fan mothers” trying to raise his kids from afar. They only thing that annoys me is when reporters keeping saying “oh they’re so normal” either in front of the kids or in regular reporting. I think if there wasn’t a contract with Mann . Its a possibility that Mrs. Katherine & the kids wouldn’t be making tv appearances. It’s also a possibility that Mrs. Katherine and the kids would be doing tv appearances even if Mann wasn’t in the picture. Sure when Michael’s kids were little he took lengths to not raise them under the glare of the media eye. He didn’t want them plastered all over the media at a young age. As they got older, like you pointed out, its been said that Michael wanted to introduce them at the concert. Who knows Michael might have done an interview with his kids as well. The only “media” I think Michael would have been comfortable with interviewing him and his kids is Ebony magazine.

    I’ll be glad when a judge will shut Mann & Melissa Johnson down and order them to stop contacting the Jackson family.


  90. lcpledwards permalink
    March 1, 2011 7:26 am

    @ Dialdancer, thanks for you comments about the DCFS!

    For everyone else, what she is referring to is this post from the Michael Jackson Accountability Network blog, which discusses the recent controversy surrounding the Katherine, the kids, Howard Mann, Heal The World Foundation, and the Estate. Here is a quote:

    It is feared that the same public scrutiny and media damage once endured by Michael Jackson, now will plague his children, as well, despite his best efforts to shield them from such abuses. Many fans and Jackson supporters believe that the California Department of Children and Family Services should investigate the use of these children to promote business-ventures that are currently the subjects of lawsuits. It is possible that the children will be emotionally damaged when they discover that the Heal the World charity is not one sanctioned by the Jackson estate.

    Michael Jackson’s intentions for his children were clear, and this is NOT it. It is hoped that the executors of the Jackson estate, and/or California D.C.F.S., will take action to see that exploitation of these children does not occur in the future.

    Although I think most fans agree with the overall sentiments of that post (i.e. the kids shouldn’t be used for Mann & the HTWF’s publicity purposes), I definitely DO NOT agree with getting the D.C.F.S. involved, because those kids are perfectly fine in the care of Katherine. The D.C.F.S., although it has good purposes, has been exploited in the past by MJ’s enemies -mainly Gloria Allred and Dr. Carole Lieberman- who wanted MJ’s kids removed after the “baby dangling” incident, after the Bashir documentary aired, and again after his arrest. I think what Dialdancer is saying that if fans publicly call for the D.C.F.S. to get involved, which is what that post is implying, that we may inadvertently assist Allred and Lieberman in their mission to humiliate MJ one last time by getting his kids removed from Katherine!

    If I was the admin of that blog I would have never approved that! The phrase “be careful what you wish for, because you just might get it” is certainly applicable to their desire for the D.C.F.S. to be involved! Other than that, I really like the blog overall. It’s a place for fans to vent whenever they are frustrated with everything going on “behind the scenes” of MJ’s posthumous affairs. You should go to that post and check out the comments for more info.


  91. lcpledwards permalink
    March 1, 2011 7:48 am

    One more thing: I don’t have a Twitter account, but if there is anyone here who does, please do me a favor and tweet someone in the Jackson family, and tell them to tell either Katherine that next time some journalist says that the kids are “normal” and “well adjusted”, that she should say “They’re normal BECAUSE of Michael, not in spite of him!”

    I can’t wait to see the look on some journalist’s face when Katherine and/or the kids say that!


  92. March 1, 2011 9:36 am

    David I just did that on twitter


  93. March 2, 2011 12:58 am

    I don’t know who in their right mind would want DFCS involved to removed the kids from Katherine, but her actions are not exactly blameless either. I don’t see Katherine Jackson as a naive, feeble 80 year old woman. She is the mother of Michael Jackson, Latoya Jackson, The Jackson 5, Janet Jackson, grandmother to 3T, and wife of Joseph Jackson. Entertainment contracts are not new/foreign to her, and neither is dealing with a treacherous predatory media. I do not see the sense in having the kids give a promotional interview for an organization that was denounce in the court of law. Katherine Jackson chose to get involve with Howard Man for whatever reason, and as I recall Randy Jackson did not like the relationship either.

    I am not a mother, so I don’t know what it is like to lose a child. I can sympathize, but not empathize with Katherine, and I have never had to make those hard parenting choices. However, I do not subscribe to the view that because Katherine Jackson is Michael’s mother she is above criticism, for that matter that Michael himself is above criticism. Yes we are looking at the developments from afar, but haven’t we always. We weren’t there for any of the other sagas either: Jordan Chandler, Lisa Marie Presley, Debbie Rowe, Gavin etc, but we still give our opinion.


  94. ares permalink
    March 2, 2011 2:44 am

    Only one question.Do you think that MJ would agree with his mother choise to appear kids to the media? Do you think that he would accepted his kids being used as a way of making money?


  95. okunuga permalink
    March 5, 2011 8:14 pm

    All this nonsence about KJ pimping michael`s kids on various tv shows will only stop when she`s able to estricate her self from howard mann and other leaches that surrounds her and the kids or the Estate wins the lawsuits against howard mann and HTWF.


  96. sanemjfan permalink
    May 15, 2012 11:32 am

    Here is Katherine Jackson earlier tonight on the Piers Morgan show:

    And here are the Jackson brothers:


  97. nannorris permalink
    May 16, 2012 3:48 am
    very disappointed to see Paris will be interviewed again by Oprah, this summer who continues to make smear her fathers name.
    I wont be giving her the ratings.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: