Skip to content

THE FINAL RECKONING -2

July 16, 2021

This is a continuation of the subject raised in this post.

First a short reminder – when Fortress Capital Group bought Michael’s loans in May 2005, the bulk of the sum was secured by Michael’s half in Sony/ATV. This catalog was in potential danger of being lost to him as it was pledged as collateral for the $200mln loan that was to mature just six months later, on December 20, 2005.

The remaining part of the debt ($72,5mln) was a Bank of America credit line with an outrageous interest rate of 16.5% which was probably secured by MJJAC catalog (according to some sources) or probably not (according to others). But its maturity date was later, so that catalog was not in so much jeopardy though the credit itself was draining Michael of millions.

And it was only the Neverland ranch that was relatively secure as it was only partially pledged or indirectly tied in with the above loans.

That was the status of Michael Jackson’s debts when Fortress bought them and left them as they were, without any refinancing and just waiting for the loans to come due.

But if Neverland was relatively free, how did it turn into collateral under Fortress too?

This matter is a really sore point because Branca’s critics directly connect Michael’s purchase of Branca’s 5% stake in Sony/ATV with his need to mortgage Neverland to be able to pay him.

And to a certain extent they are right.

The thing is that on the one hand Fortress demanded that Michael should buy back Branca’s share, but on the other hand they refused to increase the loan by a mere $13,5mln in order to pay Branca.

Instead, these good Samaritans were ‘’willing to consider’’ a separate loan, which required Neverland as collateral. The money offered by Fortress was $20mln though the estimated cost of the ranch around that time was $33mln (the estimation was done in 2008 by accounting firm Thompson, Cobb, Bazilio and Associates).

The terms on which these $20 million were offered by Fortress were outrageous in my opinion.

Besides the sum of $13,5 mln to buy Branca’s share and $3,15 mln as the “working capital” for Michael, all the rest was to be paid to Fortress including Origination Fee and Closing Costs. Fortress even kindly included into the package an “Interest Reserve” of $3 mln out of which Michael was to pay the interest on the loan.

See the letter regarding Neverland sent to Michael by Fortress on March 15, 2006 and the attachment to it that breaks down their terms and conditions. Again, the letter is provided by Marco Balletta who for some reason sees one thing in these documents while I see another 🙂

Re: Neverland Ranch First Mortgage Financing

Dear Mr. Jacskon:

You (the “Borrower”) have requested that Fortress Credit Corp. (the “Lender”) consider providing financing (the “Loan”) on Neverland Ranch, a 2,675 acre ranch located at 5225 Figueroa Mountain road. Los Olivos, California (the “Property”). The Loan will be secured by a first mortgage lien the property. The Lender is willing to consider providing the Loan substantially on the terms and conditions set forth in the Outline of Proposed Terms and Conditions attached hereto as (the “Term Sheet”). […… ]

Then comes the Term Sheet outlining the proposed terms and conditions:

OUTLINE OF PROPOSED TERMS AND CONDITIONS

Borrower                           Michael Jackson (the “Borrower”)

Lender                                Fortress Credit Corp (“Fortress” or “Lender”) and/or its affiliated and designees.

Purpose                             To provide funds for the refinancing of existing liesn or claims, secured or unsecured by the   Property, as well as proving working capital to Borrower.

Collateral                          The Loan will be secured by first mortgage lien on the Property, and a first priority secutirty interest in all fixtures, furniture and equipment.

Lien Amount                    The fully funded Loan amount shall be $20.0 million (the “Loan Amount”). At closing the Lender will fund $3.0 million of the Loan Amount into the Interest Reserve (as described herein)

Sources/Uses                  Sources    First Mortgage                     $20.00 mln

                                         Uses

                                         Refinancing Existing Lien/Claims           $13.50 mln

                                         Interest Reserve                                      $3.0 mln

                                         Working Capital                                      $3.15 mln

                                         Origination Fee                                       $0.20 mln

                                         Closing Costs                                          $0.15 mln

……………………………………………………………………………………$20.00 mln

Initial Term                     18 months

Extensions [ …..]

Origination Fee               1% of the Loan amount, payable at funding

Interest rate                    30 day Libor + 4,5% (“Total rate”)

Interest reserve               Funded at Closing in an amount of $3 million to pay interest

Another screenshot from Marco Balletta says:

  • “Fortress [ ] agreed to extend an additional $20 Million Dollars. The additional  loan was secured by Neverland (“the Neverland loan”). The purpose of the Neverland Loan was to provide MJ with sufficient cash to pay off the Branca Claim. See US $20,000,000 Loan and Security Agreement dated as of March 31, 2006 […]

A little later Fortress increased the original sum by $3mln, which brought the overall Neverland loan to $23mln.

The way Fortress was twisting Michael’s hand was not only cynical and ruthless. There was something devilish about their approach – only the vile can first demand that Michael purchase Branca’s share and then put the buyer in a situation when he has to mortgage his last asset to meet the demand.

As Randall Sulllivan puts it,

  • “Fortress intended to wring every penny from him that it could”.

Surely their goal was to drive Michael into insolvency after which the acquisition of his assets was a decided matter. These people wanted everything he had, so there can’t be any doubt that if Jackson’s team had not refinanced his debt at the end of 2007, most of his assets would have been grabbed by Fortress Capital Group in no time.

Richard Siklos says that,

  • “the Fortress loans were coming due yet again at the end of December 2007.”

The Tax Court Memo explains what happened in 2007.

The difference between the interest he owed and the income he made forced him into another refinancing in 2007. Jackson got this done in December with a pledge of additional collateral. Now his primary loan was secured not just by his interest in Sony/ATV but by his Mijac Music catalog.

The refinancing was not easy. Jackson’s team contacted dozens of banks, and in the end Barclays Bank and Deutsche Bank offered to fund a loan secured by Sony/ATV, and HSBC and Plainfield Asset Management offered two separate loans secured by Mijac Music. Jackson eventually made the following deals:

Barclays refinanced $300 million of the debt, in the form of bonds fully guaranteed by Sony and issued by a new entity, New Horizon Trust II, a bankruptcy trust,  which held Jackson’s economic interest in Sony/ATV. All of Jackson’s annual distributions from Sony/ATV were redirected to an interest reserve for this New Horizon Trust II debt. None of the loan proceeds went to him personally. 

(A bankruptcy trust allows lenders to isolate collateral securing a loan from personal claims that future plaintiffs or creditors might make against a debtor).

HSBC lent an additional $30 million secured by Mijac Music through New Horizon Trust III, another bankruptcy trust. In addition to Mijac Music, Jackson assigned to NHT III his writer’s share of performance royalties from Broadcast Music, Inc. (BMI) — after BMI’s recoupment of any advances paid to Jackson — and redirected them through the trust to HSBC to pay the interest on this loan.

Plainfield Asset Management lent $40 million, secured by a second lien on Mijac Music through New Horizon Trust III. This loan did not require current payments of either principal or interest, but interest accrued at 16.5% annually. This interest was added to principal that would be due on the maturity date, December 31, 2011.

Plainfield Asset Management was a hedge fund too, so it is no surprise that their interest rate was so enormous.  The Tax Court judge made a note that “the prime interest rate at the time was 7.25%”, however he still called these deals an achievement:

  • “These deals were, under the circumstances, an achievement.”

Well, an achievement they were only in comparison with a total disaster that awaited Michael if his debts had still been handled by Fortress Capital Group. Now that Fortress was gone and replaced by Barclays and two others, this gave Michael at least an opportunity to repay his loans in the long-term perspective, but in the meantime still left him cash-stripped.

Richard Siklos explains:

The financing was supposed to enable Jackson to settle 13 outstanding lawsuits and still have roughly $11 million on hand for creative ventures. The other loans against Sony/ATV and MiJac were both structured so that Jackson was unable to access any of the money — dividends and profits went directly toward debt payments. And additional money was raised to have “interest reserves” that would make interest payments when Jackson couldn’t.

Jackson was still, according to two people who advised him, running a deficit of $10 million to $15 million a year beyond a similar amount that he would bring in from royalties and new ventures like a special 25th anniversary “Thriller” album.

Besides, the ghost of Fortress was still there. They owned the note on the Neverland ranch and certainly lost no time in trying to sell it at an auction to the highest bidder. So exactly 18 months later, just as their Term Sheet of March 15, 2006 stated it, Fortress Capital Group launched the foreclosure procedure of the ranch.

Sullivan writes,

  • “On October 19, 2007 Fortress Investments filed a $23 million default notice on Neverland Ranch in California, the first step toward foreclosing on the property.”

Dictionary explains that “Foreclosure is a legal proceeding that bars or extinguishes a mortgagor’s right of redeeming a mortgaged estate.”

The follow-up events are known to you:

  • Jermaine Jackson brought in Tohme Tohme to help prevent the foreclosure;
  • Tohme charged Michael with a 10% finder’s fee for finding Tom Barrack of Colony Capital who would pay the required $23,5 mln to Fortress. “Finding” is the wrong word here is Tohme actually worked for Colony receiving a monthly salary of $20,000. Besides that he also wanted 10% from the future sale of Neverland plus $35,000 per month plus the 15% income from services he provided plus interest when applicable.
  • After Tohme “found” the Colony Capital, Tom Barrack took over Neverland for $23,5 million and formed a Sycamore Valley joint venture with Michael which was just a window-dressing project to cover up for Tom Barrack’s full ownership of the ranch and Michael being only its nominal owner.
  • The impressive terms on which this joint venture was created stipulated that when Neverland was eventually sold, Colony would recoup its investment of $23,5 mln plus accrued interest, plus its management and upkeep expenses plus a certain 12% “success fee”. The rest was to go to Jackson’s estate. So the longer the ranch stayed unsold the more losses Michael was to sustain as the expenses on its maintenance only rose.
  • The above means that a simple sale of the ranch to Colony Capital or anyone else would have been much more profitable to Michael (and his Estate).

Given that the ranch remained unsold for more than 5 years since it was put on the market in 2015 and was recently bought by Ron Burkle for $22 million,  if Michael had been alive he would have received zero from this sale and would have also ended up deep in debt to Tom Barrack for the ranch upkeep, accrued interest, success fee and all the rest of it.

This was how Tohme “saved” Neverland demanding for his services 10% first and 10% later.

However it is John Branca who is called a “vampire” and “greedy backstabber” by his critics. The reason why Marco Balletta calls Branca these names is his allegation that Branca wanted $50 million from Michael, but got only $13,5 mln after which MJ’s lawyers gave him “the final kick in his butt”.

Here is how Balletta makes wrong calculations of the alleged Branca’s claims:

16’121.943.73 of principal capital (rejected by MJ)

as well as

14’089,984.33 and additional amounts for the following reasons:

1’621.943.73 representing his percentage on the 300 million Fortress loan then discounted to 589’,894.33

1’032.049.40 representing attorneys fee (rejected by MJ)

13’500.00.000 being the principal balance

Blogger SymOs60 copy-pastes these figures apparently without even looking (as even the punctuation is the same) and is also resentful that Branca allegedly joined “the MJ bankruptcy fansite club”:

The above calculation is based on a document from Marco Balletta’s site which is most probably taken from some lawsuit and is said to be a rough copy of Branca’s initial request. Most of its text is crossed out.

I diligently retyped the document including the punctuation and firstly, need to say that if the paper is genuine and really belonged to Branca, the draft is indeed very rough because some sentences are not only crossed out but are also left unfinished or taken out of context. Some even produce the impression of a cut-and-paste job as they are barely coherent.

After that I studied the paper inside out and you know what I found?

The sums in this paper are not even remotely close to $50 million.  

This document is either misread by Branca’s critics or is deliberately misrepresented by them.

See for yourself:

Settlement Payment. MJ jointly and severally (but specifically excluding New Horizon) agrees to pay to the Firm the principal sum of Sixteen Million One Hundred One Thousand Nine Hundred Forty Three Dollars and Seventy Three Cents ($16,121,943.73) $14,089,894.33 and additional amounts due and owing as set forth herein:

a. Concurrent with the closing (the “Loan Closing”) of the contemplated loan transaction (the “Loan”) in the principal amount of Three Hundred Million Dollars ($300,000,000) between Fortress Capital Corp. (“Fortress”) and New Horizon, whose beneficial owners are MJ Publishing Trust and MJ-ATV Publishing Trust, MJ shall pay to the Firm the sum of One Million Six Hundred Twenty One Thousand Nine Hundred Forty Three Dollars and Seventy Three Cents  ($ 1,621,943.73) which consists of (i) Five Hundred Eighty Nine Thousand Eight Hundred Ninety Four Dollars and Thirty Cents ($589,894.33) $589,894.33 representing an agreed upon discount of certain guaranteed advances due to MJ from the Company and ii) One Million Thirty Two Thousand Forty Nine Dollars and Forty Cents ($1,032,049.40) in attorney’s fees and expenses.

Such payment shall be paid directly by the __________________ (“Administrative Agent”) to the Firm pursuant to the Direct Payment Agreement of even date herewith by and among MJ Administrative Agent and the Firm (the “Direct Payment Agreement”), a true and correct copy of hwihc is attached hereto as Exhibit “____”……………..

The 2nd page of the same looks like a cut and paste job:

b. The remaining balance of $14,500,000 (plus interest accruing as described below) as follows:

b. i. The principal balance of Ten The remaining balance of $13,500,000 plus interest in the rate of 6,72% per annum from the date of the Loan Closing until paid in full (the $13.5 Million dollars ($10,000,000) (the “Ten Million Dollar Payment”) shall be due and payable to the Firm immediately upon MJ’s refinance of Neverland Valley Ranch, 4225 Figueroa Mountain Road, Los Olivos, CA 93441 (“Neverland”), but in no event later than [April 15] June 30, 2006 and  2006 which refinancing MJ agrees they are obligated to secure promptly following execution hereof.

Ii                 The principal balance of $4,500,000 (the “4.5 Million Payment”) shall be due and payable to the Firm immediately upon the exercise by Sony Music Entertainment, Inc. and/or its affiliates and successors (“SME”) of SME’s right to purchase up to fifty percent (50%) of the Company Interest (hereinafter the “Call”) pursuant to the Operating Agreement, or upon any other disposition of any part of the Company interest by which proceeds are generated in an amount greater than necessary to pay Fortress any amount then due to Fortress under loan (except that if the Loan is in default, the Firm shall be paid any amounts greater than what is necessary to cover the default) (“Other Disposition”), but in no event later than September 1, 2007 (the “Backup Date”) in the event (a) the Call is not exercised by the Backstop Date, (b) no Other Disposition occurs by the Backstop Date, or (c) the Call, whenever exercised, does not generate an amount necessary to pay the $4.5 Million Payment (plus interest accruing on the $4,5 Million Payment from and after the Backstop Date and any other obligations then due hereunder) to the Firm at the time of the Call, then in addition to any other rights or remedies available to the Firm;…..

Forget about the crossed out text on the second page. Even if Branca claimed the additional sum of $4,5 million, this clause could become effective only if  Sony purchased Michael’s half of the catalog,  which was a scenario apparently not even discussed and therefore crossed out.

As to the rest of this paper it brings us to the following conclusions:

  • The initial principal sum (probably) asked by Branca’s firm was $16,121,943.73 which was later reduced to $14,089,894.33. So one sum is not to be added to the other as Balletta did, but the smaller sum should replace the bigger one.
  • The fee of 1,621,943.73 was reduced by almost two thirds and came to 589,894.33. It has nothing to do with the Fortress loan and is mentioned here only because its payment is to be “concurrent” (occurring at the same time) as Fortress closes their $300mln loan with Michael, which means that the fee should be paid only after Fortress provides money for it.
  • This initial fee of 1,621,943.73 is suspiciously close to what Branca waived his right to in the letter dated December 1998 where his firm agreed not to claim their 5% stake as well as the fee of $1,864,200 for the next seven years (I asked you to memorize this figure in the first post). That fee was “charged with respect to future Guaranteed Advances” and was also discounted then from the initial $2,275,000.
  • Now the new fee of $ 1,621,943.73 also refers to certain “guaranteed advances” and, same as in 1998, is to be paid from the loan proceeds – so both sums seem to be one and the same thing, only adjusted to the situation in 2005 and asking for a less percentage than before. Remember that for seven years prior to that this fee was not collected by Branca’s firm as they waived their right to it.
  • The next page speaks of the principal amount of $13,500,000 (5% interest in the catalog). This sum is not anything separate but is actually part of the $14,089,894.33 amount which the document starts with. If you add up $13,5mln (the principal sum) + $589,894.33 (the fee), the total will be exactly $14,089,894.33

So the biggest amount asked by Branca’s firm was probably $16,121,943, but even that was later reduced to $14,089,894.

Where are the crazy $50 million then?

There are NONE.

Then why are these bloggers telling tales about the gigantic Branca’s claims? Is it poor maths on their part or malicious distortion of the truth?

All of it is so strange that I don’t even want to comment on it, guys.

And besides, does anyone here really think that the sum claimed by Branca and his firm was too much for the services they rendered to Michael in all the years they worked for him? Even if it were $16,121,943, which it was not?

Why do people grudge Branca this perfectly reasonable sum while looking benignly at the outrageous $2,3 mln claimed by Tohme Tohme for ‘finding’ a company where he actually worked? Or the $48 million demanded by Prescient Acquisitions Group for finding the notorious Fortress hedge fund?

Actually, there was no need to ‘find’ Fortress at all – so big was their desire to get Michael’s assets and so sure they were that he would default on his loans, that they would have come running themselves had they received a telephone call from an insider about Michael Jackson’s distressed assets.

What I am driving at is that WE MUST BE FAIR, JUST and HONEST, and give Branca his due. Otherwise Michael’s supporters will be no better than his haters.

And it won’t do to call Branca “greedy” while there was a swarm of advisors around Michael who did nothing for him or brought only losses, but still had the cheek to sue him for tens of millions – remember Dieter Wiesner’s $64 million lawsuit, for example.

Sullivan wrote that

  • “the family of Roc-A-Fella Records cofounder Damon Dash had sued Jackson ten times in the year 2007 alone. Damon’s cousin Darien Dash was the principal in Prescient Capital, and the force behind the massive lawsuit that had nearly forced Jackson into bankruptcy.”

And Branca never sued Jackson. And he also fully restored Michael’s finances providing security for his children. And MJ Estate also managed to steer clear from the outrageous multi-million lawsuits coming at the Estate from every direction possible.

Despite all that I hear that Branca’s critics attack him on suspicion that he is a kind of a double agent working not only for Michael, but also for Sony.

But there is no ground for suspicions here because Branca was open about it himself.

We have an example of it when Branca informed Michael of a potential conflict of interest in a deal to acquire a new catalog for Sony/ATV in August 2002. There he points out that he always represented both MJ and Sony/ATV, but still thinks it necessary to remind Michael of it again.

The letter is found in Joe Jackson’s opposition to Branca’s nomination the Estate Executor (the bold type is mine):

Mr. Michael Jackson

MJJ Productions, Inc.

August 14, 2002

                            RE: Representation of Michael Jackson and Sony/ATV Music Publishing LLC

Dear Michael:

This letter pertains to the proposed joint representation by Ziffren, Brittenham, Branca, Fischer, Gilbert-Lurie & Stiffelman, LLP (the “Firm”) of you (and your related and affiliated entities) and Sony/ATV Music Publishing LLC (herein “Sony/ATV”) in connection with the potential acquisition and/or administration by Sony/ATV of the Lieber/Stoller catalogs (the “Transaction”). Although it does not appear that this joint representation would create an actual conflict of interest, the Firm is obligated to point out to you that there might be the potential for a conflict of interest to develop as between and among you (and your related and affiliated entities), on the one hand, and Sony/ATV, on the other hand, or at least the appearance of a conflict of interest [ ] .

Accordingly, if litigation or any dispute occurs among you and Sony/ATV in the future, and if either of you, Sony/ATV or the Firm is asked to testify in that legal action about communications between you, Sony/ATV and the Firm relating to the Transaction, since these communications are not protected by the attorney-client privilege in that type of joint representation situation, the attorney-client privilige could not be asserted to avoid or prevent that testimony or evidence. However, in any disputes with anyone other than a dispute between you and Sony/ATV, the attorney-cleint privilege would still exist and protect confidentiality of those communications.

The Firm understands that you are willing to waive your right to assert any claim of conflict of interest in connection with the Firm’s representation of you and Sony/ATV in any existing or future disputes (including, but not limited to, formal litigation) by virtue of the fact that the Firm is representing and/or has represented you and Sony/ATV. If you agree to these terms and conditions, you will not be able to use the fact that the Firm has represented you, or your entities, and Sony/ATV as a means of seeking the recusal and /or disqualification of the Firm in connection with any other matter.  

If you agree to the Firm’s representation in light of these circumstances and notwithstanding the potential conflicts of interest, and although a potential conflict could arise in the future and you acknowledge that the Firm has fully disclosed all relevant circumstances upon such representation, the Firm will undertake to represent you in connection with the Transaction.

Before signing this Agreement, you have the right to and should consult with independent counsel to advise you whether it is in your best interests to consent to having the Firm represent you jointly in connection with the Transaction. If you consent to the Firm’s representation after your full investigation of the facts, and after you either consulted or had the opportunity to consult independent counsel but chose not do so, please sign below to indicate your acceptance.

Sincerely,

John Branca

The above is an open, fair and honest approach. Anyone would be happy to have their legal or business advisors to treat them in the same way.

Another point which is driving Branca’s critics is that Michael suspected him of being part of a Mottola-led conspiracy against him at a time when Mottola headed Sony.

But Tommy Mottola was only one in a team of several and wasn’t even the worst villain, and he is no longer Sony, and it’s nearly 20 years since then – however the scope of a conspiracy against Michael Jackson is as big as ever and it is actually Branca who is fighting it now.

Michael Jackson didn’t know where all the malice was coming from, so was suspicious of almost everyone. And he certainly didn’t realize how deep and wide the roots of the vicious campaign against him were. Limiting ourselves to what Michael thought then means going back in circles again and again, and blocking our vision from seeing a wider and darker picture around Michael Jackson which he could not even imagine.

This blocked state of mind is what Michael called conditioning.

People are indeed so conditioned by all those stories about Branca, Sony, etc. that they are trained to look in their direction only, while overlooking everything else. And failing to notice some important details though they are glaring them straight in the eye.

  • For example, a detail like the strange involvement of a certain Myung Ho Lee who seemed to appear from nowhere in MJ’s life, and who arranged those Bank of America loans on terms far from satisfactory to the borrower, and then actually squandered the borrowed money himself on projects like Hollywoodticket.com which went bust together with Michael’s money in it. Following his two disastrous investments for MJ, Myung Ho Lee then called Michael a “financial tickling bomb”, went on Vanity Fair to tell lies about him (voodoo blood-bath and whatnot) and ended up suing MJ for $13 million in back wages threatening to disclose his financial situation to the press (Michael settled, of course).
  • And why doesn’t anyone ask questions about which of Michael’s advisors invested $50 mln of his borrowed money in the purchase of Marvel Comics (Michael’s dream) sometime in the 2000s, which later turned out to be a fraud and pure embezzlement of his funds? This is where all those loans were going into, and not into financing Michael’s “lavish lifestyle”! We know very little of that scam but some details are there in this post.
  • Or look at the sudden decision of Bank of America to get rid of Michael Jackson’s debts in 2003 which strangely coincided with a new onslaught against MJ also beginning in 2003. What I mean is that it occurred not in 2005 when the loans were actually sold and Michael was under trial, but two years before that, when everything was relatively calm. Did someone whisper in the ear of Jane Heller, Senior Vice-President of the bank, that very, very soon Michael will be in very, very much trouble, so isn’t it time to get rid of his debts?

The BOA decision looks even stranger when you realize that Michael’s collaterals were times bigger than the actual loans, so there was no need to panic or hurry up. In fact blogger symOs60 also noticed that something was not right about it:

“Given the loan amount, the asset of Sony/ATV was more than sufficient. There was no need to have Neverland as a pledge, as well as there was no need to have MIJAC as securitization. Bank of America loan guarantees seemed like it was an overkill request. The Sony ATV catalog was worth in between one billion, possibly 1.2 billion, which means the 50% owned by MJ would have an average value of the half. So, why did they need to take all his assets? Something was not right with these loans”.

And something was not right about the BOA hurry to sell MJ’s loans in complete secrecy and behind his back too. Why was it so terribly urgent to sell his loans in May 2005, just weeks before the jury verdict?  Of course the bank could be concerned that in case of a guilty verdict the loans would remain unpaid, however they had Michael’s collaterals which were much bigger than the actual loans – so why the urgency?

This timing can only be explained by someone’s desire to add to Michael’s trouble and deliver him a crushing blow at the worst moment of his life so that he would never rise to his feet again.

When these and other questions remain unanswered and are not even asked by Michael’s supporters while the majority of them are preoccupied with John Branca, it leaves me with a clear impression that someone is deliberately targeting the wrong person in order to deflect people’s attention away from many other things that are of real and tremendous importance to Michael.

[end of part 2]

3 Comments leave one →
  1. July 17, 2021 9:18 am

    Quote: “WE MUST BE FAIR, JUST and HONEST, and give Branca his due. Otherwise Michael’s supporters will be no better than his haters.” Truth! Irrespective of what WE think are the rights or wrongs of the situation, we must go by the evidence available, and not because of our personal feelings about any particular individual – our impressions of whom may be warped by the misinformation we’ve been fed. Thank you, Helena, for all your hard work on this very complex subject.

    Like

  2. July 20, 2021 2:16 am

    I am so grateful and excited to have found this page! Thank you very much for your hard work! This information is very important and interesting. Michael I love you!

    Lisa’s thread was so entertaining and informative, they wer toxic but they loved each other.. I was hoping that Lisa would get her book out and finally find out why she was so mad at him, but I don’t think it will ever come out.

    Please could you create a thread about the relationship with Prince (the singer) 🙏 lately I have found new data that if you like I could send you 🙌🕊️✨

    Like

  3. July 23, 2021 1:11 pm

    “Irrespective of what WE think are the rights or wrongs of the situation, we must go by the evidence available, and not because of our personal feelings about any particular individual” – Kerry Hennigan

    EXACTLY!

    Like

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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: