Michael Jackson's siblings resume attack on will

By Anthony Mccartney

Associated Press

Published: Wednesday, Aug. 1 2012 7:30 a.m. MDT

FILE - In this Jan. 6, 2011 file photo, Katherine Jackson, Michael Jackson's mother, leaves court after a hearing for Jackson's doctor, Conrad Murray, in Los Angeles. Jackson on Tuesday, July 31, 2012 announced she will spend what would have been her son Michael's 54th birthday in the family's hometown of Gary, Ind., which is planning a candlelight vigil, concert and other events to honor the pop superstar and his mother.

Nick Ut, File, Associated Press

LOS ANGELES — More than three years after Michael Jackson's death, his youngest brother continues to raise questions about the validity of the pop superstar's will.

On Twitter and cable TV, Randy Jackson has called the five-page document signed in 2002 a fake. The one place he hasn't made the claims is a courtroom, where legal experts say he faces almost insurmountable hurdles to invalidate the will and stiff odds against ousting the men who run the lucrative estate.

In a recent letter, Randy Jackson and three of his siblings called on Jackson's estate executors to resign and renewed charges that their brother's will is a fake.

The letter states Jackson's family — who other than his mother and three children receive no stake in his estate — was too overwhelmed after the singer's death to meaningfully challenge the document. "At that time we couldn't possibly fathom what is so obvious to us now: that the Will, without question, it's Fake, Flawed and Fraudulent," the letter signed by Randy, Jermaine, Janet and Rebbie Jackson states.

The delay, however, likely dooms any effort to invalidate the document, and if it was thrown out, would not alter the stake the King of Pop's three children receive, experts say and an appeals court has noted.

Randy Jackson has since posted on Twitter that he believes the estate is trying to isolate his mother to the detriment of her health. "It is my fear and belief, that they are trying to take my mother's life," Randy Jackson wrote last week.

Jackson's estate has denied the accusations. "We are saddened that false and defamatory accusations grounded in stale Internet conspiracy theories are now being made by certain members of Michael's family whom he chose to leave out of his will," the estate wrote in a statement.

Almost from the moment it was filed, the will has been a topic of controversy for some of Jackson's relatives. The pop superstar's father Joe Jackson attempted to get a stipend from the estate, but like the rest of his children, he was excluded from any share. His mother, Katherine, explored the possibility of challenging the executors and was given permission by a judge, but settled before a full hearing was held.

The estate benefits Katherine Jackson and the singer's three children — Prince, 15; Paris, 14; and Blanket, 10.

The five-page document is straightforward and simple, and many key provisions of how Jackson's estate is constructed are set out in a trust. That document has never been publicly released.

Many of the misgivings stem from the will's final page, which bears the signatures of three witnesses who claim Jackson signed the document on July 7, 2002, in Los Angeles. Jackson's family points out that the singer was in New York on that day, a point the Rev. Al Sharpton recently bolstered by showing video of the "Thriller" singer appearing with him at an event in Harlem that day.

"I don't think that kind of extrinsic fraud would be enough to overturn the order admitting the will to probate," said Marshall Oldman, a Los Angeles probate attorney who represented Peter Falk's wife in a conservatorship proceeding.

He said Jackson's siblings' only valid argument is that they did not receive proper notice that their brother's will had been accepted into probate. Superior Court Judge Mitchell Beckloff accepted the will in November 2009. Any challenge would have had to been filed within four months, Oldman said.

The California 2nd District Court of Appeal noted in an October 2010 ruling against the singer's father that the period to challenge the will had already expired. Even if the will were thrown out, the court noted, California law would require the estate to benefit Michael Jackson's children.

Get The Deseret News Everywhere

Subscribe

Mobile

RSS