Is MJâ€™s â€œWillâ€ the Real Deal?A jaded Joe Jackson jams executors
Papa Joe Jackson charges that the will allegedly written and signed by famous son Michael Jackson is in fact fraudulent. For some time now he has asserted that such was the case. And in speaking with him recently, I became even more convinced. But, to our shock and dismay, Superior Court Judge Mitchell Beckloff ruled against the Jackson patriarch who filed a complaint last Tuesday. The Associated Press reports: â€œMichael Jacksonâ€™s father does not stand to inherit any of his sonâ€™s assets and cannot challenge the appointment of the executors chosen by the singer to handle his will, a judge said Tuesday. Superior Court Judge Mitchell Beckloff said Joe Jackson was not named in the will but could pursue a motion to receive a family allowance from the estate.â€
Disturbingly, both the judge and media seem to suggest that Joseph Jackson is simply in it for the money. Nothing could be further from the truth. In reality, Joseph Jackson wants justice for his son, and thank God for the Los Angeles Sentinel thatâ€™s printing his side of the story. What follows is part the document Mr. Jackson filed with the court (Case No. BP 117321) that he got to me right at press time:Â
â€œPetitioner, Joseph Jackson, submits the following Objection to Appointment of John Branca and John McClain as the Executors and Special Administrators of the Estate of Michael Jackson.
â€œMichael Jackson Terminated Branca as his Attorney on February 3, 2003. Michael Jackson terminated John Branca as his attorney on February 3, 2003, in a written termination letter. (Exhibit â€œAâ€). Michael Jackson instructed Branca in writing to resign from all positions he had in Michael Jacksonâ€™s personal and business life. Branca failed to follow Michael Jacksonâ€™s instructions, but still remains obligated to comply with those instructions and resign as Executor.
â€œOn February 3, 2003, Michael Jackson instructed Branca to turn over to his new attorneys [sic] all records, files, and papers dealing with his personal and business life. While Branca turned over his other files, Branca secretly refused to turn over the purported July 7, 2002, Will, and March 2002, Trust. In violation of his fiduciary duties, Branca concealed the Will and concealed his refusal to resign as Executor. Brancaâ€™s concealment of the Will and failure to resign continued for many years despite Michael Jacksonâ€™s numerous demands Branca turn over all documents and resign from all positions. Brancaâ€™s conduct is an ethical violation this Court should not permit.
â€œMichael Jackson Terminated John Branca because of Embezzlement.
In 2003, Michael Jackson launched an investigation into Brancaâ€™s embezzlement activities regarding Michel Jacksonâ€™s money. The investigators, the firm of Interfor in New York, reported in February, March, and with a final report on April 15, 2003, there was an improper relationship between Tommy Mattola and John Branca whereby Branca and Matolla were illegally funneling Michael Jacksonâ€™s money to off-shore accounts in the Caribbean. (Exhibit â€œBâ€). The Interfor Report caused Michael Jackson great anger, and Michael Jackson demanded Branca never have anything to do with him, his business, his family, or his personal life again. Michael Jackson terminated John Branca because of his belief that Branca had committed crimes against him. Branca never accounted to Michael Jackson regarding his conduct, nor disclosed his books and records to Michael Jackson.
â€œWhether it was true or false that Branca had embezzled money [from] Michael Jackson, Michael Jacksonâ€™s belief that it occurred was the basis for Brancaâ€™s termination, and Branca never complied with Michael Jacksonâ€™s demands he account and resign. A conflicts [sic] of interest exists between John Branca and the Estate of Michael Jackson. It would be grossly negligent for any Executor of the Estate of Michael Jackson to ignore the investigatorâ€™s report concerning Branca. However, Branca has undertaken no investigation of his own financial transactions with Michael Jackson, nor will he do so because of his conflicts of interest. He has willfully concealed from this Court the reasons for his termination, and he has willfully concealed [from] the Court Michael Jacksonâ€™s belief that Brancaâ€™s [sic] embezzled money....
â€œMichael Jackson was not in Los Angeles on July 7, 2002. On July 7, 2002, Michael Jackson was in New York City, and he was not in Los Angeles at 5:00 p.m. to sign the purported Will as the Will recites. Branca and McClain have concealed [from] this Court the material fact that Michael Jackson did not sign the purported July 7, 2002, Will as they have claimed repeatedly under penalty of perjury. Their concealment of this information [from] the Court is a fraud on the Court and disqualifies them form being Executors of the Estate [...] McClain had a duty to inform the Court Michael Jackson was not in Los Angeles on July 7, 2002. They concealed that fact from this Court. Branca and McClain have violated their fiduciary duties by testifying under penalty of perjury on at least seventeen (17) times the purported July 7, 2002, Will was correct.â€
Amazingly, Judge Beckloff threw this entire document out, along with all the compelling evidence as to its veracity. He didnâ€™t consider it at all; apparently not even giving it a second thought. You can only try and imagine how devastated Michael Jacksonâ€™s family members, friends, supporters, and fans are. And as if to add insult to injury, LaToya Jackson, one of Michaelâ€™s three sisters, said she saw Randy Phillips (the chairman of AEG, the company behind Michael Jacksonâ€™s This Is It movie) at a Los Angeles area restaurant this past Monday evening. Instead of greeting Michael Jacksonâ€™s sister, LaToya alleges that he tried to duck her. Close friends and family say this speaks volumes. Stay tuned for more information.Â
Dr. Firpo Carr can be reached atÂ