Katherine Jackson - Katherine Jackson Wants Vegas Expenses Help

Aug 16, 2012 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: ContactMusic.com

Katherine Jackson wants Michael Jackson's Estate to pay her living expenses in Las Vegas, not the mortgage on daughter Janet's house as was previously reported.

Comments
1 - 20 of 25 Comments Last updated Aug 24, 2012
First Prev
of 2
Next Last
ChasUGC
|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Aug 16, 2012
 

Judged:

4

2

1

I'm glad to see that Katherine and the kids are living large. They deserve it. Don't hate.
kelly DJ

Singapore, Singapore

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Aug 16, 2012
 
US KING OF POP [ micheal jackson ] NET WORTH IN POP MUISC US $1 BILLION & [ JANET ] will get US $800 MILLION ** 2012 ** IS TRUE IN NEW YORK ******

“at yet more f'loonspin”

Since: Aug 11

I live far away from f'loons

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Aug 16, 2012
 

Judged:

5

2

2

So, Katherine wants even more money. And f'loons call her children greedy. I guess f'loons don't understand the acorns didn't fall very far from the tree.
kelly DJ

Singapore, Singapore

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Aug 17, 2012
 
US A BILLION FANS 2 [ POPULAR ] DIVAS IN POP MUISC [ mariah carey with janet jackson ] BILLBOARD MUISC HIP & POP US WORLDWIDE - TOP OF THE POP - TOPIX 2012 www.janet-fans.com
Suzie
|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Aug 17, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Len is Disgusted wrote:
So, Katherine wants even more money. And f'loons call her children greedy. I guess f'loons don't understand the acorns didn't fall very far from the tree.
Her son left her in his will because he wants her be taken care of as he did for her because he loved her. What she gets is not tax payer funded so it's really nobody's business. The estate wouldn't pay for any expense for her if it were out of line. John Branca is shrewed. Katherine is legally entitled as a beneficiary of the will. The siblings are not.

But I think Janet should pay for her mother needs while staying there since she supposidly bought the place for her to begin with. The estate should can pay for the children's stay because they aren't Janet's responsiblity.

Both my parents are dead and I would give anything to have them back. Some people don't seem to appreciate how fortunate they are to still have their parents alive.
Diane

Pleasant Hill, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Aug 17, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Suzie wrote:
<quoted text>
Her son left her in his will because he wants her be taken care of as he did for her because he loved her. What she gets is not tax payer funded so it's really nobody's business. The estate wouldn't pay for any expense for her if it were out of line. John Branca is shrewed. Katherine is legally entitled as a beneficiary of the will. The siblings are not.
But I think Janet should pay for her mother needs while staying there since she supposidly bought the place for her to begin with. The estate should can pay for the children's stay because they aren't Janet's responsiblity.
Both my parents are dead and I would give anything to have them back. Some people don't seem to appreciate how fortunate they are to still have their parents alive.
Yes! Good for you Suzie - keep comments to themselves. Not their business. key word: Non taxpayers money = mind your business!

“at yet more f'loonspin”

Since: Aug 11

I live far away from f'loons

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Aug 17, 2012
 

Judged:

6

3

2

Suzie wrote:
<quoted text>
Her son left her in his will because he wants her be taken care of as he did for her because he loved her. What she gets is not tax payer funded so it's really nobody's business. The estate wouldn't pay for any expense for her if it were out of line. John Branca is shrewed. Katherine is legally entitled as a beneficiary of the will. The siblings are not.
But I think Janet should pay for her mother needs while staying there since she supposidly bought the place for her to begin with. The estate should can pay for the children's stay because they aren't Janet's responsiblity.
Both my parents are dead and I would give anything to have them back. Some people don't seem to appreciate how fortunate they are to still have their parents alive.
So, even though the Estate pays her mortgage, bills, food, maid service, chidlren's education and needs, and initially upped her monthly allowance from $26,000, you see nothing wrong with this picture.

“It's all lies”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Aug 17, 2012
 

Judged:

7

2

2

Len is Disgusted wrote:
<quoted text>
So, even though the Estate pays her mortgage, bills, food, maid service, chidlren's education and needs, and initially upped her monthly allowance from $26,000, you see nothing wrong with this picture.
Katherine is trying to have the best time and experience with her grandchildren before she dies. She is doing this in the style that her grandchildren have always been accustomed to.

MJ's Estate has more than enough money to provide for her and his children.

I detect big time jealousy and envy on your behalf and that's the root to your problem.
kelly DJ

Singapore, Singapore

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Aug 17, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

NUMBER & THE BEST [ janet jackson ] JANET LIFE & STYLE 2012 = www.janetjackson.com
Suzie

Washington, DC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Aug 20, 2012
 

Judged:

4

3

3

Len is Disgusted wrote:
<quoted text>
So, even though the Estate pays her mortgage, bills, food, maid service, chidlren's education and needs, and initially upped her monthly allowance from $26,000, you see nothing wrong with this picture.
Katherine 50% share of the estate is held in a lifetime trust for with John Branca and John McClain serving as co-trustees. The co-trustees have complete discretion as to when income and principal may be distributed to provide for Katherine's "care, support, maintenance and comfort and well-being." Upon her death the balance will be divided equally among his children.

It is stimpulated in the trust by her son as to how she is to be cared for and the trustees are overseeing it all anyway. If this was anybody other Michael and his mother, you wouldn't have anything to say. Like I said before, it's nobody's damned business what she gets, even if she got a million dollars a month because it is her son's wishes.

By the way, you need to make sure that you have provided for your mother in case something happens to you, instead of worrying about what Katherine's getting!

“at yet more f'loonspin”

Since: Aug 11

I live far away from f'loons

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Aug 21, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Suzie wrote:
<quoted text>
Katherine 50% share of the estate is held in a lifetime trust for with John Branca and John McClain serving as co-trustees. The co-trustees have complete discretion as to when income and principal may be distributed to provide for Katherine's "care, support, maintenance and comfort and well-being." Upon her death the balance will be divided equally among his children.
It is stimpulated in the trust by her son as to how she is to be cared for and the trustees are overseeing it all anyway. If this was anybody other Michael and his mother, you wouldn't have anything to say. Like I said before, it's nobody's damned business what she gets, even if she got a million dollars a month because it is her son's wishes.
By the way, you need to make sure that you have provided for your mother in case something happens to you, instead of worrying about what Katherine's getting!
Suzie, even though you're a f'loon, try not to be stupid. The executors have been paying off Michael's monstrous debt, all the while still paying for everything Katherine needs and wants. It's my right to stand amazed at how much more she keeps demanding and how her children keep wanting to get their hands on it. Even though f'loons buy into the Jackson PR spin, it's the right of the executors to protect the estate, by finding out why she suddenly wants extra money. And for somebody who thinks the estate is nobody's business, you sure have a defensive opinion about it.

P.S. My mother IS well cared for.

“It's all lies”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Aug 22, 2012
 

Judged:

4

4

2

Len is Disgusted wrote:
<quoted text>
Suzie, even though you're a f'loon, try not to be stupid. The executors have been paying off Michael's monstrous debt, all the while still paying for everything Katherine needs and wants. It's my right to stand amazed at how much more she keeps demanding and how her children keep wanting to get their hands on it. Even though f'loons buy into the Jackson PR spin, it's the right of the executors to protect the estate, by finding out why she suddenly wants extra money. And for somebody who thinks the estate is nobody's business, you sure have a defensive opinion about it.
P.S. My mother IS well cared for.
The debt has been paid off and now MJ's estate is generating billions of dollars.

Hater get over it and learn to LOVE, instead of drowning in your own negativity.
Gibs me dat

UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Aug 22, 2012
 

Judged:

4

4

2

goodvibrations wrote:
<quoted text>
The debt has been paid off and now MJ's estate is generating billions of dollars.
Hater get over it and learn to LOVE, instead of drowning in your own negativity.
billions? have you floons no grasp of reality at all? why not just say gazillions, like most floons?

“It's all lies”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Aug 22, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Gibs me dat wrote:
<quoted text>billions? have you floons no grasp of reality at all? why not just say gazillions, like most floons?
Michael Jackson's estate is the most profitable of any deceased celebrity. It it a money making machine that keeps on generating money.
His Sony ATV catalogue is currently worth $2 billion.
His Sony music deal is worth over $250 million.

Yes MJ's estate is worth billions.

“at yet more f'loonspin”

Since: Aug 11

I live far away from f'loons

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Aug 23, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

goodvibrations wrote:
<quoted text>
Michael Jackson's estate is the most profitable of any deceased celebrity. It it a money making machine that keeps on generating money.
His Sony ATV catalogue is currently worth $2 billion.
His Sony music deal is worth over $250 million.
Yes MJ's estate is worth billions.
Michael was in deep debt when he died. His executors have been paying it off. I still can't believe the things that come out of your mouth.

“It's all lies”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Aug 23, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Len is Disgusted wrote:
<quoted text>
Michael was in deep debt when he died. His executors have been paying it off. I still can't believe the things that come out of your mouth.
His executors paid it all off with the money that Michael Jackson keeps generating, not from their money.

Disgusting Len, I can't believe the shite your head is full of.

“at yet more f'loonspin”

Since: Aug 11

I live far away from f'loons

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Aug 23, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

goodvibrations wrote:
<quoted text>
His executors paid it all off with the money that Michael Jackson keeps generating, not from their money.
Disgusting Len, I can't believe the shite your head is full of.
I reread my post, and nowhere in it does it say the executors paid off the debt with their own money.

Gawd, you're stupid.

“It's all lies”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#19
Aug 23, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Len is Disgusted wrote:
<quoted text>I reread my post, and nowhere in it does it say the executors paid off the debt with their own money.

Gawd, you're stupid.
the executors paid the debt off. There is no debt. Gawd you are so thick and fat.6
Ancalime

Essen, Germany

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
Aug 23, 2012
 

Judged:

3

2

1

goodvibrations wrote:
<quoted text>
the executors paid the debt off. There is no debt. Gawd you are so thick and fat.6
No, the debt is not paid off. The executors asked the judge to extend the probate for one year as the big loan on Sony/ATV still is not paid off (it may take 2 or 3 years). Otherwise the estate would be closed. Read the estate's report instead claiming your own private idaho...;-)
Robin

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21
Aug 23, 2012
 

Judged:

3

1

1

Charging your motherr rent for staying at a place you own is despicable.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••