Jackson Kids' Hearing Delayed At Debbie Rowe's Request

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Jackson Kids' Hearing Delayed At Debbie Rowe's Request stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

ANTHONY MCCARTNEY | July 2, 2009 09:54 PM EST | AP

Compare other versions »
I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Robin Hudson of Los Angeles hangs a sign at a makeshift memorial for the late pop star Michael Jackson outside the family home in the Encino section of Los Angeles , Thursday, July 2, 2009. (AP Photo/Matt Rourke)

LOS ANGELES — The future of Michael Jackson's children was thrown into question Thursday when his ex-wife emerged and won a delay in a custody hearing while she decides whether she wants to raise her two offspring.

It was the first legal move from Deborah Rowe since the entertainer's death. Jackson's will asks for his mother, Katherine, to get permanent custody of all three of his children.

Rowe, who met Jackson as a receptionist in the office of his dermatologist, has characterized their relationship as strictly for the purpose of birthing Jackson children. She is the mother of his two oldest children and received $8.5 million in their divorce, according to court records. His youngest child was conceived with a surrogate.

She has spent very little time with her son Michael Joseph Jr., known as Prince Michael, 12; and daughter Paris Michael Katherine, 11. But Rowe also has opposed the idea of Katherine Jackson getting custody of her children when it came up in the past.

Rowe's attorney, Eric M. George, said Thursday she had not decided whether to seek custody.

Superior Court Judge Mitchell Beckloff rescheduled a guardianship hearing for July 13 at the request of attorneys for Rowe and for Katherine Jackson, 79, who has temporary guardianship of her son's children.

The identity of the surrogate mother of the singer's youngest child, 7-year-old son Prince Michael II, has never been revealed.

Jackson's public memorial was set for 10 a.m. Tuesday at the Staples Center in downtown Los Angeles, according to a press release from the office of the Jackson family's publicist.

Story continues below
advertisement

Randy Phillips, chief executive of AEG Live, which owns the Staples Center and was Jackson's promoter, said tickets would be free. He was not sure how they would be distributed.

But Los Angeles City Councilman Dennis Zine said the Jackson family should consider delaying the public memorial to allow more time to plan. He also said the cash-strapped city doesn't have the money to pay police overtime.

"If you can imagine 100,000 people show up and you have 20,000 capacity (at the Staples Center), there is not sufficient room. Now you have a crowd-control problem," he said. With the July Fourth holiday weekend "it's the worst time ... to work something out."

Another court hearing will proceed as planned Monday on who will take temporary control of Jackson's estate. He left all his assets to the Michael Jackson Family Trust.

A person familiar with the details of the trust said it would be shared between his mother, who gets 40 percent, his three children, who together get 40 percent, and charities for children, which would receive 20 percent. The charities will be determined later by the trust.

The person was not authorized to speak publicly and requested anonymity.

Authorities also were investigating allegations that the 50-year-old Jackson had been consuming painkillers, sedatives and antidepressants.

California Attorney General Jerry Brown said his office was helping Los Angeles police investigate the possible involvement of prescription drugs in Jackson's death.

His Bureau of Narcotic Enforcement is searching a state database that tracks doctors who prescribe controlled substances, how much and to whom.

The federal Drug Enforcement Administration also has joined the investigation. The Los Angeles Police Department asked the DEA to help, a law enforcement official in Washington told the AP on condition of anonymity because of the investigation's sensitivity.

In an interview on NBC's "Today" show, Jackson's brother Jermaine said he would be "hurt" if toxicology reports showed his younger brother abused prescription drugs.

"In this business, the pressures and things that you go through, you never know what one turns to," he said.

___

AP writers Michael R. Blood, Beth Harris in Los Angeles; Michele Salcedo in Washington; contributed to this story.

LOS ANGELES — The future of Michael Jackson's children was thrown into question Thursday when his ex-wife emerged and won a delay in a custody hearing while she decides whether she wants to rais...
LOS ANGELES — The future of Michael Jackson's children was thrown into question Thursday when his ex-wife emerged and won a delay in a custody hearing while she decides whether she wants to rais...
Loading...
 
Filed by Katy Hall  |  Report Corrections
 
Comments
595
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next › Last » (10 pages total)
- VivreVie I'm a Fan of VivreVie 5 fans permalink
photo

When its all said and done i Don't think Rowe will get the kids and I think it was really smart of the Jackson smart filling for guardianship of the kids asap And I really don't think the kids will want to go with Rowe, Jackson had this all planned out

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:02 AM on 07/03/2009
- VivreVie I'm a Fan of VivreVie 5 fans permalink
photo

I think it was really smart of Mrs. Jackson filling for guardianship of the kids asap*

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:04 AM on 07/03/2009
- Bude I'm a Fan of Bude 165 fans permalink
photo

You notice that the judge immediately stopped the guardianship request when the birth mother stepped up.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:17 AM on 07/03/2009
- Bude I'm a Fan of Bude 165 fans permalink
photo

Are you saying that Michael planned for all of this to happen?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:18 AM on 07/03/2009
- VivreVie I'm a Fan of VivreVie 5 fans permalink
photo

He stopped the case becuase she does have some right to the children and because it is a court everyone has the chance to be heard thats.

If Michael wanted Rowe to be the guardian of his kids she would have been in the will

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:22 AM on 07/03/2009
- Bude I'm a Fan of Bude 165 fans permalink
photo

Rowe is the birth mother. The courts always side with the birth mother. The children will soon be with her. Michael would want what's best for the children. She is obviously best.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:01 AM on 07/03/2009

oh you bully!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:04 AM on 07/03/2009
photo

Keep telling yourself that, my deluded friend. She has said numerous times she doesn't want the kids, and now she's moved in for the kill because of the pretty trust funds they have. It's obvious that people around her have pushed/convinced her to do this, and that is truly disgusting. But then again, money talks.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:05 AM on 07/03/2009
- ccpostman I'm a Fan of ccpostman 22 fans permalink
photo

#1 The trust is in the kids name, so she can not touch any money if there is any?

#2 Jackson owes 450 million. Anyone that gets the kids will be fighting off creditors for years to protect the kids.

There is NO money. Wake up!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:31 AM on 07/03/2009
- VivreVie I'm a Fan of VivreVie 5 fans permalink
photo

If my mother gave up the rights to be my mother for money no less i certainly would not want her to be my mother

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:05 AM on 07/03/2009
- Bude I'm a Fan of Bude 165 fans permalink
photo

The judge will decide.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:06 AM on 07/03/2009
- Pleneras I'm a Fan of Pleneras 72 fans permalink
photo

She did it for Michael. She knew he would not stay married or be a normal person or live a normal life and needed children of his own. She gave him a gift.. the kids. She did something good.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:39 AM on 07/03/2009
- AFAN I'm a Fan of AFAN 33 fans permalink

Hey Mike Walker of the National inquire is that you?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:05 AM on 07/03/2009
- Bude I'm a Fan of Bude 165 fans permalink
photo

How did you guess?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:09 AM on 07/03/2009
photo

HAH?


The kids are 11 & 12 , I hardly think this is an open and shut case, the judge will take into account the trama of losing their father and then going to live with a complete strange they have no recollection of... PLUS, thier is Blanket to deal with and I don't think the Jacksons are going to give up Blanket .. In order for the judge to consider Miss. Rowe the judge would consider keeping all kids together..

The kids are also old enough to tell the judge who they want to live with...I dissagree, I think the Jackson's win this battle based on the chidrens choice and staying with Blanket and the only family they know....


So She obviously is not the best as you claim.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:18 AM on 07/03/2009
- slipthalo I'm a Fan of slipthalo 6 fans permalink
photo

I agree with you but do think maybe the judge will give DR visitation in order to allow the children to know her better. It would be nice if the court would address the Joe issue too but doubt they would.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:31 PM on 07/03/2009

Debbie Rowe recently said: "I know I will never see them again. I was never cut out to be a mother - I was no good. I don't want these children in my life. My children are my animals now."

It's hard to imagine a court giving her custody of these children after she's said she doesn't want them in her life and she's not cut out to be a mother.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:56 PM on 07/02/2009
- ccpostman I'm a Fan of ccpostman 22 fans permalink
photo

Where did she say this Judge Judy?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:20 AM on 07/03/2009

Countless newspapers carried the story. Just Google "I don't want these children in my life" and pick a source you like and respect.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:00 AM on 07/03/2009
- slipthalo I'm a Fan of slipthalo 6 fans permalink
photo

Those comments of hers have been well documented in a lot of articles along with the statement that the children were her gift to him (for which she was paid handsomely) but it now seems she wants to be an 'indian giver' of sorts. She's made a lot of different comments about not wanting the children, how she's not a good mother and how glad she was that Katherine was chosen to raise them.
Then....................the will was published and the money talked.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:22 PM on 07/03/2009
- macbabe I'm a Fan of macbabe 107 fans permalink
photo

Sorry Sweetie.... you knew the deal!!!
Was glad to see MJ had a will!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:54 PM on 07/02/2009
- Bude I'm a Fan of Bude 165 fans permalink
photo

The children are not property or assets. Hence , they cannot be willed.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:57 PM on 07/02/2009
photo

lol, WOW you must not know very much about wills.

A Will Can Appoint Guardians for Your Children

If you have minor children, you have the right to appoint the guardians who will take care of your children upon the deaths of you and your husband or wife.

Debbie gave up her rights as their parents and from what I've been hearing she's not even the BIO mother, so....

A Will Can Appoint Trustees for Children

If you have minor children, you also have the right to appoint a guardian of their estates.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:39 AM on 07/03/2009
photo

Oh how sweet of her to want the kids now.

NOT.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:51 PM on 07/02/2009

They should not allow her custody unless she's willing to raise the 3 children together.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:46 PM on 07/02/2009
- Bude I'm a Fan of Bude 165 fans permalink
photo

I agree.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:56 PM on 07/02/2009
photo

Even if she can raise three there is no way the Jacksons are going to giver her Blanket, plus the kids are old enough to tell the judge where they want to live, they don't know Debbie Rowe and their daddy just DIED...

Miss ROWE doesn't have a preyer.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:20 AM on 07/03/2009
photo

Why don't we make a pact to stop calling the child blanket.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:19 AM on 07/03/2009
- Solja I'm a Fan of Solja 117 fans permalink
photo

She should NEVER get custody, ever, ever! She only had them for the money, and never wanted to raise them or wanted them. She deserves to stay right where she's been, raising animals.

She had those kids for Michael, "as a gift". WTF is wrong with someone like that? Thank God she never raised them.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:31 AM on 07/03/2009
- Pleneras I'm a Fan of Pleneras 72 fans permalink
photo

Or the kids want to go with her.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:37 AM on 07/03/2009
- Bude I'm a Fan of Bude 165 fans permalink
photo

It's heartwarming to see the mother do the right thing and offer to raise the children. They have her blood in the veins, and as the birth mother she has a connection to these children like no other. I hope she allows the grandmother to have liberal supervised visitation.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:40 PM on 07/02/2009
photo

Money does tend to make one very heartwarming......

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:47 PM on 07/02/2009
photo

LMAO

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:40 AM on 07/03/2009

LMAO...this "blood connection" you speak of....it sure didnt stop her from basically abandoning them for money and not keeping contact with them...they dont even know that woman...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:40 AM on 07/03/2009
- ccpostman I'm a Fan of ccpostman 22 fans permalink
photo

WHAT money?

Jackson owes 450 million to people!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:34 AM on 07/03/2009
- Pleneras I'm a Fan of Pleneras 72 fans permalink
photo

Nope. I hope the grandmother allows Debbie visitation rights. The 3 kids must not be separated and besides they have a say so in this not the public.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:36 AM on 07/03/2009
- sexyrexy I'm a Fan of sexyrexy 20 fans permalink

says who?? you??? LOL....

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:00 AM on 07/03/2009
photo

This will take a few yrs to resolve....By then the kids will 16 & 15, almost 18...Debbie Row doesn't have a prayer..

The daddy died, the Jacksons are the only family the kids have ever known , and there is no way the family is going to give up the third child , Blanket..( I use that name, because it is HIS name)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:18 AM on 07/03/2009
photo

Blanket is a nickname. Try calling him Prince II. Hmmm wonder if his sister and brother call him Blanket. Think not!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:26 PM on 07/03/2009
- Ellyllon I'm a Fan of Ellyllon 89 fans permalink
photo

Blood & biology do not a mother make. No way.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:30 AM on 07/03/2009
photo

Absolutely true.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:26 PM on 07/03/2009
- tora I'm a Fan of tora 6 fans permalink

Deb Rloser wants her payday with or without those kids she could give a s*#t about. She has taken MJ to court twice in the past and got millions in divorce settlements (twice).

It's people like her who really complicated MJ's life.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:56 PM on 07/02/2009
- Solja I'm a Fan of Solja 117 fans permalink
photo

Indeed.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:40 PM on 07/02/2009

I think Joe's antics of late has a lot to do with Debbie decision as well as the fact that apparently she and Michael had a deal that he would never give custody to his mother. Debbie lived inside the twisted net of the Jackson family and was Michael's wife for 3 years. She knows the damage that has been inflicted upon ALL the Jackson children.

Debbie may not want these children but as a mother she can't help but want what is best for them and I'm sorry but Katherine is 79 years old and has no control over her husband. Debbie may not be the best person for the children but neither are NONE of the Jacksons unless and of course Janet steps up to the plate. Katherine is currently assisting Jermaine, Randy and Jackie (all of whom still live at home) with their children and to ask her to be custodian over a 7, 11, and 12 year old is a bit much. Not to mention that Katherine/Joe filed Chapter 7 ($24 million in debt) in 2007. The children deserve better than the deal they are getting.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:34 AM on 07/03/2009
- iceage7 I'm a Fan of iceage7 142 fans permalink

Micheal set up a trust to be run and controlled by his lawyer. To invest the assets to grow or sale what they dim fit. So the money is in save hands. Wise decision for michael to live his fortune to people who know how to actually invest and not to people who will just misuse the money. So whatever the mother wants it will be controlled by the attorney. Its not like she will get all the money and do as she likes with it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:09 AM on 07/03/2009
photo

Katherine and Joe live in separate homes and in different states.

Most Black grandmothers are used to raising their grandkids, nothing new. It's called extended family, lol. It's done all the time. The next person to have the kids would be Diana Ross.

This woman has said, she does not these children, but now since her name isn't inked on Mike's will, she's trying to get the money, through the kids.

lol 40% of an estimated 2 billion+ net worth is pretty appealing. She doesn't care that these kids will be split up or that the only family they know is the Jacksons.

Rebbie, Tito, Marlon and Janet would be great to these children. They have a huge support system. These kids do not need to be split up and they certainly should not be given to a woman who sold them TWICE...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:46 AM on 07/03/2009
- toocoldout I'm a Fan of toocoldout 22 fans permalink

I predict Debbie will become a very rich woman.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:51 PM on 07/02/2009
- macbabe I'm a Fan of macbabe 107 fans permalink
photo

I predict YOU ARE WRONG!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:55 PM on 07/02/2009
photo

She just wants a reality show.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:46 PM on 07/02/2009
- upbeatdem I'm a Fan of upbeatdem 6 fans permalink

Debbie + the kids she traded for money - twice. Sounds like a hit.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:09 AM on 07/03/2009
- Mirabai305 I'm a Fan of Mirabai305 5 fans permalink
photo

Y'all may not like it but if Debbie Rowe wants the kids, she pretty much has the strongest legal leg on which to stand. If she is the biological mother of the two elder kids, she has more legal right to them than Katherine does and she can cite the tolerance of abuse, along with her age, as grounds that Katherine isn't the fittest guardian around. She could seal the deal by stating that since the youngest doesn't actually have an identifiable biological relative, she'd take that one too.

Katherine's only chance would be if Debbie refused to take the youngest. A judge might use keeping the three together as grounds for refusing the two older kids to Debbie but even then, it's shaky, legally speaking.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:41 PM on 07/02/2009
photo

I think you're forgetting something...The two oldest children are 12 and 11 and any family law judge will definitely ask the children who they would prefer to live with and they will take that into account. According to many reports the kids have stated they want to stay with their grandmother.

Debbie Rowe definitely has a legal standing to take custody of those kids since she is the biological mother but a judge is going to take into account the fact that the kids have no relationship whatsoever with her, she tried to give up her legal rights to the kids not once but TWICE, and the fact that the kids want to stay with their grandmother. At the most Debbie Rowe will get is visitation and then maybe later she may get joint custody. But there is no way a judge is going to give her full legal custody of those kids at this point.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:21 PM on 07/02/2009
- Solja I'm a Fan of Solja 117 fans permalink
photo

The problem with her case is that she never wanted those kids, never raised those kids, and never spent time with those kids. A family judge has the responsibility of placing kids with the person who they think will be "best for the kids", and that is obviously the grandmother that they KNOW and LOVE. They don't even know Debbie Rowe, and she has expressed that she didn't want them. Someone has gotten to her and told her that she would get a lot of money if she got those kids, and now here she is.

She's a gold digger, plain & simple, just like the parents of the kids that accused him of harming them. It's ALL about the money.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:43 PM on 07/02/2009
photo

Money is a powerful motivator. I don't think for one minute that she is doing it out of motherly love.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:49 PM on 07/02/2009
- Mirabai305 I'm a Fan of Mirabai305 5 fans permalink
photo

I don't think she's doing it out of motherly love, either, not at all.

You're right, the judge will take into consideration that the children have a preference, though we don't know for certain what that preference might be. However, there are an infinite number of precedences where a non-custodial parent doesn't have access to the children at the wishes of the custodial parent. Those non-custodial parents do end up with custody even though they haven't been a presence in their children's lives. The fact that she is the biological parent gives her a leg up on Katherine and if, as reports seem to indicate, she shows a willingness to take the youngest one as well, she has a better than average chance of getting them. Any really good lawyer can argue this case and be very likely to win it.

You also have to consider that though she agreed to not have contact with the children, she did in fact go back to court to restore her parental rights after Michael's most recent child molestation allegation. You also have to consider that Katherine is 79 years old and the oldest child is 12, which means that there's a very reasonable likelihood that Katherine will die before the oldest is of age, necessitating yet another custody change for the children. A judge is more likely to give all three kids to Debbie with outlined visitation for Katherine and the rest of the Jackson family, hopefully sans Joseph.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:36 AM on 07/03/2009
- slipthalo I'm a Fan of slipthalo 6 fans permalink
photo

I wonder if the court will take into consideration her statement that she's not good with kids and her horses and animals are her children.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:12 PM on 07/03/2009

Pretty much sounds like a lose/lose situation for the kids. Can't Liz or Liza take 'em in?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:38 PM on 07/02/2009
- Solja I'm a Fan of Solja 117 fans permalink
photo

No. His will expressly stated that he wants his mother to raise his kids, and if something happened to her, Diana Ross, who has great kids of her own, would raise them.

Both Liz and Liza have had very negative publicity over the years. Liz with her gazillion marriages, and Liza with her ugly divorce. Neither seem like a stable family, according to media reports. Catherine Jackson, however, has been right there in that home being a great grandmother to all of her superstars kids' children. The Jackson kids, Catherine's grand kids, are all good kids with no visible problems. At least, the media hasn't exploited them yet. Diana Ross' kids are also very well spoken, educated, and well adjust kids. Either that Jackson's will requested seem to be good choices.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:48 PM on 07/02/2009

You cannot will children - you can only give the courts an idea of your wishes.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:02 AM on 07/03/2009
- TheBaffler I'm a Fan of TheBaffler 56 fans permalink
photo

The uberscum Gloria Allred was on TV today arguing on Rowe's behalf, which tells us on its face that granting Rowe custody would be a terrible move.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:37 PM on 07/02/2009
- Solja I'm a Fan of Solja 117 fans permalink
photo

Ugh! I can't STAND that woman! She is a bloodsucking troglodyte!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:49 PM on 07/02/2009
- upbeatdem I'm a Fan of upbeatdem 6 fans permalink

So true!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:11 AM on 07/03/2009
- Ellyllon I'm a Fan of Ellyllon 89 fans permalink
photo

Agreed!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:31 AM on 07/03/2009

40% assets to the children. Hmmm, You know what on second thought I think I could be a mommy.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:27 PM on 07/02/2009
- Gretel1or2 I'm a Fan of Gretel1or2 148 fans permalink

Me too:)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:41 PM on 07/02/2009

Wow never realized the whole family was such a bunch of loons!! Interesting article.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:24 PM on 07/02/2009
- Solja I'm a Fan of Solja 117 fans permalink
photo

What is your family like? Everybody is perfect, I'm sure.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:14 AM on 07/03/2009
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next › Last » (10 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect