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 claims that the will is a fake.
The
letter states the family was too overwhelmed after the singer's death
to meaningfully challenge the will that gave only family matriarch Katherine Jackson and Michael's three children — Prince, 15, Paris, 14, and Blanket, 10 — a stake in the estate.
"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 originally signed by Randy, Jermaine, Janet and Rebbie Jackson
states.
On Wednesday, Jermaine Jackson rescinded his support for the letter and said it never should have been made public.
The
delayed challenge likely dooms any effort to invalidate the will. Even
if it was thrown out, it would not alter the stake received by the King
of Pop's three children, 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.
The
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," it wrote in a statement.
Jermaine Jackson
said Wednesday he still has concerns about the estate's operations but
realizes "the way to address such matters is through the proper channels
and via a private dialogue, not public conflict."
Almost from the
moment it was filed, the will has been a topic of controversy for some
members of the Jackson family. The pop superstar's father Joe Jackson
attempted to get a stipend from the estate, but like his children, he
was excluded from any share.
Katherine Jackson
explored the possibility of challenging the executors and was given
permission by a judge but settled before a full hearing was held.
Many of the misgivings stem from the will's final page, which bears the signatures of three witnesses who claim Michael 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 probate
attorney who represented Peter Falk's wife in a conservatorship
proceeding.
He said the only
valid argument of Jackson's siblings 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.
"I
don't see how you come in three years later, and say, 'oh, by the way,
the will's a fraud, a forgery, because he wasn't in LA when he was
purported to be,'" said Howard Klein, a probate attorney for nearly 50
years and partner in the Los Angeles firm Feinberg Mindel Brandt Klein
& Kline. "It's something that should have been brought up a long
time ago."
Randy Jackson,
in comments on Twitter and to Sharpton on his MSNBC show last week, has
repeatedly accused the estate's executors of criminal conduct. Both
Klein and Oldman said even if the executors were charged with
wrongdoing, it wouldn't open the door for more of Jackson's relatives to
gain access to the estate.
Jackson's
children are deemed his heirs without the will, and a 1997 version
lodged with the court but never publicly released also doesn't name the
singer's siblings as beneficiaries of his estate.
Klein
said even if Jackson or other siblings try to challenge the document,
their bid will likely be rejected because it is too late. The judge
could also rule, as he did against family patriarch Joe Jackson, that
because he isn't a beneficiary of the will, he isn't entitled to contest
it.
"It would be a tough sell," Klein said of any effort by another Jackson relative to challenge the will now.
The
executors recently informed a judge that there have been $475 million
in gross earnings for the estate since Michael Jackson died in June 2009
from an overdose of the powerful anesthetic propofol. Jackson died with
more than $500 million in debts, but the earnings have been used to
repay many of the singer's creditors and provide a spacious hilltop home
for Katherine Jackson and the children along with private schooling, staff, security, vacations and other perks.
Katherine Jackson
has requested and the estate is recommending approval of a nearly
$35,000 a month increase in her stipend so she can retain her own
attorney, accountant and homes in Indiana and Las Vegas, court filings
show.
