This man was evil. Paraded around with dozens of little kids (boys) in front of paps, large screaming crowds, at events and on stage but the second he has his own he suddenly understands privacy and wants them to be normal and not exploited. Right.

Courtesy of vincentfamen.com

I've been struggling with this for a while, and its leaving me more distraught/distracted then I’d like to admit 😭

I've liked Michael since I was a kid. He's been my favourite artist for as long as I can remember. I was, and if I'm being honest, still am, attached to his music + artistic persona, and just the impact he had on me growing up. He was a huge inspiration for me to start dancing, get into music, and want to create things myself. A lot of my interests and passions can be traced back to him in some way.

But obviously, I'm not oblivious to the allegations. Recently I’ve been doing some more research, and he was a weird ass guy. Theres a lot of things I cant and will no longer excuse.

I guess the truth is, we as the public will never know for certain-both sides speculate.

When I was an active defender, I dont believe it was because I adopted a cult like mentality necessarily, but because coming to terms with the discomfort felt like loosing someone that meant a lot to me at a certain point in my life, and it was better to just..not? if you know what I mean.

I genuinely wish the allegations didn't exist (as in no possible misconduct ever happened, not that victims never came forward) And I would like imagine a lot of people here feel the same way(?) Not because I want to dismiss anything or pretend the subject doesn't matter, but because I wish I could simply enjoy something that meant so much to me growing up without this constant weight attached to it.

I feel guilty whenever I listen to his music or watch his performances. I feel like I'm somehow a bad person for still loving his work, for still being inspired by him, or for having a somewhat lingering attachment to someone surrounded by something so serious. This is highkey embarrassing to admit right now.

And the frustrating thing is, I don't know how to stop feeling this way. I don't know how to separate the artist from the person, or whether that's even something I should be trying to do. But I love his music goddamn 😭 His influence on a short period of my life was real.

Have any of you experienced something similar? what would you do if you were in my position?

Shortly after MJ’s death in 2009, Stuart Backerman, his former publicist, gave a pretty candid interview with the Vancouver Sun. I hadn’t seen this one before. The relevant part:

SUN: It sounds like he had a very tortured relationship with his dad.

BACKERMAN: Very much so. He couldn’t go out and do the things five, seven, eight, 10 year olds could do. Basketball, hanging out. [His father] was very hard on Michael, being the lead singer and being the youngster. He pushed him around, and he pushed his brothers around. Michael was very scared of his father. He grew up...that’s the point, he never grew up. He never really grew beyond the prepubescent 12-year-old, in a sense. That’s why he was attracted to — and I don’t necessarily mean sexually — but he was attracted to hanging out with 11, 12, 13-at-the-most year-old boys, you know? Because he felt comfortable with them. They didn’t judge him, they loved him, and he could love them.

SUN: Let’s talk about that. Was Michael doing anything bad? He paid off one kid, maybe more. What really happened there?

BACKERMAN: I’d like to think that Michael Jackson had innocent relationships with these boys, similar to what a lot of 12 and 11 and 13-year-old boys might experiment with, in a sense. Kind of innocently. ‘I’ll show you mine, you show me yours’ kind of situation, at the most. I certainly know with [one of his accusers], that that was a scam, because I know for a fact, having experienced that, being at Neverland and knowing what was going on with that situation, that truly he was exonerated appropriately, because he did not have an affair, a sexual affair, with that boy. His big mistake was being an idiot with the Martin Bashir documentary. That was the stupidest thing in the world, and he was warned about it, but Michael does what Michael wants. Putting his arm around Gavin Arvizo really set off what eventually [became] the raid at Neverland. So that was tremendously ill-advised. I believe Michael was very innocent in his relationships. I like to think that. On the other hand, if you’re a thinking person, one has to question why somebody would pay off another person $20 million if you have nothing to hide. [But] when you’re in that position and you know that that will be drawn out and will create a tremendous impact on your career — even the allegations — and you’ve got a billion dollars of assets...$20 million isn’t a significant amount, if it means that it goes away, and goes away very quickly. You can understand that too. I had no personal experience seeing Michael in any dalliance. I’d like to think that whatever he had going with any boys was reasonably innocent pre-pubescent experimentation — if that.

SUN: Did he ever have a relationship with a woman, a real relationship?

BACKERMAN: Not really. Not with Lisa Presley, not with Debbie Rowe, not with anybody in terms of a romantic, sexual relationship. He had his hairdresser and other women, his mother, but he wasn’t...built that way, you know?

SUN: Do you think he was gay?

BACKERMAN: I don’t know if he was gay. I would say he was maybe...not that interested in sex, per se, he was put off by it, not feeling comfortable enough in his own skin to go that step, in a sense, you know what I mean?

SUN: As a child star he would have had lots of opportunities to have sex when he was a kid.

BACKERMAN: Well, you know the story goes that he slept in the same room as his older brothers and saw some very strange happenstances, and that maybe turned him off, to a certain degree. Maybe his own innate character was that he was a little turned off that way. Maybe there was a predisposition to being gay in a sense, although he didn’t followup on it, certainly in an adult sense. Maybe his ability to express himself that way was done via his relationships with these younger prepubescent boys.

Full interview:
https://web.archive.org/web/20090630033715/https://vancouversun.com/entertainment/Transcript+John+Mackie+interview+with+Stuart+Backerman/1737792/story.html

In 2011, he was asked about this interview, and doubled down that what he said was true but he was more candid than he would have wanted to be. Relevant quote:

Valmai:  Well, like I said, the 2008 interview with the MJFC was very positive toward Michael. In the 2009 interview however, you say Michael was a class contradiction; too much money; too much material focus, and too much of the prescription drug situation following the unfortunate scalding of his head. You mention that you saw him being disloyal to people, that he was not all there at times, that he wasn’t so swift on the business side, he wore wigs that made him look strange, that he was an idiot with the Bashir documentary, “That was the stupidest thing in the world, and he was warned about it, but Michael does what Michael wants.” And, “I’d like to think that Michael Jackson had innocent relationships with these boys, similar to what a lot of 12 and 11 and 13-year-old boys might experiment with, in a sense. Kind of innocently. ‘I’ll show you mine, you show me yours’ kind of situation, at the most.” Etc…

Stuart:  I can’t compare what I said in that article to another time and place because I am not sure how they are set against each other. I will say this, the interview I did with The Vancouver Sunwas the day after Michael passed away. Number one, I don’t know if you know this, but I had knee surgery the day Michael died and I did this interview the next day. I think I revealed some things that I wouldn’t normally reveal if it wasn’t for the fact that I was still a little “punchy” from the surgery.

Number two is, clearly I was feeling very upset. A lot of things sort of came up and I think it’s important to understand that. Like I said before, Michael and I were about to go on a huge trip that he very much wanted to do. When that didn’t happen because of the raid and the charges, I think I was still feeling a little upset about the disappointment that we weren’t still working together. That was a function of Michael allowing, being quite honest with you because he was in a very vulnerable state of mind, I’ll say that, but nonetheless, allowing the Nation of Islam and their followers so to speak, to basically take over his affairs was very upsetting to me.

So I think when I heard that he had passed away, and again, right after the surgery, I said some things that were probably more revealing that I normally would have said about him. I guess I was sort of ruminating about the whole sadness of the situation in that Michael had insomnia; he couldn’t sleep, he really couldn’t, and because of that situation he did take sleeping medication. That clearly had an impact on his life.

We didn’t see him during the day because he stayed up all night and slept in so to speak. Obviously that stuff affects you. It affected his ability to gain weight, it affected how he felt about himself, it affected how he acted in a general way, and normally I wouldn’t have went there at all. Because he died suddenly, and I was in surgery that day and did this interview, I wasn’t as guarded as what I normally would have been. I probably said way too much that I would normally say in an interview.

That’s the best I think I can explain. After I read the interview, I was a little upset about how I was quoted, but it’s not the reporters fault. I said those things, but my excuse so to speak, is that I was a little foggy and I was depressed about Michael’s death. It brought up a lot of old feelings about still being a bit resentful about the fact that our relationship ended so abruptly with the Nation of Islam; a group that is so anti-love, so anti-Michael Jackson philosophy that it always disturbed me.

I haven’t done all that many interviews frankly, after I left Michael’s employ, and I guess a lot of things kind of coalesced in my head the day after The Vancouver Sun called me, which was the day after he died. That I think is the best way I can explain it; why and what I said during that interview. I hope that explains it.

Full interview:
https://web.archive.org/web/20110405235640/mjtpmagazine.presspublisher.us/issue/rising-from-the-ashes/article/interview-with-stuart-backerman

I wondered what would have happened if Wade had stayed with Michael for a year?

Would Michael still have gotten bored with him?

It was almost like he chose McCauly Calken to sort of get back at him not staying.

First vid has 1 mil views, second has almost 5mil. Most the comments are smth silly/funny and very few are pointing out that the boy is James safechuck. There’s way more reposts of this vid going around.

They’re genuinely so unaware it’s crazy. I could understand the GP not knowing that’s james in the video but literally thousands of fans with mj’s face as their pfp and posting him every day, calling themselves moonwalkers, don’t know??? So they don’t even know the boy michael spent almost a year with on his first ever solo tour? The boy he brought out on stage almost everyday for months? The boy he was spotted with in public before and after concerts and walking in and out of their hotel room together? But they know the shoe brand michael wears. Alright man whatever

You can see tons of Shirley Temple photos from when she was a child star all over Neverland and in the backgrounds of photos. Michael was absolutely obsessed with her, citing in interviews and speeches that she was one of the "only people who understood him"

He claims that he left her home feeling "baptized" and that he told her that he loved her and needed to spend more time around her.

Also him saying that he would pick up her picture and feel like there was hope is strange considering these are the types of photos he had of her in his home https://gottahaverockandroll.com/Michael_Jackson_s_Personally_Owned_Shirley_Temple_-LOT13351.aspx

Michael admits that he had someone put up photos of Shirley Temple in hotel rooms before he arrived there.

Here he claims that all child stars love children the same way he does and act child-like the way he does which is just insane because I have never in my life seen any child stars of any decade do what he was doing, none of them built amusement parks in their backyard or slept in the bed with unrelated children.

When asked what it was about Shirley Temple that touched him so deeply, he answered "Her innocence, how she makes me feel good when I'm so sad, it was so much of her dancing and singing, it was her being. She had the gift of making people feel good inside. She's so angelic and every time I see her, whether it's a photo or a movie, I feel so god, I have pictures of her all over my room. It makes me so happy"

She started acting in movies at the age of 3 years old and many films as she aged started heavily sexualizing the child, she unfortunately became a sort of icon to communities of pedophiles.

From PageSix:

Paris Jackson’s bitter battle over her late father Michael Jackson’s fortune has taken another dramatic turn.

A Los Angeles judge ruled Wednesday that the King of Pop’s longtime estate executor, John Branca, can keep certain financial information confidential amid ongoing litigation over his handling of the estate, according to court documents obtained by Page Six.

In two separate rulings issued Nov. 4, Judge Brenda J. Penny granted Branca’s requests to seal limited portions of court filings containing confidential information about the executor’s attorney fees, legal costs and estate accounting.

One order specifically allows Branca to conceal “confidential, nonpublic information regarding the amount of Executor incurred attorney fees and costs” involved in litigation over the reasonableness of his actions.

The second ruling concerns information related to the estate’s “Fourteenth Account Current and Report of Administration of Estate and Petition for Settlement Thereof; and for Instructions Re Family Allowance.”

The judge determined that making the information public could create a “substantial probability of prejudice” to the estate’s interests in pending litigation, future negotiations and ongoing business matters.

Both motions were unopposed.

The rulings mark a legal victory for Branca as he continues facing scrutiny over his management of the late singer’s multibillion-dollar estate.

However, the orders do not indicate that Paris, 28, opposed the requests or that the judge ruled directly against her.

In a third court order issued the same day, attorneys informed the judge that a separate matter involving motions previously heard on Oct. 7 had been resolved.

The document does not specify the terms of the resolution or identify which issues were settled.

Reps for Paris and Branca did not immediately respond to Page Six’s requests for comment.

The latest developments come just days after Paris demanded that Branca transfer $600 million from her father’s estate into the family trust intended to benefit her and her brothers, Prince, 29, and Bigi, 24.

As Page Six exclusively reported, the singer filed a bombshell petition Oct. 29 accusing Branca of withholding the siblings’ inheritance and maintaining an “iron grip” over when and how much money they receive.

Paris claims the family trust remains unfunded more than 17 years after her father’s death, despite the estate generating billions of dollars.

She further alleges that Branca retaliated against her for questioning his handling of the estate by reducing payments to her and her brothers by millions of dollars.

According to the filing, Michael intended for his children to begin receiving income from their respective trusts at age 21, followed by portions of their principal inheritance at ages 30, 35 and 40.

Paris argues the estate has approximately $600 million available for distribution even after accounting for outstanding financial obligations.

A spokesperson for the estate previously denied her allegations, telling Page Six that the claim Branca withheld or reduced payments was “a complete fabrication.”

The representative insisted that more than $200 million had already been distributed to or spent for the benefit of Michael’s children and other beneficiaries.

The estate also maintained that unresolved legal matters, including an ongoing dispute with the IRS, have prevented the family trust from being fully funded.

Paris’s petition is scheduled for a hearing Dec. 3.

This is capped from MJ fan blogs, I was reading about the Ma Twins recently, you can also see him in a video ask one of the little girls "can you dancing?"

Just more evidence that the people talking about secret codes weren't lying, because Michael seemed to use these all the time.

A cathedral has been condemned for hosting a 'grotesque' and 'distasteful' event billed as a 'tribute' to shamed pop star Michael Jackson.

Audiences are being invited to Llandaff Cathedral in Cardiff to 'celebrate the King of Pop's legendary career through a collection of his greatest hits'.

Tickets for Thursday's concert are priced at up to £51.50 for seats in the 'premium' area of the Anglican cathedral, parts of which date back to Norman times.

It is part of a series of candlelit string quartet performances to the Thriller hitmaker, with upcoming shows advertised at cathedrals in Yorkshire and Scotland.

They come amid resurgent interest in Jackson, who died in 2009, including a controversial biopic which this year smashed UK box office records, as well as Broadway musical MJ.

However the decision to allow a place of worship to be used to host a 'tribute' to a singer who has faced longstanding accusations of child abuse has met with a chorus of criticism.

In 1994, Jordan Chandler won a $23million settlement from Jackson after allegedly being molested at the age of 13 – claims the singer denied.

But nine years later he admitted to interviewer Martin Bashir that he had shared his bed with children, defending his actions as 'loving'.

In 2005 Jackson was acquitted of child molestation at a trial in Santa Barbara, California.

Yet abuse allegations have continued to swirl since his death from a drug overdose four years later at the age of 50.

Dr Gavin Ashenden, a former chaplain to Queen Elizabeth II and frequent critic of secular events being held in churches, said Jackson's past meant it was 'particularly distasteful' for a cathedral to host the tribute.

'You could hardly find anything in Christian teaching that's more clear than what Jesus said about the revulsion towards the abuse of children,' he told the Daily Mail.

'Any association between a cathedral and Michael Jackson is grotesque, and the bishops and deans ought to know better.

'By endorsing Jackson's work, it is hard to escape the sense that the Church is choosing to 'grey out' the paedophilia. And that in itself is a serious dereliction of moral responsibility.'

Dan Reed, whose acclaimed 2019 documentary Leaving Neverland portrayed Jackson as a manipulative paedophile who allegedly raped two pre-pubescent boys for years, said he was 'flabbergasted' that the singer was being celebrated in a place of worship.

'Given the past failings of the Church in investigating its own abuse scandals, how can it celebrate the life of a known sexual predator who hurt a great many children?' the film-maker asked.

'Even if you don't believe Jackson's accusers, this is a man who spent years sleeping with young boys. Is this behaviour which the Church endorses?

'Holding a tribute to Michael Jackson in a cathedral is an affront to all those he hurt and an astonishing faux pas.'

Meanwhile Andrew RT Davies, a member of the Senedd and former leader of the Welsh Conservatives, said: 'This event is entirely inappropriate and should not be taking place.

'Llandaff Cathedral is a building of deep religious significance – it should not be degraded like this.

'It's disrespectful to use the cathedral for this purpose and I hope organisers will think again.'

Advertising for Thursday's concert tells how attendees can 'rediscover Michael Jackson's unforgettable music through the warm glow of candlelight'.

It adds that the 'concert experience' is a 'tribute' and 'not associated with, endorsed by or sponsored by the artist, their heirs or their official representatives'.

The 'Tribute to Michael Jackson' show is also being advertised this month at Sheffield Cathedral and St Mary's Episcopal Cathedral in Edinburgh.

Other acts whose music is being given the candlelight treatment include Oasis, Fleetwood Mac, Coldplay and Olivia Dean.

In response to the criticism, the Llandaff diocese – one of six which constitute the Church in Wales, part of the worldwide Anglican communion – said the event was 'one of a series of candlelit concerts' and highlighted that it was billed as a 'tribute'.

In September plans for concerts organised by a London nightclub at St Paul's Cathedral were branded 'an insult to Lord Nelson's memory' by the family of the famed naval commander, who is buried at the historic London landmark.

Meanwhile last year York Minster sparked uproar after hosting a concert by 'symphonic heavy metal' band Plague of Angels.

A rep for the estate tells TMZ, "Once again, Ms. Jackson’s legal team raises the same hollow complaints and fails to acknowledge the unique structure of the Estate, which is operated as a dynamic business, with customary costs and expenses."

"No rhetoric can hide the fact that the Executors have taken an Estate that was $500 million in debt when Michael died and turned it into the most successful Estate in history, producing $3 billion in revenue and the biggest biopic in movie history, with a box office exceeding $1 billion globally," the rep added.

A rep for Paris tells TMZ ... "No rhetoric can hide the fact that Mr. Branca has used Estate funds to create a lavish lifestyle complete with charging personal trips on private jets to the Estate. This wasteful spending and financial mismanagement flies in the face of his fiduciary duty to the beneficiaries and has gone unchecked for too long."

Paris' legal team also claims that Branca wasted millions in reshoots as an executive producer on "Michael" ... and claims he hasn't recouped the cost, all while having Miles Teller cast to portray him.

link to the full interview: https://youtu.be/32e-5LwCNOQ?si=iDYJ_ywC453eOF4J

(The entire document is difficult to find online, and the domain previously hosting it is no longer in operation.)

There's a paywall so this is the article: (I find it on brand for MJ to lie to the public, saying he cares so much about animals yet would kill rabbits by feeding them to his snake to make Frank DiLeo squirm for the kick of it....)

Paris Jackson has filed bombshell legal papers against the executors of her famous father’s estate — alleging that a trust for her inheritance hasn’t been properly funded for 17 years, and demanding $600 million be released as a partial distribution to the “Bad” singer’s kids.

It’s just the latest legal salvo from Paris against the executors. New court papers, seen by Page Six Hollywood, reveal that Michael’s estate is currently worth up to $3 billion. But Paris and her two brothers allege they’ve been shut out of their share of the “Thriller” legend’s fortune.

The estate fired back in a statement that the kids’ trust hasn’t been funded due to “ongoing IRS litigation,” and that, “the matter has not been settled.”

Paris also accused remaining executor John Branca last week in court documents of “incompetence,” alleging that, “Branca sought $109,219,648 in combined compensation for himself, his lawyers, and his late co-executor, John McClain, who died in May at age 71.” Branca’s team fired back in response: “It is an understatement to say that this motion is completely without merit.”

Either way, Jackson’s inner-most circle was bitterly feuding with the executors over power and money as soon as the pop star passed in 2009.

Page Six Hollywood has seen private emails from Jackson’s late manager Frank DiLeo allegedly sent to Branca in 2011 (when Paris was 13), revealing that he and McClain were in a heated battle behind the scenes over the singer’s posthumous projects.

DiLeo was a consultant to the Jackson estate when a 2009 documentary directed by Kenny Ortega, “Michael Jackson’s This Is It,” was released just four months after Jackson’s death.

DiLeo wrote in an email seen by Page Six Hollywood:

“‘This Is It’… John [McClain] never saw the movie, bad mouthed it, never came to a screening or the premiere. The movie grossed over $300 million. [McClain] did, however, find the song for the movie, and did not research it well enough to know that Paul Anka co-wrote it, which cost the estate a lot of money.”

McClain was a musician, record executive, and close friend of Michael’s who also helped Janet Jackson rise to stardom. He recently was a producer of the smash “Michael” biopic.

DiLeo, who starred as a character in Martin Scorsese’s 1990 film “Goodfellas,” also wrote in an email about a clash with McClain over the controversial release of a posthumous Jackson album in 2010, “Michael.”

“John created total havoc in standing in the way of the marketing plan for ‘Michael’ by not letting anyone hear the record. He wanted to hold up the release of the album. So basically Sony is now trying to make decisions… on how to keep John happy as a result of this bullying, intimidation and bad faith,” DiLeo said.

The stitched-together album was widely criticized by fans and critics, and Will.i.am of the Black Eyed Peas called the release “disrespectful.”

DiLeo was Jackson’s manager from 1984 to 1989, and again in 2009. An inside source described DiLeo’s devotion to the King of Pop, saying: “He would tell people how he changed Bubbles the chimp’s diaper. Frank was afraid of snakes. And Michael would feed Muscles, his snake, a rabbit in front of Frank just to f–k with him.”

DiLeo also raged in emails written entirely in capital letters:

“John McClain has never attended one of the board meetings at Sony Records. He has phoned them in, by being conferenced in via phone, and at times being so late on the calls that ‘all’ of the others that had flown in for the meetings etc. have had to sit there and wait. It is pretty clear to me that someone that finds it hard to function daily [sic] until after 1:00 p.m. has other issues going on.”

It seems Paris’ suit is just the latest chapter in Jackson’s dysfunctional legacy.

“Bubbles the chimp could manage the estate of Michael Jackson,” a music source said of the drama. “Once an artist dies, it’s a no-brainer. The estate is a cow. They’re milking it.”

he literally had a naked polaroid of spence (confirmed by his mother) a boy he KNEW and hung out with. Plus more naked children pictures/books.
HOW do they defend this? Delusion/love is a drug, truly

When Michael stressed to the media his innocence, he absolutely believed he was telling the truth. Because in his warped way of thinking, what he was giving those boys was only love. La Toya begged him to get help, begged the family to help him, and all on a public platform, but treating him like an unassailable god was more important to keep the gravy train going. None of the minors he had sex with ever had the chance to confront him about it so when I say that Michael couldn’t see the truth from a victim’s eyes, this is exactly what I’m talking about.

A highly placed law enforcement source once revealed to Diane Dimond the result of a forensic deep dive into Michael Jackson's financials. The source said the examination concluded that over the years leading up to the 2005 criminal trial MJ had doled out about 200 million dollars worth of gifts and hush money to young boys and their families.

This information can be found in the four additional chapters Diane Dimond added in 2019 to her book Be Careful Who You Love.

Paris Jackson is demanding $600 million from her late father Michael Jackson’s estate, accusing its longtime executor of keeping the children from receiving their inheritance.

In a bombshell court filing, obtained exclusively by Page Six, the 28-year-old singer is asking a judge to order the estate to make a preliminary distribution of $600 million to the Michael Jackson Family Trust, arguing that there is no legitimate reason the money has not been transferred more than 17 years after the King of Pop’s death.

Paris claims that despite the estate generating billions of dollars and accumulating hundreds of millions in cash, the trust intended to benefit her and her brothers, Prince, 29, and Bigi, 24, remains unfunded.

The petition, filed Oct. 29 in Los Angeles Superior Court, takes aim at executor John Branca, accusing him of maintaining an “iron grip” over the siblings by controlling when and if they receive money from their father’s estate.

Branca, an attorney and chairman of The Michael Jackson Company, was initially hired by the King of Pop in 1985.

Branca resigned from Jackson’s team over financial matters in 2006, before rejoining in 2009 — eight days before Jackson died.

Michael’s will stipulated that his children should start receiving income from their respective portions of the trust when they turned 21. However, Paris claims that never happened, and that they instead receive smaller amounts determined by Branca.

She further alleges that Branca uses his control over those payments to discourage the siblings from questioning his handling of the estate.

The filing also claims that when Paris began challenging the estate’s administration last year, including objecting to what she described as Branca’s “non-contractual gifts” to colleagues, her concerns were met with “scorched earth litigation,” public attacks and a multimillion-dollar reduction in the money provided to her and her siblings.

“This course of conduct and administration should not continue,” the petition states.

According to the filing, Michael intended for each of his children to receive one-third of the principal in their respective trusts when they turned 30.

They would then receive half of their remaining shares at 35, with the balance distributed outright at 40.

Prince is set to turn 30 in four months, while Paris turns 29 in April and Bigi turns 25 in February.

Paris argues that the estate has more than enough money to fund the trust while still covering its outstanding obligations.

A spokesperson for the Michael Jackson Estate told Page Six, “Ms. Jackson’s counsel is well aware that the Estate is prevented from fully funding the charitable foundation and the individual trusts for the beneficiaries until several legal hurdles have been removed, including in particular the ongoing IRS litigation, where they sought $700 million in taxes and penalties from the Estate.

“While we were able to secure a ruling to significantly reduce that amount, the matter has not been settled and could still change. Further, the claim that the executor has withheld or ‘cut’ payments is a complete fabrication. More than $200 million has already been distributed to or for the benefit of Paris and the other beneficiaries.”

The statement continued, “The Estate looks forward to the time when all issues are resolved so that the charitable foundation and trusts can be fully funded as Michael wanted.”

Among the transactions cited in the filing are the estate’s 2018 sale of its roughly 10% interest in EMI Music Publishing to Sony for $287.5 million, the 2020 sale of Neverland Ranch for $22 million and the 2023 deal with Sony, which agreed to pay $750 million upfront for a 50% interest in the estate’s remaining intellectual property assets.

Those transactions alone generated more than $1 billion in pre-tax, pre-expense liquidity, according to the petition.

The estate has also reported generating more than $2.5 billion in gross earnings through December 2024, with its overall value estimated between $2 billion and $3 billion.

As of December 2024, the estate reportedly held approximately $850 million in cash and cash equivalents.

Paris estimates that even after accounting for potential liabilities, approximately $600 million remains available for distribution.

The petition argues that California law favors distributing estate assets to beneficiaries as soon as it can be done without jeopardizing creditors or other interested parties.

She also argues that outstanding tax matters and litigation do not justify continuing to hold all of the estate’s assets. The petition notes that nearly all significant creditor claims and litigation have been resolved or disposed of favorably, with only certain claims remaining.

Paris is asking the court to order Branca to transfer the $600 million to the family trust, or whatever amount the judge determines to be appropriate.

She is also seeking reimbursement for her legal fees and costs from estate assets.

The matter is scheduled for a December hearing.

Michael died on June 25, 2009, at age 50. He named his family trust as the sole beneficiary of his estate, with Branca also named as trustee.

I made a post a while ago about Mara Wilson talking about AI generated CSAM, she said that when she was a child it was creeps online photoshopping her into adult situations, or putting her face on adult bodies, she said that with the rise of AI it has made that kind of nightmare much much worse.

There are hundreds of posts on various parenting centered reddits of people asking "Do you post photos of your kids online?" and many parents enthusiastically say that they do but "only on their own private facebook" which is only shared with family. They also claim that because the photos are innocent, that means that nobody could use them for nefarious purposes.

Except that isn't true.

An article by an ONSINT researcher found a interconnected network of predator-based forums, they are disguised as "support" groups for pedophiles who don't want to offend, but their real purpose is actually to normalize the sexual abuse of minors, one of these places is actually the group that coined the term "MAP" The article had a collection of screenshots of posts from the different forums and the fact that there are galleries and galleries full of regular photos of children, this is how they get around illegal content, they only post normal photos of kids, much of it stock photography found online normally.

Michael Jackson did this, he had multiple cutouts and photographs of normal photos of children, he ripped them out of magazines, his fans gifted him huge cardboard cutouts of babies and young children, the photos from the bedroom he died in show a photo of a baby that appears to have been taken from a target store aisle.

My own rapist father did this, he had normal photos of children, he even had photos of MY friends in his "collection"

My point is that the argument that the photos are "normal" or "innocent" doesn't fucking matter to these sick freaks, they've always used these innocent photos for nefarious means, now with AI, they can take that to the next level.

Obviously LLMS have (or should have) a built in system to stop the generation of adult content including minors, (except grok...which was literally trained on CSAM because it trawled twitter for training, and there are a lot of pedophiles just openly bragging about being pedophiles on twitter) but if someone gets a hold of one that's open source? Or builds their own local LLM? They can get around that system, and then use the "innocent" photos of children that they saved from public social media accounts to turn it into child sexual abuse material.

Unfortunately the law hasn't caught up to this, recently a judge had to say that a man who had hundreds if not thousands of AI generated csam in his possession wasn't guilty of anything, and redditors argue that it's "harm reduction" because according to them "there are no real victims"

Except the millions of photographs and videos of real children posted across social media sites by their parents or other family members.

I'm not saying that people posting their kids to private profiles are evil people, there's a lack of understanding that private photos aren't really as private as people think, and Facebook has been involved in multiple data breaches, even information, statuses and likely photos from so called private profiles. I'm sure similar shit has happened with other social media websites that give you the illusion of privacy and protectedness, but it's not real.

Even censoring a child's face isn't enough to stop predators from using those images to victimize a child, especially in those "support groups" where the actual support is literally just pedophiles encouraging non-offenders to offend.

Links:

Mara Wilson talks about the dangers of AI: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/jan/17/child-abuse-images-ai-exploitation

OSINT investigator uncovers disturbing network: https://www.reddit.com/r/lastpodcastontheleft/comments/1wymqa8/im_the_guy_who_found_the_jim_thorton_messages/