Attorney Wants Jackson's Children Removed |
| Posted by: Lawless | | By JEREMIAH MARQUEZ, Associated Press Writer
LOS ANGELES - An attorney who has tangled with Michael Jackson called Friday for child welfare authorities to temporarily remove the pop star's three children from his custody because of new child molestation allegations.
Gloria Allred's demand came as quiet descended on Santa Barbara following Jackson's media-saturated surrender Thursday.
An arrest warrant alleges Jackson committed lewd or lascivious acts with a child under 14. The Santa Barbara district attorney has said he does not plan to file charges until after Thanksgiving.
After posting $3 million bail Thursday, Jackson returned to a Las Vegas-area hotel-casino, but his whereabouts Friday were unclear.
"He's with his kids and his family. That's all I can say," Jackson family spokesman Steve Manning said Friday.
A spokeswoman for Green Valley Ranch in Henderson, Nev., declined comment on a report that Michael Jackson was seen leaving the hotel-casino about 4 a.m. Friday.
The Jackson family was at the Las Vegas studio of CMX Productions Inc. on Friday, company spokesman Dean DeLorean said. He would not say whether Michael Jackson was among the group.
At a news conference Friday, Allred said she has twice asked child-welfare officials to investigate Jackson.
"I believe the children should be temporarily removed from Mr. Jackson's care and custody because of the history of Michael Jackson with children ... combined with present criminal allegations," she said at a news conference.
Allred cited statements Jackson has made about having sleep-overs with children, a previous molestation allegation and an incident in which he dangled his infant son outside the window of a German hotel last year.
In 1993 Allred briefly represented a 13-year-old boy involved in a molestation allegation that never led to criminal charges. The case reportedly ended with Jackson paying a multimillion-dollar civil settlement.
Jackson spokesman Stuart Backerman had no comment on Allred's demand, but it was denounced by Brian Oxman, an attorney who has represented Jackson family members, but not Michael Jackson.
"It is outrageous that she should seek such media attention for her own aggrandizement. She is attacking Michael for her own benefit," Oxman said.
Allred said she was "acting as a citizen."
Jackson has three children: 6-year-old Prince Michael I, 5-year-old Paris and a baby, Prince Michael II. Little is known about the youngest child, whose mother has not been identified. Prince Michael I and Paris were born during his marriage to nurse Debbie Rowe, which ended in 1999.
Michael X. Dean, deputy director of Santa Barbara County Social Services, on Thursday declined to say whether there were plans to take Jackson's children into custody, citing confidentiality rules.
Dean said that generally, criminal charges can prompt a child welfare investigation, but he added that such an investigation is not automatic.
Media reports have said the alleged victim in the latest case is a 12- or 13-year-old cancer survivor who visited Jackson at his Neverland Ranch, a storybook playland where the singer, who has befriended several cancer victims, was known to hold sleep-overs for children and share his bed with youngsters.
A lawyer for the father of one young cancer patient told The Associated Press his client's son was invited to a sleep-over at the ranch. But his client doesn't know whether his son is the child at the center of the molestation investigation, attorney H. Russell Halpern said.
The father is seeking custody of the boy from his ex-wife.
Halpern reiterated Friday that media reports were "assuming that my client's son is the object of the child molestation case. I can't say for certain he's the boy in the case. ... Other people believe my client's son is the boy, but I can't confirm it."
Jackson, meanwhile, was finding some sympathy among music associates and neighbors.
Quincy Jones (news), producer of Jackson's landmark "Thriller" album, told the syndicated TV program "Access Hollywood" he was concerned about the media coverage of the case.
"I don't know what to think about it. We are bombarded all day with choices from the Beltway Sniper to Laci Peterson (news - web sites). It never stops, you know, sensationalism in the media," Jones said.
In the town of Los Olivos near Neverland, store owners defended Jackson.
"Around this town people are used to seeing Michael. He's been known to walk up and down the street here," said Sharon Frowiss, manager of Jedlicka's Saddlery Inc., where he recently bought a $229 tricycle.
"When he walked in the door you said, 'Oh my gosh,' but then you keep it to yourself and go about your business," she said.
___
Associated Press Writers Jeff Wilson in Santa Barbara, Gillian Flaccus in Los Olivos and Christina Almeida and Ken Ritter in Las Vegas contributed to this report. | | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: claudiak | | I wish that woman would just shut up. Stick to being the mouthpiece for Amber Frey and let the proper authorities deal with the question on whether Michael should keep his children.
Those kids are living a life that most people would consider bizarre, or at the very least remarkably different from most children.  | | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: schmiggens | | Thos ekids CANNOT possibly be leading anything remotely close to a "normal" life. We had some shots of MJ on a Doco last night showing home videos with his kids. Poor things, they are made to wear all those covers over their faces and keep out of public, they don't have any contact with their mother.
It is not fair, it is not right. Debbie whatever-her-name-is (the ex-wife) should be ashamed of herself for leaving her children with him. Where is she in all of this, why doesn't she come and take her children??? They should be with her, at least until this stuff is sorted out. | | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: chelktty | | He paid that woman to be an incubater. It wasn't a loving relationship, it was a business deal. | | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: Lawless | | Exactly... it wasn't a marriage of love. It was a marriage of convience. She got paid to have his children... and I'm sure there was no sex involved in that. Turkey baster baby! | | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: fuscia | | How sad is that. Imagine growing up knowing that your mom didn't want you, that it was only about the money. I just think it was selfish on MJ and Debbies part. Kids deserve a mom and a dad. | | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: USA1 | | In every other part of our society, the children would be removed from the house. This is even without charges being filed.
If a social service gets a tip, they remove the kids first.
Where are they now? | | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: fuscia | | I wondered about that as well. Does anyone know if they would normally remove children under these circumstances? Is he getting special treatment because he is famous?  | | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: Inner City Blues | | Accusations don't get your children automatically removed nor should they. Stop being so hypocritical anyway, Michael Jackson is probably a better parent than 90% of the parents out there. You know he would never leave a kid in the car while he was out getting groceries. Or leave them unsupervised where they could do things like drown in a pool or something. | | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: mystic | |
| quote: |
Originally posted by Inner City Blue
Accusations don't get your children automatically removed nor should they. Stop being so hypocritical anyway, Michael Jackson is probably a better parent than 90% of the parents out there. You know he would never leave a kid in the car while he was out getting groceries. Or leave them unsupervised where they could do things like drown in a pool or something. |
No he just walks them around with feathers and masks on their face. How many other celebs do that? None that I know of. He doesnt allow them to lead normal lives like the majority of children in the world. How do you think this is gonna effect their lives?
Its not a way to raise your children.
As for him probably being a better parent than 90% of the parents out there....do you actually know this to be true or is this just a guess? Do you give him the benefit of the doubt because he is famous?
Would you give that same consideration to the guy that lives next door to you, given that he treats his children the same way MJ does?
Just curious...
| | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: slenderspender | | Being as famous as him there is NO way he has time to be a better parent than 90% of the population. How much time does HE actually spend with his kids? Probably not nearly as much as say...90% of the population. | | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: chelktty | |
| quote: |
Originally posted by Inner City Blue
Accusations don't get your children automatically removed nor should they. Stop being so hypocritical anyway,
What's hypocritical about it? If an everyday average joe was accused of child molestation TWICE, hangs out with nothing but children, pays a woman to bare him children and then makes his kids wear masks covering their faces, we would say that that guy needed his kids removed too.
Michael Jackson is probably a better parent than 90% of the parents out there.
I don't know any parents who would dangle their babies over a balcony or subject them to being lost in a mob.
You know he would never leave a kid in the car while he was out getting groceries. Or leave them unsupervised where they could do things like drown in a pool or something.
Parents leaving their kids in cars while they shop is an isolated incident. It happens, but not often, and certainly not by 90% of the parental population. And no, MJ wouldn't leave them unsupervised, he has a staff to watch after them unlike oh, say...99% of parents. Get real man!
|
| | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: lodgebo | | Do his kids go to school or what? and that guy is a bad parent if I dressed my little boy up in a mask 24/7 I would be arrested with cruelty.
Anyway the kids have to go at least until the trial is over. | | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: fuscia | |
| quote: |
Originally posted by Inner City Blue
Accusations don't get your children automatically removed nor should they. Stop being so hypocritical anyway, Michael Jackson is probably a better parent than 90% of the parents out there. You know he would never leave a kid in the car while he was out getting groceries. Or leave them unsupervised where they could do things like drown in a pool or something. |
I think the baby dangling incident alone is enough to declare him a bad parent. Have you watched the tape of him feeding his veiled baby? Very un-natural. He was bouncing the kid on his knee while the baby was trying to drink a bottle. Really good for the digestion. Oh, and MJ doesn't exactly go grocery shopping like most parents do.
| | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: mystic | |
| quote: |
Originally posted by lodgebo
Do his kids go to school or what? and that guy is a bad parent if I dressed my little boy up in a mask 24/7 I would be arrested with cruelty.
Anyway the kids have to go at least until the trial is over. |
His kids have a tutor or something...they dont go to traditional school with other kids....which is fine.....its not like that isnt ever done.
But the mask thing.....thats just ridiculous!
He dresses the one kid in a sheet so often, He might grow up thinking he's Casper the ghost....but I guess that's okay as long as your dad thinks he's Peter Pan. 
| | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: Lawless | |
| quote: |
Originally posted by mystic
He dresses the one kid in a sheet so often, He might grow up thinking he's Casper the ghost....but I guess that's okay as long as your dad thinks he's Peter Pan. |
LMAOROTF Oh gods, mystic... too damn funny!
| | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: lodgebo | | So his kids probably do not know how to interact with other children then | | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: Lawless | | Yeah... I'm guessing that he keeps his kids seperate from most people. | | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: schmiggens | | JACKSON'S FOLKS WILL ADOPT HIS KIDS
Michael Jackson's parents plan to adopt his three kids if he's forced to give them up as a result of his child molestation court case.
The pop superstar is due in court in January to answer charges he molested a 12-year-old boy, and though Jackson's family are convinced he's innocent, they're making provisions to take care of Prince Michael, Paris and Prince Michael II.
The family are now planning to spend Christmas together at their Los Angeles home. | | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: Lawless | | The news was stating that his parents can't just adopt Michaels children.
There will be court cases deciding this fact... so, we shall see. | | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: mystic | |
| quote: |
KJ said this in post #23 :
The news was stating that his parents can't just adopt Michaels children.
There will be court cases deciding this fact... so, we shall see. |
Thank goodness....
Thats kind of defeating the point isnt it....for his parents to adopt them. Wasnt it him who said that his father used to be cruel to him? I would still have to think that his family would have to go through the proper channels....(but of course, I guess they could pay people off...which is pathetic)....
Anwyas...if he loses his kids, and his parent do adopt them....I would certainly hope that he would still have to have supervised vistitation.....or really what would be the point?
| | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: fuscia | | Very true Mystic. I hope at the least that he has to take parenting classes. | | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: mystic | |
| quote: |
fuscia said this in post #25 :
Very true Mystic. I hope at the least that he has to take parenting classes. |
At the very least!! Watching him feed his youngest child was nerve racking enough for me. I was on the edge of my seat trying to grab onto the child through the TV.....
that made me nervous!! This guy needs MAJOR parenting classes!
| | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: schmiggens | | Can a court actually make parenting classes part of the punishment? If he's not charged though, they won't take his kids and if he's not charged then they can't make him take classes. Can they? If he is charged, all his visits with his kids (and anyone else for that matter) would be supervised, because they would have to happen at Jail.
Poor kids, growing up with Michael Jackson as your father and all the bizarre stuff he has done and his reputation would be hard enough. Let alone having to go to prison to visit him. I feel so sad for the kids. What was Debbie thinking when she even agreed to have MJ's kids for him???? I will never understand that. | | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: mystic | |
| quote: |
schmiggens said this in post #27 :
Can a court actually make parenting classes part of the punishment? If he's not charged though, they won't take his kids and if he's not charged then they can't make him take classes. Can they? If he is charged, all his visits with his kids (and anyone else for that matter) would be supervised, because they would have to happen at Jail.
Poor kids, growing up with Michael Jackson as your father and all the bizarre stuff he has done and his reputation would be hard enough. Let alone having to go to prison to visit him. I feel so sad for the kids. What was Debbie thinking when she even agreed to have MJ's kids for him???? I will never understand that. |
The only way a court could state that he would have to take parenting classes (granted he isnt charged), is by finding that they question his parenting "techniques." I dont see why this would be any different than the department of family services demanding a parent do this when there are questions regarding the fitness of the parent. Maybe the guy is a good parent...I dont know....all I can do is state on what I see. What I see is his kids being trampled around town with stupid masks on their face (which no other celebrity does), and the way he fed his youngest child that bottle just proved to me that he didnt feed them on a normal basis...I figure he left that to the caretakers....
Of course Ill never understand that...whats the point in having a child if you dont or cant tend to their daily needs without help from "the nanny?"
Maybe the court wont say has to take parenting classes, but he certainly does need them...in a bad way!
I agree with you on the Debbie situation....but I have to believe she did it for the money. Im pretty certain the marraiage was a rouse, and that she had planned on "selling" the kids to him eventually.....
and thats pathetic.....of course thats just my opinion.....but what else could it be?....I, as a mother, would NEVER walk away from my children without being able to see them all the time.....she did that, and I have to believe it was for the money, and nothing else.
| | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: Ken NJ | |
| quote: |
Michael Jackson is probably a better parent than 90% of the parents out there. I don't know any parents who would dangle their babies over a balcony or subject them to being lost in a mob.
You know he would never leave a kid in the car while he was out getting groceries. Or leave them unsupervised where they could do things like drown in a pool or something.
Parents leaving their kids in cars while they shop is an isolated incident. It happens, but not often, and certainly not by 90% of the parental population. And no, MJ wouldn't leave them unsupervised, he has a staff to watch after them unlike oh, say...99% of parents. Get real man! |
http://www.itv.com/news/images/gloria_allred_nonitn_sm.jpg Gloria Allred only points fingers to take parent's rights away. She blows things way out of proportion and lack credibility on TV shows. For instance, some loving parents toss kids in the air and catch them coming down . That seems more dangerous than an isolated incident responding to German fans waiting 24/7 and demanding for a peek of his newborn. It was a spur of the moment, really simply a case of bad judgement. Jacko is no less human than anyone the next day kicking self in the @ss for doing a stupid thing. Of course, the press and media just go to extreme ends reporting it yanking everyone's emotional chain. What you see over and over on TV is called repetitive conditioning of viewer psychic ....and the truth is "do you see Jacko dangling own kids daily over and over for the media to see?" Show me more than one isolated incident.
| | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: Ken NJ | | Is she right? Gloria Allred demands the State takes Jackson’s three kids away from their dad. "I don't think that Michael Jackson, a 44 year old adult male should sleep with young children. I just don't think that's appropriate." Does daddy Jackson really love son Prince Michael, 6, and daughter Paris Michael, and the newest baby age 2? Jackson divorced Nurse Debbie Rowe after three years and reportedly paid her $30 million to carry his two oldest children. Do you think Action Jackson makes a bad father? Are Jackson's under 6 age kids in harms way? <--Just Click Here How about awarding custody to their German Mommy Debbie Rowe? Children:
1. Prince Michael Jackson I by Rowe; born February 13, 1997
2. Paris Michael Katherine Jackson by Rowe; born April 3, 1998
3. Prince Michael Jackson II aka Blanket by surrogate; born 2002
Jackson Marriage to Presley: Michael Jackson's marriage to Lisa Marie Presley took place in De La Vega, Santa Domingo. Perhaps their marriage was a PR stunt to cast Jackson in a better light after allegations of sexual molestation charges involving a 13-year old boy. Presley had two children from her six-year marriage to musician Danny Keough. Jackson and Presley separated on December 10, 1995. Irreconcilable differences were cited as the reason for their divorce a month later.
Jackson Marriage to Rowe: Michael Jackson's marriage to Debbie Rowe, a former nurse, took place at a hotel suite in Sydney, Australia. She knew Jackson for 15 years before they were married, and was apparently six months pregnant at the time of their marriage. Irreconcilable differences cited as a reason for the divorce, it has been alleged that the marriage was a business arrangement and she has had very little contact with her children.
| quote: |
Child protection groups in the United States are analysing two key scenes from Martin Bashir's sensational interview with reclusive star Michael Jackson. As the American public got their first opportunity to witness the world exclusive Tonight interview, authorities are assessing whether to act on footage which appeared in two key scenes of the documentary. Ms Allred, a family lawyer is leading the calls for a probe into Jackson's activities. For some years, she has been attacking questioning the singer's relationships with his own and other people's children.
She said: "I'm not saying there is a crime, but I'm not saying there aren't any victims either. I think there is sufficient evidence to open an investigation and I think that's what children's services should do …"I've already complained about baby dangling incident. This week I asked them to investigate the situation involving children in his bedroom even if he is on the floor. "And I think they should interview every child who has been at Neverland without their parents." |
| | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: in review agent | | man the silly people think he's a muder man no!!! he aint people should get to look after their own children!!!!!!right? | | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: defensive | | I think we all should not be so quick to judge Michaels abilities as a parent. I dont think that any of us here know him personally. Yes, he does bizarre things with his kids in the public eye, i.e. the sheets and masks covering them ALL the time. However, how many of us have actually seen him in the privacy of his home interacting with his kids? Do we know that he doesnt read them bedtime stories? Do we know that he doesnt play video games or hang out eating ice cream and watching movies with his kids?
Because Michael does not conform to what the general public sees as "the norm" than the general public is so quick to judge him. He is bizarre, there is no doubt. And as I much as I love his music, and respect what he has done for children, and assuming the charges against him are not true, I tire of hearing his way too feminine voice, watching his skin go from black to albino white and seeing all of the cosmetic surgery to the point that his nose is now in parts.
But my point, we cannot say we feel sorry for the kids until such a time that we know what goes on between them and their father on a personal level. How ironic is it that i have seen parents, known parents who in public act as though their children are the center of their world, dress them in nothing but the best, and smother them with gifts for bdays,christmas, etc.......... but are hateful to their children, hit their children, etc. It is so important to always keep in mind that we cannot judge a book by its cover. Outside appearances and behavior can be very decptive. | | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: Ken NJ | | Well said! I don't know Jacko the same way I don't know any of the posters on this BB either. Despite the fact that I see so much animosity, hatred and divisiveness, I don't want to prejudge anyone here as unfit parents or unstable minds. They call him scumbag, unfit, weird and molester simply from what little they know of the individual personally or heard from him on the witness stand. Everything so far is one sided, distorted and repetitiously circumstantial. What I have learned from reading is that Michael's appearance from news account is diametrically opposed to those who know him, his family and friends. There are many who don't like him because of competition, jealousy, and simply "holier than thou." The best testimonies are those who know him and those who has spoken on his behalf so far. Well, at least 600 who attended his Xmas party this week thought well of him.
Because of that, the court of public opinion in me gives Jacko the benefit of doubt, since DA Sneddon's nine felonious charges so far are still without the hard evidence to make him guilty in a court of law. | | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: mystic | |
| quote: |
Ken NJ said this in post #34 :
I don't want to prejudge anyone here as unfit parents or unstable minds.. |
Of course you dont.....your too busy judging them on other things.
| | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: schmiggens | |
| quote: |
Ken NJ said this in post #34 :
What I have learned from reading is that Michael's appearance from news account is diametrically opposed to those who know him, his family and friends. |
I am sure Hitler's friends and family thought he was normal too.
Just about every criminal in history has been defended by their friends and family. Every crime, they put up relatives of the criminal on the news and the relatives say things like "Oh, he was such a nice boy" and "What a shock, we always thought he was so lovely", etc, etc.
Just because his friends are defending him does not mean he is innocent (or guilty).
| | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: Ken NJ | |
| quote: |
mystic said this in post #35 :
Of course you dont.....your too busy judging them on other things. |
And which of those you want to expound on for whatever your POV? Okay, let me start..... NOT guilty! Flimsy evidence, too circumstantial. The LEOs don't have the spine and fortitude to tell the mob mentality to back off in perpetuating a flimsy case against the wrongly accused. Hello darkness, my old friend....
| | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: mystic | |
| quote: |
Ken NJ said this in post #37 :
And which of those you want to expound on for whatever your POV? Okay, let me start..... NOT guilty! Flimsy evidence, too circumstantial. The LEOs don't have the spine and fortitude to tell the mob mentality to back off in perpetuating a flimsy case against the wrongly accused. Hello darkness, my old friend.... |
Ken....Ill tell you what....pick your battles with someone else...Im getting pretty tired of justifying myself to you. I say one thing, you disagree, I say another, you also disagree. You have spent more time arguing things Ive said then anything else.....and even when Ive said things that I know you agree with, you STILL argue with me....
so...you will have to discuss with others...not me.
| | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: Ken NJ | | Please don't take it personal. I know you have the fortitude with 4700 experience. It's called drilling down to some core issues and debating what is it that we see differently. No two persons will ever see things exactly each and every time. So far, we have more similiarities than differences. And forgive me if I don't compliment you as much. I think you're a nice person. Take the feelings out of it. Let's keep peeling away at the issues. | | Reply To this Message
|
Michael Jackson Forum: Attorney Wants Jackson's Children Removed
|