Rowe Not Looking for Cash Cow

31. I'll bet Debbie Rowe has ALREADY BEEN PAID her 20 million dollars that was agreed upon between her and Michael Jackson in their "deal" concerning her having the children and her not coming back to claim any rights to them.... I mean, they are 11 and 12 years old now, and my goodness, I'm SURE from the time they were born until now, he's MORE than made enough money in his career to have WELL paid her off and then some, and now she's probably coming back to the Jackson family and saying that she was not paid in full, and she wants even MORE CASH because she wasn't paid all the way, and it was supposedly "over a period of time"... PUH-LEEEEZE!!! Gimme' a break!!!

Posted at 3:25AM on Jul 15th 2009 by REEBEERENEE

32. Debbie Rowe should get arrested for selling her kids and helping Mj's addiction.

Posted at 3:31AM on Jul 15th 2009 by 420

33. 28. Is this the same Rebecca White?

http://news.lalate.com/2008/01/26/rebecca-white-says-michelle-williams-custody-fight-with-heath-ledger-over-matilda-reports-mag/
########
Yes, here's this for you, too:
Team Rowe has also sent a cease-and-desist missive to so-called pal, Rebecca White, who told Extra that Rowe is working on getting custody, despite emails the beleaguered baby-mama wrote White, stating, "These kids are not mine. They were never mine. They were always Michael's. I was Michael's best friend."

"Our firm has sent Ms. White a letter disputing the truth of her statements and demanding that she make retraction in order to avoid legal action," Rowe's legal team said in a statement to E! News.
http://www.eonline.com/uberblog/b134006_debbie_rowe_not_cashing_in_on.html

Posted at 3:46AM on Jul 15th 2009 by iwasthere

34. Looks like all the freaks are coming out of the woodwork again...

I don't buy that Debbie Rowe is abandoning her children for money, she seems pretty well set up to me...
I do believe that all of the media "insiders" are throwing out random dumb crap in an effort to sensationalize this fiasco even further, to make their own buck...
How many "tell all" books are in the works by those same freaks that enabled MJ's addiction?...How many "insider" stories will get danced around before the TRUTH comes out?...

I hope that someone with some sense intervenes on behalf of the children, or that Debbie Rowe regains physical custody...If she is the only biological relative in their already sordid lives, she deserves that chance...Like her or not, she is the only one involved with any legal rights, regardless of what MJ's will states...They need to be kept FAR away from Joe Jackson, a self admitted CHILD ABUSER...And Miss Katherine is simply too old to manage their care properly...If it comes down to them being raised by "caretakers", sign me up...I'd make sure that they have NORMAL lives, and not be swayed by the almighty dollar that ALL involved are so desperately chasing...They all seem to be forgetting three very important factors in their drama...The kids...

Posted at 3:51AM on Jul 15th 2009 by Hussie

35. by Hussie, she obviously doesnt want children. if she wanted children why hasn't she had more of her own? she doesn't want any damn rug rats. I don't blame her.

Posted at 3:58AM on Jul 15th 2009 by stoned

36. Umm, stoned
Debbie Rowe had a difficult birth with Paris and is unable to bear any more children

Posted at 4:03AM on Jul 15th 2009 by iwasthere

37. oh, okay... my bad. she still seems to like horses more than she likes kids.

Posted at 4:07AM on Jul 15th 2009 by stoned

38. Ok who to believe, they are both tabloids with mostly fodder on it, TMZ claims today that Debbie won't challenge custody as long as she recives her continued support payments from Michael's estate.

The Suntimes says Debbie said today the she will not give up her parental rights and never has, and she wants custody.

LOL i wonder who had the paid sources and who is wrong TMZ or Suntimes???

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2535919/Debbie-Rowe-denies-she-made-a-deal-with-Katherine-Jackson-over-custody-of-Michaels-kids.html

Posted at 4:13AM on Jul 15th 2009 by to little

39. I am sure Debbie's lawyers are asking The Michael Zone for a retraction on this article.

Posted at 4:24AM on Jul 15th 2009 by to little

40. I always thought it was wrong for Michael Jackson to have children in his custody. Despite having been found not guilty of the pedophile charges, he was emotionally immature; seemed to have problems being born a man, and being born a Black man. He "acquired" his children in an obtuse way, but there are no laws against what he did - but there should be! Just because you're extremely famous and wealthy, you shouldn't be able to buy sperm, a egg, and rent a womb to have a child, to your specifications, IF you're are emotionally arrested, and a substance abuser. Paris' grief was very moving at his memorial, BUT this is all this child knows. A person has to wonder if these children would have been better served if they had a Father who loved their Mother; a Mother who loved their Father; and Parents who believed all three of their children were potential wonderful adults in the making. What will happen when these children try to "find" theirselves?

Posted at 4:19AM on Jul 15th 2009 by Me, myself and I

41. its such a shame on motherhood. debbie should be ashamed of herself. if you love your kids you do not need money to stop you from visiting your children . i am sooo disgusted at debbies attitude. Are you the first surrogate mum to have kids for someone. you knew micheal jackson was soo vunurable and you capitalised on him . GO TO HELL YOU BITCHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted at 4:35AM on Jul 15th 2009 by gloppy

42. Right! Get in writing.

Posted at 5:02AM on Jul 15th 2009 by Linda Mott

43. Uh folks? This one doesn't fly. Katherine nor anyone in the Jackson family can control a legal binding agreement. Sorry. The executors will be the fiduciaries with regard to his finances and contracts, not the family. Unless there is some stipulation in there about the children or should something happen to him, I can't see her attorney worrying about this for a second. There may be something in the agreement about visitation, but... uh, the money part Katherine can't control. Nope. Not legally.

Posted at 4:57AM on Jul 15th 2009 by Cali MJ Fan

44. If everyone would stop and think about what she tried to do to make someone else happy and things tuned out the way they did, then maybe you should try and understand what Debbie might be feeling at this time. She's under stress because of the death of Michael and to think her two children have lost a Father.
I hear everyone saying, " She sold her kids," that couldn't be farther from the truth. She's tried over the years to have some type of connection with her children. Michael wanted full custody in order for him to travel without court restrictions. Debbie had to live her life under certain restrictions and this was probably the hardest thing she's had to do in her life.
You want to talk about the 8.5 Million she received. This is California and she was in fact married to Michael Jackson for a period of about two years. During that period of time, she is entitled to part of the family assets.
Hollywood couples divorce everyday and you don't see them walking away from their spouses without a settlement.
In Debbie's case, this was her Divorce Settlement not payment for her children. She tried over the years to make sure the children were safe and that's why she took him to court to retain custody.
Two wrongs don't make a right .... but it's the children that will suffer because of poor judgement.
Her children weren't around the Jackson family that often. Michael's nanny was the main care giver and the children were with him.
I would also be trying to get a restraining order against Joe Jackson... He'll just abuse them the way he did Michael.... for what cost??? So he can have another pot of gold at the expense of a damaged children.
My concern now, would be for the safety of Debbie, she's now in a position to do the right thing and take care of her children the way a Mother should. The Jacksons are just afraid that the money will be cut off.
LaToya said in her news report , " I got stuff on Debbie and we better get the children". Sounds to me like blackmail or maybe some other charges should be brought against the Jacksons. Call you lawyer and ask him.... I wouldn't have waited this long. By the way, ask him to have the Michael's property returned to his estate and stated who get the property in his will. It's not snatch and grab like it was done by the Jackson family before Michael was even buried.
Well, after tonight, I won't be watching ABC any longer. When they put on that Special, about Joe Jackson, I got sick at my stomach.
Debbie... GET YOUR CHILDREN ... don't let this family destroy them like they did Michael. Remember, what he told you about the family and apply what you know, Think what could be happening to your own Children. These are my opinion only.
If you don't step in now.. they will be loss like Michael.
My prayers are you now, Take Care.. Debbie God Bless the Children.

Posted at 5:16AM on Jul 15th 2009 by My Little Girls

45. Four million is chump change in all of this. She just wants what she was promised. There are two separate issues at hand: 1) the custody of the children and 2) making sure the money promised as a part of the deal Michael struck with his EX-WIFE to let him have full-custody. Also, there is a difference between custody and parental rights.

If you demonize Debbie for receiving money to allow the children to be in the full custody of their father, then you must also demonize Michael for treating the children as objects and purchasing them from Debbie. Neither side comes out looking good.

I just don't think Debbie is evil. I think she meant well when she married Michael and bore him two children. She admittedly turned over child-rearing to Michael. It was their agreement as a married couple. He would be Mom and Dad. However, after spending three years in the "fishbowl" she wanted out, not because she stopped caring but because she couldn't handle celebrity. The way they set this whole thing up, it was bound to backfire. Neither is any better than the other.

I think its likely she would love to speak out but may be bound by a confidentiality agreement. Perhaps that is really what these payments are all about and may have nothing to do with buying kids.

Posted at 5:23AM on Jul 15th 2009 by Huh?