Mina Sirkin, an expert Trust and Estates attorney in Los Angeles says, "I have seen a lot of wills in my career, but the copy of Michael Jackson's will leaves me with way too many questions as a trust and estates lawyer!"
Los Angeles, CA--July 2, 2009 (PRNEWSWIRE)
While some believe everything they see filed in the courts as true, sometimes, you just have to ask questions about those documents. You should also ask questions about any document you see on the internet!
In Michael Jackson's case, the copy of Michael's signature on the will (copy) doesn't look like the copy of Michael's signature on the birth certificate of his son Michael Joseph Jackson, Jr., also known as Prince Michael Jackson. Some people may say, it's just the size of the signature because it is in a small box, but look closer ...
See the Will and copy of signature of Michael Jackson on the copy filed with the court here:
See copy of Birth Certificate Picture here: Copy of Birth Certificate of Michael Joseph Jackson, Jr.
See link to the matrimonial document allegedly signed by Michael and Lisa Presley: Link to Michael's Matrimonial Certificate to Lisa Presley
Just to clarify and be fair, I can't authenticate any of these. In fact, they are linked to copies of documents on the internet. Without a document examiner examining originals, the public can't make any conclusions as to the veracity of any of these documents.
I'm not a document examiner, but I'm sure if the original actually turns up, that there will be dozens of forensic document examiners looking at the original signatures on all documents Michael may have signed around 2002.
Now, looking at all the other flaws, I noticed that the press version of the copy of the will redacted all the names and addresses of the witnesses, but my pre-press copy has the names of all the witnesses.
Two of the three witnesses are John McLain and Barry Siegel. Barry Siegel, a CPA who ran the Provident Financial Management, appears to have declined to act as a co-executor. But the letter attached to the petition which looks like a declination is not current. It is dated in 2003. This is unusual in that in most cases where a nominated executor declines to serve as executor, he or she will usually sign a declination after the death of the testator. This might infer some incident which caused Siegel to refuse the duty of executor between July, 2002 and August, 2003.
Is it possible that perhaps Mr. Siegel would not want to become a fiduciary in the estate or the trusts as becoming a fiduciary would have also made him a fiduciary to Jackson's creditors? A fiduciary with knowledge of assets and perhaps no attorney-client privilege can actually put himself and the estate or trust in a very vulnerable position. Think about it.
Need I say that even the copy of the signature of Barry Siegel on the alleged declination letter dated 2003 doesn't looks like the copy of the Barry Siegel signature on the witness area dated 2002! Why on earth would there not be a current declination, and merely a declination referred to in the August 26, 2003 letter? Who would think of that one?
The addresses of John McClain, and Barry Siegel are both redacted. The signature of the third witness is not legible. In California, at least two witnesses are needed to authenticate a typed will. My guess is that Mr. McLain and Mr. Siegel will be available for comment to the media and to the court! (or in the words of Desi Arnaz, "they may have some esplaining to do... ."
"They say, why, why, tell em' that it's human nature...." -Michael Jackson
Mina Sirkin is a Family Trust Lawyer in Los Angeles, California. She was the expert on the Anna Nicole Smith case for CBS/KCAL9, Britney Spears Conservatorship and is currently the expert to CNN, Inside Edition (CBS), and KNX. Read more about Mina Sirkin.
http://SirkinLaw.com [Site may be down for maintenance 7/3/09] 818-340-4479. Press and Media Contact only: SirkinMediaContact@gmail.com or Karen Reyes for interview scheduling: 818-340-4479 and 818-438-7170.
Link to CNN video: Link to see Mina Sirkin on CNNhttp://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/showbiz/2009/07/02/dcl.lemon.jackson.staples.cnn?iref=videosearch
Mina,
I noticed that the witnesses to the will are also the nominated co-executors. Is that valid in California? Is that normally done?
OK in CA.
Posted by: David Shulman | July 02, 2009 at 09:19 PM