Here are some thoughts regarding AMSI/Snarl's description of MJ's will, as well as his despicable taunts of MJ's children.

I'd like to think that this information would settle the question of "whether Snarl is MJ" for most reasonable minds... which unfortunately may, as usual, still leave a few stragglers who refuse to consider any reasonable evidence at all. After all -- MJ SHOULD know and very well understand the details of his will AND his legal trust -- as well as the legal status of his children... right?

First, regarding his children: Prince and Paris were the product of a legal marriage in the State of California, which makes MJ the presumptive (and thus legal) father. Whether he is their biological father as well, does not matter AT ALL. Unless maybe someone challenges this and wins in court -- which no one has... and who would? As well, no one has challenged the legality of his marriage to Debbie Rowe. So, whatever "Snarl" declares to the contrary -- it makes no legal difference toward the issue as to whether the kids are legal heirs to MJ's estate.

If, as Snarl has stated, he "never married Debbie Rowe," AND that matter was proven to be true (which would require someone to challenge it, and I doubt Debbie Rowe would, and it seems unlikely anyone else would have any desire or reason to do so) -- it would still make NO difference as MJ was the children's only known legal guardian until his passing.

Part of the reason for clarifying this: "Snarl" has recently made so many derogatory comments about Prince and Paris, including the following:

@LAMJ_SNARL Prince and Paris must stop using Michaels parentage in courts and in life. Their lies are crossing the limits of decency or humanity 27 Jun from web

@LAMJ_SNARL they use their ''baby status'' to extort money I guess. they have white parents that like a blacks money

@LAMJ_SNARL I guess the estate executives forgot to show lil clauses to em. clause this an that will take ur breath away ;D

@LAMJ_SNARL I have news for Prince and Paris.Michael left nothing in your name. Its a long walk to the wealth pond.I see u might not reach there at all

@LAMJ_SNARL Michael left you with his mother. You never went to carol wood to live. Prince and Paris, u r liars and u know it

@LAMJ_SNARL prince and Paris Jackson has turned into little cons, for money and undeserving fame, they will do anything now & in the future

@LAMJ_SNARL I hope that if a ''minor'' in cahoots with your enemies steal your money and stab u in the heart, well u will forgive them, I am sure

@LAMJ_SNARL esp if its Prince or Paris ;D

@LAMJ_SNARL But I wont. I remember when I was Prince & Paris age, I never thought of lying, for money or anything in the world. I believed in hard work

@LAMJ_SNARL and honest recognition of my efforts. Never thought to use or exploit to reach anywhere

@LAMJ_SNARL Michael has completely failed in Prince and Paris upbringing.Maybe punished for doing the unnatural to have them and using money to get them

@LAMJ_SNARL If Paris tried to cut herself, I do not sympathize with her at all. I am sorry but my decision is final 10 Jun from web

@LAMJ_SNARL If you pity Paris, you pity the pride and vanity that lies in human heart. Paris has turned into some one that I never wanted or desired 10 Jun from web

Snarl has made it clear in his timeline: Michael Jackson's children are little lying cons who are in cahoots with his enemies to steal his money, and he is not prepared to forgive them. And, he is unmoved by the idea that Paris attempted suicide, that she has become someone he never wanted OR DESIRED. (Really, what she "became" retroactively means he NEVER wanted her?) I mean, that is a terrible, awful, horrible thing for ANY parent to say.

He is legally dead, and they are his undisputed legal heirs. Except for what goes to charity -- it all goes to them. It's already a done deal; there is nothing to "steal." And, what kind of father would abandon all his children, leave them parentless, at a young age and then criticize them four years later from TWITTER?

But most of us know -- this person speaking here is NOT Prince nor Paris's parent. And we get to the nerve center of why the efforts against Snarl/AMSI are important. THIS IS NOT MICHAEL JACKSON. And now, "he" even says so himself, but as though with a wink. He boasts his is a "parody" account. (However, "parody" is meant to be satirical and humorous, and NOTHING about this account's output is either.) Did you ever feel outrage when you saw so many people making "pedophile" jokes about MJ? Well, these aren't even jokes, but they're just as mean. You know he would never harm a child, so he's not a pedophile, right? Okay, I am in full agreement. So what's this jackass doing, saying these God-awful things that YOU KNOW would hurt THESE children??

"Paris, Prince, come here children, daddy has something to tell you. You're both miserable leeches, liars, con artists, and I never wanted you."

People who believe that Snarl is MJ, now believe that MJ never had vitiligo, that he lied on Oprah's show to millions of people about it. They believe now that MJ faked his death in order to get away from his evil family, and to escape financial problems (and maybe too, that the "Illuminati" had something to do with it as well, but he has only slightly mentioned this). They believe now that he never loved Debbie Rowe or Lisa Marie Presley and, what's more, actually cares very little about them. They now believe he is disappointed in his mother AND his children. And, they now believe that he would "hide" on Twitter and tell all of this to a small handful of relative strangers, as he promises every year that he will come back THAT YEAR... and never keeps that promise.

If you believe Mr. Snarl is Michael Jackson -- you have come to believe a great many things about this beloved performer that most of his die-hard fans who stuck by him AGAINST so many vile accusations, would never, ever accept. If you read in a tabloid (before meeting Mr. Snarl) that MJ hates his children... what would your reaction be? I don't think you would accept it as truth. But, you have allowed yourself to believe this person is him, and if he says it, it must be true. So maybe he has discovered the best way to spread hateful messages about Michael Jackson... you just go ahead and SAY YOU'RE HIM!

So let's inspect that will again: First, what we saw of MJ's will after he passed was a 5-page document which referred to his Living Trust -- a SEPARATE document which holds all the information about what happens to his estate. There was lots of stuff in the news about whether he could have signed that will in Los Angeles (which it says in the document) because he was in New York at the time, in 2001. In the end, it doesn't really matter though, because if that document were to be thrown out, it would revert to the last prior known document, which still named Branca et al as executors of his estate. And, what's most important, is what it says in that Living Trust, where what happens to his estate is outlined in detail. And many might not realize this, but his Living Trust became public about one year after he died, in 2010.

He had set up his trust in 1995, before he had any children, but the trust allowed for their future existence, and in the absence of any at his passing, still allowed for the care of his mother and then funds would be distributed to a few of his cousins and nephews (which no longer matters now that he does have children). And, he signed another document amending and affirming that trust in 2002.

http://wills.about.com/od/michaeljackson/qt/What-Does-the-Michael-Jackson-Family-Trust-Say.htm

The breakdown is something like this: 20% of the estate will go to charitable causes which benefit children, to be determined by a committee of John Branca, John McClain and Katherine Jackson. Of the remaining 80%, it's divided up such that 50% of that is set aside to provide care for Katherine Jackson, from the income of that portion, until she passes away, then what's left will go to Michael's children, who will each receive one third of the remaining estate.

There are a few tricky-looking parts to this trust, but nothing within it refers to any situation where each of Michael's children would receive less than one third of what is there to distribute. They will receive income from the estate all along, then at age 30, receive one third of the principal portion, at 35, half of the remaining portion, and at 40, the rest of it. This is clear-cut. There are no "clauses" as Snarl suggests which would surprise anyone. There can't be any clauses which WOULD surprise anyone. The ONLY way any of this could conceivably change at this point, would be if Michael WAS alive and returned to reclaim his estate, and then decided to change his will and his legal trust.

What is my point? It's that Michael would have been DEEPLY involved in designing this. He would KNOW that his kids have a lock on his estate. He designed it so that they couldn't frivolously spend it all in their youth. He designed it so his mother would be taken care of, and the charities he cared about would be, too. And if somehow, a satellite landed on the Jackson compound and all four of his beneficiaries died... his estate would still go to six Jackson relatives. Still, not his father nor siblings. No matter if they question the will's legality, there is no scenario in which ANY of them would receive part of his estate, unless a real, provable document emerges dated after 2002 which says otherwise.

The point is that these were his well-defined wishes and it is written so clearly, in such a way that it can't be changed or contested... and there is no one who COULD conceivably contest it. It defines specifically that his marriage to Debbie Rowe was dissolved and that she is purposefully not provided for. And neither his father nor siblings would have a leg to stand on above Michael's children as beneficiaries. So, anything AMSI/Snarl says about his estate that goes against any of that -- whether he says there are hidden clauses, or complains about Michael's siblings challenging the legality of the will "so that they can be included" -- is utterly, completely WRONG.

The only issue the family was concerned about legally was with regard to Branca and McClain being the proper executors -- if he couldn't have signed the 2001 document in Los Angeles on that date. They felt he might have had reason to want change executors after that date; he might have complained about them at some point. But, no other legal document has emerged in all this time, so -- that is the end of it.

Why would the family object to the executors? OF COURSE they're interested in the matter -- it's their brother's legacy, after all. They don't seem to trust them. There has been conflict with those executors -- we might recall that family members were banned from Jackson's home. Really, the only ones the estate executors need to "make happy" are Katherine and the three children -- because they can be replaced, if a controlling interest of adult beneficiaries desire a different firm to handle it, they can do so once Katherine and one of the children (as soon as they reach adulthood), together making a controlling interest, decides they want to change it. Prince turns 18 in two years, so conceivably he and Katherine could remove Branca and McClain at that time, if they're unhappy with them.

Once you study these documents, is seems completely silly to observe AMSI ranting about his mother and children. If MJ was alive and wanted to change it -- of COURSE he could. If MJ was alive and was in full control of when he returns -- THIS WOULD BE THE TIME.

Snarl also posted a series of tweets relating to the idea of "fraud" for faking his death, specifying that no insurance money had been paid out:

@LAMJ_SNARL 22 Mar why you think Michael Jackson committed a fraud by faking his death? Why would it be considered a crime or a felony in the first place? Michael Jackson did no financial fraud after going away, niether did he committed any theft, nor was he covering up any murder, his debts were duly paid, even the estate paid all the taxes, everything remained crystal clear to the agencies to see and evaluate. Guys No insurance money has been collected, not a cent and never will be until ofcourse, the real death

I guess somehow he didn't know about THIS, which specifies that $3 million WAS paid out to his estate in insurance?

http://www.hollyscoop.com/michael-jackson/michael-jacksons-life-insurance-to-pay-out-3-million.html

And of course, if as AMSI has stated in the past, financial responsibilities WERE part of the reason he "faked his death." If that were true -- if his "death" would be any avenue to financial repair -- it would by design, be considered fraud. If his death was meant to, and did, enhance revenue to his estate -- it would be clear-cut fraud. Sales of his records and memorabilia, etc., went through the roof because of his passing. In AMSI's document at http://www.twitlonger.com/show/jcsmqa detailing "Why I (Michael Jackson) faked my death" from last September, he states:

"I was feeling trapped and financial responsibilities were Omni present. I met friends, had discussions and I was given an option. I either do this what I have done, saving me from drowning waiting for a better time to return or to just drown forever."

So let's make sure this is clear: First, the ONLY way MJ could be held not responsible for what WOULD be fraud... is if he was in the Witness Protection Program, as the reason for his disappearance. There would have to be a legally protected reason for it. If you want to believe Michael is still alive -- this is the ONLY way it would work where he would NOT be convicted of massive fraud. BUT -- AMSI/Snarl has NEVER stated anything like this.

If you believe AMSI IS MICHAEL -- then you have here a man who has committed huge fraud by faking his death, AND who has done one of the most unthinkable things a parent could do to his children. Who wants to defend this version of Michael Jackson then? If that's really who Michael Jackson IS... then he should stay wherever he is. He wouldn't deserve any loving support from fans who held so much faith in him all these years.

Of course, it is ridiculous to believe that this could possibly be that man. But if you defend this fraud... you defend someone who is willfully and steadily working to further darken Michael's legacy.

And as long as I'm highlighting AMSI's discrepancies between what he says and what the truth actually is, he also stated this:

@LAMJ_SNARL 22 Mar Conrad is not sentenced for Killing but for neglecting. Theres a difference dont you think?

This is WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. Conrad Murray was convicted of KILLING Michael Jackson. That's what "manslaughter" means, even if "involuntary." Murray might not have outright meant to kill him, but this verdict wasn't just based on a small neglectful slip on his part -- the verdict was based upon so many other factors, including his treatments in the months prior, without proper guidelines for administration of propofol EVER being followed; no other personnel present nor proper monitoring equipment, as is required in a hospital setting; his purposeful lack of documentation of propofol purchases and having it shipped to "his clinic" in California (which he did not have), initially lying about what he had administered to him at the hospital; his actions to protect himself by hiding evidence; the overall "callous and dismissive treatment of Michael Jackson's well-being," his "extreme disregard for the risk of death," and so many other very specific, strongly worded assertions noted by the court and documented within the official sentencing memorandum, which can be read at: http://tmz.vo.llnwd.net/o28/newsdesk/tmz_documents/1123_murray.pdf

This was not just "whoops" neglect -- it was deemed to be "criminal neglect: “Dr. Murray has been convicted of a crime involving homicide. This is not a crime involving mistake of judgment. This is not a crime involving administration of drugs, per Se. This is a crime where the end result was the death of a human being.”

So yes, Mr. Snarl, there IS a difference -- and you ARE wrong. Conrad Murray was sentenced for killing Michael Jackson.

So I ask anyone who STILL believes somehow that AMSI aka @LAMJ_SNARL is the one and only, original, world-known, beloved performer and humanitarian known as Michael Jackson -- and this includes the ladies from the Italian SIM forum, @Nefy1956, @undermj and @aliceverdino -- and @Dmovie27 aka @DrumsandD4 and his crew, @Thriller_Wolf, @ValentinaGalina, @ApplePieAlchemy, @LaurenceDupras, @Cosmic_cheri, @celmj17, @mj_trigueMMXIII, @Peacock2012, @handsonthetruth, @JackieBlue64xxx, @robin_cee (sorry if I left anyone out!) -- I ask you....

Is this really who you think Michael is? A man who runs away from his problems, who hates his family, now hates his mother and children, a man who makes empty promises (like promising "1000%" to return in 2012), who also abandoned his fans and the WORLD he supposedly wanted so much to help... abandoned that huge VOICE he had to speak out with... so that he could return and give EVERYONE the FINGER on TWITTER?

NO, I DON'T THINK SO! LOTS of people don't think so! YOU supporters of AMSI -- YOU are the reason this blight on humanity, this complete waste of skin, gets away with spreading his nastiness. YOU are the reason new people keep FINDING this guy and start following him. You allow this fraud, this phony, this fake, to STEAL Michael's goodwill he worked his entire LIFE to build... so he can get Twitter followers to listen to him undermine it all. This is an even more complete attack on his character than the people who insist MJ was a pedophile... because this person is attacking his CHILDREN.

I showed you "crew" how your esteemed Steven C. Douglas aka "Doug" existed for two years as a member of a hateful site led by DJHives, who celebrated women-hating, celebrated the "Illuminati" as benevolent leaders, who praised Satan and said that stories of Jesus were just "fairy tales." A man who said the Jews had the Holocaust coming to them. A man who believes over 99% of society are worthless "sheeple" who must either die or be exploited. I showed you that, and Doug actually confirmed it.

I showed you how Doug posted his own blog in the model of Mr. Hives, which was meant to detail his belief, using examples from movies, that women are "drugs" who are the destruction of man... and that only 1% of women are "smart," the ones who believe they must defer to men. He expressed those beliefs loud and clear. And then at the end of 2009 he announced that, after acknowledging back to Mr. Hives that "the sheeple must be exploited," he was going to go "make some things happen," whereupon he immediately joined the hoax community and began making videos about Michael Jackson. Videos which suggested, again using examples from movies, that there is a PLAN for Michael Jackson... clues which were planted in movies before he was born, or when he was still very young, that there is a MASTER PLAN for him, apparently a heavenly destiny. Because screenwriters themselves couldn't have intended this without unknowingly being guided by a higher hand.

I showed you where Doug outright said, "MICHAEL JACKSON IS JESUS." I showed you where Doug outright said that Michael Jackson is a "chosen one" -- AND that he was "chosen" by the "elite," another word for the Illuminati. Remember DJHives saying the Illuminati is benevolent? Doug says this too. Most people who believe that the Illuminati exists... believe that they're EVIL. Or at least, very, very bad people. But not Doug. I also showed you where Doug expressed that he admired the mind of Charles Manson as a misunderstood genius. How about that? One of the world's most famous sociopaths.

Doug reposted several DJHives videos which specifically talk about this benevolent Illuminati after I exposed his connection to that site. He was obviously trying to salvage his years of trying to brainwash followers by spinning Hives' messages as GOOD messages.

DO YOU THINK A GUY WHO PRAISES SATAN, PRAISES THE ILLUMINATI, EXPRESSES BIGOTRY ABOUT JEWS AND HATRED OF WOMEN -- IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM HAS "GOOD" MESSAGES??????

That is where Doug is coming from. He came to Hoaxville looking for people who wanted to hear about a Michael Jackson who was in control of a heavenly destiny. He did this in a fun way -- by having them watch movies looking for clues, like a big, fun puzzle. He wanted followers to exploit, who would embrace him as a prophet, a leader, a captain. AND HE FOUND SOME.

Maybe it wasn't enough, because after a while, ALONG COMES "MICHAEL JACKSON," so conveniently, to endorse him and his videos and... his message. What was his message? Read again, above. "Michael Jackson is Jesus." Doug also expressed that he felt he had the right to "speak for Michael Jackson" because he was being guided by a higher hand.

But if, as he says, MJ was "chosen by the elite/Illuminati" -- what does that REALLY MEAN? If Doug worshiped at the altar of the Satan-praising DJHIVES -- WHAT DOES THAT REALLY MEAN?

At the very least, he's lying, plain and simple, just to have followers and be seen as a prophet. At worst, he is actually suggesting that Michael Jackson is the ANTI-CHRIST.

I'm not making any of this up. I have already shown you the links to where all of this can be seen as it is archived all around.

Doug is a lying, scheming manipulator. Don't just take my word for it -- explore the links and do the math yourself. Do you think the devil would wear a big red cape and show you his spiked tail and horns? No. He would come along with a big smile and a friendly demeanor -- he would try to become your best friend -- because HE WANTS SOMETHING FROM YOU. You can say, "Oh no, our Cappy isn't like that," all you want, but -- I SHOWED IT TO YOU. If you want to ignore it anyway because you like watching movies for cute clues about Michael Jackson, and to hell with any other fans who are being taken in by this crap -- well, you had the chance to know, and you will have to live with that. And you know that other people will suffer for your choice, too.

If you think I'm wrong about Doug being AMSI, then think about this: I expose AMSI as a fake, but Doug still defends him and pushes him on his "crew." I expose Doug as a fake prophet, but AMSI still defends HIM. If I put the focus on Doug, AMSI starts chattering. Isn't that interesting? And observe, I've shown you Doug criticizing our president, and lo and behold, so is AMSI. I also shared with you the very touching post made by Prince Jackson as he remembered election day 2008, when his father told him what an important moment that was. That is almost all we have to tell us -- as there were few MJ interviews after that time -- that Michael was very moved by Barack Obama's election. Do you believe Prince Jackson's shared memories of his father -- or do you believe "some guy on Twitter saying he's Michael Jackson, who is supposed to be dead"?

And just the other day, you saw AMSI/Snarl declare that the number 14 is important. And what has Doug been drumming into his followers all along? "Stay on 14." (Right... and as soon as Prince and Paris PASSED 14... they're okay to publicly demean?) Doug has AMSI supporting all of his "prophetic" statements -- and in 2011, AMSI often said that "27" was important while endorsing Dmovie27. And 2 times 7 is 14, and now AMSI says 14 is important.

Most of us fans are online talking about Michael Jackson because we want to see his legacy be free and clear of all the mud. This guy is making more mud. He speaks about love, while encouraging hate -- hatred of the president, hatred of Michael Jackson's family, and now, of his mother and children, too. It has to stop. The sociopath must be stopped.

If you're reading this -- do you care about Michael Jackson? If you don't, and you want more bad crap to happen to the name of a man who can no longer defend himself... then go ahead, support AMSI. Just don't be surprised if you catch hell for it from other fans.

Reply · Report Post