While some believe everything they see filed in the courts as true, sometimes, you just have to ask questions about those documents.
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 signature of Michael Jackson on the copy of the will filed with the court here:
Michael Jackson Will Copy (http://lawmarketingsystems.typepad.com/WillofMichaelJacksonCopy2002.pdf)
See Birth Certificate Picture here: Copy of Birth Certificate of Michael Joseph Jackson, Jr. (http://lawmarketingsystems.typepad.com/michaeljackson.birthcertificates.pdf)
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.
Need I say that even the copy of the signature of Barry Siegel on the alleged declination letter dated 2003 doesn't look like the copy of the Barry Siegel signature on the witness area dated 2002! Why on earth would the declination referred to in the August 26, 2003 letter not be an actual attachment to the petition? 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, witnesses are needed to authenticate a typed will. My guess is that Mr. McLain and Mr. Siegel, in the words of Desi Arnaz, "will have some esplaining to do... !"
"When 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 and Inside Edition (CBS).
Source: Sirkin & Sirkin
