selam genclik bugun size

porno

nedir anlatacagim artik porno bir abaza isi olarak gorulmemektedir cunku xvideos da sinirsiz sikis izlenir ve izledikleriniz sadece siz deil gizlesene olup abazaligin sinirini zorlayarak liseli sikis videolarimizla götten sikiş seksin sinirlarini zorlamak mumkundur ve ayrica en kaliteli olan redtube videolarinide sizler icin koyduk ve asla unutmayin adult izle, porno izle, sikis izle adreslerimiz sizler icin hizmet vermektedir rus pornosu kalitenin dorugu burdadir pornogiller eger olurda kutunel ararsaniz onu da bizde bulabilirsiniz rokettube sizler icin hepberaber izleyelim. A New Report Alleges That Michael Jackson Did NOT Father His Children | Pink is the New Blog
Jun 30, 2009
A New Report Alleges That Michael Jackson Did NOT Father His Children
Also claims that Debbie Rowe is NOT the mother

Holy shizz, y’all! Now … take the following information with a huge grain of salt, especially considering all the insane rumors flying around since Michael Jackson‘s death last Thursday … but considering this report comes from TMZ (the first outlet to report MJ‘s death hours before anyone else) it might have some weight. According to TMZ, sources close to the births of MJ‘s two oldest children with ex-wife Debbie RowePrince Michael Joseph Jackson and Paris Michael Katherine Jackson — claim that neither Michael nor Debbie are the biological parents of the kids! If this report is true, then it would explain so much about those children:


We’ve learned Michael Jackson was not the biological father of any of his children. And Debbie Rowe is not the biological mother of the two kids she bore for Michael. All three children were conceived in vitro — outside the womb. Multiple sources deeply connected to the births tell us Michael was not the sperm donor for any of his kids. Debbie’s eggs were not used. She was merely the surrogate, and paid well for her services in the births of Michael Jr. and Paris. In the case of Prince Michael II (the youngest), we’re told the surrogate was never told of the identity of the “receiving parent” — Michael Jackson. Three days after Prince was born at Grossmont Hospital in San Diego County, Jackson’s lawyer came to the hospital to pick the baby up and deliver him to Michael. We do not know if Jackson chose the sperm or egg donors or if he even knew who they were. Although Rowe is not the biological mother, it’s not a slam dunk that she would lose a custody battle. This type of case has never been litigated in California courts. Since Rowe was married to Jackson when Michael Jr. and Paris were born, there’s a presumption that she’s the biological parent. That presumption can be rebutted by other evidence. We know there are documents outlining the whole arrangement for the birth of all three kids. Nonetheless, it’s still an open issue with the courts.

Holy MF SHIZZZZ!!!! Now, I realize that TMZ‘s sources may be completely wrong but … it would make so much sense if the children were not biologically borne of Michael Jackson or Debbie Rowe. None of the kids look AT ALL like MJ and Debbie has notoriously denied that the children “are hers”. She’s always said that the kids “belong to Michael Jackson” and that she is “not their mother”. US Weekly claims that MJ‘s dermatologist (and Debbie Rowe‘s former boss), Arnold Klein, is the biological father of the eldest MJ children. OMG! Of course this is still very speculative but the truth may, one day, come out. My guess is that either we’ll eventually learn everything surrounding the births of his children or we’ll never know anything. If the Jackson family has their way, my guess is that we’ll never find out the truth if, in fact, these allegations are true. But, in all honesty, I would not be surprised in the least if this report turns out to be the truth. I’ve had my suspicions all along about the paternity of MJ‘s children … but still … WOW! Thoughts?

UPDATE: OMG OMG!! Now TMZ reports that Michael Jackson never legally adopted any of his children!!!

We’ve learned Michael Jackson never adopted his three children, even though he’s not the biological father. We broke the story that neither Jackson nor Debbie Rowe are the biological parents of Michael Jr. and Paris. And Michael was not the biological parent of Prince Michael II either. Now here’s the rub. We’ve learned Jackson never filed legal papers to adopt any of his children. Legal experts tell us Jackson would be presumed the father but it’s not conclusive by any means. As for why Jackson didn’t formally adopt — we’re told at the time the kids were born there was no third party whom he believed would try and claim custody. For some reason, Jackson never thought Debbie Rowe would mount a custody challenge.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If MJ never legally adopted the kids then … does his mother Katherine Jackson have any claim on eventually winning guardianship of the kids? We know she filed paperwork here in California yesterday to take full custody of the children but if MJ neither biologically fathered NOR legally adopted the kids then … WTF?!

How long until the full truth comes out? Again I say … WOW!

[Source]

Like PITNB on Facebook

53 Comments. Add Yours

1 2 3
  1. HeatherLea_1340 says:

    For some reason, no matter what others say, I see him in his children. Maybe it’s just his spirit in them, but when I see photos of them, without masks and whatnot, I see Michael.
    Just because they don’t look like stereotypical bi-racial children doesn’t mean that it’s not possible.

    @John — It sickens me now that people are turning on Trent for doing his JOB. If you don’t like his reporting that IMHO is the classiest and most well put from all the blogging sites, take your eyes somewhere else. I don’t understand why you feel the need to lash out at him, when he isn’t forcing you to visit his site. Seriously, get over yourselves!

  2. dana j says:

    this is insane. michael was the father no matter how you look at it and those kids don’t need to have their lives shattered over this new batch of information. frankly TMZ needs to just leave this alone and stop putting them on blast.

  3. Nikki says:

    @HeatherLea_1340 I second that!! If people don’t like what Trent says, keep the comments to yourself and walk on.

  4. Tracy says:

    Ugh. He was such a freak. And no I will not apologize-just because he is dead doesn’t mean I suddenly have to like the guy.

  5. french fan says:

    quelle surprise ;)

  6. Lula says:

    It really all depends on the law- anyone know the law on these matters in California (surrogacy, intestacy, etc.)? I am not sure if surrogacy law matters for the first two kids since he was actually married to Debbie. But if she was implanted with donor eggs and donor sperm (if that is true), is there any “adoption” type paperwork, or once it is all implanted, is it all yours? (sorry that sounds so blunt). Or would the law of the jurisdiction where the kids were born control? I guess that is still CA for the first two (right?) and somewhere in Europe for the third. Holy conflicts of laws snd other super complicated issues, Batman!

    All I hope is that these kids are loved, well taken care of and get to live some sort of a “normal” life. I am not sure they have had a “normal” life up to this point, so anything else is going to be a shock to the system. Some articles have said that they previously had practically no interaction with other children, even their cousins.

    There is something that makes me concerned about them being raised by Katherine and Joe, tho-but if it turns out that is what MJ really put in his will (that they be raised by Katherine, but Joe is there, too, no?), hopefully he knew best.

  7. Leta says:

    @ Tracy

    And your name is boring. Marion is better.

  8. Asha says:

    I love love love your blog, but i am sad you chose to post this. :(

  9. ru says:

    WHO CARES?! He loved them as they were his own. Its NO ONES BUSINESS whos kids they are.

  10. MeganRebekah says:

    He is listed as the father on their birth certificates, which means he didn’t need to adopt them – he was legally their father.
    And further, he was married to Debbie for the birth of the first two children which means that any children born to her during that time are legally his, unless he went to court to prove otherwise.

    This isn’t as dramatic as everyone is trying to make it out.

    In the eyes of the court, the children were his and are legally Katherine’s grandchildren.

  11. Tracy says:

    Marion is actually fugly. And I hate my name but at least it doesnt sound like a 70 year old woman’s name.

1 2 3

Leave a Reply

It's easier to leave comments when you register for an account, where you can also select your own profile photo. Already have a PITNB account? Then sign in.

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.