In the continuing bizarre saga of the cultural icon, Michael Jackson, we have a case yesterday issued by the Court of Appeals.
In 1999, while still married, Michael and his then wife, Deborah, agreed that Michael would have sole legal and physical custody of their 2 children. Deborah was granted visitation rights. A few months later, Michael and Deborah's marriage was dissolved. Six months later, like any good mother of Wacko Jacko's kids would, Deborah decided to stop visiting the children because it "was not working out for various reasons." Of course, she then agreed to relinquish all visitation rights.
In October 2001, Deborah went to court to try to terminate her parental rights. In an incredible show of judicial innocence, the court granted Deborah's motion and based its finding on Deborah's belief that "it is in the best interest of the minor children that [the children] remain in [Michael's] exclusive custody without contact by [Deborah].
More than 2 years later, Deborah tried to get temporary exclusive custody of the kids pending a psychiatric evaluation of Michael. She was concerned about Michael's prosecution for child abuse and his association with the Nation Of Islam and their professed hatred of Jews--Deborah is Jewish. Michael's attorneys argued that since she had no parental rights anymore, she had no right to custody of the children.
Yesterday, the Court of Appeals found that the original order terminating Deborah's parental rights was void. The court held that parents cannot agree to terminate their parental rights. Even if they don't agree, a court can't terminate parental rights without a extensive examination of what is in the child's best interest.
If there is a silver lining in all this, at least she was concerned enough about Michael's conduct to try to get her kids back.
Why can't Michael just go away? And leave the kids behind.
Recent Comments