Home Celebrity Michael Jackson’s Kids: Biologically No, But In Every Other Way

TMZ is all excited today about some papers that were filed in the Michael Jackson wrongful death suit. The papers say the Jacksons want to exclude discussion of the paternity of Michael Jackson’s kids. Listen: I wrote about this on May 31, 2005– during the child molestation trial one of Jackson’s attorneys, Robert Sanger, said to Judge Rodney Melville: ”The circumstances that relate to the birth of the children wouldn’t be admitted for the truth of the matter. Only his love of the children.”

We made a big deal at the time out of my scoop– that Prince and Paris were carried by Debbie Rowe after she’d used a sperm bank. Later, Michael did use his DNA and chose a surrogate for Blanket. Prince and Paris are not stupid kids. and they know they don’t look anything like the Jacksons. I’m sure this has all been explained to them.

But they are Michael Jackson’s kids, no matter whose DNA they are carrying. He raised them. And crazy as we thought he was — with the masks and keeping them out of the public— those kids have turned out to be extremely bright, well behaved, sophisticated, literate, and considerate. Last year they saved their grandmother from the greedy clutches of relatives. They were heroes.

They are one half Debbie, and one half Michael. And the combination worked. Anything else is meaningless now. Just read Paris’s Twitter feed. She never ceases to impress. And she’s funny. Prince is already working. They comport themselves beautifully. So let’s concede that they are Michael’s children, and that he did a much better job than anyone could have predicted.

My column from May 31, 2005:

When the defense rested in Michael Jackson‘s child molestation case on Friday, a very important issue that had been raised was lost. Defense attorney Robert Sanger as much as conceded that the pop star’s children may not be his own.

Just before playing a taped police interview with Jackson’s then 13-year-old accuser, both sides debated several motions in front of Judge Rodney Melville.

One of them involved what is known in court as the “Outtakes Tape.” This is the video that Jackson’s cameraman Hamid Moslehi made of Martin Bashir as he was filming his documentary, “Living With Michael Jackson.”

During breaks in the Bashir filming, Moslehi let the cameras roll. With his guard down, Jackson discussed his children and his plastic surgery with Moslehi.

In each case, courtroom observers got to hear Jackson tell Bashir that not only were his children born of his own DNA, but that he had slept with Debbie Rowe to conceive the two oldest, Prince and Paris. He said for the third child, known as Blanket, he had used a surrogate whose egg had been fertilized with his own sperm.

As we told you in our April 27 column, our sources have confirmed a tabloid story that Jackson’s children are not his biologically. But in court, this suddenly became critical, as the prosecution and defense argued about allowing the “outtake” statements to be entered as evidence.

That was when Sanger, quite startlingly, uttered these words on the record: “The circumstances that relate to the birth of the children wouldn’t be admitted for the truth of the matter. Only his love of the children.”

In a veiled threat, District Attorney Tom Sneddon told the judge that if statements made by Jackson from the “outtakes” were allowed in, he would call “experts” during the rebuttal stage of the trial.

He didn’t specify, but certainly Sanger and anyone who was paying attention knew that Sneddon might show that Jackson had lied not only about his paternity, but also about his cosmetic surgeries, of which he says he has only had two.

There was, however, little question what Sanger meant about “the births of the children.” If the circumstances as Jackson had described them could not be held out as true, then there could be only one other explanation: They were false.

15 replies to this post
  1. yes, i have known for many years that Blanket is actually Michael’s son. But this business of biological, etc disturbs me. Because Michael raised Prince and Paris from babies. He was their primary parent. And it seems like he did a great job.

  2. I posted a comment but it’s seems to have disappeared so I’ll try again, Roger you seem to know for sure that Blanket is Michael’s biological son? I have seen some similarities between them but I was never 100% sure, did someone show you proof that he really is Michael’s because you seem to be adamant about it. I hope Blanket is Michael’s.

  3. If you are such a follower of Paris’s tweets you would know that she identifies as Black and that she feels she has her Fathers eye shape and teeth. Prince has vittilago and apparently gets treatment for it. Blanket is a mini Michael.

    There is no definitive proof that he did not sleep with Debbie to produce those children or use a sample for in-vitro for that matter. Lisa has stated that he held Debbie carrying his child for many of the last months of their marriage over her head and Debbie miscarried one child as Lisa was just filing for Divorce. It seems a bit extreme to marry, and continue to meet Debbie in court if she was only a surrogate. Otherwise wouldnt we have seen Blankets mother over and over?

    Speculation over the paternity of these children is not only hurtful to them but disrepectful of a man that never did anything in his life to deserve the hate that was thrust upon him. Just because he was “different” than most, he was a target for media types like you and mean mouthed commenters online.

  4. Offering evidence other than for the “truth of the matter” is a way to overcome a hearsay objection, not an admission that a statement is false. Law School 101.

  5. Rodger, you think that Michael is not his biological children? Can you explain why Michael Jackson Jr aka “Prince” has vitiligo on his fingers, arms, adams apple area and armpit? What are the odds that you can get that from some sperm bank? I am waiting.

  6. Is there anyone stupid enough to believe those children were fathered by Michael Jackson? Come on. You act like this is such a big revelation. Stevie Wonder can see that none of those children are his.

  7. AEG never raised the issue of paternity and, in fact, has filed non-opposition to Jacksons motion to exclude paternity evidence. Jacksons themselves raised this issue to stir the pot knowing TMZ would run with it to make AEG look bad for going after the kids. As you have said, they are Michael’s kids in every way that counts..

  8. What terrible, terrible reporting.

    This:

    “That was when Sanger, quite startlingly, uttered these words on the record: “The circumstances that relate to the birth of the children wouldn’t be admitted for the truth of the matter. Only his love of the children.”

    You realize what this was in connection with, right? It was in connection with showing the Bashir documentary – the prosecution only wanted the edited version shown, MJ’s defense wanted the whole thing shown. So then MJ’s side said, well, fine, we’ll show only the things that are important – we can exclude MJ talking about how his kids were born (if you watched the documentary you’d know which parts those are), but MJ talking about his love for his kids, as that relates to “the truth of the matter,” a legal term meaning the specific claims made against MJ – that he was a pedophile.

    Honestly, this level of gutter styled incompetent reporting, and the fact that you coast by on it as though it’s a great “truth” is shameful.

    Those kids know who their father is – though I do expect the next time Paris or Prince addresses it, for you to accuse them of being liars and delusional. Because we must assume you know more about this than they do.

  9. ahahahaha again the old story…. they are his biological kids, people… get a life Roger! Prince has inherited Vitiligo from him… yes he IS his bio father! don’t be stupid and don’t spread lies around, ok?

  10. I know you wont print this, but can you imagine, someone, so determined, to destroy a mans life, that he would call “experts ” to prove he wasn’t the actual father of the children he raised, and his plastic surgery , over a molestation charge, that they had to have known, was bogus, before the first day of trial..
    Looking back on it, how sad that every single aspect of this mans life was scrutinized..
    I really wish you would revisit this in a book regarding the prosecution of Michael Jackson.I think it would do very well.:)

  11. Fertility and sperm clinic were not invented for Michael Jackson….Lots of people use them , not just celebrities, and lots of people dont feel they have to announce it in the newspapers ..
    ..It really isnt anyones business, but it would make sense that he would not give Debbie the opportunity to carry his child as she was a surrogate who was a huge fan and probably would not have agreed to step out of the picture and give uphis j child .

    We do not know what conversations MJ had with his children , but they certainly loved the man and they were obviously the most important thing in his entire life…
    I just think your 2005 article shows Tom Sneddon to be the vile , vindictive person he was ,..
    He disgraced his office by abusing his power..
    If I was one of Sneddons kids , I would PRAY my mother used a donor..
    As far as this civil case, it is not a paternity case,
    If the Jacksons dont want it brought up , it is because they probably arent looking for another tabloid, show trial..
    it is supposed to be about MJ death of which I think alot of people had a cumulative part in ., for many years, and I include the Chandlers , the Arvizos , the Francias and their fairy God fathers Larry Feldman and Tom Sneddon.

  12. I don’t see what the DNA of his kids or his plastic surgeries had to do with the trial in the first place.

    As Isabella Rossellini once said when asked about her adoption of a child, in the end we all come from the same gene pool. So I guess that might be why Paris has Michael’s body in the female version – broad shoulders, long arms and legs – right down to the lower part of her legs being exact replicas of her father’s?

    I wonder how on earth you would know if Blanket carries Michael’s DNA? I know Joe Jackson thinks so, but he also thinks Omer Bhatti is Michael’s son, which he himself and about everyone else seems to have denied.

    Maybe the big secret was only that Debbie and Michael didn’t have actual sex? You can arrange a pregnancy without that. But to Sneddon, who believed hetero porn was proof you are a gay pedophile, that would of course have been big stuff. Still, unless Debbie personally told you she used a sperm bank and actually knew it was not Michael’s, I’m still uncertain – though, as you say, it doesn’t matter. Michael is the father in any case.

What do you think?

Print This Post Print This Post