Uk Paper: Jacko Doc Admits He’s the Dad, Now Wants Custody

by Diane Dimond on July 19, 2009

"Uncle Arnie" Says He's the Real Daddy of Two

Christmas Time With "Uncle Arnie", Who Now Says He's the Real Daddy of Two

As I’ve already reported in this space the mystery sperm donor for Michael Jackson’s two oldest children, 12 year old Prince Michael and 11 year old Paris Katherine, is Jackson’s dermatologist for the last 25 years.

Now, the London Daily Mirror reports the beleaguered Dr. Arnold Klein, already in the cross hairs of a joint DEA/LAPD investigation into whether he illegally wrote prescription drug orders for Jackson, plans to jump into the official custody battle for the kids. According to this report Klein has told friends he wants to take a DNA test and prove once and for all he is the Baby Daddy.

No word on whether Dr. Klein would also want to take custody of 7 year old Blanket whose parentage is still a mystery. In nearly every instance judges like to keep siblings together. My question is why Klein’s sudden interest in playing Daddy? Does he think law enforcement might ease up on him if he’s suddenly responsible for children?

QUOTES FROM THE LONDON DAILY MIRROR :

“Now the 64-year-old millionaire has told friends that he IS the biological father, he wants to bring them up and he is consulting lawyers about his options.  A custody application filed with Los Angeles Superior Court in which Klein formally acknowledges he is Prince Michael and Paris’s father would be one of the most sensational developments yet in the entire Michael Jackson saga.

Klein’s intervention threatens to throw into total chaos the custody deal that was pending between the children’s biological mother, Debbie Rowe, and Jackson’s mother Katherine. A well-placed source, who is close friends with one of Klein’s inner circle, told the Sunday Mirror yesterday: “Arnie is planning to fight for custody of Prince Michael and Paris. “He says he can prove he is their father with Debbie.via Michael Jackson’s doctor to stake custody claim on his kids saying: ‘I’m the daddy’ – mirror.co.uk.”

Now that Dr. Klein apparently plans to fight for custody.  Boy, this could really get ugly.  And the kids are the real victims.

janet4716 July 22, 2009 at 12:00 am

Ok….isn't there a time period that they have to get custody of a child after an adoption or surrogate whatever ? If there wasn't….how could anyone ever adopt? I really do not know…..I remember having friends that adopted and she said there was a 6 week or 6 month period that the biological mother could come back and decide to keep her baby. Now if he was just the sperm donor..which he says he is…..how could he possibly have any say……? Didn't he basically sell his rights? How could someone do that to those children…..he is horrible….right along with Debbie Rowe….she sold out and in my opinion neither deserves that blessing. Children are not objects to be bought…or in Rowes case sold.

DianeDimond July 24, 2009 at 3:51 am

The law in California is that if a man is married to a woman and she is impregnated by donor's sperm the husband is considered the lawful husband of any resulting children. No adoption is needed and the sperm donor has no rights.

mimie July 27, 2009 at 9:07 am

HIS NAME IS MICHEAL JACKSON AND NOT JACKO WHY DO YOU NEED TO BE SO MEAN

Christine July 28, 2009 at 4:50 am

Well thank goodness Jackson was the legal father because Arnie Klein isn't exactly someone I'd want to see the kids go to. It would also have meant splitting the kids up, something profoundly traumatic for all the children. Klein doesn't strike me as the most standup, honest, responsible individual.

Wendy September 8, 2009 at 3:14 pm

I don’t know if I believe this particular man is their father ( I do believe these kids are not MJ’s natural children, not that it matters ) but after reading he showed up at court during the proceedings?
Hmmm…….Why? The plot thickens….

Sarah Richards January 5, 2010 at 10:32 am

Since you wrote this article Diane, Mark Lester has come forward with his sperm donation story. Do you give this account any credence? He says that MJ was afraid of sex (might explain the plethora of porn at Neverland!) and that he was asked to donate sperm in 1996. I guess the timeline is credible, but I for one ain't buying it. I think MJ had sexual desires albeit not natural ones. Do you subscribe to the fact that he probably didn't have relations with women at all? I think I read somewhere that you didn't believe his marriages were "real". I certainly note that the kids are white and in some pics I've seen Prince is very like Arnold Klein.

DianeDimond January 5, 2010 at 12:35 pm

Sarah – I give Lester's story credence to this point: I believe MJ DID ask him to donate sperm, he apparently had no compunction doing so. In the "different" world of Michael Jackson things like asking others to have children for you seemed perfectly normal. Dr. Arnold Klein says MJ also asked him to donate sperm and I continue to believe – because of what various confidential sources tell me – that Klein is the father of the older two. I believe there was a pact made early on between Dr. Klein, his nurse Debby Rowe and Jackson to make babies for MJ to take home to Neverland.
Yes, I do subscribe to the idea that he probably didn't have sexual relations with women. Jackson himself told a story about how a teenage Tatum O'Neil came at him in a romantic way and he panicked – this at a time when most teen boys would relish sexual attraction Jackson was repelled by it. Much has been said about my televised statements that he and Lisa Marie Presley never had relations, but I believe that to be true. I'll add to that and report now that Debbie Rowe has also told close friends SHE and Michael never had sex either. Their children were conceived in a laboratory. ~ DD

Sarah Richards January 5, 2010 at 6:49 pm

Thank you Diane for replying, was anything normal in the wonderful world of MJ! I agree with your comments but am curious as to why you think Jackson's marriage to Lisa Marie was not consummated, she has always maintained otherwise in public.

DianeDimond January 6, 2010 at 12:29 am

Very trustworthy sources, Sarah. Very trustworthy insiders.

Sarah Richards October 21, 2010 at 3:44 am

Thanks for your replies to my countless comments over the last year, i find your reporting of this case to be excellent. I particularly like how you aren’t afraid to say what you think with regard to the LMP scenario, MJ’s ‘s fans are particularly adamant over his “love ” for her. I guess it has never been in her interests to say that he wasn’t interested in her whilst they were married. Let’s see what Oprah can ascertain in her interview tomorrow! I think that it is telling that Oprah, who has been known for her lack of loyalty to MJ in 2005 was chosen to do the interviews with LMP and Ma and Pa Jackson. Or perhaps the pay check was too good to refuse!

Sarah Richards October 22, 2010 at 1:55 am

Diane, I am wondering after seeing the LMP interview with Oprah, what your take is on what she had to say. Do you still believe your trustworthy sources? I had always been of the opinion that the marriage was not commsumated and that LMP was dumped when she had served her purpose. In the interview she talks of how their marriage was normal and they continued their relationship for 4 years after their divorce. There are infact pictures and videos on you tube of them in 1997 and 1998! Do you believe it or do you think that it is all spin? It’s odd that she waited until he was dead to say nice things about him, up until then she had been very umcomplimentary about MJ. If they had continued their relationship after 1996, surely someone would have mentioned it, ie the various sources at Neverland, Bob Jones or one of MJ’s loose lipped family members! Please let me know your thoughts!

Sarah Richards January 6, 2010 at 2:30 pm

Thanks for your reply, I'll take your word for it. Nothing is what it seems hey?

Triny January 7, 2010 at 8:17 pm

If there is one thing I've learned, don't trust the media. There have been many people that have been around both Michael and Lisa Marie and have witnessed their relationship. They all felt the relationship was real.

Diane October 23, 2010 at 5:11 pm

I only saw snippets of the interview – albeit long ones – on Entertainment Tonight. The bottom line in my opinion? Theirs was not a “Normal” marriage…by that I mean a husband and wife who live together, go to bed together, make love together on a regular basis. Do I think she kept in contact with him after they officially separated? yes, that’s possible. yes, I think its odd that only NOW does she decide to say positive things about him. I think it speaks volumes about HER.

I continue to believe Michael Jackson preferred male/boy sexual companionship over female companionship.

Sarah Richards November 9, 2010 at 9:54 am

You are so right Diane, I have recently come across some 2005 MJ trial documents on the net that speak of 14 items that the defence deemed irrelevant to the case and wanted banned from being mentioned in the court room, including the baby dangling situation, the cocaine in the underpants and the DNA of another found on MJ’s mattress pad. I an not sure if you have seen these docs however it states that their were 4 strains of DNA found: one being MJ’s and 3 other male DNA strains, no female DNA at all. If there was a way to tell the age of the owner of the DNA I think MJ would have been languishing in jail for 5 years by now! It is a pity this information was not widely available before, it may stop the nutty MJ fans in their tracks when trying to convince the world that MJ was a normal hetero male!

Hilltophouse November 10, 2010 at 9:34 pm

Quite so Sarah Richards. You can see the 14 items deemed irrelevant on the ‘desiree speaks’ excellent blogsite in all their glory. The finding of 4 male dna’s on mattress and sheets really proves that MJ was gay. You can’t argue with science. As for item 14 the cocaine in the underpants – well your guess is as good as mine!

CLS August 31, 2011 at 3:25 pm

Hilltophouse, if you take the forensic lab’s report of the DNA of four different males found in semen samples and keep it within the context of the rest of the data on the countless legal documents, it does not prove Michael was gay. It supports the fact he was a pedophile. This includes the analysis of what was seized during the raid, by criminologists who specialize in child sexual abuse cases. I communicated with a criminologist from Southern California who read both the public and nonpublic documents. His opinion does not corroborate with yours. It does, however, corroborate with those I know who knew or dealt with Michael when he was alive. I think it’s important to not sidestep the real issue, with speculation.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: