luv4u said:

babynoz said:

New article claims that a son has been found. Don't know how true this is.

http://www.smobserved.com.../1680.html

From drfunkenberry Facebook page:

A rumor is being reported that PRINCE who passed away on April 21st, 2016, may have a living illegitimate son according to the Santa Monica Observer. I want to stress this is a rumor and the estate has not made an official confirmation on this matter. The article advises the estate, which is being run by Bremer Trust, they are aware of the results.

http://www.drfunkenberry....has-a-son/

Thanks, I saw that. It was also pointed out on lsa that the article incorrectly says that Prince never married so I guess this is a tabloid story.

I do wish those connected to Prince would refrain from posting rumors or anything unconfirmed.

babynoz said:

It was also pointed out on lsa that the article incorrectly says that Prince never married so I guess this is a tabloid story.

The site isn't an obvious tabloid though. So many former legit media outlets are now doing sloppy, get'em-out-there posts. It's a lot tougher to figure out than it used to be. IMO you were right to post it.

LuxLove said:

I do wish those connected to Prince would refrain from posting rumors or anything unconfirmed.

I seldom visit there but I think funkenberry is a celeb gossip site, right?

I read the story and when it said that Prince never married I figured that santa monica observed must be a tabloid, which is what I asked on the other thread.

Eileen said:

babynoz said:

It was also pointed out on lsa that the article incorrectly says that Prince never married so I guess this is a tabloid story.

The site isn't an obvious tabloid though. So many former legit media outlets are now doing sloppy, get'em-out-there posts. It's a lot tougher to figure out than it used to be. IMO you were right to post it.

I agree. I was under the impression that you could discuss a rumor as long as you don't report it as a fact and you give the source.

babynoz said:

LuxLove said:

I do wish those connected to Prince would refrain from posting rumors or anything unconfirmed.

I seldom visit there but I think funkenberry is a celeb gossip site, right?

I read the story and when it said that Prince never married I figured that santa monica observed must be a tabloid, which is what I asked on the other thread.

I thought he was just a promoter but dunno.

babynoz said:

Eileen said:

The site isn't an obvious tabloid though. So many former legit media outlets are now doing sloppy, get'em-out-there posts. It's a lot tougher to figure out than it used to be. IMO you were right to post it.

I agree. I was under the impression that you could discuss a rumor as long as you don't report it as a fact and you give the source.

Their FB and Wiki don't look like a tabloid. It's the most widely read paper in Santa Monica and they are reporting about an alleged Santa Monica lab result. Presumably they have a source, might turn out to be a bad one, maybe not.

Right at the moment the Prince news isn't up on their FB.

https://www.facebook.com/...6645915705

Eileen said:

babynoz said:

I agree. I was under the impression that you could discuss a rumor as long as you don't report it as a fact and you give the source.

Their FB and Wiki don't look like a tabloid. It's the most widely read paper in Santa Monica and they are reporting about an alleged Santa Monica lab result. Presumably they have a source, might turn out to be a bad one, maybe not.

Right at the moment the Prince news isn't up on their FB.

https://www.facebook.com/...6645915705

Thanks for the info. I had never heard of them before.

I thought we had word a week or a few ago (time blends together) that they confirmed 6 heirs, and that they were whom we expected (siblings/half siblings etc).

How come a week or so later they are writing stuff that a son DOES exist?!

Though, this 'SMobserved' makes it SOUND like hogwash just because of the pathetic writing: 'this young man who is now an adult' Well yes, since they are saying early 80s he'd HAVE to be an adult. They sure take us for idiots! But then it says the '700 other claimants' will all be wiped out due to 'authentic claim of one full child' - Um, No. They don't just say 'okay found one, we're done here.' They still have to complete the investigation, if that were the case - unless all 699 of them changed their minds?!

.

I guess I thought they already finalized that investigation when they stated their are those six heirs...? Kind of the same reason Tyka and co finally announcing the August plans after all that time...

.

This just makes me angry on his behalf. If he really did have a son, and all that time the mom *knew* and didn't think to tell him...maybe not right away - for WHATEVER reason it was - but even later in life, perhaps even after his two marraiges ended without any offspring. He had a right to know he was a father <if this story does have any truth>. It was the one thing he wanted.

ForeverPaisley said:

I thought we had word a week or a few ago (time blends together) that they confirmed 6 heirs, and that they were whom we expected (siblings/half siblings etc).

How come a week or so later they are writing stuff that a son DOES exist?!

Though, this 'SMobserved' makes it SOUND like hogwash just because of the pathetic writing: 'this young man who is now an adult' Well yes, since they are saying early 80s he'd HAVE to be an adult. They sure take us for idiots! But then it says the '700 other claimants' will all be wiped out due to 'authentic claim of one full child' - Um, No. They don't just say 'okay found one, we're done here.' They still have to complete the investigation, if that were the case - unless all 699 of them changed their minds?!

.

I guess I thought they already finalized that investigation when they stated their are those six heirs...? Kind of the same reason Tyka and co finally announcing the August plans after all that time...

AFAIK it was simply agreed that 6 people were accepted legally as siblings. That is not the same as being given the final legal nod as being an heir. At the same time all parties are still aware that other potential heir determinations remain in progress.

Regarding the SMO comment about the 700 other claimants - it seems to be referencing people who are claiming to be siblings, cousins, and other distant relatives. It wouldn't be a surprise if all such claims were wiped by Prince having a legal child. Why would the court waste estate dollars rummaging through the backgrounds of people who couldn't possibly inherit?

Eileen said:

ForeverPaisley said:

I thought we had word a week or a few ago (time blends together) that they confirmed 6 heirs, and that they were whom we expected (siblings/half siblings etc).

How come a week or so later they are writing stuff that a son DOES exist?!

Though, this 'SMobserved' makes it SOUND like hogwash just because of the pathetic writing: 'this young man who is now an adult' Well yes, since they are saying early 80s he'd HAVE to be an adult. They sure take us for idiots! But then it says the '700 other claimants' will all be wiped out due to 'authentic claim of one full child' - Um, No. They don't just say 'okay found one, we're done here.' They still have to complete the investigation, if that were the case - unless all 699 of them changed their minds?!

.

I guess I thought they already finalized that investigation when they stated their are those six heirs...? Kind of the same reason Tyka and co finally announcing the August plans after all that time...

AFAIK it was simply agreed that 6 people were accepted legally as siblings. That is not the same as being given the final legal nod as being an heir. At the same time all parties are still aware that other potential heir determinations remain in progress.

Regarding the SMO comment about the 700 other claimants - it seems to be referencing people who are claiming to be siblings, cousins, and other distant relatives. It wouldn't be a surprise if all such claims were wiped by Prince having a legal child. Why would the court waste estate dollars rummaging through the backgrounds of people who couldn't possibly inherit?

Okay I can agree with that they wouldn't waste their time on other claimants being distant, distant, 14times removed family members or something, just wasn't sure how many more of those could be possible offspring claims. Unless you mean to say they did all those claims first to rule that out and then if no-go, then that would be round two.

I guess I missed out on the part that the 6 siblings were being accepted as legal siblings, not that they were JUST accepted, as in the rest of the investigation isn't complete yet. Thanks for clearing that up.

Still really angers me though if this person IS the son and even he and/or the mother could have known the whole time.

ForeverPaisley said:

There is so much "information" swirling around Prince and his life and death, that no one can keep it straight or know if ANY of it is true. In Toure's book, he said a doctor in Minnesota claimed Prince and Mayte lost twins - not a single child - after birth in 1996. Then, his brother through another source (not Toure's book) stated there was an out-of-wedlock child. Link all of this to the insiders who have kept his secrets over the past recent years. How could these people function? He had his own CIA.

ForeverPaisley said:

1Sasha said:

There is so much "information" swirling around Prince and his life and death, that no one can keep it straight or know if ANY of it is true. In Toure's book, he said a doctor in Minnesota claimed Prince and Mayte lost twins - not a single child - after birth in 1996. Then, his brother through another source (not Toure's book) stated there was an out-of-wedlock child. Link all of this to the insiders who have kept his secrets over the past recent years. How could these people function? He had his own CIA.

Well we know there was only one child- I'm sure Mayte would've said otherwise by now and actually Prince would've probably said when she was expecting since that was no secret. It was F'd up of Toure to put that in the book.

I think much of what is going around is bull- you have people who dissed him claiming to love him now he's gone, people who didn't know him claiming they were friends, people who were acquainted claiming to be super close- all sorts of crap. He would hate all this, how can he rest in peace with all this?

babynoz said:

luv4u said:

Thanks, I saw that. It was also pointed out on lsa that the article incorrectly says that Prince never married so I guess this is a tabloid story.

It mentions both Mayte and Manuela in the body of the article? It does say that he was unmarried when he died, yes.

YaThink said:

We keep hearing about possible sons. Was hoping he had a daughter, if true.

selah said:

Dibblekins said:

babynoz said:

Thanks, I saw that. It was also pointed out on lsa that the article incorrectly says that Prince never married so I guess this is a tabloid story.

It mentions both Mayte and Manuela in the body of the article? It does say that he was unmarried when he died, yes.

No. Evidently you didn't read it last night. What actually happened is the writer changed the story after somebody wrote a comment correcting him. It originally said....

"He never married and died without a will."

Warning from the estate's lawyers:

purplethunder3121 said:

Warning from the estate's lawyers:

LikeShow more reactions

Comment

YaThink said:

Vee0319 said:

selah said:

http://m.startribune.com/...ection=%2F

I certainly hope not.

Vee0319 said:

How did this Santa Monica Center get to test this guy's blood against Prince's, without filing a claim? Bremer has a protocol in place.

I wondered that same thing. The only hint I see is "The claimant, who never met his father, has negotiated with the Singer's estate and preserved his privacy (i.e., his mother desired anonymity) until today." That could possibly have resulted in a preliminary test.

Also, wasn't it stated here already that the family had submitted the names of two possible children to the court? I read this but don't recall specifics. If true, could support the above statement.

BTW, I'm not trying to argue that this SMO article is true. Just watching like others and speculating on possible sense of it or not.

purplethunder3121 said:

Warning from the estate's lawyers:

LikeShow more reactions

Comment

I certainly hope they don't pull down everything on YouTube.