lwr001 said:

any lawyers on here who can point to where in the constitution grants us the right to privacy that so many are speaking of?

You can walk into any courthouse and get a copy of any person's divorce file. They are rarely sealed. They are public documents.

morningsong said:

teach49 said:

Maybe just post the link?

I know others have posted a link before, but God only knows what thread that's in.

Sometimes the simplest solution is the best.

https://www.documentcloud...nseal.html

Interesting. It clearly says in the docs; quote from Manuela "The closed files have nothing to do with Prince's death", so there ya go! I can certainly understand her right to privacy and she doesn't want anymore media attention, but the court claims that the release of file will not cause her anymore attention than she is already experiencing. I hope Manuela can appeal. She does not need any of this drama!

[Edited 8/16/16 13:05pm]

ISaidLifeIsJustAGame said:

lwr001 said:

any lawyers on here who can point to where in the constitution grants us the right to privacy that so many are speaking of?

You can walk into any courthouse and get a copy of any person's divorce file. They are rarely sealed. They are public documents.

so, why the big fuss here?

ISaidLifeIsJustAGame said:

lwr001 said:

any lawyers on here who can point to where in the constitution grants us the right to privacy that so many are speaking of?

You can walk into any courthouse and get a copy of any person's divorce file. They are rarely sealed. They are public documents.

Then why bother sealing them in the first place?

ISaidLifeIsJustAGame said:

lwr001 said:

any lawyers on here who can point to where in the constitution grants us the right to privacy that so many are speaking of?

You can walk into any courthouse and get a copy of any person's divorce file. They are rarely sealed. They are public documents.

This is what I've never understood. Why is someone's divorce docs, marriage docs, autopsy, etc. public record in the first place? Why is this anyone's business outside of the immediate people involved? Basically, everyone's business is everyone's business, especially a celeb's and that's a shame.

morningsong said:

ISaidLifeIsJustAGame said:

You can walk into any courthouse and get a copy of any person's divorce file. They are rarely sealed. They are public documents.

Then why bother sealing them in the first place?

Exactly! They had the right to seal them in the first place. What changed?

lwr001 said:

ISaidLifeIsJustAGame said:

You can walk into any courthouse and get a copy of any person's divorce file. They are rarely sealed. They are public documents.

so, why the big fuss here?

That is the million dollar question.

There cant be much in those documents.

I will say it again. Where is morningsong with my mountain top?

She filed a Complaint for Divorce. Its boiler plate language.

There is a disclosure of all assets and debts.

They settled.

The End.

[Edited 8/16/16 13:12pm]

endiadj said:

morningsong said:

Then why bother sealing them in the first place?

Exactly! They had the right to seal them in the first place. What changed?

It is up to the Judge whether the documents can be sealed.

The reason you can get copies of all filings at Court is....we dont have "Secret Courts"

[Edited 8/16/16 13:11pm]

cloveringold85 said:

morningsong said:

Sometimes the simplest solution is the best.

https://www.documentcloud...nseal.html

Interesting. It clearly says in the docs; quote from Manuela "The closed files have nothing to do with Prince's death", so there ya go! I can certainly understand her right to privacy and she doesn't want anymore media attention, but the court claims that the release of file will not cause her anymore attention than she is already experiencing. I hope Manuela can appeal. She does not need any of this drama!

[Edited 8/16/16 13:05pm]

She hasnt surely hasnt been quiet since P's death. She has brought attention to herself.

ISaidLifeIsJustAGame said:

endiadj said:

Exactly! They had the right to seal them in the first place. What changed?

It is up to the Judge whether the documents can be sealed.

The reason you can get copies of all filings at Court is....we dont have "Secret Courts"

[Edited 8/16/16 13:11pm]

On Page 10 they go into Right to Privacy. It's funny, ST is saying that any info would be stale now. Then why the hell do they want the information?

[Edited 8/16/16 13:15pm]

cloveringold85 said:

morningsong said:

Sometimes the simplest solution is the best.

https://www.documentcloud...nseal.html

Interesting. It clearly says in the docs; quote from Manuela "The closed files have nothing to do with Prince's death", so there ya go! I can certainly understand her right to privacy and she doesn't want anymore media attention, but the court claims that the release of file will not cause her anymore attention than she is already experiencing. I hope Manuela can appeal. She does not need any of this drama!

[Edited 8/16/16 13:05pm]

Exactly as I speculated earlier in this thread, she is doing this because she doesn't want her business thrown around for everyone to see. I am sure her settlement is probably at the heart of the matter.

[Edited 8/16/16 13:17pm]

This is interesting. The attorneys that petitioned the Probate Judge for a waiver of attorney/client privilege because they believed they were in possession of confidential information in regard to the possbile determination of heirs, represented Bremer Trust in the Family Court case. WTF????

ISaidLifeIsJustAGame said:

leadline said:

cloveringold85 said:

Interesting. It clearly says in the docs; quote from Manuela "The closed files have nothing to do with Prince's death", so there ya go! I can certainly understand her right to privacy and she doesn't want anymore media attention, but the court claims that the release of file will not cause her anymore attention than she is already experiencing. I hope Manuela can appeal. She does not need any of this drama!

[Edited 8/16/16 13:05pm]

Exactly as I speculated earlier in this thread, she is doing this because she doesn't want her business thrown around for everyone to see. I am sure her settlement is probably at the heart of the matter.

[Edited 8/16/16 13:17pm]

I agree. Manuela probably doesn't want information about her business being disclosed. I'm guessing they are looking for financial information pertaining to his estate, as other's have said here. All I know this is beyond crazy and a hot mess!!

teach49 said:

panpac777 said:

Well we didn't buy just a flu bug so they had to switch gears and they always go to drugs! U would think they would come up with something more believable like brain hemridge or something since he had epilepsy as a child. I wonder if he canceled the concert cause he was not ready and had more last minute things to take care of. Read that bible baby. I hope u have an audience cause our entertainment is now silence even when the dial is turned up. I'll be reading it too cause there is nothing left to do. I'm happy 4 u. But not 4 me. [Edited 8/16/16 0:23am]

I so agree with you!! First, they ran the AIDS and Cancer story, then when the autopsy came out with cause of death, they were all over it "Prince drug addict" story!! Then, it was suicide because he knew he was terminally ill (AIDS).....it's just one lie after another & more disgusting stories to defame him. Now, why didn't they run these stories when Prince was alive......oh, yea 'cause they know Prince would have sued them up the arse, and then some!!!!

I don't think the Star-Tribune ran any of those AIDS, cancer etc. stories. The only place I ever saw those were in some very tabloid or extemely marginal blogs, which peddle gossip about EVERY celebrity, not just Prince. The idea "everyone" [in the media] is "defaming" him is just silly. Practically no media outlets are even reporting anything related to Prince or his death anymore.

I do wonder, in seriousness, if some folks here thing that any media outlet should be investigating Prince's life and death, or if it's simply not an appropriate topic for them to expend their journalistic efforts on.

cloveringold85 said:

panpac777 said:

Well we didn't buy just a flu bug so they had to switch gears and they always go to drugs! U would think they would come up with something more believable like brain hemridge or something since he had epilepsy as a child. I wonder if he canceled the concert cause he was not ready and had more last minute things to take care of. Read that bible baby. I hope u have an audience cause our entertainment is now silence even when the dial is turned up. I'll be reading it too cause there is nothing left to do. I'm happy 4 u. But not 4 me. [Edited 8/16/16 0:23am]

I so agree with you!! First, they ran the AIDS and Cancer story, then when the autopsy came out with cause of death, they were all over it "Prince drug addict" story!! Then, it was suicide because he knew he was terminally ill (AIDS).....it's just one lie after another & more disgusting stories to defame him. Now, why didn't they run these stories when Prince was alive......oh, yea 'cause they know Prince would have sued them up the arse, and then some!!!!

rogifan said:

This is the bad thing about the Internet. Anyone can say or 'remember' anything and then it gets passed off as fact. We need more critical thinking. And let me say as a fan of bands in the 80s that absolutely abused drugs/alcohol (some have written books about it) it was a well known fact and many times out in the open. This is absolutely not the case with Prince. Just using critical thinking it's pretty easy to debunk rumors of drug use/abuse, especially when coupled with comments from people who knew him and worked with him that have said the man they know didn't use drugs, didn't allow drugs at Paisley. Heck Sheila E. said she never even saw him take an aspirin. There's no way someone supposedly abusing pills or whatever for decades could keep it hidden from everyone. At some point someone would find out or this persons behavior or appearance/health would change to where people would figure it out.

I agree! Prince didn't like drugs. He was pissed at Vanity (Denise) because she was spending her money on dope & coke! I read somewhere that Prince partied but he didn't "party"? Also, in Rick James' memoirs he talked about how "straight" Prince was and one night when they were on tour, he tried to pour some liquor down Prince's throat. Now, you know Slick Rick doesn't lie about that stuff! God rest his soul. Like you said, someone who is a long-term drug abuser doesn't go "unnoticed". You just can't have the kind of career that Prince had, spanning almost 40-years and being on drugs. Sorry, just not possible. Sheila E. was really close to Prince and knew him from the start of his career, so she would know if he was on something.

morningsong said:

sunset3121 said:

What in the HAIL??? I really could have done without the visuals. All this time and I've never seen someone post something like that.

[Edited 8/16/16 12:46pm]

Sorry I was trying to get through to them that it is not something he would have had and no-one noticed nor a recessive allele that you carry with no symptoms. Saying it wasn't working. I'm used to medical photos which can be rather brutal but I did pick the one where only the thumb and toes were affected. Don't look up Pfieffer as this is as mild as it gets.

Thank you! My God I could have gone my whole life without seeing pictures like that.

disch said:

I don't think the Star-Tribune ran any of those AIDS, cancer etc. stories. The only place I ever saw those were in some very tabloid or extemely marginal blogs, which peddle gossip about EVERY celebrity, not just Prince. The idea "everyone" [in the media] is "defaming" him is just silly. Practically no media outlets are even reporting anything related to Prince or his death anymore.

I do wonder, in seriousness, if some folks here thing that any media outlet should be investigating Prince's life and death, or if it's simply not an appropriate topic for them to expend their journalistic efforts on.

cloveringold85 said:

I so agree with you!! First, they ran the AIDS and Cancer story, then when the autopsy came out with cause of death, they were all over it "Prince drug addict" story!! Then, it was suicide because he knew he was terminally ill (AIDS).....it's just one lie after another & more disgusting stories to defame him. Now, why didn't they run these stories when Prince was alive......oh, yea 'cause they know Prince would have sued them up the arse, and then some!!!!

I was just speaking on the media, in general. It was TMZ and National Enquirer who were posting the AIDS stories.

[Edited 8/16/16 13:49pm]

Typical Americans! Always believing they have the right to 'quote' the First Amendment just to get their own way.

.

What a sad world we live in.

.

Thank goodness I don't live in America.

.

NinaB said:

zoso1978 said:

NinaB said:

rogifan said:

Don't forget murder.

...& suicide. & knowing he was gonna die at 57 & purposely leaving no will.

Or that P planned it in 1986 when he wrote "Sometimes It Snows In April". & the date of 4/21!

sunset3121 said:

morningsong said:

What in the HAIL??? I really could have done without the visuals. All this time and I've never seen someone post something like that.

[Edited 8/16/16 12:46pm]

Sorry I was trying to get through to them that it is not something he would have had and no-one noticed nor a recessive allele that you carry with no symptoms. Saying it wasn't working. I'm used to medical photos which can be rather brutal but I did pick the one where only the thumb and toes were affected. Don't look up Pfieffer as this is as mild as it gets.

It's cool and all, but there are a ton of other people here talking about a lot of different things, you could of org noted that if that person cared that much to know.

Did anyone notice I said the Court paperwork shows that the attorneys that went to the Probate Judge and said they had confidential information in determining possible heirs and requested a waiver from the Judge to give this information to Bremer Trust is now representing Bremer Trust in regard to the release of the divorce pleadings????

This means they gave the information to Bremer Trust and Bremer doesnt want it released for some reason.

[Edited 8/16/16 14:11pm]

if you don't want the public to be interestested in your personal business, then don't marry one of the most famous men in the world. mani lived a luxurious life with prince, you can not expect to have all of the benefits and none of the negatives of the lime light. if it was not for the fans supporting his music she would not have had a large settlement to keep sealed. and i think it applies somewhat to prince as well, you can not reap the benfits of fame without comprimises. if we all did not love him and support him, we would not care about any details of any of this. we want to know because we love him in death, like we loved him in life.

ISaidLifeIsJustAGame said:

Did anyone notice I said the Court paperwork shows that the attorneys that went to the Probate Judge and said they had confidential information in determining possible heirs and requested a waiver from the Judge to give this information to Bremer Trust is now representing Bremer Trust in regard to the release of the information????

This means they gave the information to Bremer Trust and Bremer doesnt want it released for some reason.

I still think it's all about that. I mean, yeah, the ST wants it all, but in the end, I think it's that work project that they want.

Just my two cents...and yes I'm speculating.