HohnerCatcher said:

SoulAlive said:

I should clarify....Janet should only file a lawsuit IF there really is no child.Otherwise,the truth could come out in a messy court case.

is this why she never sued?

Even If there is A Child She can still Sue the Family for Slandering after all If the Child is Adopted & Janet Didn't use her Name but Instead Allowed the Adopted Parents/Family to Step in & Sign all Documents How the hell would A court find out that A Child was Born to Janet unless the Court do some Serious Digging into the Case to find out otherwise She can still Sue The DeBarge's & if possible file A motion that her Medical Records & stuff aren't open during the Case this way The Courts couldn't order medical records in for evidence .

[Edited 9/5/11 18:14pm]

[Edited 9/5/11 18:14pm]

lawsuit or no lawsuit,Janet needs to let Etterlene know that it ain't cool to go to the tabloids and spread lies.She also needs to ask James if he could put a stop to this madness.His silence is only fueling the speculation and lies.

Timmy84 said:

prodigalfan said:

Because NOT ONCE did anyone (any magazine or newspaper rag or legitimate) EVER wrote a story that Latoya was in the family way.

There was WIDE SPREAD reports of Janet being VISIBLY pregnant during her marriage to James Debarge.

Maybe you haven't been a fan back in those days... maybe you are not old enough.... but there are SEVERAL people stating the same thing.... they read stories in legititmate papers... (not National Enquirer we are talking about Jet magazine and in my case the TOLEDO freakin BLADE that reported just that.

You just can't deal with that small little issue.... That is just IGNORED because it can not be explained.

Reports or rumors?

SoulAlive said:

lawsuit or no lawsuit,Janet needs to let Etterlene know that it ain't cool to go to the tabloids and spread lies.She also needs to ask James if he could put a stop to this madness.His silence is only fueling the speculation and lies.

i took an entertainment law class this past spring, and one of the things we talked about is the fact that public people have far less 'rights' so to speak than a private person when it comes to civil court. in order to prove defamation for a public person, you not only have to prove the falseness of the allegation, you also have to prove actual malice. you have to prove that the person reporting the story knew it was false, and reported it anyway.

now, you can speculate that etterlene is being malicious for spreading this story. but what if she actually believes it, or was it was told to her and she believes it? is it malicious for her to report it? i would think so, but again when you're a public person, that line becomes much more blurry.

rush limbaugh repeatedly accused bill and hillary clinton of murdering vincent foster. he's still beating that horse nearly twenty years later. but do you recall them suing rush or anyone else making that allegation? maybe rush believes his b.s., or the 'evidence' he's seen.

or what about maureen orth who has written scads of nasty shit about mj for vanity fair, incl. saying that he went to an african tribe to drink blood in some sort of voodoo ritual, which just reeks of a racist fantasy. she accused mj of molesting a young asian boy until said boy came forward to say it was a lie. well, maureen's 'source' told her that. you can say she was negligent as a journalist for not checking these stories out, and just taking them at face value, but a court would argue that being a poor journalist is not the same as malice. again, you have to actually prove that the person knew that it was false at the time they reported it. maureen orth will argue that she had no reason to believe these things were false.

finally, a public person has to prove actual damage. in spite of all the shit thrown at bill and hillary, they are more successful than they've ever been. in spite of mj's various 'trials by media', his records continued to sell and the man was on the verge of performing 50 concerts that sold out in record time. none of these people could ever walk into court with limbaugh and orth respectively and argue that they've been 'damaged'.

so given that scenario, janet will never get what she wants. it's not worth it to sue etterlene, and it is highly doubtful that trying to speak to etterlene or james would do any good. if they were reasonable people who could be spoken to intelligently, and again assuming that none of it is true, they wouldn't be doing this shit in the first place.

[Edited 9/6/11 12:18pm]

prodigalfan said:

Timmy84 said:

Reports or rumors?

well Timmy... I don't know. My hometown newspaper REPORTED in the entertainment section. The same news paper that report the results of POUS elections. I also heard rumors...but I READ that report. READ IT. That is the reason I am so adamant that I know what I read, and get irritated when people tell me that I did not.

And then it went away. I don't put it past respected papers to post rumors and claim it was an actual report. We have to remember, in 1984, news was respected, in 2011 if this story was printed on some respective paper, you get people threatening to sue papers to post on something that could be inacurrate or not. That's why it's shady why people think the info they heard about this pregnancy rings any truth to it.

kibbles said:

SoulAlive said:

lawsuit or no lawsuit,Janet needs to let Etterlene know that it ain't cool to go to the tabloids and spread lies.She also needs to ask James if he could put a stop to this madness.His silence is only fueling the speculation and lies.

i took an entertainment law class this past spring, and one of the things we talked about is the fact that public people have far less 'rights' so to speak than a private person when it comes to civil court. in order to prove defamation for a public person, you not only have to prove the falseness of the allegation, you also have to prove actual malice. you have to prove that the person reporting the story knew it was false, and reported it anyway.

now, you can speculate that etterlene is being malicious for spreading this story. but what if she actually believes it, or was it was told to her and she believes it? is it malicious for her to report it? i would think so, but again when you're a public person, that line becomes much more blurry.

rush limbaugh repeatedly accused bill and hillary clinton of murdering vincent foster. he's still beating that horse nearly twenty years later. but do you recall them suing rush or anyone else making that allegation? maybe rush believes his b.s., or the 'evidence' he's seen.

or what about maureen orth who has written scads of nasty shit about mj for vanity fair, incl. saying that he went to an african tribe to drink blood in some sort of voodoo ritual, which just reeks of a racist fantasy. she accused mj of molesting a young asian boy until said boy came forward to say it was a lie. well, maureen's 'source' told her that. you can say she was negligent as a journalist for not checking these stories out, and just taking them at face value, but a court would argue that being a poor journalist is not the same as malice. again, you have to actually prove that the person knew that it was false at the time they reported it. maureen orth will argue that she had no reason to believe these things were false.

finally, a public person has to prove actual damage. in spite of all the shit thrown at bill and hillary, they are more successful than they've ever been. in spite of mj's various 'trials by media', his records continued to sell and the man was on the verge of performing 50 concerts that sold out in record time. none of these people could ever walk into court with limbaugh and orth respectively and argue that they've been 'damaged'.

so given that scenario, janet will never get what she wants. it's not worth it to sue etterlene, and it is highly doubtful that trying to speak to etterlene or james would do any good. if they were reasonable people who could be spoken to intelligently, and again assuming that none of it is true, they wouldn't be doing this shit in the first place.

[Edited 9/6/11 12:18pm]

You Damn right about that If James himself was any kinda person He would tell his Family & Mother to go set down & stop with this Bull . I'm starting to Believe that James maybe liking the attention of been rumored as Fathering A Child with Janet Jackson or else he would stop his Family from thrown around these Accusations of Janet & him having A Baby , & each time they come out with this Crap their story changed So people/fans should not even believe A damn thing that comes out of That Famlies mouths Cause its clear they don't know Jack neither .

& people want to Talk about Katherine Jackson , at least Katherine isn't going to the Tab's & telling Crazy untrue Stories about some crap she don't know about & you don't see her Online on Facebook trying to be Holy & God & speaking the Word Yet goes out & doesn't some crazy Sh!t like this , Katherine is Private & I truely respect Katherine for not going out trying to make money off her kids & Grand kids Like Mrs.DeBarge is doing .

[Edited 9/6/11 18:04pm]

Where is James at? How come he's just sitting back and allowing his mother to do this?! Why hasn't he issued a statement to deny (or confirm) what his mother is saying? Something strange is going on with that family.

SoulAlive said:

Where is James at? How come he's just sitting back and allowing his mother to do this?! Why hasn't he issued a statement to deny (or confirm) what his mother is saying? Something strange is going on with that family.

Thats what I'd like to know too Were's James & why is he allowing His Brothers & Mother to Continue this rat raid on Janet why hasn't he not said anything about this .

Like I said above in my Previous Post : I'm starting to think James is in on it too I think hes liking the Attention of him Fathering A Baby w/Janet or else he would stop his Family from coming out w/Accusations .

Timmy84 said:

prodigalfan said:

well Timmy... I don't know. My hometown newspaper REPORTED in the entertainment section. The same news paper that report the results of POUS elections. I also heard rumors...but I READ that report. READ IT. That is the reason I am so adamant that I know what I read, and get irritated when people tell me that I did not.

And then it went away. I don't put it past respected papers to post rumors and claim it was an actual report. We have to remember, in 1984, news was respected, in 2011 if this story was printed on some respective paper, you get people threatening to sue papers to post on something that could be inacurrate or not. That's why it's shady why people think the info they heard about this pregnancy rings any truth to it.

^ I don't think so. '84, '85, etc. I'm just having a hard time believing that even if a respected paper reported it that it means it actually happened.

The name Etterlene reminds me of 'chitterling'

Another thing here is what gets me here is Why? do The DeBarge's & some people think Janet's Child w/James would be A Light skin Child Have they watched the Maury Show ........LOL its Possible that Janet & James could produce A Caramel Brown Complexion Child given the Fact that James is half Black & mother is Very Dark Skin & Janet is Brown skin herself I Notice every child that has been Connected to this Rumor has been A light skin Child " Brandi Jackson & Now Omer Bhatti ) .

i'm very surprised that No one has never Linked Janets Other 2 Nieces Randy's Daughter "Steveanna" & Marlon's Daughter "Brittny " who both Look like their Aunt Janet to be the kid

Marlon's Daughter look like A corban copy of Janet , & Randy's Daughter is Mix yet she Favors Randy & Janet a lot .

& even with Steveanna been Mix & having A Persian Mother & Black Father Her Skin tone is A Caramel Brown color shes not light skinned ........LOL

& I'm very Surprised that The DeBarge's & People have Never tried to Link Janet's Other Niece's who look like Her to be A DeBarge/Jackson child they always go after A Light Skinned Child .

it would be Funny If Janet's Daughter isn't Light skined But A Caramel Brown Skin Girl Who looks like Her Mother & people & the DeBarge's keep picking out & Targeting Light Skin Kids.......LOL.

Its not Funny But its Possible & who's to say Just Because James is Light skinned & mix Means His Child with Janet Would be as well .

I'm like is it me Or does anyone else Notice them Targeting only Light skin children to be of the Jackson/DeBarge kid they don't realise the Child could be A Pretty Brown skin Kid .

& lets not forget that even some of the DeBarge Grandchildren aren't all Light skined neither for example ( Javon Chico DeBarge ) is Brown skin don't look anything like his Light skin Father & then theres A few other Brown skinned DeBarge Grandchildren to in the mix .

So Why? are they Targetting only Light skin Kids to be Janet & James Child when even in their own Family they have A few Brown Skin Grand children .

& I'm Just been Real Given he Fact that Mama DeBarge has all her Grandkids Pictures upon her site so You can see theres A Few Brown skin Grand kids hell Some of them look Fully African American & nothing like their Light skinned / Mix Fathers .

Thats why it trips me out to see them Brining up this Rumor & each time this Rumor comes out they link A child to it thats Light skinned its like they except for the CHild to be Lighted skinned Which may not even be the case & maybe why Janet is able to hide the kid Cause No one is looking for A Brown skin Kid .

[Edited 9/7/11 12:22pm]

rdhull said:

The name Etterlene reminds me of 'chitterling'

with her mouthing off to the Tab's that would be A good Nickname for her .........LOL Chitterling .

jax85 said:

rdhull said:

The name Etterlene reminds me of 'chitterling'

with her mouthing off to the Tab's that would be A good Nickname for her .........LOL Chitterling .

omg

Watch Omer isn't going to say shit about this neither , I'm curious to know what his Parents think of him allowing people to think Hes A Jackson Or on the Other hand Maybe he is A Jackson , But Hell at this Rate everyone & anyone can be A Jackson if they Have Talent & can sing & Dance & Favor them .

Someone should ask Omer Bhatti were can the Rest of Us Poor Black kids Get A "Jackson Kid Application " from so we can also Be Jacksons too ..........LMAO .

Timmy84 said:

^ I don't think so. '84, '85, etc. I'm just having a hard time believing that even if a respected paper reported it that it means it actually happened.

A frustrated Janet lashes out: There is no secret child,dammit!

prodigalfan said:

Timmy84 said:

^ I don't think so. '84, '85, etc. I'm just having a hard time believing that even if a respected paper reported it that it means it actually happened.

You might be right Timmy. On the other hand... I can't help thinking about how for years there were rumors of Diana Ross having a baby by Berry Gordy. YEARS. And low and behold.... Just saying, sometimes these things do happen.

Difference is Diana was known to be pregnant, had it, and people already KNEW it was Berry's child though neither she nor Berry said anything for years. Janet ain't really had to do all of that. It's not similar.

Alot of people still believe the rumor that Janet had a baby and gave it to Rebbie to raise.Which begs the question.....how many children does Rebbie have and what are their ages? Let's do the math....

SoulAlive said:

Alot of people still believe the rumor that Janet had a baby and gave it to Rebbie to raise.Which begs the question.....how many children does Rebbie have and what are their ages? Let's do the math....

Rebbie only has three. One was born in 1971, another in 1977, and the last (Austin) in 1985 lol

SoulAlive said:

A frustrated Janet lashes out: There is no secret child,dammit!

I might have to make some Janet gifs now.....

Timmy84 said:

prodigalfan said:

You might be right Timmy. On the other hand... I can't help thinking about how for years there were rumors of Diana Ross having a baby by Berry Gordy. YEARS. And low and behold.... Just saying, sometimes these things do happen.

Difference is Diana was known to be pregnant, had it, and people already KNEW it was Berry's child though neither she nor Berry said anything for years. Janet ain't really had to do all of that. It's not similar.

Timmy84 said:

SoulAlive said:

Alot of people still believe the rumor that Janet had a baby and gave it to Rebbie to raise.Which begs the question.....how many children does Rebbie have and what are their ages? Let's do the math....

Rebbie only has three. One was born in 1971, another in 1977, and the last (Austin) in 1985 lol

SoulAlive said:

Timmy84 said:

Rebbie only has three. One was born in 1971, another in 1977, and the last (Austin) in 1985 lol

Now now...

Timmy84 said:

SoulAlive said:

Now now...

he is with Janet a lot

[img:$uid]http://www.cherryconnect.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/FP_4733997_Screening_WhyMarriedToo_RAM_032210.jpg[/img:$uid]

and may I say Rebbie is lookin' REAL good for 61.....

I dont know if I'm imagined this or not but I thought I once read a magazine interview with Janet where she said that she did get pregnant during her first marriage but she had a miscarriage. Does anyone know if Janet ever said something like that?

NaughtyKitty said:

I dont know if I'm imagined this or not but I thought I once read a magazine interview with Janet where she said that she did get pregnant during her first marriage but she had a miscarriage. Does anyone know if Janet ever said something like that?

Nope, she's never said she miscarried a child.

SEANMAN said:

NaughtyKitty said:

I dont know if I'm imagined this or not but I thought I once read a magazine interview with Janet where she said that she did get pregnant during her first marriage but she had a miscarriage. Does anyone know if Janet ever said something like that?

Nope, she's never said she miscarried a child.

Ok thanks! I must've imagined she said it then

NaughtyKitty said:

SEANMAN said:

Nope, she's never said she miscarried a child.

Ok thanks! I must've imagined she said it then

I always say that with as many people who say she's had a baby, she may have an immaculate conception

[Edited 9/8/11 19:56pm]

bboy87 said:

Timmy84 said:

Now now...

he is with Janet a lot

[img:$uid]http://www.cherryconnect.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/FP_4733997_Screening_WhyMarriedToo_RAM_032210.jpg[/img:$uid]

and may I say Rebbie is lookin' REAL good for 61.....

I was just about to say that this young man looks like Janet especially his smile... then I realized that Janet and Rebbie look alike especially by their smiles.