Well there are two different issues here. The first is whether or not MJ could realistically get a flight being who he is.

The second, which is what the motion refers to, is whether or not MJ could, assuming he got a flight, potentially seek refuge in a country which doesn't have a reciprocal extradition arrangement. The answer to that is, palpably, yes. It's totally irrelevant whether or not he could be recognised in that instance.

And the motion goes on from that to argue that the higher the bail, the less likely he would wish to seek refuge in such a country, for financial reasons. That argument is pretty logical. If you think that sort of money is nothing to MJ - fine. If you don't - fine. I don't know the true details of MJ's investment portfolio, and I suspect nobody else here does either.

Editcosquotedsomeonebymistakelikealoseredit
[This message was edited Wed May 26 6:47:40 2004 by TheFrog]

Money Motive?
Jackson's Alleged Victim's Family Seeks Damages in Connection to Molestation Case



May 26, 2004 — The family of Michael Jackson's alleged victim in his child molestation case has filed a claim for damages against the Los Angeles Department of Children and Family Services, ABC News has learned.


Jackson has pleaded not guilty to 10 charges that include: felony conspiracy with 28 overt acts involving child abduction, false imprisonment, extortion; committing lewd acts upon a child; attempting to commit a lewd act; and administering an intoxicating agent to a child.

The alleged victim in the case is believed to be a cancer survivor, now 14 years old, who spent time at Jackson's Neverland ranch and appeared in the British documentary Living With Michael Jackson, which was broadcast on ABC last year.

ABC News has obtained a document, filed Tuesday on behalf of the alleged victim and his relatives, that seeks damages against the Los Angeles Department of Children and Family Services for allegedly violating their privacy. The family's claim revolves around disclosure of the details of the confidential investigation that was conducted by the department before Jackson was first criminally charged in the molestation case last November.

According to an internal government memo on the investigation, Los Angeles police and child welfare officials concluded that the sexual abuse allegations against Jackson were "unfounded." It was not until after investigators in Santa Barbara reviewed the case a couple of times that officials decided to pursue criminal charges against Jackson.


Trouble Started With The Smoking Gun

There was no public knowledge of the Los Angeles investigation and its conclusions until The Smoking Gun posted the government memo on its Web site in December 2003.

The memo said Jackson's alleged victim "denied any form of sexual abuse" and said that he never "slept in the same bed as the entertainer." The boy also denied the allegations when questioned by a social worker assigned to the Sensitive Case Unit of Los Angeles' Department of Children and Family Services back in February 2003.


In the claim, the family of Jackson's alleged victim says it is seeking damages from the Los Angeles Department of Children and Family Services because officials did not have the "human decency" to apologize for violating their privacy and allowing the confidential memo become public knowledge. The Los Angeles Department of Children and Family Services said it "continues to conduct an aggressive, ongoing investigation" into the memo's leak and has promised to hold those responsible accountable.

Not About the Money

A source close to the family told ABC News that the family is only seeking an apology, not money. They want to prevent another leak from happening. Still, the defense experts say the damages claim is the first time the alleged victim's family has sought money in the case and suggests motive.

"This new claim on their part seems to suggest that maybe there is a financial motive, and that it is about the money," said defense attorney Dana Cole.

Michael Jackson has denied any wrongdoing. He and his supporters have suggested that the Santa Barbara District Attorney's office has a vendetta against him and relatives of the alleged victim have made up the allegations to get a monetary settlement similar to the deal the singer made when another boy accused him of sexual abuse in 1993. (Jackson was never charged in that case. Prosecutors did not pursue charges against him after the alleged victim refused to testify. Still, Jackson has always insisted on his innocence in that scandal.)

The next hearing in Jackson's case is scheduled for Friday.

Reported by ABC News' Jessica Yellin on Good Morning America. ABC News' Beth Tribolet contributed to this report.

http://abcnews.go.com/sec...526-1.html

Maybe not, but Madonna´s kid´s faces are known all over the world and if you take for example Blanket, nobody knows what he looks like. One day he might be able to walk on the streets without anyone recognizing him. He´ll have a choice if he wants people to know who his father is and if he wants to be followed by paparrazzi everywhere for the rest of his life, Madonna´s kids not. I think MJ´s kids will be one day really grateful to their father for giving them that choice.
And secondly, we don´t know what kind of life MJ´s kids have in privacy, so let´s not judge that.
Sorry if you feel I am being too passionate Adoreme, but I can´t help myself.

dag said:

Madonna has hardly pimped her kids as much as practically every other celebrity - and their kids aren't snatched off the streets in record numbers (in fact what's the last celebrity abduction you heard of? Frank Sinatra, Jr., I suppose.).

History does not support your proposition.

Bottom line is: if the kids are interested in fame, they'll seek it and they'll get it. If they're not, they won't. Do you think Kate Hudson was a paparazzi target before she glammed herself up and pursued an acting career? No. Do you think the papers are covering the trials and tribulations of Rumer Willis' life? No. You whore yourself to the press, you'll get what's coming to you.
[This message was edited Wed May 26 16:34:10 2004 by VoicesCarry]

So nobody's going to comment on the article I posted above? Why am I not surprised?

I am a bit late with this one, but it's an important article:

Michael Jackson's lawyers slam prosecution for dragging its feet

1 hour, 51 minutes ago Add U.S. National - AFP to My Yahoo!
http://news.yahoo.com/new...0526023630


LOS ANGELES (AFP) - Lawyers for embattled pop icon Michael Jackson accused the prosecution in his child molestation case of dragging its heels in handing over documents that could help the defence.

The lawyers also, for the first time, threw light on the still-secret allegations against Jackson, saying Tuesday he is accused of conspiring with five other people to abduct children, falsely imprison them and extort money.


The claim that prosecutors have failed to hand over key documents came six months after Jackson's stunning arrest on charges that he sexually molested a 12-year-old boy and ahead of a hearing in the case on Friday.


The 45-year-old entertainer's team accused Santa Barbara prosecutors of not responding to official demands that it hand over all witness statements, copies of tapes, photographs seized in a dramatic search of Jackson's Neverland Ranch.


"Over six months after the charges were raised, the prosecution is far from satisfying basic discovery obligations," a document filed in Santa Barbara Superior Court by lawyers Thomas Mesereau, Steve Cochran and Robert Sanger said.


"Obtaining complete discovery from the prosecution is indispensable for defense council to prepare properly for trial," they said.


The massive investigation involved "dozens, if not over 100 witnesses" as well as "voluminous documents" and expert examination on a variety of topics, they added.


"Accordingly, Mr Jackson respectfully requests that this court order the prosecution to produce all discovery requested by the defense within a specified period of time," the lawyers said.


Since Jackson's November 19 arrest following the search of his Neverland Ranch he has been charged with child abuse and using alcohol to seduce the boy, charges that were superseded by an secret indictment against him handed down by a grand jury last month.


Jackson's team said the 10 charges in the indictment, which remains sealed, included charges of lewd conduct with a minor and a damaging, but as yet unexplained, new count of conspiracy to abduct a minor.


"The indictment substantially broadens the scope and complexity of this litigation," the lawyers wrote.


"An elaborate conspiracy is alleged among Mr Jackson, five unidentified others and unidentified others. Twenty-eight overt acts are mentioned in furtherance of a supposed objective to abduct children, falsely imprison and commit extortion."


In addition to those charges, Jackson is accused in the indictment of four counts of providing alcohol to the boy and "special allegations" that make the sentence he could face even stiffer.


Jackson has pleaded innocent to the charges and has dismissed them as being intended to extort money from him.


Jackson's team said that as prosecutors had clearly found the time to thoroughly revamp the charges against him amid a worldwide media glare, they should at least have found time to hand over key documents to the defence.


"Over the last six months, Mr Jackson has endured intrusions of privacy, worldwide coverage of criminal allegations, live broadcasts of his voluntary appearance for booking and the posting of exhorbitant bail," the lawyers wrote.


The prosecution's "failure to complete discovery is inexcusable," they added.

The lawyers and prosecutors are due to appear before Judge Rodney Melvile in Santa Maria, near Neverland, on Friday to argue motions, including one to reduce Jackson's three million dollar bail.

VoicesCarry said:

Michael Jackson is in a different league to those you mentioned as far as his celebrity status. He is probably the most famous, the most hated and the most loved celebrity in the world all at the same time. You can't compare his situation with other celebs.

In the beginning, Michael didn't mind the world seeing his kids faces. He had 2 or 3 photo shoots with Prince that were released to the public. Then the death and kidnap threats started coming.

what if in there teens mjs kid prince and madonnas daughter lordes go out with each other
wouldnt that be cool lol
its a pity madonna and mj arent really friends if they were then they could visit each other and have madonnas kids mix with mjs ones it would be interesting to see if the kids all got along since they are bought up differently to other kids

riverdean7 said:

Nooooo!

And in response to earlier posts, MJ's kids are easy to spot from a mile off. They're the ones in the netting!

Dag - your loyalty is very touching.

Thanks. I´ll take that as a compliment. You like Madonna, don´t you. See, you´re excusing her as much as I do Mike.

Wildstyle...thanks for the article. I think it´s ridiculous to think that MJ wants to flee. He doesn´t have a passport and the whole world knows it and secondly where would he hide? Everybody knows him all over the world. And to give him a bail for 3 milion is also ridiculous. I´ve heard about a guy accused of murder who was let go on a milion bail. It´s not fair. It´s like if you came to shop and there was a bread for 1 dollar and for those who can afford it 100 dollars. None of us would like it.



Who´s Kate Hudson and who are her parents. And excuse my ignorance I´ve never heard of Rummer Willis either. You can´t compare MJ´s kids to anybody else´s. The only celebrity whose status can be compared could be Elvis and Lisa Marie was in tabloids even before she married Michael and started her carreer. Actually maybe even this is not a good comparision, because for example I didn´t know Elvis had a daughter until she married Michael. It was afterall Michael Jackson who brought her name in the tabloids all over the world, not her father.

dag said:[quote]

Thanks. I´ll take that as a compliment. You like Madonna, don´t you. See, you´re excusing her as much as I do Mike.

Whoah there!

There's a bit of a difference, love! Madonna dresses up in pointy bras and joins expensive religious cults. Ain't nothing compared to the shit Mikey is in at the moment.

But it was a compliment. Just don't turn into one of those crazy, vigil-holding loonies that constantly post Pro-MJ articles in the hope of converting those of us that have some perspective. I don't think anyone wants to see MJ as guilty but some people quite rightly have their doubts.

adoreme said:

I hope you're not refering to the 2 articles I posted above. They are in no way pro-MJ articles. They are articles that are reporting on the goings on in this case. maybe if they were about "Jesus Juice" they would have got some responses here

WildStyle said:

Actually no. I was referring to previous articles and statements that have been posted on here claiming to prove MJ's innocence. Some of them are just plain loony. And portraying MJ as an innocent victim in all this just doesn't wash me me and a lot of other people.

Your articles were informative and newsworthy but they haven't swung my opinion for now. Maybe that's why they haven't received any comments.

Well, thank you very much for that

I don´t see any difference between us. It´s not about difference between Mj and other, but about difference between us. I see MJ´s behaviour more appropriate than Madonnas, that´s why I defend him. You see it vice versa, that´s why you defend her. That´s what I think we have in common. We both defend the ones who are more acceptable for us.

And please don´t turn this case always against MJ when you wanna point out that he´s weirder than anyone else. It´s annoying, cause yes Mj is in a deep shit right now, how else can I respond to that than just by repeating stupidly that one is innocent until proven guilty.

Can I ask you what kind of perspective all those other people have? I am just curious.

You know I came to this board because I like Prince and I was happy to see that I can find some people over here who like MJ so I could talk to them as well. We´re not trying to convert anyone, we´re just sharing our hopes about this case involving someone we love. It´s not compulsory to click on those topics if you don´t like them and spending time talking to crazy, vigil-holding loonies.


With the masks on and their daddy around of course. But would you recognise them as easily walking alone in the streets without those masks when they get older? One day they will love their daddy for that gift of privacy. Plus MJ´s kids didn´t look unhappy wearing them in that famous document. I don´t think they really care at this age. It´s a game for them and if it makes their daddy feel better, why not. Is it a crime?

Of course most people won´t understand most MJ´s actions, but I think it is silly of us to expect to understand his every action, because we seem to forget that we sometimes even don´t understand our relatives, so how can we understand someone like MJ. None of us has imagination wild enough to be able to put ourselves in his shoes. Instead of trying to understand his every action and diss him whenever it doesn´t fit our views of the world, can´t we just try to love him? And if we can´t love him, can´t we just try to leave him alone?

adoreme said:

You'd be surprised. The very notion that some people desperately want him to be found guilty is sickening in itself.

Cloudbuster said:

Sorry, I meant anyone here. Although I probably shouldn't speak on behalf of the masses but I for one wouldn't want him to be guilty. I'm merely prepared for the fact that he might be and pointing out that his behaviour over the past years has done him no favours. Too many "yes men" surround MJ. He needs a kick up the ass!

adoreme said:

Again, you'd be surprised.

dag said:

Yes, Michael = most fantastically magically famous massive celebrity in the world. I get it, but don't agree with it. Thanks.

By the way, why haven't the Bush Twins or Chelsea Clinton been kidnapped yet? Guess they just aren't good enough targets.

Kate Hudson is Goldie Hawn's daughter and quite a famous actress these days.

Rumer Willis is the daugher of Bruce Willis and Demi Moore. She doesn't pimp herself to the press, so that's probably why you don't know about her.

And Lisa Marie is just a stupid attention whore.

You´re taking my statements as if I was saying that MJ is the most beloved person in the world, no way. But he IS the most famous. Believe it or not, I´ve met people (in England) who didn´t know who John Lennon is. I´ve met people in America who didn´t know who their president is. In the country where I live (Czech republic) I´ve met people who don´t know who Bruce Willils and Demi Moore are, there are people in my class who have never heard of Prince (just last week I had a Prince DVD at school, cause I wanted to lend it to my friend and one girl saw me giving it to her and said what´s that, WHO´S THAT!!), but I´ve never met anyone who wouldn´t know who MJ is. Young, old EVERYBODY knows him. They always know at least that it´s the one with plastic surgery. I think that most of the people on this board are americans, right? Or at least people from the "western" Europe. I come from the "eastern, excomunist" Europe, and you´d be suprised how many people are really famous in this part of the world.

And you know what´s the other difference between other celebreties having kids and MJ? For everybody else it is considered to be normal to have children. Well, it´s not considered to be normal when it comes to MJ and everybody wants to know what they look like to see if they are really his.


Adoreme I am quite interested in knowing your opinion, cause I can´t figure out whether you think if he´s innocent or not.


[quote]Too many "yes men" surround MJ. He needs a kick up the ass![quote]

Again, I hope this won´t sound too "suportive" for you, but you can´t expect anyone to be "in touch with reality" when you´re surrounded by yesman all your life. If you have a recepy how to avoid them, let Mike know, I am sure he´d appreciate it.

Let me add that it´s not just that MJ is not just probably the most famous, but it´s also this strange view that people have of him. I am fascinated how for example Lisa Marie is being asked in every single interview whether they really had sex. I mean, how many women in this world have ever been asked (repeatedly) to confirm that they really had sex with they ex-HUSBANDS. It´s ridiculous. And although she has confirmed it so many times, most people still don´t believe that, but they do believe that he MIGHT have had sex with a 12 year old boy.

When he gets married, of course it must be for everything else than him simply being in love. Michael Jackson is not expected to have any feelings at all.

There´s just no way that people would accept that Michael Jackson could do something normally.
The world´s view of Michael Jackson is more ridiculous than MJ´s view of the world.



And the last thing...Americans should also wake up and stop considering yourselves as the centre of it all. Of course most people in the world know who the american president is. But you are silly to believe that the most of the world knows the american´s wife´s name or that they know how many children the president they has. For example I´ve just found out from your post that Bush has twins. Each state has it´s own president or leader whose family´s are the people of that particular country interested in -- not the US. Each state has also its own stars who are HUGE within the country, but nobody knows them once you cross the border. For example Karel Gott is the most famous in our country, (he truly is a "god" over here) but I would never expect any foreigner to know him. Don´t think that everyone who is famous in the US is famous outside the US. IF you think that anyone in our country knows who Kelly Carlton (or what her name is) is, than you´re wrong. Nobody has a clue over here who she is. I know her only because I have MTV, but people who don´t have MTV don´t know that she exists. You´d be surprised how many people over here have never heard of James Brown, Stevie Wonder, any US country music star, Marlon Brando, people who are considered to be legends in the US.

MACALEY CULKIN ON LARRY KING LIVE. Here´s transcript if anyone is interested at all.



KING: We have to cover it so let's ask about it.

What's the relationship you had with Michael Jackson?

CULKIN: Had or have?

KING: Both.

CULKIN: Whatever.

KING: Let's go with had to have.

CULKIN: He's a good friend of mine and still is. Everything that's going on is an unfortunate situation for everyone involved, and you know...

KING: When did you first get to meet him?

CULKIN: I first meet him -- kind of called me randomly out of the blue, hi, it's Michael. It's like hey. And the thing is...

KING: This after "Home Alone."

CULKIN: This is after "Home Alone." I had actually met him before I was doing "Nutcracker" at Lincoln Center. I was playing Fritz, and he came back stage one day. And I actually met him very briefly and he kind of recognized me because it was after I had done "Uncle Buck." And so, he kind of mentions something. Than he calls me up kind of out of the blue and it's just this weird, random kind of thing. Why don't you come over to my house?

Think is, I didn't react to him the way most people did. Most people are like Michael Jackson, and you know, he was a god to people. And to me, I knew he was a pop singer but beyond that, I wasn't one of the fans. I think that's one of the reasons why we connected was the fact that -- believe me, I call him a jerk all the time. I call him a fat head and this and that and he gets it.

KING: And brother (UNINTELLIGIBLE) to..

CULKIN: Yes. We all did. He was a family friend.

KING: What happened at the house? That's what all the things that people are concerned about.

CULKIN: That's what's so weird.

KING: What did happen?

CULKIN: Nothing happened. You know, nothing really. I mean, we played video games. We, you know, played at his amusement park.

KING: Did he sleep in the bed?

CULKIN: The thing is with that whole thing, oh, you slept in the same bedroom as him. It's like, I don't think you understand, Michael Jackson's bedroom is two stories and it has like three bathrooms and this and that. So, when I slept in his bedroom, yes, but you understand the whole scenario. And the thing is with Michael he's not good as explaining himself and he never really has been, because he's not a very social person. You're talking about someone who has been sheltered and sheltering himself also for the last like 30 years. And so, he's not very good at communicating to people and not good at conveying what he's actually trying to say to you. So, when he says something like that people -- he doesn't quite understand why people react the way that they do.

KING: Why do you think he likes young people so much?

CULKIN: Because the same reason why he liked me, was the fact that I didn't care who he was. That was the thing. I talked to him like he was a normal human being and kids do that to him because he's Michael Jackson the pop singer, but he's not the God, the "king of pop" or anything like that. He's just a guy who is actually very kid- like himself and wants to go out there and wants to play video games with you.

KING: Did your parents encourage it?

CULKIN: They weren't against it. It wasn't like they encouraged it or pushing me upon it. I wanted to hang out with him and they were fine.

KING: What do you make of what he's going through now?

CULKIN: Like I said, it's unfortunate, and you know, it's a circus.

KING: Do you think it's a bad rap?

CULKIN: You know, I think so. Yes. Listen, look what happened the first time this happened to him. If someone had done something like that to my kid, I wouldn't settle for some money. I'd make sure the guy was in jail. It just really goes to show as soon as they got the money and they ran. I mean, that's what really what happened the first time. And so I don't know. It's a little crazy and I kind of have taken a step back from the whole thing, because it is a bit of a circus. And you know, if the same thing was happening to me, I wouldn't want to drag him into it and vice versa. So I try my best to take a distance from it, but like I said he was still a friend of mine.

KING: If they asked you to be a character witness, would you appear? CULKIN: I guess so, but probably not. Like I said, it's crazy, and I don't really want to be a part of it.

KING: You like him.

CULKIN: I like him and he's a friend of mine. I'm not saying I wouldn't. It hasn't been brought up to me and I don't think he'd want me to either. Just because, like I said, if the same thing was happening to me...

KING: What reaction has happened to you from all of this?

CULKIN: What do you mean?

KING: Do people inquire of you a lot about it?

CULKIN: Sometimes. You know, people always have their opinions. It's funny. People always talk to me about him, because you know, I'm one of these people who will tell you anything about my life, really, to get me going. You know, so yes, I mean, I've openly and freely talked about him and stuff like that. But overall, you know, s' just a good friend of mine.

KING: You wish him well.

CULKIN: Of course I do.

dag said:

The irony is - I'm not American. And I also like that you seem to believe I expect all foreigners to know everything about US pop culture. America has its own supply of psycho looney celeb stalkers, they don't need to outsource. My point was that the children of presidents are much more likely candidates for foul play than those of Michael Jackson, especially with the political situation we're in right now.

I have no idea how your rant actually applies to that point.
[This message was edited Fri May 28 5:32:42 2004 by VoicesCarry]

[quote]The irony is - I'm not American. And I also like that you seem to believe I expect all foreigners to know everything about US pop culture. America has its own supply of psycho looney celeb stalkers, they don't need to outsource. My point was that the children of presidents are much more likely candidates for foul play than those of Michael Jackson, especially with the political situation we're in right now.


Oh sorry. I thought you were American. Where are you from then?
And my responce was not just towards you because of what you said, but that arose from the impression I got from Americans, whenever I met them. Maybe I just had a bad luck with people, I don´t know.

Yeah, presidents children are also at risk, no doubt about it, but celebrities as well, cause people know they have money. And if MJ feels he needs to protect them, let him do it. That´s all.

And sorry, english is my not mother tongue, so I am not sure what you meant by those sentences that I highlighted.

My post wasn´t meant as rant, so I apologize to anyone who felt offenced by it. Please tell me what was it that I said that gave you this impression.

dag said:

LightOfArt said:

This just in:

Michael Gets Court Date
Fri May 28, 4:15 PM ET
By Joal Ryan

Looks like it could be a busy fall season for Michael Jackson. In court.

On Friday, a judge in Santa Maria, California, penciled in Sept. 13 as the start of the entertainer's child-molestation trial.

Santa Barbara County Superior Court Judge Rodney S. Melville indicated the date was not an absolute, but "a bull's-eye that we're shooting at here."

Jackson's camp, led by defense attorney Thomas Mesereau Jr., has said it doesn't think a trial should be scheduled until it's been given access to all the evidence, including items seized in a raid of the singer's Neverland Ranch.

The defense team is also of the mind that Jackson's $3 million bail is too steep.

In court papers filed this week, his attorneys argued that $435,000 is about the right price tag for the charges. The prosecution countered that Jackson is a flight risk who, by virtue of his "international celebrity," could seek haven in an adoring European country that does not have an extradition treaty with the United States. Deputy District Attorney Ron Zonen called Jackson's bail "roughly comparable to what he would spend in a weekend in Las Vegas."

Melville heard both sides on the bail beef in court Friday, but did not issue a ruling.

Melville did rule on two other matters, however.

As expected, he opted to keep a lid on grand-jury transcripts and the full indictment against Jackson for now. Several media groups had petitioned for release of the documents. Melville will revisit the grand-jury testimony issue during a June 25 hearing.

Meanwhile, the judge declined to force to prosecutors to turn over evidence demanded by Jackson's legal team. Melville noted that prosecutors had already turned 2000-plus pages of reports, nearly 70 audiotapes, two videos and a CD-ROM of photographs related to the case.

Jackson, 45, was not required to be in court Friday and did not show. He pleaded innocent last month to a 10-count grand-jury indictment. The onetime pop king is accused of liquoring up a child and committing lewd acts on him. The indictment also unloads allegations of conspiracy, child abduction, false imprisonment and extortion.

June7 said:

Prosecution is stalling, they're looking for a quick decisive Victory, Defence does have a point exchanges in court cases must be made thoroughly
Plus i've even heard that Forensic testing results have been released...
My only problem so far with the case is the public budding in for "gory details"
i think its a waste of time and tax payer money
theirs no need for evidence to be publicized until the trial

New Jacksons-Jackson 5 box set is oing to be released...Thats gonna be their best collection

VERY BEST OF JACKSON 5, JACKSONS
1. Can You Feel It
2. Blame It On The Boogie
3. Enjoy Yourself
4. Show You The Way To Go
5. Dreamer
6. Even Though You're Gone
7. Goin' Places
8. Torture
9. Shake Your Body
10. Lovely One
11. Heartbreak Hotel
12. Walk Right Now
13. State Of Shock
14. 2300 Jackson Street
15. Nothin' (That Compares 2 U)
16. Don't Stop Till You Get Enough
17. I Want You Back
18. Abc
19. Love You Save
20. I'll Be There
21. Mama's Pearl
22. Never Can Say Goodbye
23. Sugar Daddy
24. Dancing Machine
25. Lookin' Through The Windows
26. Doctor My Eyes
27. Ain't No Sunshine
28. Got To Be There
29. Rockin Robin
30. Ben
31. One Day In Your Life
32. Farewell My Summer Love
http://www.amazon.com/exe...ce&s=music
[This message was edited Mon May 31 4:19:26 2004 by LightOfArt]

Thank you daq for answering.

I personally wouldn't recognise them, but I'm sure people who are big fans of Madonna would recognise her children easily if they happened to be walking down the street.

As for Michael's children, you'd have no idea. They could be anybody, and I'm sure they'll be very grateful for their privacy when they're older. I mean, they're the King Of Pop's children. They're bound to be as popular and as much in the public eye as their father.