.
July 2nd, 2009
09:45 PM ET

Live Blog from the Anchor Desk 07/02/09

[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/images/01/02/liveblogfinal.copy.jpg]

We have information that might shed new light on perhaps the central unanswered question in Michael Jackson's death. Was the "King of Pop" using powerful, potentially deadly, surgical anesthetics to get to sleep? Don't miss our exclusive 360° investigation.

Want to know what else we're covering tonight? Read EVENING BUZZ

Scroll down to join the live chat during the program. It's your chance to share your thoughts on tonight's headlines. Keep in mind, you have a better chance of having your comment get past our moderators if you follow our rules.

Here are some of them:

1) Keep it short (we don't have time to read a "book")
2) Don't write in ALL CAPS (there's no need to yell)
3) Use your real name (first name only is fine)
4) No links
5) Watch your language (keep it G-rated; PG at worst - and that includes $#&*)

And take a look at our live web camera from the 360° studio. Watch the WEBCAM


Filed under: Live Blog • T1
soundoff (378 Responses)
  1. ???, Singapore

    It depends whether the children were close to her and whether they had any emotional ties with her and whether they would be worse off without her. If she little to nothing contact with them, then it may probably be about the money.

    July 2, 2009 at 10:18 pm |
  2. Alan

    Anderson,

    I have heard several reports on CNN regarding the physician who was with Michael Jackson when he died. First – the physician was a cardiologist and second – Michael specifically requested this physician to accompany him during the tour. Does anyone find it strange that the physician Michael requested was uniquely qualified to handle the type of condition, which is believed to have killed Michael? Also, is it possible that Michael was experiencing some type of cardiac related symptoms, which caused him to seek the services of this particular physician? I just find it unsettling that Michael should die from a heart condition (whether or not it was caused by drugs) shortly after being paired with a cardiologist.

    July 2, 2009 at 10:18 pm |
  3. Lisa

    Courts try to keep the siblings together, such as in the case with Bob Geldof's children and the orphaned daughter of Michael Hutchence and Paula Yates......The courts ruled that they should be with Geldof, although his is not related to Tigerlily by blood. The same could happen in this situation.

    July 2, 2009 at 10:18 pm |
  4. Krasi

    Mike, Syracuse, NY, sounds like what probably happened.

    In addition, she got so much money when they divorced (more than I'll ever see in my lifetime) why are people surprized she is out of the will. Why should she be in?

    And it's so frustrating to hear people saying that because she is the biological mother she has some claim on the kids. What? There's certainly more to being a parent than biology!

    July 2, 2009 at 10:18 pm |
  5. Gloria, Brooklyn, NY

    Rowe is the mother to whom? Where was she? And what happen to all the money in order to give them up?

    July 2, 2009 at 10:18 pm |
  6. Sharon

    It's a shame that the focus is on Mr. Jackson's drug problems. Though until his death I really did not know much about him or his music. He was such a fantastic entertainer from everything I have seen so far. My prayers are with children and family.

    July 2, 2009 at 10:18 pm |
  7. tanita

    I really dont think that Debbie deserve to have the children’s custody because she gave up that right since Micheal was alive for 8.5 M. she sold her kids. Katherine will be a wonderful mother to the kids.
    therefore lets just abide by the will that M J left.

    July 2, 2009 at 10:18 pm |
  8. ashley

    Debbie should no way no how have Michael's children. Those children need to be with the Jackson family to help carry on Michael's legacy. His chldren need to be raised by their grandmother and their wonderful, awesome nanny, Grace.

    July 2, 2009 at 10:18 pm |
  9. kadie

    i think Debbie Rowe is out for the money and that's the only reason why
    she wants the kids because where ever the kids go the money go.
    and the man is not ever in the ground and the media is ripping me apart i know he had bad times but its like the media is forgetting the good ones

    July 2, 2009 at 10:18 pm |
  10. Patty

    I bet Michael's dancers are very sad.

    July 2, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
  11. Roy Tatum

    I think the things that are going on with Debbie Rowe is a money Issue. It's all about money to her! Debbie wasn't trying to get the kids when he was alive. And now that he is R.I.P. she now wants to come into the picture and try to gain custody. But they should leave it to the kids on what they want. Seeing that they didn't really know her.

    July 2, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
  12. Nancy/PA

    I didn't think MJ looked great in that video. He's very thin and hunched over. Look at the tape of him walking into the London tour announcement. Almost looks like he has osteoporosis (can men get that?).

    July 2, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
  13. SeLina, Jersey City, NJ

    Michael looked great at his last rehearsal...he would've blew the roof off at that concert. Someone killed Michael and its all starting to come out now. His funeral Tuesday is going to be crazy and that place is not big enough for his service! I love Michael Jackson and there will never be another Michael!! P.S.– Debbie should not get those kids she is an unfit mother(if those are her kids).

    July 2, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
  14. Diane

    As a parent should do, Michael Jackson gave special attention to the well being of his children while alive and more importantly in the event of his death. Isn't the purpose of a will to honor the requests of the deceased?
    Otherwise, what is the purpose of a will?

    Michael Jackson purposely omitted Debbie Rowe and that should be the bottom line in any decision making.

    July 2, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
  15. Cathie

    Michael Jackson wanted his mother to raise his children. Debbie Rowe has been nowhere to be seen. She only wants to the money...and to split up these three children who just lost the only loving parent they have ever known!! **What good is a will if it isn't upheld??**

    Katherine Jackson and Joe Jackson are not living together. They have not been for 15 years. They live seperate lives.

    July 2, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
  16. Aylin

    $ 25 to pay your tribute to Michael?!
    Are those people crazy? That shows how much they did care for him. I am disgusted! I am not going to a funeral that will make someone rich and that would turn to a circus with all the DVD's playing etc. planned for the day... This makes me sick!

    When I sow the last video... it bring tears to my eyes. I have been to lots of MJ concerts, I ahve seen him rehearse... THIS IS HIM This is how I know him and how I was expecting to see him in London.

    Someone had more to gain from his death!

    July 2, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
  17. Shirley

    If Debbie Rowe gets custody, does she have to give back the 8.5 million?

    July 2, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
  18. Larry

    @MAG. How could you omit Michael's good friend Freddie Mercury?

    July 2, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
  19. Sam

    Al Sharpton needs to go home. Have you noticed he has only been seen with Joe Jackson the other opportunist.

    July 2, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
  20. carol kesling

    michael jackson was my angel........... i will miss him alot !!!!!!!!!!! gone too soon... you will be in my prayers allways... god please bless his children !!!!!!!!!!!

    July 2, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
  21. Minou, New York City

    Why is Blanket called Blanket? and what's his/her real name?

    July 2, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
  22. Jasmine

    I agree with Mike in Syracuse, NY....

    July 2, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
  23. tasha

    why can you bury Elvis at Graceland but not Michael Jackson at Neverland, i think the he needs to be there that was his neverland his place that he created and loved so much.

    July 2, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
  24. torrey mcneal

    How can debbie rowe seek custody of kids she reliqueshed herself of for 8.5 million and the stata of california should take that into consideration.

    July 2, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
  25. rhonda

    I think Debbie Rowe just wants the money, what is to say that when trust money is gone that she just doesn't throw the kids away again. If you ask me she sold her parental rights.

    July 2, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
  26. Abdourahmane

    Debbie Rowe should not get right for the custody.Did she settle before for money and now again for money?

    July 2, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
  27. Dee - Los Angeles

    It would be a travesty if Michael Jackson's children are split up.
    If Debbie Rowe was really interested in these children, she wouldn't have to think about it.

    July 2, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
  28. Natalie

    Greed. The only reason the mother wants the kids is because her lawyers started buzzing in her ear that with the kids comes the money. This woman has not been involved in their life and now she gets full custody? That is ridiculous.

    July 2, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
  29. billie jean

    All that Debbie Row wants is those kids money, because if she wanted them she would've asked for them before his death.

    July 2, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
  30. Rose from Muscoy, Calif

    Jermaine Jackson said this is MJ wanted. That says it all. Debbie wasn't in their lives that much I heard?

    July 2, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
  31. kim-chicago

    This story gets more bizarre every day...

    No matter how twisted the story...when those new tapes were played it's amazing what an intriguing performer he was...

    July 2, 2009 at 10:16 pm |
  32. jennifer clark

    I think it would be devasting to the children if they were taken away from the Jackson family, she has not been around for all of these years and she took an 8.5 million dollar settlement to give up custody. I think she should leave well enough alone.

    July 2, 2009 at 10:16 pm |
  33. Annette

    Its all about money for Debbie Rowe! What about the best interest of the children. Doesn't she realize that Blanket will be left alone! Shameful!

    July 2, 2009 at 10:16 pm |
  34. Amir - Houston

    Debbie Rowe's initial statement after the announcement of Michael's death had no mention of feeling any distress for the kids, she directed it to her own loss and that of his (Jackson) family only. Why would she not speak out for her children first and foremost? Was there not a quote from her as to her giving her womb to Michael as a gift?

    July 2, 2009 at 10:16 pm |
  35. William, Columbus Ohio

    The WILL should be the final say in this matter!

    July 2, 2009 at 10:16 pm |
  36. Kandi

    RIP to a man of many talents. I don't believe the ex wife has any rights to the children bc she gave up her rights for money. Like she sold them!!!!

    July 2, 2009 at 10:16 pm |
  37. Jo Ann, North Royalton, Ohio

    Michael looks emaciated and sickly in this video. I have taken dancing all of my life and what he is doing in this video is not dancing. In fact, it barely qualifies as movement.

    So sad.

    July 2, 2009 at 10:16 pm |
  38. stephen

    Debbie Rowe is the one who is actually related to the kids. She should have custody of the two that are hers. Anything to keep those kids out of the clutches of that train wreck of a family.

    July 2, 2009 at 10:16 pm |
  39. Carrie

    Debbie Rowe is just after these children money. No one sells their kids for money if they truly love them. No matter the amount.

    July 2, 2009 at 10:16 pm |
  40. Amanda, GA

    Hi all!
    MJ was such an influential musician, humanitarian and person. Lets just hope that's what he is remembered for; his greatness! I hope his children get some say in who will be their guardian if a custody battle arises.

    July 2, 2009 at 10:16 pm |
  41. Rishi

    Rowe got 8 million for the kids. She is back for only more money. Leave Michael kids alone, money hungry witch!

    July 2, 2009 at 10:16 pm |
  42. Cyndi

    I think Deb Rowe would only be asking for custody of the 2 children because she wants more money. She already got almost $9 million for carrying Michael's children. Greed is not good. Michael Jackson was a wonderful, warm, talented, kind man who deserves our compassion and love and respect of his wishes.

    July 2, 2009 at 10:16 pm |
  43. Graham

    Anderson
    I believe we should all just Honour MJs memory and his last wishes in his will.

    Debbie Rowe should not yet to separate the children.

    July 2, 2009 at 10:16 pm |
  44. Nicole

    Good evening 360. Debbie Rowe should not get custody of the kids. I don't think she should have them when she hasn't been there all the while. I think now her motivation is money considering that she was cut out of MJ's will. She need to respect Michael's decision and leave the kids with his mom. Katherine is who they know and she will be doing a disservice to them if she took them away. If she really love them she would let them be.

    July 2, 2009 at 10:16 pm |
  45. PRBF

    Debbie Rowe is all about the money and not the children. If she really wanted her children, she would have made it clear in her contract with Michael Jackson in the beginning. GREED..........................................

    July 2, 2009 at 10:16 pm |
  46. Melanie

    Debbie Rowe should not be allowed to think that she would ever get her kids back. Afterall she was "paid" to terminate her rights and she has said that she is not a mother to them and have not been. Those kids do not know her and because I believe she was left out of the will and there is money involved she is out to get her hands on something. I hope Katherine and the rest of the Jackson family fight to honor Michael's wishes. How dare she come in and he's not even in the gorund and she's talking about his kids. I am so glad they are older because they can tell the judge what they want.

    July 2, 2009 at 10:16 pm |
  47. Jolene, St. Joseph, MI

    It doesn't surprise me that Debbie Rowe may possibly try to gain custody of the children. She gave up those kids to MJ long ago and that along with MJ wishes as expressed in his will should take precedence.

    Bottomline, it should be about what is in the best interest of the children. To split the two oldest children from the youngest would be terrible.

    July 2, 2009 at 10:16 pm |
  48. Lisa Hathcoat

    Debbie Rowe had many opportunities to be involved in the lives of her children. She chose to give up custody. Since Michael saw fit to leave the children to his mother, his wishes, and his will, should be honored. Question: What about the third child? He seems to have been completely forgotten. Shouldn't public opinion care about this child as well as the two children which have Debbie Rowe as mother on their birth certificates? Be it ever so dysfunctional, the Jacksons are a family. Let them mourn together as a family and that includes all three of Michael's children.

    July 2, 2009 at 10:15 pm |
  49. sue

    Michael is someone who should be admired for his talent on stage, but not iodlized as a person.

    How can anyone say that Debbie Rowe never tried to see her children, when Michaels own friends say that his body guards would not let any of them in. She had no power against Michael and his money

    July 2, 2009 at 10:15 pm |
  50. mgk

    If MJ had a 5 hour physical a few mths ago...how come the dr's did not pick up all the needle marks ALL over his body? Why did he pass this physical? why was he allowed to be insured? why didn't the dr's question these marks? Perhaps this could of all been avoided if somebody did something at that time.
    mgk

    July 2, 2009 at 10:15 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8