Yesterday we reported on two stories related to the custody of Michael Jackson’s children. British paper The Mirror claimed that Debbie Rowe, the biological mother of Jackson’s two older children, had reached some kind of secret custody agreement with grandmother Katherine Jackson. Supposedly Debbie and Katherine worked out a deal where the kids could stay with Katherine as long as grandfather Joe Jackson had no access to Michael’s children. This seemed plausible, especially since Debbie told a radio station that she was going to seek a restraining order against Joe to keep him away from the children.

The other story, originating in the NY Post, had Debbie receiving a behind-the-scenes payoff for not challenging custody. She supposedly received a “final payoff” of $4 million in exchange for letting Paris and Prince Michael stay with their grandmother.

According to Debbie’s lawyer, neither story is true and she just wants to continue whatever spousal support she had worked out with Michael before his death. I wonder how much money they’re talking about monthly:

“Bombshell emails” from Michael Jackson’s ex-wife Debbie Rowe reveal that she doesn’t want custody of her two kids but was concerned about her public perception as “a woman who gave away her kids and just forgot about them,” according to the New York Post. In a July 5 email to her friend Rebecca White, Rowe wrote, “Do I want the kids? Hell no. Does it look good for me to ask for them? Absolutely.” White told the New York Post, “There’s definitely going to be a settlement that’s going to come out of this.” But her attorney says reports that Rowe gave up her parental rights in exchange for a $4 million payoff are incorrect. “There has been no agreement reached between Ms. Rowe and the Jacksons,” lawyer Eric George said. “Ms. Rowe has not and will not give up her parental rights. … And Ms. Rowe has not accepted and will not accept any additional financial consideration beyond the spousal support she and Michael personally agreed to several years ago.”

[From The Buffalo News]

I don’t really trust the NY Post and let’s assume we don’t have enough evidence that these supposed e-mails from Rowe exist to prove there was a payoff. (Rowe’s lawyer also said that story was completely fabricated.) In the only interview I’ve ever seen with Rowe, a 2003 rebuttal to the Martin Bashir series called “Living with Michael Jackson, Take Two” (link leads to video) she spoke of her children as a gift she gave to Michael and seemed like she never intended to take a role as their mother. Rowe said “I did not leave my children. My children are with their father, where they’re supposed to be,” and that “”It’s not that they’re not my children, but I had them because I wanted him to be a father.”

The next custody hearing is on July 20, next Monday, and according to her lawyer Rowe will be there. Is it true that she’s not out for money at all, or is she using those kids as pawns to try and squeeze money out of the estate? I do believe that she cares about their well being, but it’s doubtful that she wants to take responsibility for two children she hasn’t seen in over ten years. Sadly, I’m kind of on Kaiser’s side that money is a motivation for Rowe, but I’ll still give her the benefit of the doubt that it does matter to her what happens to those kids.

Rowe is shown on her ranch in Palmdale, CA on 7/3/09. Credit: Mike/Fame Pictures