On top of the songs, there is the merchandise. Where are the royalties for those, and potentially other, songs being paid? Certainly victims of the Manson murders would have been entitled to them at some point, but those claims may have expired over the course of nearly 50 years since the murders. These include a 1993 Guns N' Roses recording of "Look at Your Game, Girl" and the 1969 Beach Boys song, "Never Learn Not to Love," that was primarily written by Manson. Manson's 2002 will claims that he authored over 100 songs, and at least two were commercially recorded. That last question by itself is complicated. And after that is resolved, the big question - is there any money to justify the fight?.If DNA testing does prove that Lentz is the biological son, does the adoption cut off his right to be considered as next-of-kin, as it would for an intestate inheritance?.If neither are valid, then should Freeman, as the grandson, be considered "next-of-kin" (which would give him the legal right to receive Manson's body) or should it pass to the purported son, Lentz?.If the 2017 document isn't valid, how about the 2002 one?.Is there an appropriate authorization in that document for someone to handle the burial or cremation of Manson's body?.Is there a valid 2017 will and what does it say?.Which county court should be considered to be the one where Manson was domiciled - giving it jurisdiction to handle the probate proceeding - the one where Manson was hospitalized when he died, the one where he was an inmate before going into the hospital, or the one where he lived before his arrest?.There are many legal questions that have to be answered before his body can be laid to rest, or cremated, and many more to resolve about any potential for profit that could be generated from the estate. As Manson wrote on the back of the 2002 will, "I'm not in the best spot to rest in peace." Until the competing claims can be sorted out, Manson's body won't be laid to rest. Lentz says he will seek a DNA test to prove his biological relationship. If valid, that document would supersede the prior will and leave Lentz and Gurecki in control of both Manson's body and whatever property, royalty and image rights remain. This purported will has not yet been made public. He says that he has a will from 2017 naming him as the sole beneficiary and a different memorabilia collector, Ben Gurecki, as the executor. To make the case more complicated, another man, Matt Lentz, claims he is a biological son of Manson, given up for adoption as a newborn. This suggests that Channels was not present when Manson signed it, meaning it would be difficult for Channels to prove that the will was valid. That may be hard for Channels to do, considering he said on record that the will was sent to him, unexpectedly, after meeting Manson. California law does still permit a will to be valid if one of the two witnesses was also a beneficiary, and therefore not "disinterested," but that person then has to carry the burden of proof to convince the court that the will was not caused by duress, menace, fraud, or undue influence. In California, two disinterested witnesses are required to a sign a will, but in this case, there appears to be only one signature along with those of Manson and Channels. Freeman and his attorney dispute the validity of the 2002 will, questioning how it could have been signed in prison by Manson and also apparently signed by Channels. (who later changed his name and then committed suicide). Freeman is recognized as Manson's grandson from one of Manson's two acknowledged sons, Charles Manson, Jr. That same will specifically disinherited anyone claiming to be a child of Manson and all other relatives. This 2002 will specifically directed that Channels was to receive all of Manson's music and royalty rights to the songs Manson wrote, as well as his image and publishing rights.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |