Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, how did he not realize that he wasn't adopted until he was in his mid-30s, and why was the conservatorship still continuing to this point?
I'm not doubting his case, just trying to understand what happened.

How many adopted children go back and read the documents that made them adopted? How many every read those documents? Why would you?

Nobody probably knew about the concervatorship except the Tuoeys and their lawyer, it's not like there is a computer system that alarms every time someone in a conservatorship signs a document.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that they picked a conservatorship over an adoption is so suspect. Why would they need to go that route, if not for money?

One article I read stated that because Michael was over 18 at the time, traditional adoption was not an option.

Anonymous wrote:The fact that they picked a conservatorship over an adoption is so suspect. Why would they need to go that route, if not for money?

Anonymous wrote:How does someone not know they were adopted? I say this as someone with an adopted sibling. Your birth certificate changes! As an adult I’ve used my birth certificate many times- passports, insurance, starting a new job.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that they picked a conservatorship over an adoption is so suspect. Why would they need to go that route, if not for money?

In the movie, they mention his age and how he’s too old for adoption. I think it’s silly for him to bring this up now.

It was perfectly legal to adopt a young adult. They just didn’t want to.

Right. Sad story.

Why? What would he have gotten as an adoptee that he didn’t?

Retaining decision-making authority for himself. That seems like a big one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that they picked a conservatorship over an adoption is so suspect. Why would they need to go that route, if not for money?

In the movie, they mention his age and how he’s too old for adoption. I think it’s silly for him to bring this up now.

It was perfectly legal to adopt a young adult. They just didn’t want to.

Right. Sad story.

Why? What would he have gotten as an adoptee that he didn’t?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that they picked a conservatorship over an adoption is so suspect. Why would they need to go that route, if not for money?

Because he was over 18

Anonymous wrote:The fact that they picked a conservatorship over an adoption is so suspect. Why would they need to go that route, if not for money?

Anonymous wrote:Obviously the black guy must be lying! Those nice white people were so generous. There was a movie about it. Case closed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What confuses me is how his nfl agents or anybody advising him financially didn’t specifically tell him he was in a conservatorship.

They would not know. How do you think they would know?

Because per the terms of a conservatorshop, the Tuohys would have needed to approve any business contract. It seems they did that, but it remains to be seen whether they took an inappropriate cut and/or kept all Blind Side profits for themselves. That’s his specific complaint and he wants them to stop profiting from his story, which seems reasonable. Pretty gross they became celebrities, with who knows what perks, too.

And used his name and likeness to promote books and speaking engagements. Why would they not end the conservatorship years ago. Their actions matter so much more than their words

When did he previously seek to end it and faced their opposition? Never.

They claim they never got paid from the conservatorship. If true, that’s easily proven. Much more easily than if there wasn’t a conservatorship in place.

Why would it be up to him to end it particularly if he didn’t know what it was. Once again their actions speak volumes.

Anonymous wrote:Time will tell. There are always multiple sides to the story. But this one is looking pretty one sided at the moment against Michael.

They say they gave him his cut.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that they picked a conservatorship over an adoption is so suspect. Why would they need to go that route, if not for money?

In the movie, they mention his age and how he’s too old for adoption. I think it’s silly for him to bring this up now.

Silly? Are you a touey? There’s nothing silly about any of this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that they picked a conservatorship over an adoption is so suspect. Why would they need to go that route, if not for money?

In the movie, they mention his age and how he’s too old for adoption. I think it’s silly for him to bring this up now.

It was perfectly legal to adopt a young adult. They just didn’t want to.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What confuses me is how his nfl agents or anybody advising him financially didn’t specifically tell him he was in a conservatorship.

They would not know. How do you think they would know?

Because per the terms of a conservatorshop, the Tuohys would have needed to approve any business contract. It seems they did that, but it remains to be seen whether they took an inappropriate cut and/or kept all Blind Side profits for themselves. That’s his specific complaint and he wants them to stop profiting from his story, which seems reasonable. Pretty gross they became celebrities, with who knows what perks, too.

And used his name and likeness to promote books and speaking engagements. Why would they not end the conservatorship years ago. Their actions matter so much more than their words

When did he previously seek to end it and faced their opposition? Never.

They claim they never got paid from the conservatorship. If true, that’s easily proven. Much more easily than if there wasn’t a conservatorship in place.