Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: The Leaving Neverland - Lie Collection (No comments)

   
  1. #1
    Points: 2,825, Level: 32
    Level completed: 50%, Points required for next Level: 75
    Overall activity: 100.0%
    Achievements:
    Overdrive1000 Experience Points31 days registered
    Awards:
    Activity Award

    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    816
    Points
    2,825
    Level
    32
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 324 Times in 175 Posts

    Default The Leaving Neverland - Lie Collection (No comments)

    To the "soldiers of Love"......

    I thought it is time to make a thread were we can collect and present all exposed Lies and credibilty issues of Leaving Neverland, the two accusers and the filmaker for new visitors and to have a collection were we can give people a link to when we are defending Michael in these days.

    Please post only things which are really sure that they are lies or very sure.
    WITH EVIDENCE!
    No speculations.

    Don't replay on posts here.
    Whrite a personal message to the posters when he/she posts something wrong that he can correct it.

    ---------------------------------------

    To the readers of this thread.....
    First you should watch all the three follerwing video for some important basic informations about the Wade Robson and James Safechuck case.







    This collection is not a full collection of the admitted lies and credibility issues from the two Michael Jackson Accusers Wade Robson, James Safechuck and the Filmaker Dan Reed.

    There are many admited lies and credibility issues which are collected elswhere.
    But I/we try to fill this thred with so many content as possible in the next days, to give you an overview.
    Last edited by ManBehindTheMirrOr - Dona; 15-03-2019 at 03:28 PM.

  2. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to ManBehindTheMirrOr - Dona For This Useful Post:


  3. #2
    Points: 9,143, Level: 64
    Level completed: 31%, Points required for next Level: 207
    Overall activity: 11.0%
    Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    766
    Points
    9,143
    Level
    64
    Thanks
    10,392
    Thanked 1,399 Times in 414 Posts

    Default Re: The Leaving Neverland - Lie Collection (No comments)

    In the Oprah Winfrey interview:

    Oprah: "So when Wade came out and we saw him on The Today Show, was that the first time you consciously recognized there were others? Cause obviously you recognized there were others because you testified in a trial."

    Safechuck: "I mean I testified when I was a little kid. And you don't think about there being others. Your brain doesn't go there, you're just thinking about you and him."

    In the documentary:

    Safechuck: "There was one particular boy who sort of entered and replaced me. And so I saw him grow closer and closer to that boy. And I was pushed out more and more. And that was really difficult to handle. It was a lot of jealousy and hurt. You're no longer special. One specific night that was really tough, it was at Avenue of the Stars. You're spending the night there and the boy was there. The boy would sleep in Michael's room and I would sleep downstairs on the sofa. It's like being cast out. And it was like a realization that, like, 'Okay, I'm not number one.' And I just wanted to go home. I cried and cried. And I cried out for my mom. And I just cried myself to sleep. So it was like the first night it really hit. Michael's my, like, partner, and then he's gone."

    ***

    In the Oprah Winfrey interview:

    Oprah: "Why when your mother asked you in the first trial, why did you deny it?"

    Safechuck: "I didn't not testify out of thinking I was doing something good or knowing that what he did was bad. I was afraid of being caught. It was on the news 24/7. I mean it was just being broadcast. And there was so much attention on it from the world."

    Oprah: "So by that time, you thought of what you were doing as a bad thing."

    Safechuck: "No."

    Oprah: "Or just as a thing that you all did, but you had to keep it a secret."

    Safechuck: "I didn't think of it as good or bad."

    In the documentary:

    Safechuck: "And so I told my mom then that he wasn't a good person."

    Safechuck’s mother: "Jimmy was over and he said to me, "Michael's an evil man."

    In Safechuck's complaint:

    "Plaintiff talked to her about the call and told his mother that the decedent was a "bad man", but was unable to tell her any details or say anything but the very briefest statement that he had been abused."

    ***

    In the Oprah Winfrey interview:

    Oprah: "When did you start to think of it as abuse?"
    Safechuck: "It wasn't until Wade came out [in 2013]."

    In the documentary:

    Safechuck, about 2005 trial: "And so I told my mom then that he wasn't a good person."

    Safechuck’s mother, about 2005 trial: "Jimmy was over and he said to me, "Michael's an evil man."

    In Safechuck's complaint:

    About 2005 trial: "Plaintiff talked to her about the call and told his mother that the decedent was a "bad man", but was unable to tell her any details or say anything but the very briefest statement that he had been abused."

  4. #3
    Points: 2,825, Level: 32
    Level completed: 50%, Points required for next Level: 75
    Overall activity: 100.0%
    Achievements:
    Overdrive1000 Experience Points31 days registered
    Awards:
    Activity Award

    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    816
    Points
    2,825
    Level
    32
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 324 Times in 175 Posts

    Default Re: The Leaving Neverland - Lie Collection (No comments)

    Judi Brisse



    My summery to the credibilty of the story with the wedding ceremony and MJ and James did so much incredible sexual stuff together in Neverland:

    How can it ever be beliveable that Michael and James spend so much time TOGETHER and did all this many sexual stuff there over a long perid of time when they only show three pictures in the movie of Michael and James in Neverland (one picture of James in a pool one pictures of Michael alone, anouther picture of MJ looking on Hitler at the screen, where he seames much older, and it can't be sure that it is really MJ, cause his face is covered) and a Birthday Party at neverland where no Michael showed up?

    James said in LN that MJ and he filed out a document about their "marriage".
    They didn't explain, what happened to this document.
    Why could James not keep this damm document but the rings?
    James seames not to have it and Michael Jackson seamed also not to have it cause the police turned his house upside down in 1993 and 2003 and found nothing!!!

    The wedding cermomy should beliveable because they showed three cheep rings in the camera in Leaving Neverland?

    When I would be so much in love with Michael and had a loveing relationship with the biggest superstar in the world, I whould make photos with the rings on my finger as a child.
    But there is not a single one in LN!

    The whole story with the wedding ceremony and the sex adventures in Neberland is unbeliveabe!

    I think they knew by making the film that the Neverland Part, the weekest part of James story is, because of the incredible lack of evidence they could show about it (three photos, birthday party, the rings).
    So they brought the most graphic crazy details into this to manipulate the emotions of the viewer so far as possible that he don't reconize when they only watch LN once (what the most people do) the lack of evidence they are showing.

    Even the first version was not strong enough so Reed decided to bring the wedding ceremony in.
    This was the last thing they filmed.
    They made this also cause they know it whould trigger the media extreamly who always wanna sell the storys that MJ abused kids in the "kiddie-candy Land" Neverland and not somewere else!

    ---------------------------------

    Watch this video to see that James Safechuck is definitly lieing on the the subject in Leaving Neverland that MJ beggin him to testify in the 2005 trail:

    Last edited by ManBehindTheMirrOr - Dona; 14-03-2019 at 10:05 AM.

  5. #4
    Points: 2,825, Level: 32
    Level completed: 50%, Points required for next Level: 75
    Overall activity: 100.0%
    Achievements:
    Overdrive1000 Experience Points31 days registered
    Awards:
    Activity Award

    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    816
    Points
    2,825
    Level
    32
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 324 Times in 175 Posts

    Default Re: The Leaving Neverland - Lie Collection (No comments)

    Confusion about the Credibility of Wade Robsons Story Part I



    Wade was already 8 in that video of 1990.
    So he danced after all horrible painful things he claimed, whould have happened to him months before were he must practicing oral sex, to the music of his molester, idolized him when he could have chossed every other music to dance to!
    He could have choosed also every other song of Michael Jackson but it had to be "The Way You Make Me Feel"???
    Wich has this very sexual dance break szene included in its short film?
    Very strange behavior for a sexual abused victim!
    It is very possible that the relationship between MJ and Wade was in reality compleatly harmless and the 8 year old Wade here didn't know anything about sex at this moment like every normal child!!!
    __________________________________________________ ___

    Wade Robson is bying the History CD with his mother in 1995:



    Why must Wade Robson who had an longtime loving sexual relationship at this time with Michael Jackson buy the Historyalbum on his own?
    Why wouldn't his generous lover MJ (who seamed to loved to always groom and seduce him and his family) send him a personal free copy of his most personal album?

    It seames that MJ wasn't his lover in reality and don't even care about Wade or their friendship during this time cause he instead was a Ladys Man (Which is proven by the maaany adult Porn Magazines, found in Neverland sometimes with traces of his sperm), in love with Lisa Marie and wanna seduceing, grooming her in bed all the time!

    I remember that friends of Michael and even staff members very often got personal copys from his albums from MJ.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Chantal Robson the sister of Wade Robson never showed public support to her brother as a sexual abused victim on her offical twitter account exept from a video she shared and an announcement about an interview with Wade back in 2014, but not a single personal statememt!

    https://mobile.twitter.com/chantalrobson

    For a sister who works also in the music industry as a choegrapher from a real victim of childabuse who has the courage to come forward and stand up against Michael Jackson there whould be much more public support expectable!

    It seames that Chantal Robson in reality knows that Wade Robson is lying and couldn't stand to support it!

    ------------------------------------------------------

    This is a must watch videos about Wades actual victimfund AND his past victim fund he had in 2013:



    This so called "victim" and his not selfish financial motives behind this funds can't be taken seriously!
    Last edited by ManBehindTheMirrOr - Dona; 13-03-2019 at 05:07 PM.

  6. #5
    Points: 27, Level: 1
    Level completed: 54%, Points required for next Level: 23
    Overall activity: 1.0%

    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Posts
    7
    Points
    27
    Level
    1
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default Re: The Leaving Neverland - Lie Collection (No comments)

    I wonder why mj did not want to be around the safechucks?

  7. #6
    Points: 9,143, Level: 64
    Level completed: 31%, Points required for next Level: 207
    Overall activity: 11.0%
    Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    766
    Points
    9,143
    Level
    64
    Thanks
    10,392
    Thanked 1,399 Times in 414 Posts

    Default Re: The Leaving Neverland - Lie Collection (No comments)

    Dan Reed is plagiarizing Victor Gutierrez's pro-pedophilia book again in this interview: https://www.hit.com.au/story/leaving...-claims-125583

    Dan Reed: “The intense period of Wade's - it's terrible to say it, but - sexual relationship with Michael Jackson was from the age of 7 to the age of 9. That was if you like to begin to use it the dreadful word the 'honeymoon' period, the period when they were really seeing each other a lot.”

    Victor Gutierrez: Meanwhile, Jackson and Jordie told June that they wouldn't be able to go, since they both had a cold, and they stayed in the hotel room. According to Jordie, this was an excuse that they had agreed upon so that they could have complete freedom and privacy. "It was fun. I felt very special waiting for the moment of the 'honeymoon', as we called it, when we could be alone."

    ***

    Dan Reed: “She's (Brandi) saying they were together for 7 years. Now he met his wife Amanda when he was 19 or I think maybe even younger, 18 or 19. So that would have meant that Brandi was in a sexual relationship with Wade from the age of 12. Really?"

    He's trying to discredit Brandi by saying Wade met his wife Amanda when he was 18 or 19 years old, but if anything, if this is true, it only reinforces Brandi's claims that he was cheating on her with multiple women.

    ***

    Dan Reed: Mike Pesca, host of The Gist, asked director Dan Reed whether the items are “actual Michael Jackson–worn gloves and jackets,” and Reed responded that they’re the real deal. “Of course, it’s all genuine. I verified this with Wade,” he said in an interview. “He’s not gonna go and buy some Michael Jackson memorabilia on eBay and then burn it in front of his little boy. I mean, come on.”

    Wade Robson: "The Thriller jacket that I burned in the photos was my custom childhood Thriller jacket that I used to perform in. Those are the images portrayed in Leaving Neverland.”

  8. #7
    Points: 2,825, Level: 32
    Level completed: 50%, Points required for next Level: 75
    Overall activity: 100.0%
    Achievements:
    Overdrive1000 Experience Points31 days registered
    Awards:
    Activity Award

    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    816
    Points
    2,825
    Level
    32
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 324 Times in 175 Posts

    Default Re: The Leaving Neverland - Lie Collection (No comments)

    This is a must watch video to see that this two accusers are lying for finanzial motivations and to understand why they are doing it:



    The money they can get out of their claims depends on the amount of demage, that they abuse had to endure as children and how much it has infected their lifes.

    Thats why....

    - They say it happened multible times (100 times)
    - They say it happened over a long period of time from many years
    - They say when it hapened it happened nearly everytime they were togeteher with Mj without days or weeks breaks between the molestations
    - They say the molestations were always very exreme and intense
    - They roll everthing what went wrong in their lifes off the things MJ did to them

    Everything makes the financial outcome from the lawsuits, the interviews and from the sells of LN higher for them!

    When the would only say it happend one til 5 times and it was only some inapropreate touching, it whould be not so valuable for the outcome of their lawsuits, not enough to get huge public attention and fill out a film with this.

    When they must get trogh this they wanna 'win big time" not only a few dollers... bilions of dollars so everthing what did happen to them has to be so EXTREAME as possible!!!

    They are collecting the dollars since the sundance premier now and will collect much more til they are really exposed publically.
    When they are exposed they can leave the country and don't have to give anything back cause nobody can sue them for deformation of a dead person.
    Last edited by ManBehindTheMirrOr - Dona; 14-03-2019 at 07:11 PM.

  9. #8
    Points: 2,825, Level: 32
    Level completed: 50%, Points required for next Level: 75
    Overall activity: 100.0%
    Achievements:
    Overdrive1000 Experience Points31 days registered
    Awards:
    Activity Award

    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    816
    Points
    2,825
    Level
    32
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 324 Times in 175 Posts

    Default Re: The Leaving Neverland - Lie Collection (No comments)

    This videos exposes Lies of the two Michael Jackson Accusers:





    Watch the last video above also to clearly reconize that this interview uploaded on July 13 2012 didn't fit in Wades newest version of the burning MJ memorbilia story because of his abuse he told in LN.
    Here he is still highly prising Michael Jackson with no visuable psychlogical problems:



    This dancesession who Wade Robson dances in 2012 to Michael Jacksons song "Unbreakable" contredict also very strongly the story in his lawsits:



    In the video you can also see how negative "triggered" Wade Robson is from MJs music when he heared it puplically and had "to leave" immediatly.
    Last edited by ManBehindTheMirrOr - Dona; 14-03-2019 at 01:15 PM.

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to ManBehindTheMirrOr - Dona For This Useful Post:


  11. #9
    Points: 2,825, Level: 32
    Level completed: 50%, Points required for next Level: 75
    Overall activity: 100.0%
    Achievements:
    Overdrive1000 Experience Points31 days registered
    Awards:
    Activity Award

    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    816
    Points
    2,825
    Level
    32
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 324 Times in 175 Posts

    Default Re: The Leaving Neverland - Lie Collection (No comments)

    Dan Reed is a unprofessional greedy filmaker who used foreign video footage in the childporngraphic movie "Leaving Neverland" without asking the footageowner for permissions or paid for it.
    It is a movie from which he makes huge money out of it on his own after it is sold to over 130 countries.

    The footage from a Neverland visit in 2017 of this man was used in Leaving Neverland:




    Quote Originally Posted by KOPV View Post
    PS the footage of Neverland was NOT 'OK'd' by the distributer of the footage, was unaware that it was even going to be in a film..
    Quote Originally Posted by KOPV View Post
    The Neverland footage was not approved by the publisher of the footage, I spoke to him and he said a few things. He has a 'nasty' lawyer that he could talk to regarding the use of the footage and may look into seeing what he can do.
    Quote Originally Posted by KOPV View Post
    He was there in an exclusive visit by the agent with the company he works for. That agent has ties to those who are selling the property. They went there to tour it, have lunch, have a Q&A on the property and luxury real estate etc. His footage was used by someone in the past trying to pretend they broke into Neverland and it was up on youtube. He complaint to youtube and expressed he hopes it was taken down. Dan Reed was not there!
    The fact that Dan Reed gives the imagination in the credits of "Leaving Neverland", that he filmed everything with his filmcrew on his own what he used ouside the privat footage of Wade and James, makes him uncredible Liar in this case.

    Here are the reactions from two MJ fans who were misportraid in Dan Reeds Leaving Neverland:



    Last edited by ManBehindTheMirrOr - Dona; 16-03-2019 at 11:50 AM.

  12. #10
    Points: 2,825, Level: 32
    Level completed: 50%, Points required for next Level: 75
    Overall activity: 100.0%
    Achievements:
    Overdrive1000 Experience Points31 days registered
    Awards:
    Activity Award

    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    816
    Points
    2,825
    Level
    32
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 324 Times in 175 Posts

    Default Re: The Leaving Neverland - Lie Collection (No comments)

    new, detailed and helpful article from TheMichaelJacksonAllegations

    NOTE: This article includes lots of screencaps of legal docs, photos and links which don't appear below.

    Differences Between Leaving Neverland/interviews and the Robson/Safechuck lawsuits
    Posted on March 17, 2019

    While the story in “Leaving Neverland” is based on Wade Robson and James Safechuck’s lawsuits, there are some differences between the film, their interviews during the promotional campaign of the film and their complaints. Here I will post a list of those differences:

    1) In the film Wade Robson makes the allegation that Michael Jackson made him get rid of a bloody underwear after attempting to anally penetrate him when Wade was 14.

    Robson does claim the anal penetration attempt in the court filing, but does not claim anything about a bloody underwear and Jackson allegedly making him get rid of it. This is all that is alleged in the complaint about the alleged anal penetration [1]:


    Is this yet another example of Wade Robson’s ever evolving “memories”?

    2) In interviews during the promotional campaign of the film, James Safechuck made an allegation that Jackson supposedly made a video tape of their alleged sex acts. Safechuck, conveniently, alleges that Jackson then destroyed this evidence.

    “Both men claim Jackson never wore condoms during their sex acts. They allege he often plied them with alcohol and pornography before molesting them, and even recorded one of his sexual encounters with Safechuck.

    “He immediately freaked out when he realized what he just did and taped over it,” Safechuck says. Although he was aware Jackson was filming, “it was fun at the time, and when you’re having fun, (Jackson) isn’t thinking about it. But later, he’s like, ‘Wait a minute. I just documented this.’ He was very careful, but that was his one sort of slip.“ [2]

    This claim was neither in his complaint, nor in the film. It was first alleged during the promotional interviews of “Leaving Neverland”. There is no evidence of Jackson ever making or having such tapes. Keep in mind that his premises were raided and thoroughly searched in both 1993 and 2003 and also that he was a disorganized hoarder. No sex tape was ever found in his possession either with Safechuck or any other child.

    (Maybe we should take a mental note of the fact that when Safechuck first started claiming this, the R. Kelly case, that heavily features sex tapes, was very prominent in the media.)

    3) James Safechuck alleges in his court filings that Jackson showed him child pornography – movies in which children were masturbating [3].


    Safechuck made the claim in the film that Jackson showed him pornography, but there was no mention of movies with children masturbating in it or any kind of child pornography.

    There is no evidence of Jackson ever having such movies. No such movies were ever found at his premises during the extensive house searches in both 1993 and 2003.

    4) In the film Wade Robson alleges that what finally convinced him of protecting Jackson in Court in 2005 was a dinner that they had together before Wade’s testimony where Jackson looked very sick and Wade felt sorry for his children and was worried for them that they would be left without a parent if Jackson went to jail. Wade tells about this in a dramatic tone where he attempts to seem compassionate for Jackson’s children.

    Here you can watch that part: https://streamable.com/bkqkd

    In his complaint this was never mentioned as a motive for him to testify the way he did. There his reason was Jackson’s alleged role playing of him on the phone and him not understanding that he was abused [1]:


    Moreover, Michael Jackson’s nephew, Taj Jackson claims that Robson is definitely lying in this clip as this dinner actually took place AFTER Wade Robson already had testified. Taj was there, along with other witnesses, such as the Barnes family. [4]


    5) Although Robson in the film mentioned Jackson calling him on the phone before his 2005 testimony, but he leaves out the part where Jackson told him: “They are making up all these lies about you and me, saying that we did all this disgusting sexual stuff.”

    Probably because – although Robson now, in the hindsight tries to characterize this as some sort of “role play” -, it actually looks like something that an innocent man would say, not an abuser to his victim. Jackson calls the allegations “made up” and “lies”, and calls them “disgusting sexual stuff”. Not love. Not romance. Not a beautiful thing.

    It defies Wade’s claim of him believing it was love until 2012, because he was allegedly brainwashed into that by Jackson. Here he quotes Jackson himself telling him that such acts would be “disgusting sexual stuff”, so how would that not, at least, ring a bell to an adult man, like Wade was in 2005, that something was wrong with the “love” angle, after all?

    6) In the film the narrative is that these two men protected Jackson for so long because they were brainwashed to be “in love” with him. However, in their lawsuit there are other angles that are omitted from the film – possibly because they would contradict the “in love” narrative.

    For example, in Safechuck’s complaint there is also a strong narrative of alleged constant intimidation and threats by Jackson. In a declaration he claims that Jackson constantly checked on him over the years by calling him once or twice a year and reminded him to keep his mouth shut or else his “life would be over”.

    This narrative in his complaint was used to support an equitable estoppel argument. Equitable estoppel is a legal doctrine that prevents that someone could take advantage of his wrongdoings in court. For example, in relation to statutes of limitations, if a claimant or plaintiff fails to file a timely claim because the defendant threatened or intimidated him, then equitable estoppel can be invoked and in that case claimant’s/plaintiff’s complaint would not be dismissed even if statutes of limitations have already run.

    For this argument and to get around the statutes of limitations Safechuck needed to establish ongoing threats and intimidation by Jackson, so he filed a declaration in which, next to the “love” narrative, he is also going on and on and on about alleged threats and intimidation by Jackson, although the exact nature of it remains vague. He writes:

    “During the entire time I knew [Michael Jackson], he continued to intimidate and threaten me in a manner that can be described as subtle only in the sense that he did not threaten actual physical violence – but his intimidation and threats were no less real and effective. He told me over and over again that my life would be finished if anyone found out about what he/we had done, and I believed him. I had no reason not to, because he trained me to believe that and I had no reason to doubt or question what he said. And because of who [Michael Jackson] was – his power, his iconic status around the world, his fame and fortune – I knew that he could see to it that my life would be over if what happened ever came out.” [5]

    Let us note here, that there is no record of Jackson being a vengeful, threatening, intimidating character who would “see to it” that people’s life were over if they crossed his path. On the contrary, he was a pretty meek guy. But Safechuck needed to claim intimidation and threats for an equitable estoppel argument to try to get around statutes of limitations, so he claimed intimidation and threats.

    7) A LOT is left out of the film about the legal proceedings of both Robson and Safechuck. In actuality, the fact that they are both suing Jacskon’s entities (Estate and companies) for a monetary compensation is only mentioned fleetingly. It is mentioned in the film that the lawsuit was dismissed “based on technical grounds and not merit”, but it fails to explain the legal background to that and that the ruling does include implicit judgements about the truthfulness of some of their claims.

    For example, to get around statutes of limitations, Robson claimed that he did not know about the administration of the Michael Jackson Estate before March 4, 2013, which proved to be a blatant lie – and that under oath.

    Safechuck’s complaint never even got past the demurrer phase, because, unlike Robson, he was never even employed by Jackson’s companies during the time he claims sexual abuse. To be able to even sue, he needed to make up a very contrived theory about how the fact that he danced with Jackson (and other children) on stage during the Bad Tour was somehow “employment” by Jackson’s companies.

    Considering that they claim this is not about about money, it is interesting that they both go lengths to get to that money in Court, even if they have to lie or twist things for that.

    Both men’s lawsuits allege that Jackson’s companies, MJJ Productions and MJJ Ventures, were “the most sophisticated public child sexual abuse procurement and facilitation organization[s] the world has known” that knowingly and deliberately “facilitated” their alleged abuse.

    They make up contrived ways to try to blame their alleged abuse on the companies just to be able to sue them, calling Jackson’s personal assistant at the time, Norma Staikos a “madam” or “procurer” of child sexual abuse victims for Michael Jackson”, all the while never mentioning their own parents’ responsibility in their lawsuit.

    While doing this, they make several false claims which were inadvertently destroyed by Wade’s own mother, Joy Robson in her 2016 deposition.

    For a detailed discussion of Robson’s civil lawsuit see this article (like mentioned, Safechuck’s lawsuit never even got to this stage, but he made similar allegations about the companies as Robson).


    To be continued…

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •