Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate
Ivy, what are the next steps in this civil case and probate case?
still demurrer. I would expect multiple hearings, amended complaints and demurrers.. until the judge says "yes this can go forward" or "no this is dismissed", I think we'll see amended complaint - amended demurrer cycle.
I read half of William Wagener's report from court house, but left because he went full conspiracy mode :scratch: He said something that caught my attention too, which was that how often judge gives an instructions to either side how to proceed with the case? Like here he tells to plaintiffs side that he doesn't see enough stuff in their case, go home and amend it and then come back. Why he didn't instruct defence side that your demurrer wasn't strong enough, here is a few tips that helps you. Better yet, doesn't judges usually just read documents (demurrers etc) and then gives his ruling and thats that?
I wouldn't pay attention to WW. He's biased - not only he hates Estate, not only he's on T-Mez side but he also thinks all the judges are corrupt. His reporting covered all those conspiracies. Plus he's not really professional when it comes to his reporting (such as calling AEG lawyer Jessica Rabbit) and I personally don't think he really grasps law concepts (give he still seems to think he can get Sneddon indicted). The only thing he got right was that judge gave Robson a chance to amend his complaint. I would be very skeptical about rest of his conspiracy involved claims. But that's me.
She ran back to Australia before it popped off
Are we sure? According to her FB, she seems like she's in LA.
The negligence claim is for the companies. You cannot accuse companies of sexual abuse as companies cannot commit sexual abuse. They can only be negligent and thus facilitate abuse.
But Robson so far has failed to establish how the companies were negligent and how they had a duty of care over him in which they were negligent. Robson simply made a vauge statement about the companies somehow being responsible for his abuse but never said how. Oh, he said they brought him to the US where he was allegedly abused so that somehow makes the companies responsible in his argument. But that's not so according to law. He has to allege tortious acts on the part of the companies to get them involved. To make the negligence claim work against the companies he has to show the companies knew about the alleged abuse and they deliberately facilitated it.
That's what the Judge is saying. He has to tell what exactly he accuses the companies of because so far he has not told. He also has to tell who else other than MJ he accuses and of what exactly. You cannot make a lawsuit go ahead on vague statements.
I don't think he definitely has to but how else do you accuse a company of negligence? I mean you have to claim that someone in the company did something, you cannot just throw out a general accusations saying "the company was negligent", period. You have to explain what exactly the company supposedly did and who exactly in the company supposedly did that. A company is a fictious entity, not a person, it cannot act on its own without people acting in it.
I don't think he needs to name people. I think the issue here - as you also explained - Robson made a very general "sexual abuse" claim against corporations. I think Judge agrees with Estate - which is good - that such claim cannot be made against organizations. So Robson needs claim the organizations was negligence. Of course it would bring in claims of duty of care and such.
I think judge says that if he claims corporate negligence, then he needs to come up with more details and be more specific, and in order to do that he needs to name people who worked on those corporations in order to accuse someone (not corporations) for negligence? A bit like AEG trial, KJ named names and stated how people within AEG were negligent and how they had duty of care of MJ, am I right?
You are right. Exactly like AEG trial. That also claimed a duty of care between MJ and AEG, it claimed Murray to be AEG's employee and hence liability for negligence. It doesn't require to accuse someone, it could be against organizations only. (such as how AEG trial was against AEG INC and AEG Live) but I guess the first step for him would be making those claims. I guess duty of care could be relatively easy as Robson was an employee of those corporations and perhaps he can claim some sort of duty of care - but I didn't check. But as we have seen in AEG case and in the demurrers I think he would still have issues with how the corporations could have controlled MJ and knew / should have known part. That's why I think even if he amends his complaint it won't go far.
This what is confusing me a bit. They and the judge are going on about negligence, but don't they have try to show there was abuse in the first place in order for someone to be negligent? When does their having to provide proof of the actual abuse come into this?
What would be classic evidence for this charge of negligence against mj's companies are of course the 'fbi files' story which claim the cover up of dozens of victims by hush contracts and $$millions - this wd obviously have to involve mj lawyers and accountants, one contract of course naming weitzman. We know Gradstein was aware of the story, hopefully he's done his own research to discover it's bs otherwise we have to grimace through yet another publicity outing for this story if he puts it into his amended complaint.
This isn't about proof or evidence. It's not judge's job to determine if there's a proof about it - at least not right now. Judge just looks to the complaint on it's face value and determines if it fits to the law and if there's a question for the jury.
I still don't understand why robson lawyers even launched this civil suit? Even tactically as they may suggest, I still don't see how this civil suit is benefiting Robson.
Well everything is eventually going to be a civil suit. Even if the probate claim was filed on time, Estate had 3 responses - accept , accept in part/deny in part and deny it.
So even if we
assume Robson made a valid claim on time, Estate would deny it - as they already said so. And if/when they deny it, Robson has two choices to either drop it/forget it or take it to civil court.
So I'm guessing that's why they already filed the civil claim because that's where this is going eventually. Probably it's saving them time to file it early and there could be other advantages as well.
I'm not sure why Ivy's website got blocked here. It just got blocked, because last time I checked earlier today it was not blocked out yet. I'm not sure why fan blogs are getting blocked out on this forum recently - especially as useful and informative ones as Ivy's.
Not a mod anymore but let me point out one of the forum rules
"
10. Please do not post links on the board or in signatures to promote or link to competing MJ forums or Websites. You can links to your personal blogs, facebook, Youtube etc. "
I classify it as a personal blog and not a competing website but it's okay. That's why I personally don't refer or link to it.
