[Discussion] Sexual Abuse Claims Against MJ Estate - Robson/ Safechuck/ Doe

[Bubs]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

This is good.

I bet this makes Wade's nervous.

 

[elusive moonwalker]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I thought this was denied before so how come the judge has now ruled for the examination. Not that im complaining! Excellent news lets see if he cracks under pressure

 

[Bubs]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

08/23/2016 at 08:30 am in department M at 1725 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401
Motion for Protective Order(RE DEPOSITION OF WADE ROBSON)

and I thought he wants speak out, loud and clear?

I would love to read it.

Didn't Wade's team recently demanded the estate to release (invented) confidential agreement (or something similar) and said they should be a public?

 

[Goddess4Real]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

08/23/2016 at 08:30 am in department M at 1725 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401
Motion for Protective Order(RE DEPOSITION OF WADE ROBSON)

and I thought he wants speak out, loud and clear?

I would love to read it.

Oh to be a fly on that wall ?

 

[HIStory]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

08/23/2016 at 08:30 am in department M at 1725 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401
Motion for Protective Order(RE DEPOSITION OF WADE ROBSON)

and I thought he wants speak out, loud and clear?

I would love to read it.

Didn't Wade's team recently demanded the estate to release (invented) confidential agreement (or something similar) and said they should be a public?

Oh yes. How ironic that in that letter his lawyers were all about "transparency" and now they request a protective order for Robson's upcoming deposition.
They want to have it played it out in the media, feed tabloids like Radar Online, but when it is Robson under scrutiny they suddenly want it under seal.

BTW, I think he already had a deposition in the probate case.

 

[Goddess4Real]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Oh yes. How ironic that in that letter his lawyers were all about "transparency" and now they request a protective order for Robson's upcoming deposition.
They want to have it played it out in the media, feed tabloids like Radar Online, but when it is Robson under scrutiny they suddenly want it under seal.

BTW, I think he already had a deposition in the probate case.

Yuuuup he wants to have his cake and eat it too.....spineless coward!

 

[bluemoon7]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

This sounds like good news, but I do not know what mental evaluation really includes. I just guess it examines the "clients" mental health in a very detailed way and tries to evluate the accountability. I believe that such an evaluation is really very unpleasant and embarrassing for the client - that might be another reason for the motion of protective order.

It hopefully will show that Robson is a cheater and helps ending that terrible court case!! Regardless of him testifying under protected circumstances or not.

 

[Bubs]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Hammer ?@Hammertonhal 16h16 hours ago
Of course noone in the press asked: how come MJ didn't even try to silence Robson himself with money?

I don't know who is this person, but she/he posted valid question.
Wade's team claim MJ silenced all sort of boys and wants those so called protective orders out and open, but MJ never tried to silence Wade himself? Its really good question.

 

[Goddess4Real]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I could be wrong...I think the only threats Wade "alleges" was that if "the truth" came out their careers would be over and they would both go to jail.....because people wouldn't "understand" blah blah blah.

 

[barbee0715]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

If you just use the example of a mental evaluation that respect gave: sexual harassment leads to low self esteem, lack of motivation, etcetera. his actions have proved otherwise.
Think this is funny. Hope they say he is a psychopath.

 

[HIStory]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I believe that such an evaluation is really very unpleasant and embarrassing for the client - that might be another reason for the motion of protective order.

These are two different issues. A deposition is an interview carried out by lawyers. Lawyers from both sides are there. It happens in most cases. It happened also in the probate court case in this same matter. Others can be deposed as well by any side. Such as MJ's employees, Robson's mother etc.

The mental examination will be something carried out by mental health professionals and apparently Robson's lawyers cannot be present there.

Hammer ?@Hammertonhal 16h16 hours ago
Of course noone in the press asked: how come MJ didn't even try to silence Robson himself with money?

I don't know who is this person, but she/he posted valid question.
Wade's team claim MJ silenced all sort of boys and wants those so called protective orders out and open, but MJ never tried to silence Wade himself? Its really good question.

I always said this. Ironic that haters, tabloids and all these accusers always pin their hopes on these never seen phantom victims who were supposedly paid off left and right by MJ, yet, not only they never found any in over 20 years through several investigations, but the accusers themselves say they themselves were never paid off. Remember, haters and tabloids actually created pay off stories about Safechuck as well before he made his allegations. Stories about how his parents were supposedly paid a million dollar for MJ abusing him. Yet, his own lawsuit doesn't contain any such thing. He doesn't claim to be paid off. Nor does he claim his parents were ever paid off. He claims that his parents didn't know until his recent "realization" (or 2005 - depending on which version of his story we take).

Supposedly MJ had this routine of paying off boys left and right, and dozens of them, yet he failed to pay off any of very boys who make allegations. In fact, we know from the Chandler story that the Chandlers themselves wanted MJ to pay them off to not to go to authorities and MJ refused. So what are the chances then that there are these dozens of silenced, paid off boys out there? It's a media myth, nothing more.

 

[ivy]

08/23/2016 at 08:30 am in department M at 1725 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401
Motion for Protective Order(RE DEPOSITION OF WADE ROBSON)

and I thought he wants speak out, loud and clear?

I would love to read it.

I will say that protective orders for depositions are common. For example it was present in KJ- AEG case as well and depositions didn't get public until trial.

This sounds like good news, but I do not know what mental evaluation really includes. I just guess it examines the "clients" mental health in a very detailed way and tries to evluate the accountability. I believe that such an evaluation is really very unpleasant and embarrassing for the client - that might be another reason for the motion of protective order.

It hopefully will show that Robson is a cheater and helps ending that terrible court case!! Regardless of him testifying under protected circumstances or not.

These are two different issues. A deposition is an interview carried out by lawyers. Lawyers from both sides are there. It happens in most cases. It happened also in the probate court case in this same matter. Others can be deposed as well by any side. Such as MJ's employees, Robson's mother etc.

The mental examination will be something carried out by mental health professionals and apparently Robson's lawyers cannot be present there.

Respect77 is right. Deposition and a mental examination is two different things. Deposition happens with lawyers from both sides present. The other side's lawyer will grill you while your lawyer would be there to protect you with objecting. Depositions allow parties to determine what will your testimony be in a possible trial.

Mental evaluation happens at the request of the other party and the only ones present will be Robson and the doctor doing the mental examination. I tried to learn about it to see what entails. This is what I gathered (and please share if you know or find something else)

- examination is referred to as an "independent" as the doctor wouldn't have any previous doctor- patient relationship with Robson. So a totally new doctor to evaluate him

- some documents refer to the doctor as "Defense expert" - making me think that Estate selects it.

- According to the law the doctor who can perform such examination should be "licensed physician, or a licensed clinical psychologist who has a doctoral degree in psychology and at least five years of postgraduate experience in the diagnosis of emotional and mental disorders."

- it's mentioned as "hours long" examination and the doctor totally determines what type of examinations they would do. In 30 days they will write a report and provide it to both sides.

- for such motion to be granted there needs to be a "controversy"about the mental health and there needs to be a good cause. By controversy they mean that parties disagree about the mental health claims.

- As respect77 wrote one website gives this example of when a mental examination can be done "For example, a mental exam may be granted when a plaintiff alleges sexual harassment that leads to diminished self-esteem, reduced motivation, sleeplessness, loss of appetite, fear, anxiety, loss of reputation, emotional distress" . In other words if someone claims a mental distress situation, you can ask them to go through a mental evaluation to see if this mental distress claims are actually true or not.

- Another source says for plaintiff (Robson) one way to avoid such mental examination is "no claim is being made for mental or emotional distress over and above what is usually associated with the physical injuries claimed and no expert testimony regarding this usual mental distress will be offered at trial." or "If plaintiff ’s emotional distress ceases during the course of the litigation, it is no longer at issue." I can't see any of these helping Robson. His whole claim is mental/emotional distress.

- Plaintiff (robson) can also try to come to an agreement with other side to "a) protecting plaintiff ’s privacy, limiting discovery into his or her personal life, and (b) limiting the time required for examination, the number of examiners, examinations,and tests administered. "

Finally why Estate might be asking for this and how will they benefit from it

- "Defendant’s primary reason to compel a mental evaluation is to prove alternative causes for the alleged injuries." Looking for preexisting condition and thereby raising the question of alternative sources for the distress

- "the defense mental examination also tends to cast plaintiff in a negative light due to general bias against people with psychiatric diagnoses"

- "Undermining plaintiff’s credibility: the presentation of alternative theories of causation combined with plaintiff ’s psychopathology diagnoses operate to undermine his or her credibility. Defendant’s psychiatric experts will give the opinion that plaintiff had numerous preexisting problems that caused the mental condition long before he or she encountered defendant. These alternative diagnoses serve to cast doubt on plaintiff ’s reliability as a witness and his or her veracity."

That being said given the medical nature of this and patient protection rights, I'm quite sure any report will be under a protective order and sealed and we won't hear about the details until a summary judgment or even until trial stage (if it comes to that of course).

 

[elusive moonwalker]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Hope it gets leaked seeing as everything and anything pertaining to mj got leaked illegally over the years but you never saw judges take action

 

[Bubs]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Hope it gets leaked seeing as everything and anything pertaining to mj got leaked illegally over the years but you never saw judges take action

We'll hear something soon enough when Radar posts a story about this. They were against this mental evaluation, so they will hit back by going to their lapdog Radar.

 

[#MJforever57]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

This is good news Wade you should have gotting out of the kitchen a long time ago. Wade was not acting like a person who was abuse he was to clam and relax going on with his normal life like nothing ever happen. like to see how Wade is going to get out of this one another lie.

 

[elusive moonwalker]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

We'll hear something soon enough when Radar posts a story about this. They were against this mental evaluation, so they will hit back by going to their lapdog Radar.

Im sure whatever the outcome they will run to radar with their version of what happened

 

[redfrog]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Why does the Estate need to do this mental evaluation to win summary judgement?
How does his mental state relate to the statutes of limitations or whether the companies had control over MJ or whether
they knew about any abuse? How could they use the result of such exam to win judgement?

And why is it so important that they take the risk the result would be that Wade is sane and has no mental issues?
There are so many other things they could use against Robson, why are they

As far as I remember earlier they wanted the doctor's records not a mental exam and the response was that if it goes to trial
the judge would reconsider. So they cannot get the records unless there a trial but they can get a mental exam?
How does that make sense?


Does anyone know anything about this asshole? http://www.oppermanreport.com/

Apparently he made an almost two hour show about the allegations to convince everyone MJ was guilty.
I won't listen to his shit someone who called MJ a pedo on twitter posted it so I assume he is a lunatic liar.
https://twitter.com/EmailRevealer/status/762414575673221120

Does anyone in America know whether he is relevant there or not?

 

[jaydom7]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Why does the Estate need to do this mental evaluation to win summary judgement?
How does his mental state relate to the statutes of limitations or whether the companies had control over MJ or whether
they knew about any abuse? How could they use the result of such exam to win judgement?

And why is it so important that they take the risk the result would be that Wade is sane and has no mental issues?
There are so many other things they could use against Robson, why are they

As far as I remember earlier they wanted the doctor's records not a mental exam and the response was that if it goes to trial
the judge would reconsider. So they cannot get the records unless there a trial but they can get a mental exam?
How does that make sense?


Does anyone know anything about this asshole? http://www.oppermanreport.com/

Apparently he made an almost two hour show about the allegations to convince everyone MJ was guilty.
I won't listen to his shit someone who called MJ a pedo on twitter posted it so I assume he is a lunatic liar.
https://twitter.com/EmailRevealer/status/762414575673221120

Does anyone in America know whether he is relevant there or not?

totally irrelevant.. No clue who he is.

 

[ivy]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Why does the Estate need to do this mental evaluation to win summary judgement?
How does his mental state relate to the statutes of limitations or whether the companies had control over MJ or whether
they knew about any abuse? How could they use the result of such exam to win judgement?
And why is it so important that they take the risk the result would be that Wade is sane and has no mental issues?
There are so many other things they could use against Robson, why are they

As far as I remember earlier they wanted the doctor's records not a mental exam and the response was that if it goes to trial
the judge would reconsider. So they cannot get the records unless there a trial but they can get a mental exam?
How does that make sense?

no one said they "need" to do a mental evaluation to "win summary judgment" first of all. Secondly although there is still summary judgment and chance to dismiss the case, discovery happens as if a trial would happen. There is no time after summary judgment to do discovery etc. Plus summary judgment isn't just limited to technicality of the case (statutes of limitations or the level of control companies had etc.). During summary judgment phase you can also succeed by showing the plaintiff cannot legally prove their claims.

right now this case is in "goes to trial" situation. It survived demurrer and a trial date has been set. Yes it can still get dismissed but like I said right now all discovery is happening as if this will go to trial. So now all the doctor reports, independent mental examinations etc is becoming relevant and will fall under expert witnesses.

The benefits of a mental evaluation has already been explained. It has 3 major benefits. Robson alleges mental & emotional distress. Does he really suffer from such? No mental & emotional distress means he doesn't have much left as a damages claim. Second is did he have a preexisting mental condition? Something else that could make him experience the mental & emotional distress he claims he is experiencing? and Finally if he has a mental condition (example bipolar like his father) it could be used to argue he lacks credibility and even question if his accusations are even real or not.

and honestly I don't really get the purpose of most of your posts. Most of them sounds like you post them just to disagree with anything and everything. In this instance you have a person - Robson- who claims he never forgot what happened but he didn't realize it was abuse until he had his breakdown and saw a doctor. You have a person who claims he could never work during his lifetime. You would prefer Estate not question these claims? Especially when he is obviously not making sense and showing differing behavior than his claims? "I could never work in entertainment industry" Robson is releasing dance videos with his friends. and his weird repressed memory or perhaps more correctly compartmentalized memory is the first thing to question IMO. Add to that his family's mental illness history, it makes all the sense in the world to subject him to an independent mental evaluation.

 

[jaydom7]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

true Ivy! I bet Wade won't be happy about that mental evaluation.. also another question for you, at this time can the defense present Wade's videos, interviews and court room testimony from the 2005 trial to show what he said then? I am sure the mental health expert will take into account all of his previous comments about MJ and come to the conclusion that Wade is a lying psychopath.

 

[barbee0715]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I hope it just gets dismissed since the companies had no control anyway. Opperman is nobody. Looks like a YouTube guy.

 

[jaydom7]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I hope it just gets dismissed since the companies had no control anyway. Opperman is nobody. Looks like a YouTube guy.

right.. it should get dismissed based on the fact, his team hasn't proved anything about the companies knowing anything.. Have they even determined who was in control of the companies?

 

[ivy]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

true Ivy! I bet Wade won't be happy about that mental evaluation.. also another question for you, at this time can the defense present Wade's videos, interviews and court room testimony from the 2005 trial to show what he said then? I am sure the mental health expert will take into account all of his previous comments about MJ and come to the conclusion that Wade is a lying psychopath.

right now it's the discovery phase. so it would be interrogatories, document requests, depositions, followed by expert witness reports and depositions. At this time we will only see and hear about discovery related issues - as it just happened. a request to get Robson a mental evaluation, a request to seal his deposition etc.

I don't think mental health experts duty is to determine whether he is a liar or not. Robson had his own doctors that gave affidavits and such. So I think this is more like a way to challenge those experts.

The stuff you mention could be brought up during summary judgment but I think they will only come up during trial (if it happens of course). It's a credibility issue and that determination lies with the jury - not the judge.

 

[jaydom7]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

right now it's the discovery phase. so it would be interrogatories, document requests, depositions, followed by expert witness reports and depositions. At this time we will only see and hear about discovery related issues - as it just happened. a request to get Robson a mental evaluation, a request to seal his deposition etc.

I don't think mental health experts duty is to determine whether he is a liar or not. Robson had his own doctors that gave affidavits and such. So I think this is more like a way to challenge those experts.

The stuff you mention could be brought up during summary judgment but I think they will only come up during trial (if it happens of course). It's a credibility issue and that determination lies with the jury - not the judge.

Has it even been determined by Wade's lawyers who in the 'companies' was supposed to be controlling Michael?:busted:

 

[redfrog]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

and honestly I don't really get the purpose of most of your posts. Most of them sounds like you post them just to disagree with anything and everything.

I didn't disagree with anyone I asked whether anyone knows how the Estate's requests to do this is relevant to the summary judgment.
I didn't know that at this stage everything is done as if trial's going to happen. That's such a waste of time and money.

You would prefer Estate not question these claims?

Of course they should question it. In fact I don't see how any legal system would take a man seriously who claims that he didn't know until age 29 that raping a child was wrong. It's insane that the case has not been thrown out based on that nonsense alone after all it's his only way to get around the statutes of limitations and what he says is not only without precedent but totally impossible. Of course he knew long before age 29 that rape is wrong and not consensual.
I just wanted to know whether the Estate can effectively use this to win summary judgment or this is merely preparation for trial.

So you think the Estate will present all this evidence about Robson being in perfectly good mood to make dance videos while claiming he can't work anymore to win summary judgement?

 

[KOPV]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

is it even normal practice to sue someone's company for something like this? I mean, get MJ is not here.. But if the Sam Walton did (or did not) do something to someone I can't see that person Walmart for a personal matter..

 

[barbee0715]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

is it even normal practice to sue someone's company for something like this? I mean, get MJ is not here.. But if the Sam Walton did (or did not) do something to someone I can't see that person Walmart for a personal matter..

I think only if the company knew Sam Walton was a rapist and put employees in harm's way. Isn't that the argument here?

 

[elusive moonwalker]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Duty of care.. its about what they knew and how they should have acted.

 

[ivy]

I didn't know that at this stage everything is done as if trial's going to happen. That's such a waste of time and money.

not really a waste. again demurrer is more about technical issues where as summary judgment requires full discovery.

see below

A motion for summary judgment (sometimes called an “MSJ&#8221 is a request for the court to rule that the other party has no case, because there are no facts at issue. The party making the motion is claiming that either the case should not go before a jury at all, or a jury could only rule in favor of the moving party.

In order to win an MSJ, the moving party must show that:

there are no facts which can reasonably be disputed; or
anyone looking at the facts and applying law would rule in favor of the moving party.

I just wanted to know whether the Estate can effectively use this to win summary judgment or this is merely preparation for trial.

Depends on the arguments they would raise. if we are solely talking about credibility (lying) that would be more of an issue for jurors and not the judge.

So you think the Estate will present all this evidence about Robson being in perfectly good mood to make dance videos while claiming he can't work anymore to win summary judgement?

again, don't limit everything to just summary judgment. While some points can be raised at summary judgment, some might only come up during a trial. I imagine this issue will have dueling experts from both parties.

is it even normal practice to sue someone's company for something like this? I mean, get MJ is not here.. But if the Sam Walton did (or did not) do something to someone I can't see that person Walmart for a personal matter..

church are regularly sued for abuse by priests. similarly schools are sued for abuse by teachers. so it is normal practice to sue companies. BUT see below

I think only if the company knew Sam Walton was a rapist and put employees in harm's way. Isn't that the argument here?

true. you can sue companies but you need to show a control between the company and the abuser and they knew or had a reason to know, the power to do something but did nothing.

So imagine this scenario. church assigns a priest to a location, during his work the priest interacts and abuses kids, church receives a complaint of abuse but does nothing or just moves the priest to a new location. In this example the abuse happens during an interaction related to the church and church has the knowledge of abuse and the power to fire the priest. by doing nothing they become liable for the abuse by the priest.

 

[#MJforever57]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Ivy do we know what happen with this? it just happened. a request to get Robson a mental evaluation, a request to seal his deposition etc.


A request to seal the deposition is that come from Wade's lawyers?