Latest on MJJC

3T Sues Radar Online for $100 Million Over Sexual Abuse Reports

respect77 said:
Like I said, there is a significant difference here to cases where a tabloid just relies on a source: that Radar themselves had the actual document about which they lied. So they cannot just blame it on their source. They cannot claim they just believed him when they had the document themselves about which they knew what they put in their article wasn't in it.

No, I do not expect an easy slam dunk. It will be probably long and drawn out and it may end in a settlement because usually that's how cases like these end. I would not mind that either as long as the settlement contains an obligation for Radar to retract their story, admit it was false and that they mislead the public with it and they publicly apologize.
Click to expand...

Reading the complaint, it says each Plaintiff asks for $35 million in compensatory damages AND they ask for puntitive damages as the Court deems fit. But like I said it is not set in stone. Even if a Jury would find Radar liable they could set the awarded sum lower or even higher. For example, Hulk Hogan asked for $100 million but the Jury awarded him even more, $115 million, against Gawker. Although it is said that the Appeal's Court typically reduces such high amounts significantly, so it will probably be a lot less even if the liable verdict is upheld in Appeal's Court.

I think we also have to consider that the nature of the tabloid's claims is significantly more serious in 3T's case than in the average celebrity vs. tabloid case. Typically you have celebrities suing tabloids for saying they cheated on their wives, they are bad fathers, they were seen drunk somewhere etc. Here, however, they accuse people of criminal activity and covering-up for criminal activity, which is a far more serious and more damaging allegation.
 
Last edited:
Bubs said:
Weitzman and Johnnie Cochran as criminal-defence lawyers"
Click to expand...

Huh? Weitzman is a criminal lawyer? Then what is he doing as the Estate's civil lawyer?
I always thought he did only civil cases. Does anyone know what criminal case he ever did?



respect77 said:
awarded sum lower or even higher. For example, Hulk Hogan asked for $100 million but the Jury awarded him even more, $115 million, against Gawker.
Click to expand...

And that case was not about molestion and cover up. This is one of the most serious charges that exist.
However I don't see how 3T could get money for Radar lying about MJ himself.
They lied about 3T too but when it comes to the claims that MJ used sexy photos of his nephews to excite young boys
how does that defame 3T? Radar didn't accuse them of making the photos knowing that MJ would use them to groom boys.
They will sure use this line of defense. Field is making the case that the article suggested that 3T made the photos
to help MJ groom boys.

The child porn report is not part of this lawsuit, that only defamed MJ not 3T.
Why would the judge allow evidence regarding the child porn report itself?
That it was doctored by Radar does not prove that they lied about 3T.
Even though it obviously show that they are capable of anything.

Also would he allow other Radar articles which lied about MJ to demonstrate a pattern of malice?
If not then why would he allow the child porn story?
 
Last edited:
redfrog said:
Huh? Weitzman is a criminal lawyer? Then what is he doing as the Estate's civil lawyer?
I always thought he did only civil cases. Does anyone know what criminal case he ever did?
Click to expand...

He has a few practice areas:
Criminal Defense
Business Litigation
Entertainment IP Litigation
Intellectual Property Litigation
Entertainment Litigation

and here are some of his criminal defence cases:

http://kwikalaw.com/practice-areas/criminal-defense/
 
Soundmind said:
According to this article some judges consider that there was no source whatsoever if a publication refuses to disclose their sources. Whereas some judges do not allow publications to rely on unnamed sources in their defense to prove there was no malice on their part if they insist on keeping names confedintional. So there is a possibility radar will eventually screw its sources to protect itself because such criminals when their asses are on line they will throw everyone under the bus to save themselves.

http://www.rcfp.org/browse-media-la...-and-law-spring-2007/confidentiality-catch-22
Click to expand...

Imagine if Radaronline finally tosses Stacy Brown to the wolves and exposes him.

Or if they expose how Wade was the one behind those documents.
 
3t won't go after Murray they would've done it by now though..
 
This is great news to hear. I have to agree too finally the Jacksons camp making some noise.
 
Last edited:
Saw this on twitter, not sure if this is true or not

Story Alleging Michael Jackson Abuse Pulled After $100 Million Lawsuit

Daniel Adrian Sanchez September 6, 2016

Is Radar Online about to go… offline? A controversial story about Michael Jackson has now disappeared from view.

Radar Online is known for a lot of things in the tabloid world, but factual reporting apparently isn’t one of them.

We first reported back in June a laundry list of items supposedly found in Michael Jackson’s Neverland Ranch by the Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Department back in 2003. The full report was published and posted in PDF format on Radar Online’s site on June 21.

However, in going back to review this tragic news story of the late singer being harassed by more and more reports of alleged sexual molestions, this writer found that Radar mysteriously deleted the story just weeks before Taj, TJ, and Taryll Jackson filed their $100 million liberal lawsuit against the website in late July. I decided to ask myself the same question I started off this article post: Was Radar Online publishing a “real news story,” or was this just a sensationalist trash piece that got way bigger than what the tabloid expected it to?

Were they now trying to bury this piece to avoid a huge payout to the Jackson Estate?

I decided to report it to my editor. He told me, “Why don’t you investigate to see what happened? I have the perfect headline! ‘$100 MM suit alleging incest etc. story pulled!’” All right, I said to myself. What’s the worst that I could find? What exactly is Radar Online trying to hide?

To see exactly what happened, this writer searched through archive.org using the PDF link once widely available on Radar Online’s website. However, what I found is that the final time archive.org was able to save a full snapshot of the PDF was on July 10. The PDF is now only available through this website, but a word of warning to the wise, as first reported back in June, there are several black-and white NSFW images embedded onto the document, so please, don’t open this at work, in front of your boss, or in front of your children.

The actual report contains images of nude teenagers and young adults, pictures of nude children, images of a pornographic magazine. There are also lengthy summaries of what exactly the Sheriff’s Department found.

To see what happened, I then decided to go on Radar Online’s site to see the articles in question. The actual website no longer has the controversial articles indexed on their site, with the only article “published” (read: indexed) this year is of Paris Jackson’s estranged mother, Debbie Rowe, having breast cancer.

The article before it? Photos of the singer’s home taken in Jan 28, 2010. This seems like a no brainer, I thought to myself. If there aren’t any direct article links, then what exactly could Radar Online be sued over? To prove if this was the case, I decided to check previous links to the articles in question in the $100 million libel suit. After clicking on several links that I’ve posted on, I found out that, sure enough, they’re right there on Radar’s site, hiding behind search engine indexed pages.

These pages are still intact, right down to the sensationalist, clickbait titles, which apparently haven’t been changed:


“*****’s Sick Excuses Exposed!”

“Inside Michael Jackson’s Twisted Closet of Secrets”

“Break The Door Down! Cops Serve Warrant To Michael Jackson’s Staff In Epic Raid”

“Michael Jackson’s Secret Pain: Never-Before-Seen Drawings Illustrate Anxiety, Depression & Insecurity, Art Therapist Claims”

“Inside Michael Jackson’s Twisted World: ‘Frightening’ Raid Evidence Exposed”

I found out, however, that clicking on all of the links didn’t take me to their original, respective articles. What are they trying to do? I thought to myself. I then came to the realization that Radar Online, in a desperate attempt to avoid being sued, has tried to redirect this year’s Michael Jackson articles to other, more current (read: not-liable) stories. When I clicked on an article titled, “Michael Jackson’s Secret Ex-Lover Tells All,” I was taken to a Kim Kardashian photo gallery where she was apparently planning a new nude photo shoot back in late May. Will this strategy work? I asked myself. Probably not. The internet has grown too big and these articles are still on everyone’s minds, especially of those who have seen them before on Radar’s site.

No direct statements have been given by Radar Online or parent company American Media, Inc. The only statement American Media was able to give was in defense of the stories in question.

“The Radar article clearly states that detectives reported that Michael Jackson may have used photos of his nephews ‘to excite young boys’. This theory was, in fact, presented by the prosecution during Michael Jackson’s 2005 criminal trial. Radar looks forward to correcting plaintiffs’ misstatements in a court of law.”

This writer wonders what Radar’s lawyers will have to say about these “missing” articles once the court date comes around.

http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2016/09/06/radar-online-pulls-mj-articles/
 
I think we all know that lawyers tend to tell clients t ask for much more than they initially expect simply because people often don't get it.. You ask for $10,000 you can expect $4,000 If your lucky... So if you are aiming for lets say 40,0000 be safe and say 100,000... than way if you are rewarded 40% of claim you leave with the 40,000 you hoped for If you win...
 
that proves even more this was bull and I hope 3 T bring this out in court.
 
KOPV said:
I think we all know that lawyers tend to tell clients t ask for much more than they initially expect simply because people often don't get it.. You ask for $10,000 you can expect $4,000 If your lucky... So if you are aiming for lets say 40,0000 be safe and say 100,000... than way if you are rewarded 40% of claim you leave with the 40,000 you hoped for If you win...
Click to expand...
Exactly. that is call throwing everything at the wall and see what stick. 3T should sue for that amount. Radar lie went around the world.
 
Last edited:
Figured that you all might find this interesting. :yes:


Story Alleging Michael Jackson Abuse Pulled After $100 Million Lawsuit

Daniel Adrian Sanchez September 6, 2016 11




Is Radar Online about to go… offline? A controversial story about Michael Jackson has now disappeared from view.

Radar Online is known for a lot of things in the tabloid world, but factual reporting apparently isn’t one of them.

We first reported back in June a laundry list of items supposedly found in Michael Jackson’s Neverland Ranch by the Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Department back in 2003. The full report was published and posted in PDF format on Radar Online’s site on June 21.

However, in going back to review this tragic news story of the late singer being harassed by more and more reports of alleged sexual molestions, this writer found that Radar mysteriously deleted the story just weeks before Taj, TJ, and Taryll Jackson filed their $100 million liberal lawsuit against the website in late July. I decided to ask myself the same question I started off this article post: Was Radar Online publishing a “real news story,” or was this just a sensationalist trash piece that got way bigger than what the tabloid expected it to?

Were they now trying to bury this piece to avoid a huge payout to the Jackson Estate?

I decided to report it to my editor. He told me, “Why don’t you investigate to see what happened? I have the perfect headline! ‘$100 MM suit alleging incest etc. story pulled!’” All right, I said to myself. What’s the worst that I could find? What exactly is Radar Online trying to hide?

To see exactly what happened, this writer searched through archive.org using the PDF link once widely available on Radar Online’s website. However, what I found is that the final time archive.org was able to save a full snapshot of the PDF was on July 10. The PDF is now only available through this website, but a word of warning to the wise, as first reported back in June, there are several black-and white NSFW images embedded onto the document, so please, don’t open this at work, in front of your boss, or in front of your children.

The actual report contains images of nude teenagers and young adults, pictures of nude children, images of a pornographic magazine. There are also lengthy summaries of what exactly the Sheriff’s Department found.

To see what happened, I then decided to go on Radar Online’s site to see the articles in question. The actual website no longer has the controversial articles indexed on their site, with the only article “published” (read: indexed) this year is of Paris Jackson’s estranged mother, Debbie Rowe, having breast cancer.

The article before it? Photos of the singer’s home taken in Jan 28, 2010. This seems like a no brainer, I thought to myself. If there aren’t any direct article links, then what exactly could Radar Online be sued over? To prove if this was the case, I decided to check previous links to the articles in question in the $100 million libel suit. After clicking on several links that I’ve posted on, I found out that, sure enough, they’re right there on Radar’s site, hiding behind search engine indexed pages.

These pages are still intact, right down to the sensationalist, clickbait titles, which apparently haven’t been changed:


“*****’s Sick Excuses Exposed!”

“Inside Michael Jackson’s Twisted Closet of Secrets”

“Break The Door Down! Cops Serve Warrant To Michael Jackson’s Staff In Epic Raid”

“Michael Jackson’s Secret Pain: Never-Before-Seen Drawings Illustrate Anxiety, Depression & Insecurity, Art Therapist Claims”

“Inside Michael Jackson’s Twisted World: ‘Frightening’ Raid Evidence Exposed”

I found out, however, that clicking on all of the links didn’t take me to their original, respective articles. What are they trying to do? I thought to myself. I then came to the realization that Radar Online, in a desperate attempt to avoid being sued, has tried to redirect this year’s Michael Jackson articles to other, more current (read: not-liable) stories. When I clicked on an article titled, “Michael Jackson’s Secret Ex-Lover Tells All,” I was taken to a Kim Kardashian photo gallery where she was apparently planning a new nude photo shoot back in late May. Will this strategy work? I asked myself. Probably not. The internet has grown too big and these articles are still on everyone’s minds, especially of those who have seen them before on Radar’s site.

No direct statements have been given by Radar Online or parent company American Media, Inc. The only statement American Media was able to give was in defense of the stories in question.

“The Radar article clearly states that detectives reported that Michael Jackson may have used photos of his nephews ‘to excite young boys’. This theory was, in fact, presented by the prosecution during Michael Jackson’s 2005 criminal trial. Radar looks forward to correcting plaintiffs’ misstatements in a court of law.”

This writer wonders what Radar’s lawyers will have to say about these “missing” articles once the court date comes around.

Here's a link to the article on the website.
http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2016/09/06/radar-online-pulls-mj-articles/
 
He started ok
"Radar Online is known for a lot of things in the tabloid world, but factual reporting apparently isn’t one of them."

Then he went downhill
"I decided to report it to my editor. He told me, “Why don’t you investigate to see what happened? I have the perfect headline! ‘$100 MM suit alleging incest etc. story pulled!’” All right, I said to myself. What’s the worst that I could find? What exactly is Radar Online trying to hide?"

The headline he was planning is as bad as any Radars.

"I found out, however, that clicking on all of the links didn’t take me to their original, respective articles. What are they trying to do? I thought to myself. I then came to the realization that Radar Online, in a desperate attempt to avoid being sued, has tried to redirect this year’s Michael Jackson articles to other, more current (read: not-liable) stories. When I clicked on an article titled, “Michael Jackson’s Secret Ex-Lover Tells All,” I was taken to a Kim Kardashian photo gallery where she was apparently planning a new nude photo shoot back in late May. Will this strategy work? I asked myself. Probably not. The internet has grown too big and these articles are still on everyone’s minds, especially of those who have seen them before on Radar’s site."

What I have noticed that when I do Google search on MJ, all sort of stories from Radar comes up even though MJ is not mentioned in the article (you can see that without clicking any Radar stories). Those current "articles" can be about anyone, but somehow they link older MJ stories to them.

One more thing, do americans know the child porn is illegal? Seemingly nobody bothers asking that question that did MJ really had child porn because it was illegal then, and it is still illegal. Sneddon found 14 counts to charge MJ, but child porn wasn't one of them, and if there was child porn, it would have been slam dunk and MJ would have gone to jail.
At least there was somebody who asked the right question after Radar bs story got the wings:

‏@JuddApatow
Why wasn't the Michael Jackson evidence used in the trial? Hard to believe they wouldn't have used it if it exists.
 
Not surprising they want to make the evidence disapear
 
I'm certain 3T and their attorney has done their work and screen capped and copied those articles.
I remember Howard Mann was trying to pull fast one when he had MJ related stuff in his website, and the estate sued him from copyright infringement.
Mann removed that stuff from his website, but too late as the estate has images of his website where he broke copyright and presented them as evidence.
 
They can ask fans for the original copy of the PDF that Radar put on. Many fans saved it. I did.

Golden rule: Once something is put on the Internet it stays there forever as the Internet doesn't forget.
 
Unfortunately I don't think this story about Radar deleting stories is completely true.

I googled michael jackson name and radar, clicked on 3 and they were all working


ivy;4164916 said:
When I clicked on an article titled, “Michael Jackson’s Secret Ex-Lover Tells All,” I was taken to a Kim Kardashian photo gallery where she was apparently planning a new nude photo shoot back in late May.
Click to expand...

I clicked on the same article and it took me to the correct place.

The two articles - the original with the document as well as the article that mentions nephews - both still available. The only thing I saw was the link to the pdf file didn't work, it took you to the radar homepage. However the original post has still the document linked. So I'm thinking they probably just changed the link when they deleted some of the pages from the document.

The search function on Radar's website isn't that good either. When you search for MJ it gives you old and new articles mixed. some of the articles from june show at the search results and some don't. So it's not that easy to find these articles with a radar search. but they are still there.

so I will consider is news story as not completely true - some links don't work, it's not easy to find the articles on radar site with the search function but the two articles 3t's lawsuit was about is still available.
 
Last edited:
Radar is pretty F'ing dumb to get MJ's family involved in there claims.. Like they are just going to accuse something that involves them.
 
Alright 3T your uncle would be very proud of you for standing your ground for letting the truth be know.(y)
 
Last edited:
Bubs said:
One more thing, do americans know the child porn is illegal? Seemingly nobody bothers asking that question that did MJ really had child porn because it was illegal then, and it is still illegal. Sneddon found 14 counts to charge MJ, but child porn wasn't one of them, and if there was child porn, it would have been slam dunk and MJ would have gone to jail.
Click to expand...

When it comes to Michael Jackson Americans are ****ing morons. They will believe anything.
I bet no other country has been more brainwashed by the media than the US.

They actually think MJ needed a freaking amusement park because otherwise no way kids would want to spend time with him.
Oh yeah no pedophile ever needed an amusement park to get victims but Michael Jackson of all people would need to spend
tens of millions on a zoo, train station, Indian Village, amusement park, arcade, movie theater in his backyard because he needed all that
to have Jordan Chandler, a fan since age 4, around him.
And then he filled the place with a bunch of firemen, chefs, maids, gardeners and policeman just to make sure he would have
witnesses to his criminal activity. What a masterplan he had! He then invited the parents so they can walk in the room
at any moment while he was molesting their kids And just to make sure he would get caught he went to the
parents's home to molest their kids there dozens of times while the mothers and fathers could open the door and catch him.


I found this on twitter and it says it all:

CqypWPxWIAApUzo.jpg
 
@redfrog: I, for one, would appreciate if you would not refer to all Americans as fxxxxxg brainwashed morons. We are not all stupid and are quite aware of why Michael built the amusement park and zoo at Neverland.
 
barbee0715 said:
@redfrog: I, for one, would appreciate if you would not refer to all Americans as fxxxxxg brainwashed morons. We are not all stupid and are quite aware of why Michael built the amusement park and zoo at Neverland.
Click to expand...

love your post very well said.
 
barbee0715 said:
@redfrog: I, for one, would appreciate if you would not refer to all Americans as fxxxxxg brainwashed morons. We are not all stupid and are quite aware of why Michael built the amusement park and zoo at Neverland.
Click to expand...


Not all but too many. I know there are exceptions.
And it's true there are plenty of morons in the UK too who believe everything the Sun, Mirror etc. print.
 
Last edited:
Morons come in all colours,religions nationalities. You cant reason with stupidity?
 
Sorry but I think most Americans and people know this was BS on MJ but the idiots get the attentions and talk the loudest.
 
Is this case over?
Documents Filed
03/02/2017 Request for Dismissal (with prej. complaint )
Filed by Attorney for Pltf/Petnr

Status: Dismissed
 
Bubs said:
Is this case over?
Documents Filed
03/02/2017 Request for Dismissal (with prej. complaint )
Filed by Attorney for Pltf/Petnr

Status: Dismissed
Click to expand...

yes it is.

can't tell if 3T just dropped the case or if they got a settlement and dismissed the case. No documents as of yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top