Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"
As I recall, Safechuck only says that 'Michael is a bad man', which in itself is a strange thing for a ?27-year old to say. He didn't say that he knew he was abused. He's just using that phrase to indicate a reason for not testifying (Michael had got very mad at him for refusing- maybe that's why he said Mj was 'bad'..if he said it. )
Then he said something about 'MJ told him he had the best lawyers, and they would get him for perjury if he didn't testify'. Problem is Safechuck defended MJ in 1993 (at Grand Jury), so saying MJ would get him for perjury means Mj would be saying he lied, and that Mj abused him in 1993. So the whole 'reported conversation' with MJ doesn't add up.
Had he ONLY said that...BUT....(and as I said, that WHOLE COMPLAINT DOES NOT MAKE ANY SENSE and is full of contradictions!)....And this is STRAIGHT from Safechuks complaint where it says and I QUOTE:
"Plaintiff was also panicked about the DECEDENT talking to his mother---
fearful that she would find out about his abuse by the DECEDENT"...
Then a few sentenses later it says:
"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. Plaintiff told his mother not to let DECEDENT know that she had found out. Plaintiff was panicked that DECEDENT would find out that he had told his mother.
When the DECEDENT called Plaintiff's mother, she pretended that she was not aware of DECEDENT'S earlier threatening call to her son, or about the abuse."
So not only ddi JAMES know....his MOTHER ALSO knew in 2005.....DURING THE TRIAL. And then he says that MJ and his secreteries were calling him and demanding him to come testify at the trial. So he is seriously saying that not only did him but ALSO HIS MOTHER know that he had supposedly been abused....and HE WAS ASKED TO COME TO THE TRIAL......a place that was IN A COURT HOUSE SURROUNDED BY POLICE.....which would make it the SAFEST PLACE ON EARTH to say "Yup, he abused me". But he goes "naaaah...."??? He really expects anyone to believe that???!!!! SERIOUSLY???!!! COME ONNNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
But of course that's not all....the insanity and the contradictions continue. It says (and II'm paraphrasing now) in 2005 he wanted to end the telephone call with MJ quickly because "the very sound of DECEDENT's voice made him very uncomfortable and put him into panic mode." Yes, because we all know how THREATENING Michael is and sounds....right? He da real GANGSTA, man!!! A real THUG, dude!!! *eyeroll*
But of course then.................ta da.....it wouldn't be Safechuck if he didn't immediately contradict himself again because it says:
"Upon learning of his death, Plaintiff felt sad because he realized he would never have the opportunity for a normal relationship with the DECEDENT, and that his experiences with the DECEDENT would never be resolved." Yeah...MJ's mere voice put him nto panic mode but then when he died he was sad. Makes sense...
And then later on it says that he "didn't realize how 'sick' it was that the DECEDENT did the things he did to him as a child until he began therapy". (But he knew he was abused? Yeah, totally makes sense. So what did he see the abuse as before that then? As "fun and games"? But see....if he didn't realize how sick it was, how could he have been SO DAMAGED PSYCHOLOGICALLY that he was "unable to bring his claim until now"? It doesn't add up. Beacuse t goes on to say that it was his "psychological iniablity" to bring his claim until now. (SUUURREEEEE....Jesus!! *EYEROLL*)
And then what about his MOTHER who supposedly knew his son had been abused but didn't do anything? What kind of a mother is that? "oh you're on trial for child abuse and I know you abused my son but yes, let's pretend I don't know anything and chat on the phone. Have a nice day!" SERIOUSLY????!!!!