Latest on MJJC

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

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

respect77 said:
And wasn't there some tidbit in one of the articles (Radar Online?) that the Estate lawyers managed to get him admit in a deposition that he did have knowledge of the Estate before March 2013? Could be just a rumour, but I hope that's true as well.
Click to expand...

Yes, they did. I remember reading that as well. Hope Ivy can post some documents. and I think it forms one of the bases upon which the estate filed for summary judgement.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Snow White luvs Peter Pan said:
I don't mean to upset anyone here, I apologize beforehand if I do so and if I'm graphic in my post.

I watched 6 years ago by chance one of those taped interviews police conduct on suspects or criminals. This one in particular there was a white SOB recounting how he tried to sodomize a 5-year-old boy but he felt himself a "failure" because he couldn't penetrate him, it hurt the poor thing in the attempt nonetheless. :puke: :mad:

If that bastard crook was allegedly raped, THERE'S NO WAY it could've passed unnoticed, it doesn't matter his age. If you've visited 'The Manhood Thread,' you'll know what I'm talking about.
Click to expand...

Obviously this is not a good argument for those who do not have knowledge about Michael as a person like we do, so I'm not using this in debates with outsiders, but such a thing would be so far away from Michael's nature. He was so worried about not to hurt people. I watched Bad 25 the other day and Scorsese talks about that scene in the Bad video where MJ and his gang are trying to mug that old man. And Scorsese said that MJ hurt that man a bit while shooting that scene and he was totally freaked out about that, so worried and felt so bad about it and begged Scorsese not to have to shoot the scene again. I'm sure we can all cite hundreds of stories about him which highlight his gentle soul and the fact that he is the type of guy who couldn't hurt a fly.
He should have a severe multiple personality disorder to be able to rape a child.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

respect77 said:
IIRC Ivy said they did not tick it, but I don't think that means anything. Like you said it's just a plan, obviously not ticking it would not prohibit them to settle if the Estate offered them such a thing. And it's mainly up to the defendant if a settlement happens or not - I mean it's a defendant who has to be willing to offer a settlement for it to happen, no matter what a plaintiff ticks in that box.
Click to expand...

Actually Robson's case management form wasn't on the system when I last checked so I don't know if they checked the box or not. MJfacts had made several conclusions based on her perceptions. However checking it or not doesn't mean much. Bonnie Blue is right, court encourages alternative resolution methods as it saves time and cost. Sometimes they can even force parties to take part in ADR but it doesn't mean it will be used or they could reach to a conclusion with that way.

passy001 said:
Yes, they did. I remember reading that as well. Hope Ivy can post some documents. and I think it forms one of the bases upon which the estate filed for summary judgement.
Click to expand...

I don't have his deposition. That seems to be filed under probate court case. I have access to civil case. Which has complaint, first complaint, second complaint, two demurrer requests by Estate and Case management by estate. I can post anything from those that you want.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

ivy said:
Actually Robson's case management form wasn't on the system when I last checked so I don't know if they checked the box or not.
Click to expand...

OK. Thanks for clarifying.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I believe Weitzman got Wade to acknowledge that he was aware of guardianship issues involving the kids, Katherine and the estate at some point after MJ's death. In other words, he unconsciously did admit he was aware there was an estate and executors handling MJ's business, contrary to what he asserted in his filings. .
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

respect77 said:
Obviously this is not a good argument for those who do not have knowledge about Michael as a person like we do, so I'm not using this in debates with outsiders, but such a thing would be so far away from Michael's nature. He was so worried about not to hurt people. I watched Bad 25 the other day and Scorsese talks about that scene in the Bad video where MJ and his gang are trying to mug that old man. And Scorsese said that MJ hurt that man a bit while shooting that scene and he was totally freaked out about that, so worried and felt so bad about it and begged Scorsese not to have to shoot the scene again. I'm sure we can all cite hundreds of stories about him which highlight his gentle soul and the fact that he is the type of guy who couldn't hurt a fly.
He should have a severe multiple personality disorder to be able to rape a child.
Click to expand...

We, the fans (specially the ones who have been for decades) are aware Michael's character and personality don't match with a paedo, no matter how many "experts" weight in. I have never used that argument with an outsider, my point with my previous post was, if Robson's disgusting claims were true, there must had been physical evidence to sustain such; claiming it was out of "love," claiming "he didn't know it was wrong" or not. Therefore, it was arrogant, desperate of him and quite preposterous to come up with those "revelations" to have attention from the media thinking they'd support him.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Snow White luvs Peter Pan said:
I have never used that argument with an outsider, my point with my previous post was...
Click to expand...

I didn't say you used that argument. I just threw in a bit of character thing because that too is another element (among the many) in this whole mess that does not add up in Wade's claims.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

ivy said:
Actually Robson's case management form wasn't on the system when I last checked so I don't know if they checked the box or not. MJfacts had made several conclusions based on her perceptions. However checking it or not doesn't mean much. Bonnie Blue is right, court encourages alternative resolution methods as it saves time and cost. Sometimes they can even force parties to take part in ADR but it doesn't mean it will be used or they could reach to a conclusion with that way.



I don't have his deposition. That seems to be filed under probate court case. I have access to civil case. Which has complaint, first complaint, second complaint, two demurrer requests by Estate and Case management by estate. I can post anything from those that you want.
Click to expand...

The demurrer requests by the estate would be nice. or at the very least a summary.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

respect77 said:
They are trying to circumvent by saying that Wade did not know about the administration of the Estate until March 2013.
Click to expand...
Sorry, i guess i'm just ignoring this crazy defence about wade not knowing mj had an estate until 2013, everyone who dies has an estate and everybody in the world (apart from pearl jr)knows mj died in 09, esp wade who went to his funeral.

My point however was about wade's lawyers circumventing the 60 day timelimits by using the equitable estoppel defence - they're using multiple defences - where they concede the timelimits haven't been met but claim that wade missed them because of mj's conduct. I was just making the point that they can't prove the elements required for this defence and blame mj as he had been dead for 4 years so his 'conduct' cannot have caused wade not to come forward within the timelimit of 60days in 2013. I just don't see any chance of a lawsuit proceeding in this case because of the timelimits or the civil case against the companies where they have to prove that the company knew of and allowed the abuse. There seems to be important obstacles to bringing historic sex abuse cases against the deceased in california, which is as it should be as the dead can't defend themselves.
 
Last edited:
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

here are the documents I have

MJ Estate Demurrer Corporate Defendants : http://www.scribd.com/doc/235319852/Robson-Estate-Demurrer-Corporate-Defendants

MJ Estate Demurrer Doe1 Defendant : http://www.scribd.com/doc/235319853/Robson-Estate-Demurrer-Doe1

Case Management statement (MJ Estate) : http://www.scribd.com/doc/235319704/Robson-Case-Management-Estate

Robson Motion to compel : http://www.scribd.com/doc/235319708/Robson-Motion-to-Compel

Robson 2nd Amended complaint: http://www.scribd.com/doc/235319581/Robson-Second-Amended-Complaint
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

MJ Estate Demurrer Corporate Defendants : http://www.scribd.com/doc/235319852/...ate-Defendants
Click to expand...
That's interesting, wade's not even made any attempt to suggest that any personnel at mj's companies knew of the abuse and didn't act upon it. They've just not made any factual claims at all. Wade's just got nothing at all to get the lawsuits to proceed.

Case Management statement (MJ Estate) : http://www.scribd.com/doc/235319704/...agement-Estate
Click to expand...
Oh. I see the estate have said that they are prepared to enter into a settlement conference. One thing to agree to mediation or even some neutral evaluation (?), but a settlement conf is something else, they didn't need to tick that box. Not remotely happy about that, they've got a fantastic case against wade who's on record in the media, in a court of law, in his actions for decades, denying exactly what he's trying to now claim.
 
Last edited:
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

^^
If you pay attention you'll see they selected the ones that aren't binding and under their control. and again just because they said they are willing for ADR doesn't mean it will even happen. These demurrers will be heard on October. Based on that this could even be over before any ADR.
 
^I pay attention ivy. I see that they ticked the settlement conference in a case that is vital i wd say for mj's reputation. They didnt' need to tick it, it's not mandatory. A settlement suggests a mutually agreed resolution involving damages. How on earth can what wade is alleging be reconciled with an absolute denial of his claims. Maybe just lob some £££ for some inappropriateness in the relationship if the other side agrees to drop the anal sex? I don't know, i've no idea how it works when one side alleges 7 yrs of sexual molestation as a boy and the other side denies it.

Yes, i think the best we can do is just hope the judge throws out the cases, and we don't get to find out if the estate is prepared to actually stand up and defend mj's rep in court.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I worry because the judge might perceive this as an indication of the executors' eagerness to offer a settlement so he might allow it to proceed , the same way I worry about the executors' eagerness to throw money left and right on Katherine Jackson which might also persuade him to believe there is enough money for everyone so why not leave it to a jury to decide instead of denying a possible " child victim" his chance to be heard.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

If the estate enters into any kind of negotiation talk with Wade, than we all know what the media would imply about that. And this time, the Estate would not be able to brush it off, in my opinion. They managed to get out from under the fake FBI files tabloid mess for the most part because even the mainstream media had a tough time believing that. And the success of the "Xscape" and "Cirque du Soleil" projects got alot of the public interested in Michael's music again. But they shouldn't push their luck with the public in regards to Wade's case, in my opinion. The Estate can't even think of settling with him if they want their business and public relations prospects to stay good. What Michael went through after the 1994 settlement was bad enough. The Estate can't fall into the same trap that he did. Not when all they have to do is get the documents together that could go a long way in showing a jury when this mess is really about. Settling would be just as terrible for them as it was for Michael. And it could also open the door for even more abuse claims. For the sake of their business and their respect for Michael, they need to go to court loud and clear with a trial and shut this garbage down. Period.
 
Last edited:
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Settling in would only provoke more crooks "coming forward." I don't think they're that stupid to fall into the same trap again, I want to believe what happened in 2003 worked to learn a lesson.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Soundmind said:
I worry because the judge might perceive this as an indication of the executors' eagerness to offer a settlement so he might allow it to proceed , the same way I worry about the executors' eagerness to throw money left and right on Katherine Jackson which might also persuade him to believe there is enough money for everyone so why not leave it to a jury to decide instead of denying a possible " child victim" his chance to be heard.
Click to expand...

The law encourages ADRs so the Judge cannot interpret checking that box as anything. He needs to make his decisions strictly based on the law and on that front it will come down to what the situation is with statues of limitations and whether the demurrer requests are justified etc.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

the judge in 2005 should not have allowed the evidence from 1993 but he did . As interpretations of the law are left to the judge mostly, I would still be worried.


Willingness to settle a child molestation for a third time seems like a pay off more than anything else to me from people who don't believe MJ was innocent , which are those in charge of his estate, don't believe the judge would interpret it any other way.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

But that was the law . 1108 prior bad acts. It was up to a judge's discretion. Did not needed to be proven just allegations in the called from the so-called victim. The Michael Jackson law is what some reporters called it, unfair is what a lot of attorneys called it. At the end of the day thanks to Wade and others it did not work
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Thanks Ivy for the docs.

Reading Robson's Motion to Compel:

juihr9.jpg


I have no idea how Neverland search material could prove his claim that MJ's companies "breached their duty of care to him by aiding and abetting Jackson's sexual acts with Robson".

2rha5bb.jpg


He will try to use the magazines, books, videos sized as he - taking a leaf out of Gavin's book - claims that MJ showed him pornography. I guess that is the supposed "modus operandi" they will try to establish with this. However, that does not prove a modus operandi. That only proves he read Gavin's allegations. In fact, he was shown a couple of that material in court in 2005 so he obviously knows about them. He was explicitely asked about them and whether MJ ever showed him such material which he answered "no" and in fact he even expressed his surprise that MJ even owned such material. Again, if he just did not know it was wrong to show children such material then why didn't he say: "yes, MJ showed me such material, but I don't think there's anything wrong with that". But that's not what he said. He said MJ never showed him anything like that and was even surprised he had them.

The correspondence between the Estate and Robson lawyers on page 61-70 is interesting. Robson's lawyer is basically trying to get the Santa Barbara authorities to give them all the material they have before there is even a court order for them to do so. Their subpoenas are for 1) witness statements made during the 1993 and 2005 cases, 2) all material from the Neverland Search in 2003. Robson's lawyer tried to argue that for the Estate to block the production of these materials by the SB authorities to them they should have filed a motion to quash which they failed to do in time. However the Estate argues: you addressed the Notice about the subpoenas to the wrong entity as the Estate is not a party to the lawsuit. So how can we file a motion to quash then? All we could do was to file an objection which we did. Estate also says that the same subpoenas are subject to a pending motion to quash in the other case (creditor's claim) therefore Robson is getting ahead of himself with this request:



2q857x1.jpg

Robson's lawyer argues that is not true as the two cases are independent from each other and a pending motion in the other does not affect their request here.

There are some heated exchanges too. Here the Estate lawyer telling Marzano to stop accusing him of lying:


9a3kh0.jpg




At the end Marzano admitted that the Estate's objections to the production of Neverland Search results were correctly made, so for now they are only asking for the witness statements.

30jlctj.jpg
 
Last edited:
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Demurrer 1

So basically Robson's lawyer says: "Yeah, you are right that we have no legal grounds to name MJ as a defendant. But we still will."

LOL.

51d9wj.jpg


Estate lawyer:

2e65569.jpg
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

They are trying to bully the estate and clearly it is not working at all
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I swear it is a bad joke. They are upset why the estate raised the issue "as of now" they should wait lol , they acknowledge MJ cant be a defendant but would still continue with listing him as such until they get what they want. This is not only pure desperation but also abuse of the justice system.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Demurrer 2 - regarding the dismissal of Corporate Defendants (MJJ Productions, MJJ Ventures) as defendants.

Very sound arguments there by the Estate and precedent law seems to be very clearly on their side.

To summarize:

According to law (CCP 340.1) only a natural person can be accused of child molestation directly as companies (entities) are obviously not capable of sexual molestation. Companies can only be accused of assisting the crime as third parties. However in the case of third parties statues of limitations are more strict than in case of natural persons. In case of a natural person a plaintiff can sue for childhood sexual abuse a) until he turns 26 years old or b) three years within his discovery of allegedly having been molested and its effects. This latter is what Wade tries to claim, but acc. to this demurrer it fails because in the case of entities b) simply does not apply. In case of entities plaintiff can sue until the age of 26 which Wade obviously missed. There is only one exception to that rule as CCP 340.1 (b)(2) states:

(2) This subdivision does not apply if the person or entity knew
or had reason to know, or was otherwise on notice, of any unlawful
sexual conduct by an employee, volunteer, representative, or agent,
and failed to take reasonable steps, and to implement reasonable
safeguards, to avoid acts of unlawful sexual conduct in the future by
that person, including, but not limited to, preventing or avoiding
placement of that person in a function or environment in which
contact with children is an inherent part of that function or
environment. For purposes of this subdivision, providing or requiring
counseling is not sufficient, in and of itself, to constitute a
reasonable step or reasonable safeguard.
Click to expand...

Estate argues that these companies were solely owned and controlled by MJ. Even Robson's very own lawsuit acknowledges that MJ controlled these companies and not the other way around. Moreover he failed to provide any facts as to why and how these companies allegedly facilitated and failed to prevent his alleged abuse. He just states they did, but does not provide any allegation about any employee of these companies knowing and turning a blind eye or anything like that. (Notice the Estate specifically calls out Robson's mother on that. LOL.)

v3kv0p.jpg


2aj3ner.jpg


nmexqc.jpg


de19he.jpg


w0p8xz.jpg


34zn5zo.jpg


258uvz8.jpg


292n04z.jpg

mczqs7.jpg


dc515x.jpg


w1el2g.jpg


Based on these I think that MJ and MJ's companies should be dismissed as defendants in these cases. (Hopefully there is no loophole that Robson can use for his advantage.) I guess that would leave the Estate and the Executors as entities they could sue and that would come down to the decision about the creditor's claim in February 2015. Whatever the decision on that would be I guess the case would still go ahead, because if the decision is that the creditor's claim is dismissed then Wade's side will sue the Executors (I think they already said that) and if the cc is given the go ahead then it will be the Executor's who will deny it which again would mean a lawsuit. So this could go on for years.
 
Last edited:
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

It also IMO puts Joy in a spot. She would have to say she knew of the abuse it seems for this to go forward. And what would they sue the executors for?
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Justthefacts said:
It also IMO puts Joy in a spot. She would have to say she knew of the abuse it seems for this to go forward. And what would they sue the executors for?
Click to expand...

That would reek of desperation if Joy all of a sudden claimed she knew just to try to get this go forward. That would mean she knowingly lied in 2005. While Wade claims he was brainwashed by MJ and did not know abuse was abuse what would be Joy's defense? She should basically say she prostituted her son for job/career/green cards. If that is the case she is the one Wade should try to sue and be angry with. Because even if Joy claimed this she should also prove that she reported this to people in authority who did nothing. Heck, she is his mother so why didn't she report it to authorities?

Nah, I don't think they will go there, unless Wade is prepared to throw his mother under the bus. Besides it still would not get them far with their lawsuit, because it would shift the primary blame from MJ's companies personally to Joy. So then the Judge could say: "Then go sue your mother, not these companies."
 
Last edited:
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

respect77 said:
That would reek of desperation if Joy all of a sudden claimed she knew just to try to get this go forward. That would mean she knowingly lied in 2005. While Wade claims he was brainwashed by MJ and did not know abuse was abuse what would be Joy's defense? She should basically say she prostituted her son for job/career/green cards. If that is the case she is the one Wade should try to sue and be angry with. Because even if Joy claimed this she should also prove that she reported this to people in authority who did nothing. Heck, she is his mother so why didn't she report it to authorities?

Nah, I don't think they will go there, unless Wade is prepared to throw his mother under the bus. Besides it still would not get them far with their lawsuit, because it would shift the primary blame from MJ's companies personally to Joy. So then the Judge could say: "Then go sue your mother, not these companies."
Click to expand...


If he has no issues hurting people to get what he wants then it would not shock me if he did throw her under the bus. Not saying he will but it would though
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

she run away to Australia probably so she would not be subpoenaed by the estate. If only claiming his mother was aware would allow him to go forward with this case, I am sure he will. She will stay in Australia not to face any consequences until he gets a settlement or be heard in a court of law.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top