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

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

That is why i am hoping the judge will see through this Wade had all this time and he still didn't file and now he is sayin the reason he could't file is because of MJ that doesn't make any since at all.

I just don't see a judge letting Wade use these excuses for not filing that is imo.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

^No wonder pearl jnr is so interested in this case that she goes herself to court to see what's what. Mj not actually being dead but still doing his fabled brainwashing for me is the only way you can invoke eqit estop, but clearly not for this judge. Does he publish his reasonings on decisions, i'd be quite interested on reading them.

I was under the impression the eqitable estoppel was just for the creditor's claim.



Wade and his lawyer are trying to use these in both cases their are trying to get around those 60 days.
If their can't use it in the lawsuit their will try to use it in the probate claim.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

^^

to be a devil's advocate : Robson's timeline of abuse predates Cascio and Dieter and Schaffel. When he claims to be abused Cascio was also a kid and germans weren't in MJ's life.

I think the only thing he could do is to somewhat repeat Chandler accusations.

Yes, but he could claim that as these others knew about the Arvizo abuse, that it proved others knew and were involved in all the abuses too.

I mean considering he's throwing the kitchen sink into his claims, it seems like an obvious thing to try and claim. Statutes/memory compression/breakdowns/prophecies/books MJ didn't even have till 10 years after the abuse ended are being used, why not supposed proof that others knew based on other claims?

Why hasn't Jonathan the cousin or others tried to claim this?

Their claim right now is the abuse was enabled by people around MJ and those are the real bad terrible horrible people, and yet they aren't even using the apparent best case for this, being the Arvizo's.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Ivy, have Robson opposition documents posted on court system?
I really want to see what exactly they said when they say they haven't served MJ.

No and I don't think they would be added. Estate filed their replies to Robson Opposition on Sept 24th. So Robson opposition should have been filed several weeks before but it's not on the online system. I can only assume that they are filed sealed hence doesn't show up on the public document system.


----------------------

As for tomorrow, please remember it's a hearing. It doesn't mean there would be a decision tomorrow. For example judge made a decision about discovery issues 12 days after the hearing (hearing was september 4th, decision was september 16th).
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

No and I don't think they would be added. Estate filed their replies to Robson Opposition on Sept 24th. So Robson opposition should have been filed several weeks before but it's not on the online system. I can only assume that they are filed sealed hence doesn't show up on the public document system.


----------------------

As for tomorrow, please remember it's a hearing. It doesn't mean there would be a decision tomorrow. For example judge made a decision about discovery issues 12 days after the hearing (hearing was september 4th, decision was september 16th).

Let me guess Wade is going to have a reason for this too.

Ivy why can a decision not be made tomorrow?

In the lawsuit there is only three things MJ's companies and MJ and the companies are not a person so you can't sue them and MJ is no longing with us and this is what the Estate has been saying you can't sue a dead man so why would it take the judge more then a week or so to give a decision in this case What is happen?
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

^^

well because judges especially this one takes their time to make sure they make the right decision. It's possible that he might have a tentative order or just hear to the oral arguments and decide afterwards. We'll see.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

i don't even understand what is happening tomorrow and i still feel sick about it.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

just so you know...

Ivy ?@Ivy_4MJ
@mccartneyAP are you going to attend tomorrow's hearing MJ Estate v. Robson?

Anthony McCartney ?@mccartneyAP
@Ivy_4MJ Hi Ivy - wasn't aware of a hearing tomorrow and don't see on court's calendar. Got any details on it? Thanks.


Ivy ?@Ivy_4MJ
@mccartneyAP It's a demurrer hearing about MJ and Corporate defendants. This document shows the date as Oct 1st - http://www.scribd.com/doc/241210020/Robson-Estate-Reply-Doe-1-Demurrer

Anthony McCartney ?@mccartneyAP
@Ivy_4MJ Thanks for the heads up - I probably won't make the hearing but am keeping an eye on the case.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Yes, but he could claim that as these others knew about the Arvizo abuse, that it proved others knew and were involved in all the abuses too.

I mean considering he's throwing the kitchen sink into his claims, it seems like an obvious thing to try and claim. Statutes/memory compression/breakdowns/prophecies/books MJ didn't even have till 10 years after the abuse ended are being used, why not supposed proof that others knew based on other claims?

Why hasn't Jonathan the cousin or others tried to claim this?

Their claim right now is the abuse was enabled by people around MJ and those are the real bad terrible horrible people, and yet they aren't even using the apparent best case for this, being the Arvizo's.
I honestly think that conspiracy charge sneddon cooked up in the arvizo trial would have gone down in calif legal folklore as the most dreadful mistake ever by an attorney and janet arvizo (the only real witness for this)is probably seen as the definition of a trial disaster. i can't imagine any attorney ever contemplating to use this line of attack even one as desperate as gradstein. He's clearly ok with wade talking about spielberg prophesies and what he might or might not have remembered at various points in his life, and witnesses like blanca claiming what she might or might not have seen through a shower screen, but he's clearly drawing the line at janet ranting about body waxes and hot air baloons. Even out and out haterz in the media don't use janet to damage mj, so i think gradstein is pretty clued up as to what will work with the 'public'.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

As for tomorrow, please remember it's a hearing. It doesn't mean there would be a decision tomorrow. For example judge made a decision about discovery issues 12 days after the hearing (hearing was september 4th, decision was september 16th).

Shoot, I thought because the documents were already in court system, judge had chance to read them and then gives his ruling on hearing date:(
Back to waiting :timer:
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

^^

he could have a tentative ruling prepared and mention it today or he could simply take it under consideration and make a decision later. I just didn't want anyone feel discouraged if a decision doesn't come today.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I apologize... but I'm too lazy to go searching through pages and pages and pages looking for an answer. What time does this all go down at?
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

^^For some reason this case doesn't appear in public case summary so I cannot check anything.
Stupid system, I can see every other cases, civil or not, but this case is not for my eyes:(

Ivy might have that info as she is registered and can see stuff.
Are you planning to go there? If you do, will you take some rotten eggs and tomatoes with you, and throw them on Wade's stupid lawyers:yes:
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

^^For some reason this case doesn't appear in public case summary so I cannot check anything.
Stupid system, I can see every other cases, civil or not, but this case is not for my eyes:(

Ivy might have that info as she is registered and can see stuff.
Are you planning to go there? If you do, will you take some rotten eggs and tomatoes with you, and throw them on Wade's stupid lawyers:yes:

Am I going? No- but it's a nice thought :lol:

Nah... this takes places in California doesn't it? I'm on the opposite side of the country :D
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I honestly think that conspiracy charge sneddon cooked up in the arvizo trial would have gone down in calif legal folklore as the most dreadful mistake ever by an attorney and janet arvizo (the only real witness for this)is probably seen as the definition of a trial disaster. i can't imagine any attorney ever contemplating to use this line of attack even one as desperate as gradstein. He's clearly ok with wade talking about spielberg prophesies and what he might or might not have remembered at various points in his life, and witnesses like blanca claiming what she might or might not have seen through a shower screen, but he's clearly drawing the line at janet ranting about body waxes and hot air baloons. Even out and out haterz in the media don't use janet to damage mj, so i think gradstein is pretty clued up as to what will work with the 'public'.

It's just so funny to me how these supposed victims choose to ignore a supposed victim and their family and their claims.

So much for victim's support and not being alone and all that shit.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

^^For some reason this case doesn't appear in public case summary so I cannot check anything.
Stupid system, I can see every other cases, civil or not, but this case is not for my eyes:(

Ivy might have that info as she is registered and can see stuff.
Are you planning to go there? If you do, will you take some rotten eggs and tomatoes with you, and throw them on Wade's stupid lawyers:yes:

8:30 AM PST. and I see it from the court documents - check the first page of the document I tweeted to AP.

This case doesn't show up on civil calendar due to sealed/redacted nature I believe. I don't see it either.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

It would be nice if we hear a "tentative" decision today, but I will not be disappointed if we do not.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Thanks Ivy.
Never thought of checking time from your documents, everything has to be done in hard way:D
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

8:30 AM PST. and I see it from the court documents - check the first page of the document I tweeted to AP.

This case doesn't show up on civil calendar due to sealed/redacted nature I believe. I don't see it either.

Yeah I was thinking the same as Bubs... I never would have thought to check there. And by that I mean, I didn't know you had tweeted anything :lol: Thanks though.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

How many more hours?
 
Home » News » Michael Jackson to remain an unnamed defendant in molestation case
Michael Jackson to remain an unnamed defendant in molestation case

October 1, 2014 1:43 pm by: Westside Today Staff Category: News, Politics Leave a comment
A judge today denied a motion by attorneys for the estate of Michael Jackson to dismiss the King of Pop as an unnamed defendant in a lawsuit filed by a choreographer who alleges the late singer sexually abused him as a child.

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Mitchell Beckloff said Jackson can remain in Wade Robson’s civil case for now and continued to be identified as “Doe 1.”

However, Beckloff said lawyers for Robson will have to shore up the civil complaint in general for it to move forward. The judge said the case appears to be implying negligence, but that no such specific allegation is made in the complaint.

“I think there needs to be more facts or else it’s uncertain,” Beckloff said.

Robson attorney Maryann Marzano told Beckloff she will file an amended complaint.

“One can always improve upon work that’s been done in the past,” she said.

Beckloff said attorneys on both sides have filed court papers with a solid level of support for their arguments that he does not always see from other lawyers.

Robson, who has worked with such luminaries as Britney Spears and Usher, has filed both civil and probate court actions. The civil suit was filed in June 2013 and names two Jackson companies as well as “Doe 1” as defendants.

In their court papers, lawyers for the estate say it is clear that “Doe 1” is Jackson himself and that a judge does not have jurisdiction over a deceased person or the ability to enter a judgment against him.

But in an email to Jackson estate attorney Jonathan Steinsapir, a copy of which is attached to the estate’s court papers, Marzano states that Jackson is being left as Doe 1 in the civil case for tactical reasons.

“We are well aware that any claims against Michael Jackson need to be made against the estate,” Marzano wrote. “Having said that, we are reluctant to dismiss the Doe 1 defendant given the possible adverse effect a dismissal may have on our pleadings in discovery.”

Robson, 32, still needs a judge’s permission to file the probate court claim because it was brought in May 2013, nearly four years after the entertainer’s overdose death at age 50 on June 25, 2009.

Robson alleges Jackson molested him between 1990-97, though he testified in the singer’s 2005 child molestation trial that the pop star did not sexually molest him. Jackson was acquitted on all charges in his 2005 trial. He settled out of court in 1994 another claim in which he was accused of sexually abusing a 13-year-old boy.

http://westsidetoday.com/2014/10/01/michael-jackson-remain-unnamed-defendant-molestation-case/
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Am I wrong or does it seem like the judge is bending over backwards for Roberson's lawyers. He is letting them refile?
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

It sounds like the judge is saying name a person
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

^^

he's allowing them to amend the complaint so a little but there's some good news here as well.

His comment shows that he thinks the way the complaint is now is not enough to proceed so that's good. He's giving Robson a chance to amend his complaint - which is in Robson's favor. Robson is required to improve his complaint, provide more facts, compelling evidence for this to move on. So I guess it would depend on what else can he add. As for MJ probably Judge is keeping him "for now" to reserve a place for Estate. His decision in probate court would determine if Estate can be added or not, so he might be waiting for that. We'll see. Hopefully the ruling will get added to the system and we'll know more. Right now we have no idea what happened to the corporate defendants.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

can someone translate that for the less legally inclined :/


edit**nevermind. thanks ivy :)
 
^^

I would classify this as a standoff.

I wish we had more details and hopefully get a copy of the ruling to understand it better.

I'm just looking to keywords to make sense

"Jackson can remain in Wade Robson’s civil case for now". "for now" to me either tells he didn't make a ruling about dismissal or agreed to keep MJ as a place keeper until it is decided Estate can be added to the complaint or not.

However, Beckloff said lawyers for Robson will have to shore up the civil complaint in general for it to move forward. The judge said the case appears to be implying negligence, but that no such specific allegation is made in the complaint.“I think there needs to be more facts or else it’s uncertain,” Beckloff said.

and this - to me - tells that the complaint isn't sufficient to proceed. He's giving them a chance to amend. Depending on what they do, it might or might not allowed to proceed.

So a standoff in my opinion.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I thought it only meant the negligence part was lacking details?
 
ivy;4046912 said:
^^

he's allowing them to amend the complaint so a little but there's some good news here as well.

His comment shows that he thinks the way the complaint is now is not enough to proceed so that's good. He's giving Robson a chance to amend his complaint - which is in Robson's favor. Robson is required to improve his complaint, provide more facts, compelling evidence for this to move on. So I guess it would depend on what else can he add. As for MJ probably Judge is keeping him "for now" to reserve a place for Estate. His decision in probate court would determine if Estate can be added or not, so he might be waiting for that. We'll see. Hopefully the ruling will get added to the system and we'll know more. Right now we have no idea what happened to the corporate defendants.

Well, it would have been nice if this got dismissed... but, it does say this from the judge:

“I think there needs to be more facts or else it’s uncertain,” Beckloff said.

So, what they have presented "so far" is not good enough in the judge's opinion. He is giving them another chance to file a stronger suit though. So, who knows what they will scheme up in the new complaint.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I'm sorry but I am beside myself with rage. I don't understand why he would allow them more time to amend the claim and more or less tell them what was needed.
I didn't understand the negligence claim in the chandler deal and I don't now!!
 
ivy;4046914 said:
^^

I would classify this as a standoff.

I wish we had more details and hopefully get a copy of the ruling to understand it better.

I'm just looking to keywords to make sense

"Jackson can remain in Wade Robson’s civil case for now". "for now" to me either tells he didn't make a ruling about dismissal or agreed to keep MJ as a place keeper until it is decided Estate can be added to the complaint or not.

However, Beckloff said lawyers for Robson will have to shore up the civil complaint in general for it to move forward. The judge said the case appears to be implying negligence, but that no such specific allegation is made in the complaint.“I think there needs to be more facts or else it’s uncertain,” Beckloff said.

and this - to me - tells that the complaint isn't sufficient to proceed. He's giving them a chance to amend. Depending on what they do, it might or might not allowed to proceed.

So a standoff in my opinion.

But.... why? Seriously, why? If the judge thinks the case is negligent and no specific allegations are made and everything is just "wonkey".... why allow him the chance to amend?

I am in shock with this as well. Just throw it out! But, I guess that's not how the law works :(

Any idea when the amendment needs to be filed by?
 
Back
Top