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

Soundmind

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
3,667
Points
0
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Thank you ivy. looking forward for the day this garbage of a case will be thrown out.
 

barbee0715

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2012
Messages
6,940
Points
63
Location
Texas, USA
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Good job Ivy. Estate did an excellent job here. It should be over.
 

jaydom7

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
4,244
Points
0
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Good read Ivy! thanks for the write up..
 

HIStory

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
6
Points
0
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Thanks Ivy. Good job with the summary.

I also think this opposition sounds good.
 

redfrog

Proud Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2015
Messages
947
Points
0
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Thanks Ivy. Good job with the summary.

I also think this opposition sounds good.

Why do you think the Estate says
failure to train and educate Plaintiff regarding sexual abuse?
That's not what Robson says rather that the companies failed to train their employees
regarding sexual abuse as it is recommended for mandatory reporters.
Looks like a mistake.

robson.jpg
 

HIStory

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
6
Points
0
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Why do you think the Estate says
failure to train and educate Plaintiff regarding sexual abuse?
That's not what Robson says rather that the companies failed to train their employees
regarding sexual abuse as it is recommended for mandatory reporters.
Looks like a mistake.

robson.jpg

No, not a mistake. Read Robson's complaint.
 

Smooth72

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2012
Messages
980
Points
43
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Thanks you so much!! Ivy, your summaries and reports are alway factual and help us understand things clearer. Respect you are another that provide us with great facts and arguments. Keep up the fight the end is coming.
 

redfrog

Proud Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2015
Messages
947
Points
0
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

No, not a mistake. Read Robson's complaint.

Is this what the Estate refers to? Training about how to avoid the risk of sex abuse?

risk.jpg


What is the law which makes it the companies' duty to do such a thing?
They don't mention any actual statute.
 

ivy

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
16,074
Points
0
Location
USA
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

@redfrog

Refer to page 46/120

item d "failing to inform or concealing from plaintiff's parents and law enforcement the fact that plaintiffs and others were or may have been abused"

page 62/120

under negligent failure to train, warn or educate claims

item 132 reasonable protective measures to protect plaintiff ..... such as failure to properly warn, educate or train plaintiff and other minor children

so it's not a mistake, those were in Robson's amended complaint
 

redfrog

Proud Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2015
Messages
947
Points
0
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

item 132 reasonable protective measures to protect plaintiff ..... such as failure to properly warn, educate or train plaintiff and other minor children

so it's not a mistake, those were in Robson's amended complaint

Yeah thanks I've noticed since , 131 and 132 are the relevant paragraphs.
But what's the legal basis of this?
The companies should have educated Robson about MJ being a child molester?
What law states that that would have been their duty? There is no reference to the relevant statute in the complaint.
Doesn't even make sense.
Putting aside that MJ was never hired, this just wouldn't make sense not even if he had been
an employee.
First they say the companies shouldn't have hired him in the first place
because of his history of abuse but then it would have been their duty to warn Robson
that the person they didn't hire was a child molester.
One negligence claim kills the other. If he is not hired there is nothing to warn about.
 
Last edited:

Bubs

Proud Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2012
Messages
7,856
Points
0
Thanks Ivy for summary. Interesting reading indeed:

Robson’s own complaint alleges a personal relationship between him and Michael. According to Robson’s complaint he and his family came to visit USA on an unrelated matter. Neither companies nor Michael had prior knowledge of this trip. It was Robson’s mother who got in contact with Michael’s assistant and asked to see Michael. Robson and his family began a personal relationship with Michael and visited him at his private residences as his personal guests.

Furthermore according to Robson’s complaint it was over a year and half after the alleged abuse begun before Robson and his mother had a business connection with the MJ Companies. Therefore not only the MJ companies did not create an opportunity for the alleged abuse, they couldn’t stop Robson and Michael’s personal friendship.

Its like Wade's new lawyers are trying to fit this case, which is square, in the round box, but it doesn't fit, but they are trying to hammer it anyways(so to speak).

I got an impression from that tidbit footnote that Wade's previous attorneys dropped (withdrew) from the case and possibly told Wade that they cannot get any further so get yourself a new lawyer?
 

Bubs

Proud Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2012
Messages
7,856
Points
0
"As for Robson’s negligence per se claims about mandated reporters, Estate argues Robson’s arguments are flawed. First of all the version of the law Robson’s attorneys cited is a recent version and it wasn’t in effect during the time of the alleged abuse. Estate argues that MJ Companies weren’t a mandated reporter organization. According to the law organizations that regularly provide services to the children are mandated reporters. Such organizations are schools, camps, day care centers etc. Despite Robson's attempt to portray MJ Companies as some sort of "school" with Michael mentoring kids, the companies were entities formed to handle Michael's business affairs. Furthermore Robson fails to identify which specific employees of the companies were supposed to be mandated reporters and what event they were supposed to report to the authorities."

Either the estate attorneys reads here or they know what they are doing, either way its good to see that we have people here that are aware of all sort of legalities:)
Didn't Soundmind post earlier info about that they used new law to support their argument, but not the one that was on effect back in time?

So, this Friday it the day when there is a hearing or judge decides whether he can amend his claim?

Did Wade's camp filed their opposition?
09/30/2016 Brief (REPLY )
Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff


elusive moonwalker;4169024 said:
How pathetic. They make sneddon and co look professional����

They are as despicable as CM attorneys with their media tricks.
 
Last edited:

myosotis

Proud Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
4,224
Points
48
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

It's good that (in addition to this claim likely failing on the grounds of the Statute of Limitations) the Estate lawyers seem to have both 'belt' and 'braces' arguments against the new complaint(s). for example, regarding bringing a negligent hiring /retention / supervision claim against the companies, they argue both that this possibilty was already verbally raised and negated (by both the Corporations counsel and the Court) in previous hearings, ...which Marzano presumably agreed with as they did not attempt to make a case for negligence. (I like that the defence attorneys call them Robson's 'very able prior counsel :)

... And that they also also cite precendents that show that 'just because you have a new attorney', it doesn't mean that they can bring in whole new complaints at a late stage...(especially with no new alleged facts) even where in one cited prior case the possible legal penalty in that case was death.

It's also nice to see that the Estate lawyers refer in a rather understated way to the 'boilerplate' wording and 'general and conclusory allegations' in the amended complaint. They convey very well that this complaint is very 'generic' in its wording, and neither applies to the actual real-world situation of MJJP /MJJV nor makes specific complaints about who (eg who as a 'mandatory reporter') was supposed to be at fault.

Assuming that this case will end before trial, the only thing I will 'miss' (being ironic here) , is the possibility of John Branca being brought to the witness stand to explain (as per the claim of negligent hiring / retention) why he and the other directors did not fire MJ......
 

myosotis

Proud Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
4,224
Points
48
I wanted to start a new post here, because this has no connection with my last one..This relates only to the Gurvey's law radio podcast from 2nd October 2016.

https://audioboom.com/boos/5123829-gurvey-s-law-10-02-16

Listening to the 'Gurvey's Law' programme for 2nd Oct 16 was interesting. The relevant part starts at about 34.20.

The main interviewer (Alan Gurvey, AG) says that TMez will be appearing on the programme next week...but I guess the main reason for that is not to talk about the WR case. However, AG does say that he will try to persuade TMez to take up Vince Finaldi's (VF) invition to a public debate, with $10k being paid to charity by the 'winner'...(whoever can guess how that would be decided! ....)

The only thing that gave me any cause for concern about this interview was VF's comment at about 37.34 to 'hang tight, and watch the press in about 2-3 weeks'. This was said in the context of Wade being threatened with being in contempt (if he did not appear) in 1993 and subpoena'd to appear in 2005 and also supposedly being 'tutored' by MJ lawyers etc about what to say in both 1993 and 2005. AG commmented that he himself would not use witnesses whose honesty may be compromised, and then came the comment from VF to watch the press.

On the 'pro' side of the interview, the female interviewer (Kerri Kassem, KK) said that she was still friends with more than one former child who spent a great deal of time with MJ, and these friends had always said that nothing untoward ever happened to them, or to anyone else they knew who spent time with MJ. VF responded that abusers select their vistims, and that MJ's companies had helped him to do that. VF also said that he has 'never called the situation 'a ring'; he went on to call it a 'machine, or a process that helped to isolate the kids'. He continued by saying that MJJP was a 'loan-out' corporation that protected MJ from personal liability, as was common in the entertainment business. He added that this was no different than the employee relationship between a church and priest, and then between the priest and a child. (he mentioned the mentor/coach teacher' role again). (42.28- 45.21 is a commercial break in this discussion)

AG asked whether a victim would be eligible for psychiatric damages as an employee. VF argued no, only if sex was part of the job, but AG disagreed, and said he knew of many cases where that was not the case.
The invitation to TM to a public debate is at 48.29.

VF ended by saying that they were preparing for trial to let the world know how the true facts, as the whole record written on MJ has been cleaned- eg there is nothing on his Wiki page...that's the most important thing.



Edit: I'd never heard of a loan out corporation, so I looked it up:
As MJJP is a production company, it doesn't sound like a loan out corp from its title.....

http://www.forbes.com/sites/russala...-celebrity-loan-out-corporation/#7fe725722af2

Entertainers such as actors and musicians often set up loan out corporations as a way to protect their assets and obtain certain tax benefits. The basic way a loan out corporation works is that the entertainer – an actor, for instance – is an “employee” of the loan out corporation. The corporation then enters into contracts with other businesses such as a production company. Then the loan out corporation “loans out” the services of the actor to the production company.

How does it work? The loan out corporation receives monies from contracts with other businesses and pays a salary to the entertainer for services performed. Meanwhile, the loan out corporation provides essential services to the entertainer, from accounting and legal, to coaching and agency fees. All business expenses incurred are deductible because the entertainer is officially an employee of the loan out company.
 
Last edited:

ivy

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
16,074
Points
0
Location
USA
myosotis;4169157 said:
VF ended by saying that they were preparing for trial to let the world know how the true facts, as the whole record written on MJ has been cleaned- eg there is nothing on his Wiki page...that's the most important thing.

But there is

1.1 1958–1975: Early life and the Jackson 5
1.2 1975–1981: Move to Epic and Off the Wall
1.3 1982–1983: Thriller and Motown 25: Yesterday, Today, Forever
1.4 1984–1985: Pepsi, "We Are the World", and business career
1.5 1986–1990: Changing appearance, tabloids, Bad, films, autobiography, and Neverland
1.6 1991–1993: Dangerous, Heal the World Foundation, and Super Bowl XXVII
1.7 1993–1994: First child sexual abuse allegations and first marriage
1.8 1995–1999: HIStory, second marriage, and fatherhood
1.9 2000–2003: Label dispute and Invincible
1.10 2003–2005: Second child sexual abuse allegations and acquittal
1.11 2006–2009: Closure of Neverland, final years, and This Is It


I found it interesting that Finaldi said Robson perjured himself at age 12. Are they now claiming he knowingly lied?
 

myosotis

Proud Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
4,224
Points
48
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

^ :) Good point. (about the knowingly lying)

Re Wiki, VF is very selective in his comments and what he admits...like the 'never called it a ring'.
 

HIStory

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
6
Points
0
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

LOL at the nerve of Finaldi claiming there is nothing about the allegations on MJ's Wikipedia page. Why lie even about things that are just so easy to check out? This lawyer is so shameless in lying through his teeth. SMH.

Overall they are still trying to make that square shape fit into a round shape and vica versa. So now they are trying to make MJ's companies "loan out" companies so that they can call MJ an "employee"? But he wasn't. He was the owner. And even if MJJP/V were loan out companies, how does it solve the control problem? MJ being the owner still controlled them, not the other way around. And that is the bottom line in this case: whether the companies had a power to hire/fire/move MJ. They didn't, no matter whether in one moment you want to call them "schools" and the next moment "loan out companies". They are all over the place.

The "watch the press in 2-3 weeks" only confirms that they try to play this in the media and not in the courtroom and that they feed the media.

So now they are claiming Wade was somehow "forced" to testify for MJ in 1993 and 2005? It will be hard to sell when according to Joy in 1993 Wade himself was eager to speak up for MJ in that interview with Brett. As for 2005:

Aussies bolstered Jackson's defence case
Santa Maria, California
June 14, 2005 - 1:31PM
Page Tools


Wade Robson will move ahead with his Hollywood career and wedding plans in the wake of the acquittal of good friend Michael Jackson.

Brisbane-born Robson, portrayed by Santa Barbara prosecutors as one of Jackson's past victims, will marry fiancee Amanda Rodriguez in August and has invited Jackson to the wedding.

Ironically, the 22-year-old choreographer and film director will be one of the last in the western world to find out about today's court decision.

Robson was flying back to the US from London, a 10-hour flight, when the verdict was announced.

"The only way he knows is if they announced it on the plane,'' Robson's mother, Joy, said.

The Robson family plans to celebrate once he lands back in Los Angeles.

Robson, along with his mother and sister Chantal, 25, were all called to testify as defence witnesses in the child molestation case against Jackson.

Both Robson and fellow Australian Brett Barnes told the trial they had shared Jackson's bed while adolescents, but denied he ever molested them.

The Robson family has known Jackson since Robson won a dance contest when he was five years old.

They remained close friends with the King of Pop, often spending nights at Jackson's Neverland Ranch.

Joy Robson was heavily criticised by the public and media commentators during the trial for allowing Robson to stay at Neverland and sleep in Jackson's bed.

Robson, when he took the stand, flatly rejected testimony from one witness who said he saw Robson in a shower with Jackson.

"We just feel so vindicated right across the board,'' said Joy Robson, who watched the verdict live on TV from her LA home.

"We were crying and screaming and crying and screaming.''


The Robson family has kept in close contact with Jackson during the trial, with Joy last speaking to him when the defence and prosecution rested their cases.

"He's always reasonably optimistic,'' she said.

"He has a lot of faith and relies a lot on his faith.

"He did ask me to pray for him. We all believed ultimately the truth would come out.''

Joy Robson said she never doubted Jackson was innocent, despite the serious charges against him.

She said the world has the wrong impression of the entertainer.

"I've never questioned Michael,'' she said.

"That's the bottom line. I've never ever had a second of a concern.

"I don't care what people say of me.

"You have to know Michael to understand.

"I've always said to Michael `I wished the world could know the Michael we do'.

"He's not what the media makes him out to be.''

Wade Robson, who has a huge following in the US after choreographing music videos and concerts for the likes of Britney Spears and boy pop group NSYNC, was in Europe last week hosting an MTV show with R&B singer Ashanti.

He also has a deal with Disney to direct films.

Joy Robson said her son would push ahead with his career, but also was looking forward to his August wedding with Rodriguez, a 25-year-old beauty from Hawaii who he met in LA.

Jackson is on the wedding guest list, but it's unclear if he will attend because he does not want to turn his friend's wedding into a "circus''.

"He asked for an invitation and we took an invitation to him and he said he'd love to be there, but he thought he'd turn it into a circus,'' Joy Robson said.

AAP

http://www.theage.com.au/news/Peopl...ns-defence-case/2005/06/14/1118645780742.html


Wow, they were so forced! Thing trying to act like Wade was somehow forced to testify for MJ is an angle that will backfire at them big time. The Estate will be able to bring a million quotes where Wade voluntarily defends and praises MJ in interviews. Who forced those?
 
Last edited:

redfrog

Proud Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2015
Messages
947
Points
0
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

He continued by saying that MJJP was a 'loan-out' corporation that protected MJ from personal liability

So if MJ was the abuser that protected him from personal liablity :crazy


The only thing that gave me any cause for concern about this interview was VF's comment at about 37.34 to 'hang tight, and watch the press in about 2-3 weeks'. This was said in the context of Wade being threatened with being in contempt (if he did not appear) in 1993 and subpoena'd to appear in 2005 and also supposedly being 'tutored' by MJ lawyers etc about what to say in both 1993 and 2005.

So basically Finaldi admitted that they want to use the press to win this case and it's all orchestrated.

Just because you are subpoenaed does not mean that
1. you have show up, Chandler threatened to sue Sneddon if he tried to put him on the stand so Sneddon didn't even try
2. even if you show up you don't have to lie under oath to protect a molester
3. if MJ had been a an abuser the last thing he would have wanted is a victim being cross-examined by Zonen
4. no competent lawyer would put a victim on the stand when his testimony is not even necessary to win the case
especially not the very first defense witness
5. Scott Ross interviewed Robson several times, he said he saw no sign at all that he was lying and if he had seen
any sign he would have advised Tom Mez not to call him as a witness. Ross said OK you can fool me but
you cannot fool Tom Mez AND Susan Yu too. He said no way you can fool her she doesn't believe anyone


Robson doesn't say anything in his complaint about being tutored by lawyers just MJ telling him about
those "disgusting sexual stuff" which made him believe those were not disgusting sexual stuff.
They will make up some story about MJ and his lawyers threatening Robson to testify.

VF ended by saying that they were preparing for trial to let the world know how the true facts, as the whole record written on MJ has been cleaned- eg there is nothing on his Wiki page...that's the most important thing.

What a piece of shit! MJ has been dragged through the mud since he died more than when he was alive with
one horrific story after another and he says the record has been cleaned???
That's the most important thing for sure. Previously the most important thing was to raise awareness of child abuse in the entertainment industry.
Everything is more important for them than getting as much money out of this as possible. Sure.


VF responded that abusers select their vistims, and that MJ's companies had helped him to do that.

And MJ just happened to choose a boy who popped up out of the blue in 1990 with his whole family
and he was so lucky that this random boy didn't even need grooming he just went along with the abuse from the get go
and never showed any sign of abuse and never told anyone. He was also very lucky that Wade and Chantal both
wanted to sleep in his room on day one! Wow he didn't even have to move a finger and got the perfect victim.

How did the companies help him select Francia, Chandler or Arvizo or Safechuck by the way?
And Brett Barnes was also selected? Frank, Eddie, Sean Emmanuel Jonathan?

What irritating that those in the media never challenge these liars even though it would take nothing but a little common sense.
 
Last edited:

HIStory

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
6
Points
0
Vincent Finaldi, 2016:

Importantly what happened was Wade did not want to testify. Judge Lance Ito, this is before the OJ case, actually held Wade in contempt as a 12 year old kid. He was going to put him in jail if he didn’t testify. So Michael Jackson’s lawyers met with him. Anthony Pellicano met with him, who we all know about now. They told him exactly what to say. As a 12 year old he already perjured himself because he bought what Michael Jackson told him all along

Joy Robson, 1995.

To this day, the Robson family maintain Michael is innocent. “Michael would hurt himself before he would hurt a child. He didn’t have a childhood himself, so it is important to him to see others having one,” said Joy. It was Wade’s decision to `go public’ on television and proclaim Michael’s innocence. “It was a tough thing to do – especially for an 11-year-old – but we couldn’t stand by and let people believe Michael had been anything but a friend to us,” said Joy, with Wade nodding his approval as he sat in on our interview.

“He would never hurt anyone,” said Wade, with a maturity that belied his years. Wade said Michael was an inspiration to him and a guiding force spiritually but his career, including the move into recording, was his and Joy’s decision alone.

http://onwiththeshow.com.au/the-inside-story-on-life-in-michael-jacksons-shadow-1995/


That television interview where Wade defended MJ happened on August 26, 1993 - only days after the Chandler allegations became public. MJ wasn't even in the US during that period...

The Grand Jury testimony was in March/April 1994 and it the reluctance probably had only to do with them not wanting Wade to testify in open court. Because they did when he didn't have to in open court. Considering the fact that all through that period and also before and after the Robsons stayed friends with MJ, kept defending him at every opportunity, often voluntarily and Joy kept bringing Wade to MJ, that eposide with the Grand Jury will be hard to sell as what they are trying to sell about it now. Same with Wade's 2005 testimony. With the million quotes the Estate can gather about Wade praising and defending MJ at any opportunity, and often voluntarily.
 
Last edited:

HIStory

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
6
Points
0
redfrog;4169169 said:
5. Scott Ross interviewed Robson several times, he said he saw no sign at all that he was lying and if he had seen
any sign he would have advised Tom Mez not to call him as a witness. Ross said OK you can fool me but
you cannot fool Tom Mez AND Susan Yu too. He said no way you can fool her she doesn't believe anyone

Robson doesn't say anything in his complaint about being tutored by lawyers just MJ telling him about
those "disgusting sexual stuff" which made him believe those were not disgusting sexual stuff.
They will make up some story about MJ and his lawyers threatening Robson to testify.

Now Finaldi made the claim in this interview that Mez somehow "coached" Wade to say the things he said. I am sure that it is these kind of interviews that Scott Ross mentioned that they will now try to portray as "coaching" when that is just normal - the prosecution did that with their witnesses as well.

Finaldi:

I know all about what his trial team did in 2005 and how they interacted with Wade and his family and how they coached his testimony. So I’ll be more than happy to talk with him on live radio about it.

Wade on October 3, 2003.

[video=youtube;kCOiY0r0hRs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCOiY0r0hRs[/video]

Wade on November 26, 2003.

November 26, 2003: Aussie Star Tells of Sharing Jackson's Bed

AUSTRALIAN Wade Robson is one of the hottest young talents in Hollywood and yesterday he revealed he had as a child shared a bed with Michael Jackson.
Brisbane-born Robson, who has a hit TV show in the US and a three-movie directing deal with Disney, broke his silence about the years he spent visiting Jackson at Neverland Ranch in California.
He is now 21 and shadowed by his friendship with the superstar, which began at age five. But Robson says it was an innocent relationship that never involved any sort of abuse.

"I never had that experience and I hope that it never happened to anybody else," he said...
Robson yesterday said he also visited the sprawling Neverland Ranch north of Los Angeles after his family moved to the US with the encouragement of Jackson.
Robson met the entertainer in 1987 after winning a Jackson dance-impersonation contest and was then invited to perform with ***** at his Brisbane concert.

In 1991, Robson, his mother, Joy, and his sister Chantelle moved to LA and he was almost immediately cast in three of Jackson's videos -- including Black or White.
He was later signed to Jackson's private label as half of a short-lived rap duo, Quo.
Over the years, Robson said, Jackson bought him instruments and encouraged him in their friendship, which, according to the 187cm rising star, was always "creatively based".
"His initial interest in me was because of my dancing. He saw the talent and the spark I had inside me and all he has ever wanted to do is just help my career," he said.
Asked if he had ever slept in Jackson's bed, Robson said: "Yeah, but nothing strange happened."

Robson said he didn't think it was "weird" that a grown man would share the same bed as a child.
"Everything in life is so complex. He just wanted something around that was simple -- to hang with kids," he said.
"The biggest thing you have to understand is that he has no concept of reality.
"He has been a superstar since he was five years old.

"I mean, what concept does he have of what society thinks is right?"
Robson said he no longer saw Jackson as often as he did as a child -- maybe I will talk to him every six months -- but he would always remain a friend.

"I will always support him and whatever happens is supposed to happen -- I hope it works out for him," he said.
"It is sad to see."
Robson, a choreographer and songwriter for Britney Spears and 'N Sync, has just scored the second highest rating show on MTV with the live dance contest The Wade Robson Project.

He has also been signed to direct three films for Disney, the first a musical, which is scheduled to begin shooting next year.
<cite>Hobart Mercury (Australia) - MICHAEL McKENNA</cite>

Mez wasn't even in the picture yet...

And MJ just happened to choose a boy who popped up out of the blue in 1990 with his whole family
and he was so lucky that this random boy didn't even need grooming he just went along with the abuse from the get go

Yep.

Finaldi:

The second point is because someone is a pedophile doesn&#8217;t mean they will sexually abuse every single boy or girl they come in contact. They still pick and choose the ones they abuse. It is called the grooming process. Through the grooming process they discern which one they believe will keep quiet, which one will be more right for the abuse.

But Wade's own complaint contradicts it when he says he was abused right after they contacted MJ when they came to the US. How did MJ know after two days of knowing Robson he will be the one to keep quiet? Why would he be that type, anyway? I mean Wade was extremly close to his mother and his mother was extremely controlling. If anything those kind of kids are the riskiest to abuse. The ones that pedophiles typically target are the ones who are neglected by their parents and don't talk to them, are not too close to them etc. Wade was just the opposite.
 

barbee0715

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2012
Messages
6,940
Points
63
Location
Texas, USA
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Ah-they've hit rock bottom going on an obscure local radio show with probably few listeners. It's over.
At least Kasey Kassems kid had some good things to say and she should. My only hope is that Tom doesn't "debate" this guy. Sometimes his ego gets the best of him.

As someone else said, the general public doesnt give a shit. Last night one of our Olympic gymnasts performed the TWYMF on DWTS and got the first perfect score of the season. And they raved on Michael for 10 minutes while the audience roared with applause.

Take that!!!
 

#MJforever57

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2013
Messages
3,050
Points
48
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Ah-they've hit rock bottom going on an obscure local radio show with probably few listeners. It's over.
At least Kasey Kassems kid had some good things to say and she should. My only hope is that Tom doesn't "debate" this guy. Sometimes his ego gets the best of him.

As someone else said, the general public doesnt give a shit. Last night one of our Olympic gymnasts performed the TWYMF on DWTS and got the first perfect score of the season. And they raved on Michael for 10 minutes while the audience roared with applause.

Take that!!!

Amen love it.
 

myosotis

Proud Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
4,224
Points
48
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Also, VF seems to imply that MJ was only acquitted in 2005 because of Wade's testimony. I'm pretty sure that if Wade wasn't anywhere in the situation, the Arvizo's testimony alone would have led to an acquittal.
 

redfrog

Proud Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2015
Messages
947
Points
0
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Also, VF seems to imply that MJ was only acquitted in 2005 because of Wade's testimony. I'm pretty sure that if Wade wasn't anywhere in the situation, the Arvizo's testimony alone would have led to an acquittal.

Wade's testimony was not crucial at all. He was only needed to refuse Francia
but Francia was discredited during cross exam as she sold the shower story to tabloids
and contradicted her 1993 sworn deposition. Not to mention was all over the place like liars
always are.
If Wade had not testified it wouldn't have made a damn difference.
Tom Mez simply picked him as the first witness because he was so convincing.


he went on to call it a 'machine, or a process that helped to isolate the kids'.


They were so isolated in Robson's home, Safechuck's home (mother AND the father) , Chandler's homes (mother AND the father dozens of times) hey no way their parents could just open the door and see what he was doing.
They also convinced Joy Robson to take Wade to Mj's apartment. No way Joy Robson had her own brain and made
her own decisions. Norma Staikos first called her and told her that her life would be over unless she took Wade to MJ!.
The isolation was so severe that June Chandler went in and out of MJ's room whenever she wanted to
and so did Joy Robson and Lisbeth Barnes and Kit Culkin.

Look how he isolated Mac Culkin in Neverland. His father was always around and could have broken Mj's neck!

culkin.jpg


Regarding the ridiculous idea that Jimmy could be secluded in hotels because his parents
got rooms on another floor, did that prevent either of them from walking
to MJ's room and knocking on the door? June Chandler had no problem walking in the
Monaco hotel room or the New York hotel room where MJ stayed with her kids.
I guess for Safechuck's parents this task was just too intellectually challenging because
their room was on a different floor. :doh:

And he still can't name anyone other than Norma who was in the "machine".
After going through all those documents he has one madame.
Because no way MJ could have called Joy Robson himself to ask them to come to Neverland
he absolutely needed Norma to be a successful pedophile. And risked being exposed by her.
How sophisticated indeed!

WTF is this about Wade not wanting to testify in 1993?
This was never mentioned during the trial and if it had been true no doubt Zonen and Sneddon
would have made a big deal.
I guess Joy didn't want him to testify fearing manipulation by Sneddon.
She didn't want him to talk to the police either for the same reason.
I would have had the same concern. He was only 12 and look what they did to Francia.
 
Last edited:

#MJforever57

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2013
Messages
3,050
Points
48
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Also, VF seems to imply that MJ was only acquitted in 2005 because of Wade's testimony. I'm pretty sure that if Wade wasn't anywhere in the situation, the Arvizo's testimony alone would have led to an acquittal.

Good point you make because the Arvizo did have a history of lying.
 

HIStory

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
6
Points
0
So Michael Jackson&#8217;s lawyers met with him. Anthony Pellicano met with him, who we all know about now. They told him exactly what to say. As a 12 year old he already perjured himself because he bought what Michael Jackson told him all along.

Except, according to Wade's own complaint this is how it went down:

Clipboard01.jpg


So they were first interviewed by the police and THEN Wade's mother Joy called Staikos who THEN put them in contact with Pellicano. So by all accounts they volunteered to defend Michael. But now they are trying to sell the story as if it were MJ's people who put them under pressure to say those things. But his own freaking complaint contradicts that. And it is obvious they did not tell anything incriminating about MJ in those police interviews otherwise Sneddon would have used it. And that before any contact with Pellicano.

Oh and they were so reluctant to testify in 1994 that not only Wade did but also Joy. From Lisa Campbell's book The King of Pop's Darkest Hour.

The grand jury in Santa Barbara questioned Joy Robson, the mother of Wade Robson, on March 1. This was probably due to the claims made by the former security guard who said she saw Michael touch the boy. Nothing of what was asked or what the witness, or any of the witnesses said, was revealed to the press.
 
Last edited:

redfrog

Proud Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2015
Messages
947
Points
0
respect77;4169171 said:
That television interview where Wade defended MJ happened on August 26, 1993 - only days after the Chandler allegations became public. MJ wasn't even in the US during that period...

How do you know it was Aug 26? What's the source?


respect77;4169174 said:
Now Finaldi made the claim in this interview that Mez somehow "coached" Wade to say the things he said. .


So he needed to be coached because he didn't think all that sex was wrong and abuse
but still had to be told to deny it because everyone else believes it's wrong and worse it's very much ILLEGAL and
if you just say "yeah he sucked my dick and I sucked his but so what it's not wrong I think it's love" he would go to jail.

Did Scott Ross Susan Yu and Tom Mez know that Robson didn't think sex between a man and a boy was wrong
and so they adjusted their coaching accordingly?
That is the big question in la la land.

The second point is because someone is a pedophile doesn&#8217;t mean they will sexually abuse every single boy or girl they come in contact. They still pick and choose the ones they abuse. It is called the grooming process. Through the grooming process they discern which one they believe will keep quiet, which one will be more right for the abuse.

And so MJ travelled with Brett Barnes, shared a bed with him countless times between age 10 and 19
gave gifts to his family and did nothing sexual with him because in that case he needed 9 years
to figure out hm this kid would probably talk so even though I have him in my bed countless times
I won't molest him.

I wonder how long it took to figure out that Frank and Eddie and Aldo Cascio or Sean Lennon or
Emmanuel Lewis or Corey Feldman or Omer Batthi or Mac Culkin or Alfonso Riberio would talk cause they were not molested either.

And Safechuck? The abuse just comes out of the blue in June 1988 start with masturbation right there
not some hug or kiss like with Chandler. MJ decided in June 1988 in Paris that Safechuck would probably not talk.
After not seeing him for months!
 
Last edited:

jaydom7

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
4,244
Points
0
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Hopefully in two to the three weeks this mess will be over...It should be over with the fact that MJ owned his companies and was 100% owner and no one controlled him.
 

#MJforever57

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2013
Messages
3,050
Points
48
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

It all coming to the light now that why you have to watch what you say because it will come back and haunt you.

Jaydom7 you are so right this should have been over a long time ago. Wade change his claim to blame the companies and we all know that MJ own his companies end of story.
 
Last edited:

HIStory

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
6
Points
0
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

How do you know it was Aug 26? What's the source?

Adrian Grant's book. But I checked it now and actually there were two interviews. One with KNBC on August 26 or 27 and this was with CNN on August 29.


Here is an August 28, 1993 article referring to Robson's KNBC interview as "last night":

Meanwhile, a second young companion of Jackson's declared last night that he had not been abused by the pop star. Accompanied by his mother and Jackson attorney Weitzman, Wade Robson, 10, said on KNBC in Los Angeles that he had spent time on a bed with Jackson, but it had been just fully clothed at "a slumber party."

http://mjjr.net/robson/


Regardless of the exact date the point was that they took place only a couple of days after the Chandler allegations broke. And once again, if they will try to claim that Pellicano or Weitzman somehow coached them/put them under duress that actually can be refuted with their own complaint where they say they were first interviewed by the police and THEN Joy called Norma who THEN put them in contact with Pellicano who THEN arranged the media interviews.
 
Top