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

SarahJ

Proud Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2014
Messages
2,035
Points
0
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

It's not new info. It's a prosecution document from 2005, only RadarOnline now acts like it's some big bombshell evidence that no one ever heard of and they also twist it to make innocent material look sinister and criminal.



Same here. People are so gullible and it's frustrating. I have seen people discuss "Oh he had child porn and wasn't arrested. That's because he was a celebrity" bla-bla-bla, all the usual nonsense. How come that despite of being a celebrity he was arrested on Gavin's allegations but never arrested on owning child porn? What exactly is the theory for Sneddon not charging him with the possession of child porn if he had it? It's nonsense and you do not even have to know the case to see through it. He wasn't charged with that because he didn't have it. As simple as that. Not even the prosecution claimed any of of these books were illegal. But RO managed to twist it into some horrificly brutal child porn. That's what "journalism" is today. Manipulation and deceit. Shameful. I wish people would be smarter to see through all the nonsense.

Never underestimate the stupidity of the human race.
 

HIStory

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
6
Points
0
ivy;4152931 said:
That was good.

Full article was also good

http://www.digitalspy.com/showbiz/n...-estate-slams-alleged-pornography-collection/

Michael Jackson estate slams 'pornography collection' allegations and those who "shamelessly exploit" him
Santa Barbara police also respond to 'leak' of purported obscene images.


BY JUSTIN HARP
22 JUNE 2016

The Michael Jackson estate has strenuously denied allegations regarding an alleged pornography collection once found on the star's property, telling Digital Spy in a statement that "enough is enough".

RadarOnline has published an 88-page report, purportedly including information compiled by investigators prior to Jackson's molestation trial in 2005.

Jackson was ultimately acquitted on all counts at the end of that five-month molestation trial.

Regarding new allegations that police found graphic sexual images on Neverland Ranch during its 2003 investigation, the Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Department told Billboard: "Some of the documents appear to be copies of reports that were authored by Sheriff's Office personnel as well as evidentiary photographs taken by Sheriff's Office personnel interspersed with content that appears to be obtained off the internet or through unknown sources.

"The Sheriff's Office did not release any of the documents and/or photographs to the media. The Sheriff's Office released all of its reports and the photographs as part of the required discovery process to the prosecution and the defense.

"The documents with a header titled Sheriff's Department that contain a case number appear to be Sheriff's Office documents. The photos that are interspersed appear to be some evidentiary photos taken by Sheriff's investigators and others are clearly obtained from the Internet."

However, The Michael Jackson Estate delivered a strongly-worded denial of these latest allegations and a rebuke of those who "shamelessly exploit" the late star.

The Jackson Estate told Digital Spy: "Seven years ago this coming Saturday, the world lost an amazing artist and humanitarian devoted to helping children in need in all corners of the world.

"Michael Jackson's fans, including the Executors of his estate, prefer to remember the wonderful gifts Michael left behind instead of having to once again see his good name dragged through the mud by tabloid trash.

"Everything in these reports, including what the County of Santa Barbara calls 'content that appears to be obtained off the Internet or through unknown sources' is false, no doubt timed to the anniversary of Michael's passing.

"Those who continue to shamelessly exploit Michael via sleazy internet 'click bait' ignore that he was acquitted by a jury in 2005 on every one of the 14 salacious charges brought against him in a failed witch hunt.

"Michael remains just as innocent of these smears in death as he was in life even though he isn't here to defend himself. Enough is enough."

Michael Jackson's nephew Taj Jackson - son of Jackson 5 member Tito - also denied the validity of these latest allegations on Twitter on Tuesday.

Follow
Taj Jackson ✔ @tajjackson3
Not only is there absolutely no truth to this story whatsoever, but I'm truly sick of this crap. #getalife and stop living off ours.
4:59 PM - 21 Jun 2016
280 280 Retweets 296 296 likes
"Not only is there absolutely no truth to this story whatsoever, but I'm truly sick of this crap. #getalife and stop living off ours," Taj wrote.

edited to add: Billboard also published the almost same thing - http://www.billboard.com/articles/n...ichael-jackson-alleged-pornography-collection

Can't they just be more specific?

For God's sake make it very clear that none of it is child porn. Make it very clear that all of this was seen by the jury in 2005 and it's nothing new. Make it very clear that these are legal art books and the media are basically calling renowned artists "child pornographers" with this. Yes, I think this could be good to make the media understand the stupidity of this claim - to point out that if they call this material "child porn" then that means they are calling renowned artists with exhibitions etc. "child pornographers", some of the very photographers who work with some of their own biggest magazines actually. Magazines that are now spreading around this lie. So are they calling their own photographers "child pornograpers" now? Or are they calling artists that they do interviews with and they promote themselves "child pornographers" now?
They should point out how the criminalization of legitimate art is fascist. And the selective criminalization of it is hypocritical. I mean they will celeberate and work with these very photographers and they will promote their art and books, but when those books are in MJ's hands they are suddenly "child porn"?

Eg.

Bruce Weber (born March 29, 1946) is an American fashion photographer[SUP][1][/SUP] and occasional filmmaker.[SUP][2][/SUP] He is most widely known for his ad campaigns for Calvin Klein, Ralph Lauren,[SUP][3][/SUP] Pirelli, Abercrombie & Fitch, Revlon, and Gianni Versace, as well as his work for Vogue, GQ, Vanity Fair, Elle, Life, Interview, and Rolling Stone magazines.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_Weber_(photographer)


Johan received the New York Foundation for the Arts Fellowship in 2002, the Pollock-Krasner Foundation Grant in 2009 and the George A. and Eliza Gardner Howard Foundation Grant for Photography in 2012.[SUP][4][/SUP] His work has appeared on the covers of Aperture (magazine)[SUP][12][/SUP] and Art+Auction,[SUP][13][/SUP] and he was interviewed on WNYC's Leonard Lopate radio show.[SUP][4][/SUP] In 2010, Comme des Garçons used Johan's sculpture of a long haired wolf for their fall advertising campaign.[SUP][14][/SUP] His image of a buffalo reclining in littered dirt was featured in Oliver Stone's film Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps.[SUP][15][/SUP]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simen_Johan


Ed Templeton (author of the book The Golden Age of Neglect) in Rolling Stone (Italy): http://joshualinergallery.com/jlg_inventory/pressandreviews/Ed_Templeton_press3.pdf

The Huffington Post promoting Ed Templeton: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrew-reilly/ed-templeton-photography_b_2546774.html

The Guardian promotes Jake and Dinos Chapman (authors of the book The Fourth Sex: Adolescent Extremes): https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2015/jun/16/jake-and-dinos-chapman-how-we-made-hell

The Independent promoting Kelly Klein (Underworld): http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/just-be-sure-your-ex-is-a-great-brand-1309876.html

The freaking hipocrisy!!!!
 
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

Radar has just released a third article, three in one day! They have declared war on him. Something is motivating this... rehashing all this trial stuff. It absolutely has to be the legal team of Robson and Safechuck, along with Zonen, and they are using their buddy from Radar to bury Michael. And of course, when an anniversary date approaches. I've been mostly leading my busy life and not paying too much attention to any MJ news lately, as it's been quite peaceful. This is all beyond disturbing.

It's seems obvious they are wanting to force a settlement. What else could possibly be the motivation to bury a dead man like this, other than money?

I wonder what is going on in court with Robson that they are so desperate that they started this massive media offensive.

And notice, how it's never about their own case. They are trying to use tabloid fabrications (the whole MJ paid off 20 victims for $200 million lie) and the twisting of old stories like this to boost their case. They simply base their campaign of prejudicing people against MJ, not on their own actual case and allegations. These are underhanded tactics, I wish someone would call them out on this BS already.
 

8701girl

Proud Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2007
Messages
21,442
Points
83
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

^its money!!! He wants the money sooooo baddd he will stop at nothing till he gets it
 

HIStoric

Proud Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2011
Messages
3,456
Points
48
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Can't they just be more specific?

For God's sake make it very clear that none of it is child porn. Make it very clear that all of this was seen by the jury in 2005 and it's nothing new. Make it very clear that these are legal art books and the media are basically calling renowned artists "child pornographers" with this.

Yeah and honestly the wording is really bad at times. While they do say it's false later on, "Michael Jackson's fans, including the Executors of his estate, prefer to remember the wonderful gifts Michael left behind instead of having to once again see his good name dragged through the mud by tabloid trash."

At least to me, the way they wrote that sentence sounds as if we fans are trying to sweep these allegations under the rug (prefer to remember him for this and not that) when we're fighting out against them. Maybe it's just me, least that's how I interpreted it first time I'm reading.
 
Last edited:

gerryevans

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2009
Messages
1,760
Points
63
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Once again I'm seeing people go "Well OJ was found not guilty!" as if that completely discredits every other non-guilty verdict in American court history (and thus, Michael's verdict). They are two completely different cases and shouldn't be compared. Ugh.

I read a great comeback about the tiresome OJ stuff somewhere. It went to one of the most significant differences in the cases. That is, the poster said others had to paint a picture of what happened to Nicole Brown for the jury to make their decision. In MJ's case, the person MJ was accused of harming actually took the stand on his own behalf, testified and was questioned, and was proven to be lying.

I'm not putting it as eloquently as that poster did, but he made a great point in that Gavin, the supposed victim, is what helped to clear MJ because of what came out of his own lying mouth. The only victim in the MJ case was MJ.
 

8701girl

Proud Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2007
Messages
21,442
Points
83
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Paris just posted this on twitter "mood" with the picture from the scream video and he has his rude finger up LOL
 

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

Paris just posted this on twitter "mood" with the picture from the scream video and he has his rude finger up LOL

Bless Paris, but she shouldn't fight this alone. The whole family AND the Estate should be up in arms. Sorry, but that lukewarm statement by the Estate doesn't really do.

I just put this on my Facebook - I think this angle should be pointed out as well for people and the media to understand the stupidity and hypocrisy of all this.

So let me get this straight. The (tabloid) media is now calling the innocent art books found in Michael Jackson possession "child porn", "child torture", "animal abuse" pictures and people just believe it because thanks to copy&paste journalism the same lie is coming from every direction now. Of course, none of these books were child porn and the prosecution's document confirms that - if you actually read it. But everyone with a half brain should actually know this already, from the very fact that Michael Jackson was never charged with child porn. Apparently many people don't even have a half brain. I have seen the books, they are nothing like how the media portrays them now with the sole intent of slandering MJ.

But let me point out the irony of this smear campaing by the media from another angle. They do not only criminalize Michael Jackson, but with these claims they also criminalize renowned photographers. Photographers that the same media otherwise works with (Vanity Fair, Rolling Stone etc.) or otherwise often promotes and praises their work. After all if these books are child porn or otherwise criminal or unethical then the photographers who made them are "child pornographers" or otherwise criminal or unethical too.

Are they ready to call renowned photographers like Simen Johan, Ed Templeton, Bruce Weber, Kelly Klein etc. etc. "child pornographers" and criminals now? If so then why do they work with them and why do they promote their work - that they are now trying to criminalize with these nonsensical and untrue claims? Or does this only become "child porn" or otherwise criminal or unethical when MJ owns the book (a book that is legal and readily available in any book store or library) but when others do they are suddenly art again? Isn't that hypocritical? I wish the media came to its senses and realized what a fascist thing they are doing with the criminalization of totally legal art - art that even they use and promote. But I guess nothing gets in the way a good day of Michael Jackson bashing. ?#?MichaelJackson?
 

8701girl

Proud Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2007
Messages
21,442
Points
83
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Bless Paris, but she shouldn't fight this alone. The whole family AND the Estate should be up in arms. Sorry, but that lukewarm statement by the Estate doesn't really do.

I just put this on my Facebook - I think this angle should be pointed out as well for people and the media to understand the stupidity and hypocrisy of all this.

I agree i wish prince would say something on twitter too
 

SarahJ

Proud Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2014
Messages
2,035
Points
0
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I wonder what is going on in court with Robson that they are so desperate that they started this massive media offensive.

And notice, how it's never about their own case. They are trying to use tabloid fabrications (the whole MJ paid off 20 victims for $200 million lie) and the twisting of old stories like this to boost their case. They simply base their campaign of prejudicing people against MJ, not on their own actual case and allegations. These are underhanded tactics, I wish someone would call them out on this BS already.

Amen to that. Wish someone would grow a pair and stop this crap instead of hiding their heads away hoping it will all go away soon. They'd all better start looking up because this keeps being drilled into peoples heads it won't.

Interesting that some of the press is updating with the estates statement. Its their chance to kinda backtrack a little. Just in case you know. But I am sure they knew it was bs but went along with it anyway for the clicks and to make their advertisers happy. They saw the attention RO got and ran with it. The trial was only 11 years ago and the books, porn etc.. was talked ad nauseum in the news at the time. Hell some of them were probably sitting in the court room.
News (and I use the term loosely) is big, big business. Clicks are it and they don't care how they get them or now much untruth they have to post.

Good on Paris and Taj Jackson by the way.
For those who haven't heard, Taj is tweeting that he is exploring legal options as some article mentioned 3T.
 

StephluvsMJ

Proud Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Messages
2,154
Points
63
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Can't they just be more specific?

For God's sake make it very clear that none of it is child porn. Make it very clear that all of this was seen by the jury in 2005 and it's nothing new. Make it very clear that these are legal art books and the media are basically calling renowned artists "child pornographers" with this. Yes, I think this could be good to make the media understand the stupidity of this claim - to point out that if they call this material "child porn" then that means they are calling renowned artists with exhibitions etc. "child pornographers", some of the very photographers who work with some of their own biggest magazines actually. Magazines that are now spreading around this lie. So are they calling their own photographers "child pornograpers" now? Or are they calling artists that they do interviews with and they promote themselves "child pornographers" now?

Eg.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_Weber_(photographer)




https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simen_Johan

Well, RO considers their work to be child pornography, child erotica, child torture and animal abuse. It's interesting that these photographers, editors and publishers were never investigated or charged for photographing and distributing this material. That the US Library of congress was never accused of pedophilia advocacy by having these art books in their collection. It's because the one and only time in this world and universe these books are considered child pornography is when they're in the hands of Michael Jackson. And for the most part not even in the hands of Michael.... Sitting in an box for perhaps years along with hundreds of completely unrelated non-child erotica art and photography books. And furthermore these "child erotica" books are the books that Wade Robson himself flipped through and said they were not erotic in any way.
 

Rhilo

Proud Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2010
Messages
2,816
Points
0
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I got the same reply to my email to MJ online team rep. Alicia. I replied back saying their statement was not strong enough and that they need to do more. I told them being quiet and ignoring this story is more damaging to his legacy than not.
 

Ms. BlueGangsta

Proud Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2016
Messages
2,880
Points
0
Location
A Place With No Name.
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Yeah and honestly the wording is really bad at times. While they do say it's false later on, "Michael Jackson's fans, including the Executors of his estate, prefer to remember the wonderful gifts Michael left behind instead of having to once again see his good name dragged through the mud by tabloid trash."

At least to me, the way they wrote that sentence sounds as if we fans are trying to sweep these allegations under the rug (prefer to remember him for this and not that) when we're fighting out against them. Maybe it's just me, least that's how I interpreted it first time I'm reading.

Exactly!

I've seen fans on YouTube, and Twitter (I don't visit instagram or facebook) fighting back against the dumb haters.
Fans are fighting but the estate isn't supporting the fight very much.

But we as fans also need to realize that there are some sick delusional people out there that believe and want Michael to be guilty NO MATTER WHAT.
Some people are just so consumed with hatred for Michael that their minds simply CANNOT be changed.

They hate on Michael as if it's their career.
I can't stand those sick freaks.

So the real goal to me is to debunk the mess that the media says about Michael and spread the truth, and not to change everyones mind because that sadly cannot be done.
 
Last edited:

Rhilo

Proud Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2010
Messages
2,816
Points
0
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

The haters will always hate. My worry is that the barrage of articles will have a negative influence on people who were otherwise neutral or casual fans. If that happens, there will be a definite negative impact on MIchael's legacy.

if anyone emailed the estate contact and received a reply similar to what I got, please let them know that their statement is NOT ENOUGH this time. Because this story has gone mass...
 

HIStoric

Proud Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2011
Messages
3,456
Points
48
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

The haters will always hate. My worry is that the barrage of articles will have a negative influence on people who were otherwise neutral or casual fans. If that happens, there will be a definite negative impact on MIchael's legacy.

Ditto.
 

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

Interesting that some of the press is updating with the estates statement. Its their chance to kinda backtrack a little.

I think the Statement of the Santa Barbara Sheriff's Office maybe made them stop in their tracks too, since they said it's not their original document and someone added things. While that is not a defense of MJ (and I don't think they would ever defend him - they hate his guts), but this showed to the media that something is not clean with this story and already the core document RO references is manipulated.

The whole "sex crazed MJ" angle for example comes from that claim of MJ taking Precocet for sex addiction. It was not in the police's official report. (Not that if it was their theory it would be any more true, but it is not even a prosecution theory but a later addition.) The official report only said there was a prescription for Precocet that was found. The "sex addiction" angle is one of the additions of whoever created this (probably Wade Robson's lawyers). The photos in the document (which look more "creepy" in this blurred black and white version than when you look up the originals) were also additions. Of course, selected to show the more "explicit" ones and trying to give the impression that they represent a book's full content when it's far from true.
 

Ms. BlueGangsta

Proud Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2016
Messages
2,880
Points
0
Location
A Place With No Name.
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

The haters will always hate. My worry is that the barrage of articles will have a negative influence on people who were otherwise neutral or casual fans. If that happens, there will be a definite negative impact on MIchael's legacy.

if anyone emailed the estate contact and received a reply similar to what I got, please let them know that their statement is NOT ENOUGH this time. Because this story has gone mass...

Agreed.
 

HIStory

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
6
Points
0
From Robson’s testimony:

1 When you were a young child, did Michael
2 Jackson ever show you any sexually explicit
3 material?
4 A. No.
5 Q. Did you ever see Michael Jackson show
6 sexually explicit material to any child?
7 A. No.
22 BY MR. ZONEN:
23 Q. Mr. Robson, when did you first learn that
24 Michael Jackson possessed material of the nature
25 that’s before you right now?
26 A. Right now I did.
27 Q. All the years that you have known Michael —
28 A. Actually, no one’s told me where this came
1 from.
2 Q. Assuming this comes from Michael Jackson’s
3 residence.
4 A. Assuming it does, this is the first I know.
5 Q. All right. And you had never, ever known
6 that Mr. Jackson collected sexually explicit
7 material?
8 A. No.
9 Q. This is something new that you’re learning
10 just today; is that right?
11 A. Yes.

Robson claims he remembered all along what allegedly happened to him he just didn't know it was wrong. But on the stand he was asked specific questions like these. It's not a matter of not knowing it was wrong. Now he claims MJ showed him porn magazines, art books with nudity, everything. If in 2005 he just didn't know it was wrong then why didn't he say "yes, MJ showed me these, but I don't think it's wrong"? He is a freaking liar.
 

Bubs

Proud Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2012
Messages
7,856
Points
0
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

The s..t heads in Wade team are working overtime.

"The Sheriff's Office did not release any of the documents and/or photographs to the media. The Sheriff's Office released all of its reports and the photographs as part of the required discovery process to the prosecution and the defence."

Wade's team gave these to Radar, as they usually do when they go for smear campaign against Michael. They did the same shit last year around same time with their articles of Wade and his lawsuit.

This is the headline of their article last year
Michael Jackson Sex Abuse Lawsuit Continues As Wade Robson ...
Jun 24, 2015


Folks, there is a reason why they went to tabloids now.
 
Last edited:

innuendo141

Proud Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
3,370
Points
48
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

The Sun and Irish Sun reporting it now. Lovely.
 

Bubs

Proud Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2012
Messages
7,856
Points
0
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

The Sun and Irish Sun reporting it now. Lovely.

Who is their right mind even reads anything from Sun as they are worst kind of yellow press and as bad as Radar and National Enquire?

Yellow journalism, or the yellow press, is a type of journalism that presents little or no legitimate well-researched news and instead uses eye-catching headlines to sell more newspapers. Techniques may include exaggerations of news events, scandal-mongering, or sensationalism.
 
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

The Sun and Irish Sun reporting it now. Lovely.

Oh I wasn't under the illusion that the Sun would miss such an opportunity to slander MJ. They always "loved" him.
 

innuendo141

Proud Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
3,370
Points
48
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Oh I wasn't under the illusion that the Sun would miss such an opportunity to slander MJ. They always "loved" him.

To be fair, they say nothing of "child porn" but rely heavily on whoever was working the case that they got all the "info" from.

Excuse me while I shower in lava after visiting that site
 

HIStoric

Proud Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2011
Messages
3,456
Points
48
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I made the mistake of going to the Daily Mail comment section and well, I was almost hospitalised from the amount of cringe and facepalming I did. sigh.
 
Top