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

[larry141094]

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

Yes, Larry you are grown man who sees your abuser get into trouble for the same thing he did to you and still didn't know it was wrong? You have to be mentally underdeveloped or something else is going on that I don't want to get into.

Its not that simple at all. The fact that you think it is, worries me slightly. But whatever, not everyone can understand simple facts

 

[HIStory]

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

What's the penal code used? 288 or 288(a)? There is a difference. They would have to be incredibly stupid to use 288, since MJ has never been accused of anal penetration.

These are the penal codes they reference:

266j. Any person who intentionally gives, transports, provides, or
makes available, or who offers to give, transport, provide, or make
available to another person, a child under the age of 16 for the
purpose of any lewd or lascivious act as defined in Section 288, or
who causes, induces, or persuades a child under the age of 16 to
engage in such an act with another person, is guilty of a felony and
shall be imprisoned in the state prison for a term of three, six, or
eight years, and by a fine not to exceed fifteen thousand dollars
($15,000).

Here they reference 286 (b)(1) but I cite (a) for context:

Penal Code286 bis:

286. (a) Sodomy is sexual conduct consisting of contact between the
penis of one person and the anus of another person. Any sexual
penetration, however slight, is sufficient to complete the crime of
sodomy.
(b) (1) Except as provided in Section 288, any person who
participates in an act of sodomy with another person who is under 18
years of age shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison,
or in a county jail for not more than one year.

286(b)(2)

Quote: (2) Except as provided in Section 288, any person over 21 years of age who participates in an act of sodomy with another person who is under 16 years of age shall be guilty of a felony. ​

286(c)(2)(A)

Quote: (2) (A) Any person who commits an act of sodomy when the act is accomplished against the victim's will by means of force, violence, duress, menace, or fear of immediate and unlawful bodily injury on the victim or another person shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for three, six, or eight years. ​

286(c)(2)(C)

Quote: (C) Any person who commits an act of sodomy with another person who is a minor 14 years of age or older when the act is accomplished against the victim's will by means of force, violence, duress, menace, or fear of immediate and unlawful bodily injury on the victim or another person shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for 7, 9, or 11 years. ​

288(a)

Quote: 288. (a) Except as provided in subdivision (i), any person who willfully and lewdly commits any lewd or lascivious act, including any of the acts constituting other crimes provided for in Part 1, upon or with the body, or any part or member thereof, of a child who is under the age of 14 years, with the intent of arousing, appealing to, or gratifying the lust, passions, or sexual desires of that person or the child, is guilty of a felony and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for three, six, or eight years. ​

288(b)(1)

Quote: (b) (1) Any person who commits an act described in subdivision (a) by use of force, violence, duress, menace, or fear of immediate and unlawful bodily injury on the victim or another person, is guilty of a felony and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for 5, 8, or 10 years. ​

288a(b)(1)

Quote: (b) (1) Except as provided in Section 288, any person who participates in an act of oral copulation with another person who is under 18 years of age shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison, or in a county jail for a period of not more than one year. ​

288a(b)(2)

Quote: (2) Except as provided in Section 288, any person over 21 years of age who participates in an act of oral copulation with another person who is under 16 years of age is guilty of a felony. ​

288a(c)(1)

Quote: (c) (1) Any person who participates in an act of oral copulation with another person who is under 14 years of age and more than 10 years younger than he or she shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for three, six, or eight years. ​

288a(c)(2)(A)-288a(c)(2)(C)

Quote: (2) (A) Any person who commits an act of oral copulation when the act is accomplished against the victim's will by means of force, violence, duress, menace, or fear of immediate and unlawful bodily injury on the victim or another person shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for three, six, or eight years. (B) Any person who commits an act of oral copulation upon a person who is under 14 years of age, when the act is accomplished against the victim's will by means of force, violence, duress, menace, or fear of immediate and unlawful bodily injury on the victim or another person, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for 8, 10, or 12 years. (C) Any person who commits an act of oral copulation upon a minor who is 14 years of age or older, when the act is accomplished against the victim's will by means of force, violence, duress, menace, or fear of immediate and unlawful bodily injury on the victim or another person, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for 6, 8, or 10 years. ​

289(h)

Quote: (h) Except as provided in Section 288, any person who participates in an act of sexual penetration with another person who is under 18 years of age shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison or in a county jail for a period of not more than one year. ​

289(i)

Quote: (i) Except as provided in Section 288, any person over 21 years of age who participates in an act of sexual penetration with another person who is under 16 years of age shall be guilty of a felony. ​

289(j)

Quote: (j) Any person who participates in an act of sexual penetration with another person who is under 14 years of age and who is more than 10 years younger than he or she shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for three, six, or eight years. ​

647.6(a)(1)

Quote: 647.6. (a) (1) Every person who annoys or molests any child under 18 years of age shall be punished by a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars ($5,000), by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by both the fine and imprisonment. ​

 

[Gold Pants Girl]

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

Larry I don't see how the "they didn't know it was molestation" thing can apply in Wade or Jimmy's case, since they have been asked very specific questions about MJ and molestation multiple times over the last 20 + years. I think in any other case it is very possible, but not this one.

 

[larry141094]

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

Man US laws are so convoluted... how can anyone study law over there without their head falling off?

 

[passy001]

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

I dont really read into lawyers rhetoric, they're all crooks pretty much. My basis of this being common is based on medical journals i read during my first degree in University. And yes, it is Wade's side i am waiting on, innocent until proven guilty. He has the burden of proof, so lets see what he's got

Why waste your time waiting? unless you enjoy the "freak show" the media have always sponsored from day one, which seems to be the only way for them to cash in on a dead man they so profoundly despise, even by Hollywood standard.

It's very obvious these so-called abuse claims are merely shakedown attempts. Besides, repress memory is not exactly a science. it remains a very disputed topic among scholars. in fact some dismiss it altogether as a fallacy designed to manipulate people by planting false stories into their head.

 

[larry141094]

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

Larry I don't see how the "they didn't know it was molestation" thing can apply in Wade or Jimmy's case, since they have been asked very specific questions about MJ and molestation multiple times over the last 20 + years. I think in any other case it is very possible, but not this one.

There are cases that are similar to this, in that a victim will deny any abuse for years and then one day, for some reason connects the dots and either 1. Reports it or 2. Suppresses it and becomes progressively unstable. Direct questioning to an event that the brain doesn't connect to the question itself won't make a difference.

 

[larry141094]

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

Why waste your time waiting? unless you enjoy the "freak show" the media have always sponsored from day one, which seems to be the only way for them to cash in on a dead man they so profoundly despise, even by Hollywood standard.

It's very obvious these so-called abuse claims are merely shakedown attempts. Besides, repress memory is not exactly a science. it remains a very disputed topic among scholars. in fact some dismiss it altogether as a fallacy designed to manipulate people by planting false stories into their head.

You're talking about repressed memory RETRIEVAL, which is a very hotly debated subject. But repressed memories are not, there is a lot of evidence for them and they are not very well understood. They're like gravity, there's evidence for it everywhere, but almost no understanding about how it works

 

[Justthefacts]

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

Its not that simple at all. The fact that you think it is, worries me slightly. But whatever, not everyone can understand simple facts

You can make things sound has complicated has you like for it to sound. So let's take something simple in 05 Wade Roberson denied something he sites in his claim the made saying she saw something he denied it in 05 and so did she under cross so if it was an act of love why deny it? I can't speak of the other one because it's under seal but as stated before if it's similar to Wade's that does not give you pause?.

 

[Gold Pants Girl]

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

Wow! They are just throwing everything out there, hoping at least something will stick!

 

[HIStory]

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

There are cases that are similar to this, in that a victim will deny any abuse for years and then one day, for some reason connects the dots and either 1. Reports it or 2. Suppresses it and becomes progressively unstable. Direct questioning to an event that the brain doesn't connect to the question itself won't make a difference.

Sorry, but in this specific case I find this hard to believe. There are so many factors in this case which are nothing like the cases cited in those so called "typical cases". If we are going to believe any nonsense based on the notion that with child abuse victims anything is possible, then how do you find out the truth?

 

[larry141094]

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

You can make things sound has complicated has you like for it to sound. So let's take something simple in 05 Wade Roberson denied something he sites in his claim the made saying she saw something he denied it in 05 and so did she under cross so if it was an act of love why deny it? I can't speak of the other one because it's under seal but as stated before if it's similar to Wade's that does not give you pause?.

Why would any other child abuse victim deny abuse under oath? Even as an adult? No one really has the answer to that, all we know, is that it happens and it is VERY common. It's a disassociation thing, he would remember it, but not connect the experience to the question they're asking. Brain chemistry, it does that sometimes

 

[larry141094]

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

Sorry, but in this specific case I find this hard to believe. There are so many factors in this case which are nothing like the cases cited in those so called "typical cases". If we are going to believe any nonsense based on the notion that with child abuse victims anything is possible, then how do you find out the truth?

Wait for the evidence. If there's no evidence, then MJ's innocent and they're lying through their teeth. Thats just how i operate, i think scientifically, not emotionally. Sure i have an emotional love for MJ's music and his message, but that's no where near my love for truth and science. So my priorities push MJ to the side, for me at least. It sucks that all this is happening with Xscape out, but the album's already doing miles better than Michael, it's critically more successful and has virtually no controversy. So, all in all, it's a good month to be an MJ fan

 

[Justthefacts]

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

But Roberson said it was an act of love and he didn't know it was wrong so why disassociation? Why not just say well yeah he did that but I was molested it was consensual. The chances of this case being thrown out are very good. Based on the time passed and Roberson being caught in a very big lie

 

[larry141094]

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

But Roberson said it was an act of love and he didn't know it was wrong so why disassociation? Why not just say well yeah he did that but I was molested it was consensual

Because, he didn't want the man he perceived as loving him to goto jail. Disassociation =/= stupidity. As i said though, i will reserve judgement until i see some evidence

 

[Kikuchiyo]

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

Some of you, need to get a reality check here, i love Michael, i do, so EXCUSE me for having doubts. YES i know 93 was a crock of shit, so was 2005. But that doesn't mean he didn't do things like that at all. DONT GET ME WRONG PLEASE, im not saying he DID do anything, im just saying i want to hear what they have to say.

EXCUSE me for having doubts, DON'T GET ME WRONG PLEASE, I'm not saying you are, but I think that you are someone close to Wade Robson! :2cents:

Do you (or did you) have same doubts in all other cases - attempts to extort money from MJ?
MJ got over 50 extortion attempts per year (over the years more than thousand lawsuits have been filed against MJ for all kinds of reasons) so I guess every single time you have/had a doubts even though common sense, evidence, logic, arguments clearly showed from the start that MJ was a victim of greed.

You consistently cite allegations as possible facts that have occurred ignoring facts that say contrary! There are countless examples in this thread which undoubtedly shows that Wade Robson is lying .

 

[larry141094]

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

EXCUSE me for having doubts, DON'T GET ME WRONG PLEASE, I'm not saying you are, but I think that you are someone close to Wade Robson! :2cents:

Do you (or did you) have same doubts in all other cases - attempts to extort money from MJ?
MJ got over 50 extortion attempts per year (over the years more than thousand lawsuits have been filed against MJ for all kinds of reasons) so I guess every single time you have/had a doubts even though common sense, evidence, logic, arguments clearly showed from the start that MJ was a victim of greed.

You consistently cite allegations as possible facts that have occurred ignoring facts that say contrary! There are countless examples in this thread which undoubtedly shows that Wade Robson is lying .

Am i not allowed to say "Im on the fence until i see some actual evidence?" because thats what im saying. Sorry that you have a problem with that, but thats just how i am

 

[passy001]

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

You're talking about repressed memory RETRIEVAL, which is a very hotly debated subject. But repressed memories are not, there is a lot of evidence for them and they are not very well understood. They're like gravity, there's evidence for it everywhere, but almost no understanding about how it works

It's not just the retrieval which is contested. The EXISTENCE of the actual memory being repressed is also a hotly contested topic. Here is a quick passage of text from wikipeadia ( don't have time to search through journals)

The existence of repressed memories is a controversial topic in psychology; some studies have concluded that it can occur in victims of trauma, while others dispute it. According to some psychologists, repressed memories can be recovered through therapy. Other psychologists argue that this is in fact rather a process through which false memories are created by blending actual memories and outside influences. Furthermore, some psychologists believe that repressed memories are a cultural symptom because there is no written proof of their existence before the nineteenth century.[2]

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repressed_memory

 

[Justthefacts]

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

Because, he didn't want the man he perceived as loving him to goto jail. Disassociation =/= stupidity. As i said though, i will reserve judgement until i see some evidence

Ok that means he knew it was wrong. So he's lying when he says it was wrong

 

[Kikuchiyo]

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

Am i not allowed to say "Im on the fence until i see some actual evidence?" because thats what im saying. Sorry that you have a problem with that, but thats just how i am

You only see what you want to see! You are ignoring the FACTS!

 

[larry141094]

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

It's not just the retrieval which is contested. The EXISTENCE of the actual memory being repressed is also a hotly contested topic. Here is a quick passage of text from wikipeadia ( don't have time to search through journals)



source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repressed_memory

Retrieval hasn't been "accepted" but repressed memories are "accepted" within the Psychological community.

 

[larry141094]

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

Ok that means he knew it was wrong. So he's lying when he says it was wrong

No, he didn't perceive it as wrong, which would be why he would've lied (assuming this isn't BS)

 

[HIStory]

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

Wait for the evidence. If there's no evidence, then MJ's innocent and they're lying through their teeth. Thats just how i operate, i think scientifically, not emotionally. Sure i have an emotional love for MJ's music and his message, but that's no where near my love for truth and science. So my priorities push MJ to the side, for me at least. It sucks that all this is happening with Xscape out, but the album's already doing miles better than Michael, it's critically more successful and has virtually no controversy. So, all in all, it's a good month to be an MJ fan

Have you read Wade's lawsuit? Because if you truly have a scientifical-analytical approach, then you should at least know about basic facts of a case you are talking about. Your suggestion that we defend MJ based on "emotions" (or when you said that it's "blind defense") is very offensive and condescending, especially coming from someone who obviously did not spend as much time with researching these cases as many of us did.

There are lots of disputed aspects of psychology and at one point something is accepted as very scientific then it gets debated. Back in the 90s there were lots of recovered memory cases, by now the mention of recovered memory became reason to be cautious and sceptical. And in any court case you can put psychology "experts" on the stand to vouch for either side - as I'm sure it will happen in this case if it goes to court. My point is, it's easy to be lost in some armchair psychology and just because we read a couple of articles or papers on the subject we are not experts. Heck, even experts can have totally opposing opinions of the same subject.

But there are lots of other interesting aspects of Wade's claim. When he said he did not know about the administration of the Estate until March 2013, do you think that too was because the administration of the Estate was a traumatic event to him, so he failed to connect the dots before? Or is it more likely that he says that to get around statues of limitations? If he does, then that already means he lies for money. Or when he said on the Today's Show that it's not about money but it's about saying it loud to heal, but then we find out that his inital request was to keep the case under seal for the privacy interests of the accused. Obviously if that had happened then he could not have said it loud to heal... So the logical conclusion is that it was ALL about money to him, because there was nothing else in it for him initially with the case being under seal.
Or when he says people in charge of MJ's Estate are responsible for his abuse, but his mother is not... Or we should believe that 7 years of anal rape as a child did not cause him any type of medical problems or anything that his mother would notice.

 

[larry141094]

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

You only see what you want to see! You are ignoring the FACTS!

Im sorry, but did i miss the trial? No? Then no facts have been formally presented, so im on the fence until then

 

[passy001]

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

Retrieval hasn't been "accepted" but repressed memories are "accepted" within the Psychological community.

Like i said before, it's a controversial topic that still today continues to polarize scholars.

 

[Soundmind]

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

Because, he didn't want the man he perceived as loving him to goto jail. Disassociation =/= stupidity. As i said though, i will reserve judgement until i see some evidence

so you believe Gavin and Chandler lied, but are willing to listen to Wade and Chuky? Ok, if you believe he could have very well molested Wade and Chucky, how come Jordan and Gavin are liars?!! Are you saying he molested only two boys ?

Just say I believe all of them

 

[Soundmind]

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

why did they only file the claim in the wake of ONE ? why did they only added Chucky immediately before the release of xscapel ? This is how victims HEAL ? LOOOOL

 

[larry141094]

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

Have you read Wade's lawsuit? Because if you truly have a scientifical-analytical approach, then you should at least know about basic facts of a case you are talking about. Your suggestion that we defend MJ based on "emotions" (or when you said that it's "blind defense") is very offensive and condescending, especially coming from someone who obviously did not spend as much time with researching these cases as many of us did.

There are lots of disputed aspects of psychology and at one point something is accepted as very scientific then it gets debated. Back in the 90s there were lots of recovered memory cases, by now the mention of recovered memory became reason to be cautious and sceptical. And in any court case you can put psychology "experts" on the stand to vouch for either side - as I'm sure it will happen in this case if it goes to court. My point is, it's easy to be lost in some armchair psychology and just because we read a couple of articles or papers on the subject we are not experts. Heck, even experts can have totally opposing opinions of the same subject.

But there are lots of other interesting aspects of Wade's claim. When he said he did not know about the administration of the Estate until March 2013, do you think that too was because the administration of the Estate was a traumatic event to him, so he failed to connect the dots before? Or when he said on the Today's Show that it's not about money but it's about saying it loud to heal, but then we find out that his inital request was to keep the case under seal for the privacy interests of the accused. Obviously if that had happened then he could not have said it loud to heal... So the logical conclusion is that it was ALL about money to him, because there was nothing else in it for him initially with the case being under seal.
Or when he says people in charge of MJ's Estate are responsible for his abuse, but his mother is not... Or we should believe that 7 years of anal rape as a child did not cause him any type of medical problems or anything that his mother would notice.

I agree with alot of what you said, i don't generally listen to "expert testimony" or "eyewitness testimony" because thats easily the most flimsy part of any case. Im interested in the EVIDENCE (if any). Furthermore, statements that don't make sense or are illogical (on Robsons part) aren't evidence for anything, unless you can conclusively connect them to something. I understand that i may not have as much research under my belt for this particular case, but that's mainly because it hasn't gone to trial and i tend to ignore anything in the media (TV or otherwise) because it can be twisted and edited to reach any conclusion

 

[Justthefacts]

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

Well all the cops in a psychiatrist at work the 93 in 2005 cases are stupid people.. They spent all this time with the liars totally ignored the victims

 

[HIStory]

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

I agree with alot of what you said, i don't generally listen to "expert testimony" or "eyewitness testimony" because thats easily the most flimsy part of any case. Im interested in the EVIDENCE (if any). Furthermore, statements that don't make sense or are illogical (on Robsons part) aren't evidence for anything, unless you can conclusively connect them to something. I understand that i may not have as much research under my belt for this particular case, but that's mainly because it hasn't gone to trial and i tend to ignore anything in the media (TV or otherwise) because it can be twisted and edited to reach any conclusion

I'm not talking about the media. I'm talking about Wade's own court filings and papers.

 

[larry141094]

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

so you believe Gavin and Chandler lied, but are willing to listen to Wade and Chuky? Ok, if you believe he could have very well molested Wade and Chucky, how come Jordan and Gavin are liars?!! Are you saying he molested only two boys ?

Just say I believe all of them

Well i don't believe all of them... they're all unconnected cases. Jordan and Gavin's case has gone to trial and i have read the evidence and then formed my conclusion based on what i read. I will do the same for this case, why the hell is that an issue for everyone? Haven't any of you been in a science classroom before? We're ALL like that, it's just the way we work.