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

[HIStory]

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

And Jordan didn't suffer extensive abuse by Evan as a child? You don't think he would have felt, I don't know, pressure maybe, to go along with what Evan told him to do? Or maybe forced him? What you're implying was that it was Jordan's idea to begin with. My implication is that Jordan was operating under duress of an abusive, controlling father. It does not excuse what he did but seriously, he was a child. A CHILD, just barely learning what the adult version of right and wrong means. He was drugged, for gods sake. Seriously?

The Sodium Amytal theory? I don't think it's true and it appears to come from the Chandlers themselves because it served them right at the time. There is no logic in the claim he was drugged when according to Pellicano just a couple of weeks after supposedly being planted false memories by Sodium Amytal Jordan told him he was not abused. So did he have false memories of abuse or not? Unless you think Pellicano made that up. But even the Chandlers do not think so. Also according to Mez he had witnesses that Jordan told people around him that he was never abused by MJ. How come if we accept the theory that false memories were planted in his brain by Sodium Amytal? This article sums up the problems with the Sodium Amytal theory: http://michaeljacksonallegations.com/the-use-of-sodium-amytal/

Of course, this does not mean he was not under duress and was not manipulated by his father. See here: http://michaeljacksonallegations.com/how-did-the-allegations-of-the-chandlers-emerge/ This article describes the way his father coerced him into making allegations.

So you are right that he was coerced by his father. But to compare Michael being beaten by Joe and Jordan telling a lie about someone that ruined that person's life is seriously wrong. It's not the same thing, not even close. Michael did not ruin anyone's life.

And I think everyoneone would accept Jordan as just a poor victim himself if he had put it right since. He is an adult since 1998 - that is 16 years. And for 16 years he did nothing to put this horrible lie to rest. Instead he's having a great time spending Michael's money on his luxury lifestyle and does not seem to be bothered by a fact that a man was ruined because of his lies and does not seem to feel there is something he owes Michael. Since 1998 it's his responsibility that he's letting that lie being out there. And in every other allegation against Michael that ruined his life Jordan Chandler shares responsibility. There would not have been Francia, Arvizo, Robson or Safechuck allegations without Jordan Chandler. He could have made Michael's life so much more easier by telling the truth. Heck, he could still help to dispell this horrible myth about Michael that he started. That he chooses not to speaks volumes about his character to me and sorry, but by now he's not a victim of his father but a co-perpetrator.

 

[HIStory]

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

Quite literally that is all I meant. That now, so many many years later, especially now that Michael is dead, NOW is when he would have to worry about something like that happening. I never one claimed it to be a legitimate concern, just that the threat may exist, and that either way he may be concerned with the threat and so he would not want to draw more attention to himself.

You seem to ignore every example I gave when they did not seem to be concerned about supposed fan crazyness when money was involved for them (another lawsuit, book, tabloid reports etc.)...

Actually Jordan could have made himself from zero to hero in fans' eyes if in 2005 he went up on that stand, not to tell more lies, but to tell the truth. I accept that to him it was more complicated as telling the truth would have meant to incriminate his father. But his father died in 2009. And he still said nothing.

BTW, there are a lot of fans who believe that hoax about Jordan confessing after Michael's death. Since then more fans discovered that it wasn't true but a hoax, but at the time a lot of fans believed it. Did anything happen to Jordan when so many fans believed he confessed after Michael's death? Rather fans were happy about his supposed confession. I haven't seen anyone threatening him for it.

I get not wanting to be understanding of them, and I don't really believe there's a real excuse either - but we, as fans concerned for Michael's image, well-being, and continued success - come from an extremely biased side on the whole issue.

So being disgusted by injustice is "extreme bias"? You do not have to be biased to be utterly disgusted by a horrible lie that ruined a person's life. You do not have to be biased to call Jordan's continued silence about that what it is: cowardiance. It has nothing to do with bias. It has to do with moral compass. After all it's either wrong or right.

Or let's put it this way: if the general public (non-MJ fans) got suddenly miraculously enlightened about the allegations and suddenly saw the light and that it was a lie, do you think people would not be disgusted by Jordan's silence about that? Do you really think you have to be an "exteremely biased" MJ fan to be disgusted by such lies and the cowardiance that keeps up those lies and facilitates more such lies (ie. other allegations by people who try to ride the coattails of Jordan by using the stigma Jordan put on Michael)? I don't think so.

At the same time, blindly making assumptions about a person you don't really know other than through court documents (and, well, also through absence of court documents and publicity) isn't really ideal behavior either.

What assumptions? It's not an assumption that Jordan Chandler is an adult since 1998 (actually he emancipated himself in 1995). For 16 years. It's not an assumption that ever since he failed to do the right thing and lets a lie live on that ruined a person's life and continues to ruin lives (eg. a lot of bullying that Michael's kids get are because of the allegations against their father). This guy called Michael a child molester, a pedophile and by his continued silence he continues to call him that. So I'm not going to feel bad about calling him a coward and a liar because that's exactly what he is.

 

[Mechi]

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

Jordan is an adult for some time now. He should get ready for being judged for his choices one day. *shrugs*
I honestly don't care about him. He certainly came from a problematic family during his childhood... but sheeesh many do and even though become good and sincere adults thank God. I mean yes, take Michael as an example although he of cuz had lived an extraordinary life not easy for many reasons not only his childhood.

Even if Jordan Chandler would talk now... the truth or lies again... to me that would not make anything different... I don't need to hear from him ever again. To me he is not even worth the attention ppl on this board are giving him.
He had his chances to get clear with Michael... those are gone... he'll be judged for that... he will have to face eternal justice.
However I certainly don't want him to be a tiny bit hurt or even worse killed by some crazy fan. That would maybe make it easier for him when facing his creator and Michael again... I don't want that.

 

[Justthefacts]

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

If anyone in this thread thinks we should feel bad for Jordan Chandler or understand his point of view. You are clearly at the wrong place. This is a MICHAEL JACKSON fan board not a board to feel bad for lying assholes

 

[HIStory]

Regarding Wade's case, I found an interesting article about this law of "late discovery" of alleged abuse that makes it possible for people to sue even after they pass the initial statues of limitations. A reminder: the basic law is that in cases of alleged child abuse the statue of limitations is 8 years after the alleged victim reached the age of majority - ie. one can sue until the age of 26. Obviously both Wade and James have passed that. But California and some other states applied another rule that might allow late filings. This is when the alleged victim discovered his or her abuse or the injury resulting from it late - past the age of 26. In those cases they have three years to file from the time they discovered their alleged abuse or the resulting injury. This is the law that Wade and James try to use and this is why they claim they only recently realized they have been abused and that it was wrong and that whatever psychological issues they have (or pretend to have) is a result of years of sexual abuse by Michael Jackson.

However, according to this article I found, it's not really automatic that you are getting your way around statues in case you claim such things. In fact, it seems to claim repressed memories would have been better for Wade from this aspect, you will see from the article why. But of course, claiming repressed memories would have caused other problems for his case. Repressed memories are viewed with scepticism in courts by now and especially in his case where all his life he was continuously confronted with questions about whether MJ molested him, it would be difficult to claim repressed memories. The cop out that he uses is in the last part I highlighted: he can claim he knew about the abuse and it's not repressed memory, only he has to add that he was not aware of the wrongfulness of the alleged acts. And lo and behold, that's exactly what Wade claims. His lawsuit is very carefully constructed to claim exactly the things he needs to claim to get around statues, as you will see from this article. But even so it will be difficult for him. Also keep in mind that this case is even more complecated than this because of the fact that Michael is dead and they missed another deadline too - ie. the deadline to file creditor's claims against the Estate. Nevertheless here is the article: http://www.rcrsd.com/publications/sex-abuse/

The relevant parts from the article:

California courts have routinely followed the DeRose decision where the court distinguished two types of case fact patterns in reference to the delayed discovery rule. Plaintiffs who alleged complete repression of the molestation would be entitled to delayed accrual of the statute, while those who did not allege repression of the abuse, but instead argued that other factors had caused their delay in filing suit were not entitled to the rule.

In DeRose, the court held that the allegations within plaintiff’s complaint, including that the abuse was "against plaintiff’s will and without her consent" and that she "felt great fear," precluded an application of the discovery rule. (Id. at p. 1017)

DeRose was allegedly molested by her step-grandfather over an eight-year period, beginning when she was four years old. She filed suit some thirteen years after the last incident of abuse. The court, reviewing Section 340.1(d), declined to apply the discovery rule, stating that the statutory language "…does not mandate application of the delayed discovery doctrine in any particular case." (Id. at p. 1020) The legislative intent, the court reasoned, was to "avoid the implication" that the longer statutory period was a "rejection" of the discovery doctrine. (Id. at p. 1020)

The requirements of the rule, however, had not been changed. And the rule applies "…only when a plaintiff has not discovered all of the facts essential to the cause of action." (Id. at p. 1017) The facts set forth in DeRose’s complaint clearly demonstrated her awareness around the time of the abuse of the essential elements to her action. The court characterized the abuse as an "assault" which by definition "causes harm as a matter of law." (Id. at p. 1017) Plaintiff’s argument that her action did not accrue until manifestation of the psychological injury and her understanding of the causal connection between the abuse and the injury, was rejected by the court since she had alleged in her complaint that her abuser, Carswell, had assaulted and molested her against her will, causing her extreme fright. Those facts demonstrated an earlier awareness of the wrongfulness of the conduct which precluded use of the discovery rule.

Plaintiff’s assertion that the abuse caused delayed consequences, i.e., psychological trauma, was not relevant, since plaintiff’s action was time barred by the statute of limitations before her complaint was filed. The DeRose court, however, expressly left open the possibility that plaintiff might have successfully argued for the application of the delayed discovery doctrine had she pled that she "repressed her memories of the sexual assaults until one year before filing her complaint." (Id. at p. 1018)

In Snyder, supra, plaintiff’s sexual abuser was a former Boy Scout leader who allegedly sexually assaulted plaintiff over a three-year period. Plaintiff’s complaint was filed in 1985, a little more than four years after the last incident of abuse, and several months after plaintiff’s 19th birthday. Plaintiff’s delay in filing suit, he alleged, was due to "embarrassment, humiliation, fear and sorrow" over the abuse. (Id. at p. 1322)

In opposing defendant’s motion for summary judgment based upon the one-year statute of limitations (Section 340[3]), plaintiff presented the declaration of a psychiatrist who opined that embarrassment, humiliation and fear were "byproducts of post-traumatic syndrome" which explained plaintiff’s delay in divulging the abuse earlier. (Id. at p. 1322) In refusing to apply the discovery rule, the court emphasized that plaintiff had established in his own declaration that he had suffered "appreciable harm" before his eighteenth birthday. (Id. at p. 1324) The statute began running on Snyder’s eighteenth birthday since all of the facts essential to plaintiff’s cause of action were known by him at that time. (Id. at p. 1324)

In Evans, supra, the First District Court of Appeals provided plaintiffs in sexual abuse cases with a glimmer of hope when it held that plaintiffs should be allowed to amend their complaints to allege delayed discovery of the wrongfulness of the defendants’ conduct, or that they repressed the abuse. An "awareness of wrongdoing," the court stated, was a condition precedent to the accrual of the plaintiffs’ action. (Id. at p. 1618) Plaintiffs were three brothers who alleged they were molested by their uncle and former foster father. They argued that they developed psychological blocking mechanisms which had precluded them from understanding the wrongfulness of the abuse and the nature and extent of the resulting damage.

The court noted that "two common themes" connected the numerous California cases dealing with the delayed discovery doctrine. (Id. at p. 1614) The first such theme is that the discovery rule has been routinely extended to causes of action where the plaintiff would find it difficult to discover or comprehend their injuries or the negligence which caused them. Noting that in some cases the plaintiff’s injuries, or their negligent cause, is "actually hidden," as in a medical malpractice action where foreign objects have been left in the plaintiff’s body after surgery. (Id. at p. 1614, citing Ashworth v. Memorial Hospital, 206 Cal.App.3d 1046, 1054-1062; 254 Cal.Rptr. 104 [1988])

Additionally, the nature of the defendants’ conduct, such as in a professional malpractice case, may be such that a layman may find it difficult, if not impossible, to comprehend the negligence. (Id. at p. 1615, citing Neel v. Magana, Olney, Levy, Cathcart and Gelfand, supra, 6 Cal.3d at p. 188)

The second theme is the existence of a "special relationship" between the parties, such as a fiduciary relationship where the defendant has occupied a superior position to comprehend the act and the injury. In such cases, a defendant should not be allowed to benefit from a plaintiff’s failure to comprehend the negligent act or the injury. (Id. at p. 1615, citing April Enterprises, Inc. v. KTTV, 147 Cal.App.3d 805, 831; 195 Cal.Rptr. 421 [1983]) The burden of proof is on the plaintiff to plead facts sufficient to rebut the presumption that he was aware of the injury on the date it occurred. (April Enterprises, supra, at p. 832)

In its discussion of the discovery rule, the court in Evans recognized the unique psychological sequelae that child abuse victims suffer. (Id. at p. 1615) The court pointed out that researchers and commentators in the field of childhood sexual abuse have identified psychological blocking or coping mechanisms which children develop in response to the abuse. Although a child may not totally repress the memory of the abuse, it may be an extended period of time before she can come to terms with the "full impact" of the abuse. (Id. at p. 1616)

The court stopped short, however, of a wholesale extension of the delayed discovery rule to cases involving adults who sue for injuries suffered as a result of childhood sexual abuse. In order to successfully argue that the discovery rule applies, the court stated:

"For plaintiffs to prevail they must be able to show they remained unaware of, and had no reason to suspect, the wrongfulness of the conduct until a time less than three years before the action was filed." (Id. at p. 1619) (Emphasis added)

The plaintiff who alleges sexual molestation against "his or her will," however, bears the risk of having their action dismissed for untimeliness since the delayed discovery rule will not toll the accrual of an action where the plaintiff suffers "actual and appreciable injury" at the time of the abuse. This was the very crux of the court’s decisions in DeRose, supra, and Snyder, supra, where the courts declined to apply the discovery rule to extend the limitations. This view is also consistent with the court’s interpretation of the rule in Jolly, supra. There, the court held that the statute begins to run when the plaintiff "suspects," or "should suspect," that "someone has done something wrong to her." (Supra at p. 1110)

Therefore, where the victim does not purport to have repressed the abuse itself, but instead alleges only to have recently discovered the extent of their psychological injuries from the abuse, tolling of the statute does not occur. (Evans, supra, at p. 1620)

In Marsha V. v. Gardner, supra, the delayed discovery doctrine was again rejected, with the court stating that the facts in DeRose, supra, were factually "indistinguishable" and the opinion "persuasive." (Id. at p. 272) Marsha V. made no claim that she was unaware of the abuse when it occurred, that she had suppressed or forgotten the acts, nor had she professed "contemporaneous or belated ignorance of the wrongfulness of respondent’s conduct." (Id. at p. 271) Rather, plaintiff complained that there had been a delay in her discovery of the "ongoing, deepseated psychological injuries and the causal link between those injuries and [respondent's] misconduct." (Id. at p. 271) The court held that such facts were insufficient to invoke the discovery rule.

And this is the cop out for Wade:

The Marsha V. court reflects a common thread between the decisions rejecting the delayed discovery rule in the case of adult survivors of childhood molestation. A plaintiff who, by her own admission, was molested "against her will" but does not claim to have immediately and completely suppressed the abuse, cannot take advantage of the discovery rule. This should be distinguished from the case where the plaintiff claims to have had no prior awareness of the "wrongfulness" of the defendant’s conduct until some point in time which is no more than three years before the complaint is filed. This is the distinction drawn in the Jolly and Evans decisions. California courts have thus far been reluctant to apply the discovery rule, unless the plaintiff can successfully argue that she has repressed the molestation, or that she was ignorant of the "wrongfulness" of her abuser’s conduct.

 

[Justthefacts]

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

Like you said the difference is Michael is dead. This would have worked for him if Michael was still with us. And you know when you look at Wade's lawsuit they word stuff in it liike Michael is still very much here. Seems like they are trying to get around the fact Michael is dead

 

[wendijane]

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

I just want this whole lie ...to die :sigh: It is just so wrong Just stop being evil Wade.
Just stop doing this to Michael

 

[Justthefacts]

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

And also Wade does not help himself when he says after years of silence I must speak my truth or I lived with the pain of this for years. You dummy you are telling on yourself

 

[analogue]

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

If anyone in this thread thinks we should feel bad for Jordan Chandler or understand his point of view. You are clearly at the wrong place. This is a MICHAEL JACKSON fan board not a board to feel bad for lying assholes

Jordan is just like his father. I have zero sympathy for him

 

[HIStory]

I realized something else in the above article:

The Marsha V. court reflects a common thread between the decisions rejecting the delayed discovery rule in the case of adult survivors of childhood molestation. A plaintiff who, by her own admission, was molested "against her will" but does not claim to have immediately and completely suppressed the abuse, cannot take advantage of the discovery rule. This should be distinguished from the case where the plaintiff claims to have had no prior awareness of the "wrongfulness" of the defendant’s conduct until some point in time which is no more than three years before the complaint is filed. This is the distinction drawn in the Jolly and Evans decisions.California courts have thus far been reluctant to apply the discovery rule, unless the plaintiff can successfully argue that she has repressed the molestation, or that she was ignorant of the "wrongfulness" of her abuser’s conduct.

I always felt for several reasons that Wade shot himself in the foot by claiming anal rape. He probably did that for shock value and probably constructed that lie before he was legally advised by Gradstein and therefore he really went too far with that claim that could come back and bite him in the ass. And this is yet another reason. Many of the Penal Codes they reference in their lawsuit contains that it was against his will. For example:

(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.

But according to precedent cases it seems he cannot claim that he was not aware of the wrongfulness of it when he claims it was against his will.

The way I understand it is that basically the Court is saying the same as what is our common sense argument of "you claim you have been anally raped and you claim you did not know until now that it was wrong? GTFOH."

 

[Justthefacts]

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

I agree it was done for not only shock value but IMO also because he thought or he hoped that the estate would see it and settle with him right away. All of this just screams of him wanting a secert pay out

 

[Snow White luvs Peter Pan]

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

I've always thought the 2005 trial must had never taken place because Sneddon had no case whatsoever. If the judge in charge of Robson's lawsuit send it to trial, it would show California has a bias treatment when it comes to Michael. There's no reason for a trial at all, Robson's claims are ridiculous and his timing (the money he's demanding) is quite suspicious. but that judge have accepted previous suits against MJ, I really hope I'm wrong and both traitors have a dismissal right in their asses.

 

[Robbsaber01]

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

Is there a thread to discuss Jimmy Safechuck?? I cannot believe another liar is accusing MJ of molestation. These people are sick.

 

[JEMFTV]

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

^^ There was one, but it got closed because of this one.

 

[HIStory]

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

Is there a thread to discuss Jimmy Safechuck?? I cannot believe another liar is accusing MJ of molestation. These people are sick.

James is discussed in this thread as well. They are represented by the same lawyer.

 

[wendijane]

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

One day I wish to wake up and see this thread gone because everything had been thrown out..All hese lies... I cannot believe wade and Jimmy would do this to Michael You don't don this to a friend, deceased or not.... where is your heart.? How do you sleep?

 

[Robbsaber01]

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

I just found out about James today. This is seriously messed up. MJ would be furious at these new lies. I've said this before and I'll say it again, its a decade cycle. 1993 - 2003 - 2013/14. Really, when does it stop. Real pedophiles usually have child pornography in there homes. If the FBI found nothing after a giant raid on Neverland, how could Mj be guilty?

What is the most messed up thing about this is that James and Wade both told the truth in 2005. What are the odds that they both "after therapy, remembered being molested by MJ". That is total BS.

The reality is this, they worked with MJ, became friends, years later they are broke and in need of $$.
Jordan took the $ his father extorted and ran.
All the accusers mindsets are simple :
MJ is dead, which means I can make up some BS molestation scandal, get paid $$, Mj isn't here to defend himself = I'm rich !

They also believe they are somewhat credible because they were at one point friends with MJ which is BS too. Sadly, any child that MJ was friends with could make an accusation even though its BS.
I have respect for Macaulay Culkin because he has always told the truth.
Rant over.

 

[J5master]

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

ugggh I didn't even know this controversy existed. I wish I hadn't looked in the direction of this thread, makes me sick to my stomach. Only consolation is that from what I see, not many people are talking about it because I was away from the whole MJ fan thing for a while and never heard about any of this, not even in passing. Second consolation is MJ doesn't have to endure this crap any more.

 

[bluetopez]

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

Simply put, if Murray is still walking and breathing then Jordan Chandler has shit to fear from so called threats by "crazy MJ fans!" -_-

 

[MJresearcher]

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

ugggh I didn't even know this controversy existed. I wish I hadn't looked in the direction of this thread, makes me sick to my stomach. Only consolation is that from what I see, not many people are talking about it because I was away from the whole MJ fan thing for a while and never heard about any of this, not even in passing. Second consolation is MJ doesn't have to endure this crap any more.

I'm sorry that this is what you came back to, I hadn't been on fan forums for a very long time either and then this shit happened. I've only had one other person say anything to me about it but he's a hardcore MJ fan, nobody else seems to know anything about it. Wade's case is full of holes and lies, and Safechuck hasn't helped himself by joining it. We don't know too much about what he's alleging yet but the judge still has to decide whether or not this case will go forward. Because of the statute of limitations things actually aren't in their favour so we're all hoping it gets tossed. If not, there's plenty of things to show Wade's a bullshitter so hopefully that'll all be exposed if it goes to trial. It's off calendar at the moment so we all just have to wait. I hate it!

 

[Petrarose]

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

Simply put, if Murray is still walking and breathing then Jordan Chandler has shit to fear from so called threats by "crazy MJ fans!" -_-

Very true. He even travels and continues to promote himself on video and in magazines (I call all his interviews and power-point "promoting himself"), and the mere fact he does this regularly shows that potential attacks from fans is not an issue for him. Just like Garvin changing his name and then talking about Michael which lets people know who he really is. Not to mention his promoters (former DA & his attorneys) always commenting about him and letting us know how great he is doing, and then his photo is shown so those who know his new name can connect the photo to his old name. Don't seem to me that this type of behavior shows fear of harm from fans. How about Chandler going to school and then talking about Michael in relation to himself--that is a very interesting way of being anonymous.

They are all cowards & cheats. They pretend they don't want people to know who they are by changing their names and moving their residences; then they do actions to draw attention to who they really are. Most likely they can't resist letting people know that they were connected to some famous person.

 

[HIStory]

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

^ Gavin's name-changing was only temporary. He uses his real name now, even has a FB account as well as Star.

Wade has never been real active on FB but he is more active since his allegation and he plasters the picture of his 3-year-old son all over for symapthy points. That just shows there is no real threat from MJ fans.

 

[Justthefacts]

I think that people like Jordan and Gavin and the rest of them get some sort of sick thrill bringing Michael up. They probably get some sort of sick thrill knowing they ruined a man. More so for Gavin and his family. The night Michael died, Star was somewhere online saying Michael did coke and some other silly shit. People like him and the rest of them are vacant on the inside there is no heart and when you have no heartother people’s pain especially if you caused them the pain means nothing to you. I need to believe that people like Jordan,Wade, Gavin, Jason, Upchuck, and their families and supporters have something coming to them that will be tenfold has bad then what they did to Michael. And IMO the only reason why the DA and Dimondare hanging around Arvizo is just to keep him in line. I used to say that I truly believe that Michael would be cleared of all of this I just hope he still around to see it. Sadly, he is not but I still believe that day is coming

 

[Petrarose]

I think that people like Jordan and Gavin and the rest of them get some sort of sick thrill bringing Michael up. They probably get some sort of sick thrill knowing they ruined a man. More so for Gavin and his family. The night Michael died, Star was somewhere online saying Michael did coke and some other silly shit. People like him and the rest of them are vacant on the inside there is no heart and when you have no heartother people’s pain especially if you caused them the pain means nothing to you. I need to believe that people like Jordan,Wade, Gavin, Jason, Upchuck, and their families and supporters have something coming to them that will be tenfold has bad then what they did to Michael. And IMO the only reason why the DA and Dimondare hanging around Arvizo is just to keep him in line. I used to say that I truly believe that Michael would be cleared of all of this I just hope he still around to see it. Sadly, he is not but I still believe that day is coming

Yeah they keep an eye on them to make sure the story stays the same, after all a lot of heads will roll if any party squeals. I remember the DA in the OJ trial made a big production after the 1 year anniversary of OJ's wife death, going to the burial grounds with flowers and making a big media scene. The next year it was quiet and you can see she moved on. However, the lawyers connected to the Arvizo's case still keep tabs on them & know what they are doing. They are at weddings together, and that was not a case where there was any evidence to show guilt, so why are these people such close friends?

Like you I am keeping the faith that one day there will be complete vindication. I don't know how it will come about, but I feel it requires certain events to take place that will drive certain people to come clean.

 

[Kingofpop4ever3000]

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

Yeah they keep an eye on them to make sure the story stays the same, after all a lot of heads will roll if any party squeals. I remember the DA in the OJ trial made a big production after the 1 year anniversary of OJ's wife death, going to the burial grounds with flowers and making a big media scene. The next year it was quiet and you can see she moved on. However, the lawyers connected to the Arvizo's case still keep tabs on them & know what they are doing. They are at weddings together, and that was not a case where there was any evidence to show guilt, so why are these people such close friends?

Like you I am keeping the faith that one day there will be complete vindication. I don't know how it will come about, but I feel it requires certain events to take place that will drive certain people to come clean.

I agree. I believe something really huge would have to happen to take the lid off that whole mess. From 1993 all the way to 2009. But that means somebody involved would have to have a very nagging, guilty feeling about what happened to Michael. And I personally think that sadly, these people have all managed to convince themselves that Michael somehow deserved what they did to him.

 

[wendijane]

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

Its' 100000000 per cent sure for me that mac would never deceive Michael :heart: !TRUE FRIEND!

**** the rest of these CHEAP money grabbers. you are DISGUSTING!

 

[Petrarose]

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

I agree. I believe something really huge would have to happen to take the lid off that whole mess. From 1993 all the way to 2009. But that means somebody involved would have to have a very nagging, guilty feeling about what happened to Michael. And I personally think that sadly, these people have all managed to convince themselves that Michael somehow deserved what they did to him.

At times, I think that it may not be revelation because someone feels guilty that would cause the train reaction. Rather, I think something could happen that has nothing to do with the allegations, which would bring up some actions that one or more of the parties involved with the allegations did, and those actions would cause certain behaviors/actions of people involved in the shakedown case to be brought to light. Then, the guilty parties would have no other recourse but to come clean because of the situation they find themselves in. You know like if someone gets arrested connected to the former DA/Arvizios/lawyers/etc. and then the person disclose that what they did, the DA, e.g., did too or showed how the DA did it, and then the person showed how the DA did it for his fake allegation case, then the DA is brought in and has to come clean or face some charges.

 

[Snow White luvs Peter Pan]

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

Wasn't there a hearing on Michael's anniversary? What's the latest regarding Robson's/Safechuck's rediculous lawsuit?

 

[speeddemon88]

Re: [TMZ] New child molestation claim by Wade Robson

Sigh... Michael, people just dont leave you alone. Sick world, sick people.

All those kids Michael surrounded himself with make me sick, what a bunch of scumbags. Its just unbelievable how fake they are, what kind of people are they anyways if u are willing to do such horrible things for money. How much more do they want to hurt Michaels image, its neverending.I hope the karma will come back at them, all of them...

 

[Bubs]

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

And IMO the only reason why the DA and Dimondare hanging around Arvizo is just to keep him in line. I used to say that I truly believe that Michael would be cleared of all of this I just hope he still around to see it. Sadly, he is not but I still believe that day is coming

You are not the only one who thinks that is the reason why they keep in touch with Gavin etc.
I'm certain that if Demon etc stops all the contact with him, Gavin will start talking.
Now he feels as him being important, but once he is dropped, he'll want his attention.

I don't know if Demon ever going to drop him, but if she doesn't, isn't that karma working on her?
She lives her life knowing that she cannot let go of Gavin in case he talks, so she is tied to him as glue, and isn't that nice punishment that you have to hang out with person you wouldn't normally do so.