Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate
Do the courts in the United States simply reject even the most absurd claim attempts? After what I know about the complaints against MJ and his Estate I know nothing is simply rejected. All this takes a long time. There was Billie Jean, who complained to be Michael's wife and Blankets mother. How long did it take until her case was dismissed? Even hearings were set. Michael Amir tried a creditor claim where long ago the deadlines had passed. It took two years until his lawsuit was dismissed.
What I find strange is that Meserau expended so much energy to discuss it as if the process takes place. Yes, he says, he hopes it will be thrown out. But he leaves it by this short sentence. Why does he not use the energy to argue that it has to be clear that this can not come to a trial and support the Estate in their argumentation. He even referred to the attorney from Chucksafe and Robson as a really reputable lawyer. I really think he has not even read the complaints and the demurrers from the Estate.
Instead Meserau argued almost as if the trial takes place and even supports fans in their attempts to launch that he is the lawyer.
I really find Meseraus in his statements strange.
Annita This is what I find with our legal system. It seems they tend to follow a process which I guess they feel is in place to safeguard the rights of the individuals. That is why you see such foolishness going before the judge, and there are hearings & arguments which I feel is a waste of our money. It seems to me that there should be a prior filter before a case is even filed, you know like a prescreening.
About TMez, he seems to be a very ethical person, so he always talks highly of other counsels. He always say they are professionals and good lawyers or words to that effect. The other thing I find about him, is that he is tied to Randy and tends to come across as siding with the family vs the estate. I don't know if this is because he feels Randy is against the estate, so tends to see the actions of the estate in a particular way. Or, because he knows the way the family sees the estate, his statements are structured in such a way to appease the family? I don't know I was just wondering, because this is an intelligent man, but people are human. He never makes blanket statements against the estate though, but the way he phrases his comments gives me the impression of how he views them.
He feels that the estate lawyer screwed up with the Jordan case, which we all do; and due to this, his view of the attorney is still clouded. Therefore, he makes statements about how the attorney may do the same thing in this case due to their past history of settlement. I feel that Mez has not sat down with all the documents and reviewed them, which I think he should do since he is often asked to speak about the issues.
What I wish is that, when he talks on radio, he shows more clearly the inconsistencies of the parties statements and shows the illogical aspects of the claims/statements so that lay people, who usually listen to these broadcasts, can have a quick understanding of the quality of the case. We have gone over several of them here like Wade not knowing about an estate but seeking work from the estate, the statements of not knowing about the abuse, but at the same time saying he lived with pain all his life or words to that effect. It is good to spell out these things to the average listener, because some people love to say how someone got off due to a legal technicality. Someone like him should really show how bogus the claim appears to be as well as giving his legal perspective. He is the best spokeperson we have so far.
