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

[barbee0715]

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

Although I never thought Alan was a great journalist or anything, I do hope he finds a better job quick at a reputable place before he becomes "associated" with this kind of trash and they forget his previous work at CNN, etc.

 

[MJLovesyoumore]

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

This same person has also posed as a black female and also an Italian female on some other sites. He uses multiple screen names and has pretended to be a fan and has infiltrated fan boards, posting and pretending to be a fan. I think this person was on the old MJFanClub.net site and used the screen name "dancingboy", until he got busted posting on Desiree's blog with info he got from MJFanClub's site and was terminated and blocked on MJFanClub. I also think he is using multiple screen names currently on IMdB. This person has NO life whatsoever, other than Michael Jackson. I think he spends his whole life devoted to this stuff. So yeah, he's still got a serious addiction problem.


Desiree's site is gone now, isn't it?

It's interesting you say the name is Dan or Danny. Do you know his last name?

Interesting. Do you have the links to these IDMB screen names, please? Yes Desiree's site is gone, but I hear from the SOWR FB page that she is currently working on getting it all back up again. :angry::no:

No, I have absolutely no idea of his last name. And I don't know for certain if Dan is MJfacts just yet, but I do highly suspect he is for a number of reasons.

If Dan is MJfacts then ...Yes, he is devoted to this stuff. I can't go into too much detail how I am getting this info, just in case he is actually on here. But I am beginning to understand why he would be doing all this. I think he himself was actually abused as child and wants to, or somehow thinks he is getting revenge or justice on his own abuser through speaking out about these MJ accusations. This would make perfect sense, as all the regulars on SOWR are too obsessed over this issue for the same exact reason.

 

[HIStory]

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

It's so clear that RadarOnline has become the mouthpiece of Robson. This article is nothing but an excuse to repeat the graphic allegations and of course comes with an incredibly misleading headline. How is saying "we do not want to answer a million questions individually when we have answered them already by saying we do not admit any sexual abuse" silencing the victim? Does Alan Duke understand at all how court proceedings work and what they are about or is he deliberately being misleading? Probably the later. Sad to see Alan Duke sink to that level but a journalist will remain a journalist. He will write whatever he is paid for. Well, we have a couple still having integrity but not many.

 

[Bubs]

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

Prior moving from CNN to Radar, my opinion of Alan Duke wasn't great, he was just above Roger Friedman, but now it is even lower. He is in the same line with Jen Heger and Dylan Howard. Funny how it works - Alan's nose is as deep in Jen's arse than Jen's nose is in Demon D arse:scratch:

Regarding his headline and content of this so called article, you would think Radar has rules that you must submit as much shocking words as possible to make it attractive to their readers, either that or Alan has penis complex.

I would love to ask Alan whether he feels embarrassed by putting his name under that article?

 

[HIStory]

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

Simple: money talks. And money is generated by how many clicks an article gets. You will not get that by writing factual, reasonable analysis of the court proceedings. You will get it by salacious headlines. This headline had both "silencing the victim" and "anal rape" in it. Readers are at fault as well, because many of them encourage this type of journalism by their demand for gossip and salacious stories. This demand is manifested in the fact that many people will not read an article with some factual but boring headline and with a factual, reasonable analysis of the court proceedings. It's a case of the lowest common denominator.

That's why we will always be at disadvantage to get out Michael's side of the story. The accusations are always more sensationalist and salacious than the answer to them. It was the case in 1993, it was the case in 2005 and it is the case now. RadarOnline quickly realized that and so they alligned themselves to Robson's side who will provide the salacious headlines to them - that's the thing they need, not some in-depth analysis of court papers.

And this article just strengthens my opinion that I mentioned earlier in this thread that the whole point of these questions with such graphic descriptions is to make the media pick it up and thus to pressure the Estate. I cannot see any other point in this back and forth about why the Estate should answer each and every individual allegation when they already said they deny any and every allegation of sexual abuse.

ETA: And reading the doc it's also clear that Robson's side is not constructive in the debate at all. The Estate asked to meet and confer and reach a compromise about the interrogatories and they refused and to their latest letter they did not even answer. To me it really does seem like they just threw these questions out there for the media to pick them up but they do not really want to seriously debate the issue with the Estate.

 

[Bubs]

^^ Too funny, I remember a while ago, Jen Heger was accused being one sided in their reporting, and she replied something like "not true, we always report from both sides". You wouldn't think that if you read the actual court documents and then this so called article, they don't match and is so far from actual reporting.
Maybe it is that Alan Duke doesn't understand legal language and writes mumbo jumbo just for the sake of it?
His reporting during the AEG trial was really really poor, and it has not improved since moving to Radar, quite contrary, he fell to bottom feeder category.

Another thing, Jen Heger's twits from few days ago:

jen hutton heger @jenheger · Nov 2
Anyone happy over a man's death is sick in the head.

en hutton heger @jenheger · Nov 2
MJ fans threats to desecrate Sneddon's grave are disgusting & should be arrested if done.

en hutton heger @jenheger · Nov 2
@DiDimond don't engage w/loons hope u r well & enjoying your Ferguson coverage.

en hutton heger @jenheger · 14h 14 hours ago
4 the record, I absolutely believe Sneddon was overzealous in witch hunt of MJ. However, anyone celebrating his death, desecrating his grave

jen hutton heger @jenheger · 14h 14 hours ago
needs to check themselves, as that is everything MJ stood against! Peace, love & happiness. Embrace it people!

I'm absolutely fuming over her hypocrisy. She has nerve to call out MJ fans and yet in turn she and her staff are verbally pissing on Michael's grave over and over again, what a witch!

2 hours after her preaching to MJ fans she posts this:
jen hutton heger @jenheger · 12h
Silencing The Victim? Michael Jackson Lawyers Ask Judge To Limit Questions About Anal Rape In Wa… http://wp.me/p2PFBY-3pWj via @radar_online

2 words about that: bottom feeder.


Addition:
jen hutton heger @jenheger · Oct 30
Have never been prouder 2 work with amazing peeps @radar_online & @NatEnquirer peeps.

No wonder:doh:

 

[LastTear]

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

I hate Dimond. I'm kinda glad Jen Heger did say what she felt about the witch hunt. As for fans comments about Sneddon, I can't support or berate them and I can't deny that I often think the same things especially when I think back to his conduct in '05, however, I do keep them to myself.

 

[Bubs]

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

I hate Dimond. I'm kinda glad Jen Heger did say what she felt about the witch hunt. As for fans comments about Sneddon, I can't support or berate them and I can't deny that I often think the same things especially when I think back to his conduct in '05, however, I do keep them to myself.

Too bad that Jen agrees about Sneddon's witch hunt, but doesn't understand she herself is participating different kind of witch hunt.

 

[Virre]

I don´t get this with Alan Duke. He always hangs out at Forest Lawn with one special fan (and some others), and she is a big supporter of Katherine and the family and knows them pretty well. She must be furious with Alan now.

 

[HIStory]

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

documents: https://amradaronline.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/wade-signed.pdf

By the way is it deliberate that RadarOnline puts on these docs such a watermark that it makes them very difficult to read? So that even those with an inclination to read the actual documents would stop reading after a paragraph?

 

[SarahJ]

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

Alan Duke chose to go Radar, just as Jen Heger choses to stay there. They'll play both it both ways in twitter posts etc..so they can give the impression of being impartial when in the end they will write what their paid to write.

If they ever thought they'd get more revenue with positive news about Michael, they'd turn on Robson so fast it would make his head spin.

 

[barbee0715]

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

People have to pay their mtg. People have to eat. It's sad but that's the way it is these days. Just be thankful that Michael is gone or it'd be coming from every news outlet. Not just junk sites and twitter.
Is DD still working? I thought she just posted to Facebook.

 

[SarahJ]

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

She's written for the Daily Beast (gotta love the irony of that) and whenever press wants a negative spin on MJ they pull her out from under her rock, but other than that I don't get the impression she's too hot at the moment.

Alan Duke and Co. should pay attention, 'cause I have a feeling that's where their headed. The same old tabloid bs that was played out throughout his life is getting old and tired. There's a change taking place towards a more open outlook on Michael I think. It's subtle but its there.

 

[ivy]

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

Technically speaking the contents of the article is true, it's the headline that annoys me the most. Article itself mentions Robson sent 93 RFA's when the rule says it should be 35 and the article also explains Estate's denial of the abuse. The only thing about the article is using the latest documents to list the salacious RFA's once again and article comes with a terribly biased headline.

 

[SarahJ]

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

Negative spin is what they excel in.

 

[LastTear]

I don´t get this with Alan Duke. He always hangs out at Forest Lawn with one special fan (and some others), and she is a big supporter of Katherine and the family and knows them pretty well. She must be furious with Alan now.

Special? Best to take most claims with a pinch of salt.

Technically speaking the contents of the article is true, it's the headline that annoys me the most. Article itself mentions Robson sent 93 RFA's when the rule says it should be 35 and the article also explains Estate's denial of the abuse. The only thing about the article is using the latest documents to list the salacious RFA's once again and article comes with a terribly biased headline.

Exactly, he missed out the word 'alleged' in the title.

 

[Bubs]

I don´t get this with Alan Duke. He always hangs out at Forest Lawn with one special fan (and some others), and she is a big supporter of Katherine and the family and knows them pretty well. She must be furious with Alan now.

Next time, if you or anyone else goes to Forest Lawn, take a rotten eggs with you and throw them on Alan if he is there. I would absolute puke in my own mouth if I publish that kind of garbage (not just this latest article, but the previous ones too) about the person and then visit in that persons graveuke:

Alan Duke chose to go Radar, just as Jen Heger choses to stay there. They'll play both it both ways in twitter posts etc..so they can give the impression of being impartial when in the end they will write what their paid to write.

If they ever thought they'd get more revenue with positive news about Michael, they'd turn on Robson so fast it would make his head spin.

They are made of the same s..t (pardon my language) than Roger F. RF is famous for writing ok article, next article will be twice as nasty, same goes with Jen Heger. Unfortunately many fans, including me, though she might be fair because the way she reported granny-napping and was having Q&A with fans.
Lets just say, I learnt my lesson and I have since changed my mind about her.

 

[barbee0715]

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

Oh. That's sad. There haven't been ethics in journalism sadly since the 80s.
It's all about money period.

 

[ivy]

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

Perhaps it's important to note that Dylan Howard is the boss of both Jen and Alan.

 

[Bubs]

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

Ivy, we know, but that it doesn't look like they put up the fight what kind of articles they post. As reference, see Jen's tweet about how proud she is working for Radar and NE. They voluntarily stay there and are voluntarily following the guidelines as "how to compose Pulitzer prize winning article" set by whoever runs those rags.

By the way is it deliberate that RadarOnline puts on these docs such a watermark that it makes them very difficult to read? So that even those with an inclination to read the actual documents would stop reading after a paragraph?

It is driving me up to wall trying to read them. What's that second document is about?
Weren't those issues sorted out in previous hearing?

 

[HIStory]

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

It is driving me up to wall trying to read them. What's that second document is about?
Weren't those issues sorted out in previous hearing?

Estate agreed to answer 35 + 8 interrogatories. However Robson wants them to answer more questions. Estate argues that questions 36-93 are redundant (same questions over and over again) and Robson did not even attempt to explain why they are needed. In fact, Estate invited them to a meet and confer to discuss it and try to reach a compromise but Robson refused and they did not even answer to the Estate's latest letter regarding the matter.

Robson wants them to answer questions about each and every specific allegation but Estate says that is redundant since they already stated firmly that they do not admit any kind of sexual contact or sexual abuse between MJ and Robson:

An example of that redundancy in the questions:

The Estate discribing Robson's refusal of meet and confer:

 

[Bubs]

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

^^Thanks Respect, but I actually meant that other document that was after the first
(Notice of Ruling on demurrers and motion to compel at Oct 1 hearing)
It seems to be some sort of summary of kind from Weitzman from previous hearing?

PS, I'm going to get some sort of fit or convulsion while trying to read that document:blink:

Ps 2, I hope the judge sees the light and do something useful for change such as throws this case out of the window:yes:

 

[HIStory]

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

^^Thanks Respect, but I actually meant that other document that was after the first
(Notice of Ruling on demurrers and motion to compel at Oct 1 hearing)
It seems to be some sort of summary of kind from Weitzman from previous hearing?

Oh, that's just a summary about the judgements on October 1. We discussed them before.

- Doe 1 demurrer denied.
- Companies demurrer sustained with leave to amend.
- And the discovery issue.

 

[Bonnie Blue]

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

Simple: money talks. And money is generated by how many clicks an article gets. You will not get that by writing factual, reasonable analysis of the court proceedings. You will get it by salacious headlines. This headline had both "silencing the victim" and "anal rape" in it.

I think these radar articles that repeatedly dwell in detail on all the supposed sex activities mj and wade had are really disturbing - i don't think even tmz do this do they? Seriously, who wants to read this type of imagery except pedophiles? - it's basically child porn. Reminds me of the content of vg's books.

 

[Virre]

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

Special? Best to take most claims with a pinch of salt.

What claims? This is something I've seen myself. I used the word special since he always arrives with her and he is like a tail after her. I've seen this one fan with her friends who are known to most people at other places too. During the AEG trial they went to Forest Lawn most days after court. And Alan was with them many times.

Sorry for for being off topic now.

 

[LastTear]

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

What claims? This is something I've seen myself. I used the word special since he always arrives with her and he is like a tail after her. I've seen this one fan with her friends who are known to most people at other places too. During the AEG trial they went to Forest Lawn most days after court. And Alan was with them many times.

Sorry for for being off topic now.

We may or may not be talking about the same fan, if it's the one I'm thinking of (she who shall not be named) then I stand by my comment, if not then my apologies for jumping to conclusions.

 

[Virre]

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

No, it's not the one who should not be named. It's one woman who actually is really nice, and so are her friends.

 

[LastTear]

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

No, it's not the one who should not be named. It's one woman who actually is really nice, and so are her friends.

Well in that case she can be as special as you see fit, sorry I jumped to the wrong conclusion.

Better get back on topic now.

 

[Bonnie Blue]

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

[

BTW, I still don't get the whole equitable estoppel argument. I went through his lawsuit and arguments again and I just do not understand it.

There are three laws at play.

Probate Code 9103

- having to file within 60 days of getting knowledge about abuse, the resulting injury and the administration of the Estate.

CCP 366.2

- When a person dies all other time limitations of running issues go out of the window, there is a one year period within a claimant has to file.

And CCP 340.1

- 26 years of age and a 3 year period after getting knowledge about abuse, the resulting injury in case of companies which knew or had a reason to know bla-bla-bla.

Robson's argument seems to be that the PC 9103 and CCP 366.2 limitations do not apply to him because he is entitled to equitable estoppel which makes the limitations of CPP 340.1 apply to him instead. Obviously he is trying to ge to that "3 year period" stuff, because that's the only time limit he could be within.

I'm not sure i understand what your'e saying here. There is only the first two laws at play for wade's equitable estoppel. He's only using equit estop for the probate claim against the estate, not the companies claim. From what i understand, equt estoppel doesn't create new time limits or give different timelimits to claims, it just allows a claim to go forward.

But my point is here that I do not understand how even equitable estoppel could be invoked here. For that he would need something that the Defendant (MJ, companies, Estate) did to him to prevent him from filing within the limitations of PC 9103 (between May and July 2012) and he just cannot claim any such thing.

Totally agree. I don't think he has a prayer that equitable estoppel can be applied to his case. He escaped his 'manchurian candidate' level of brian washing that mj had imposed on him, which is his basis for claiming equit estoppal, and california law - anticipating this frankly unusual scenario - allowed him 60 days to file even if his abuser was dead. He missed it. End of story. Reading those transcripts, i'm sure the judge knows this, he seems to be subtly passive aggressive with wade's side whilst ostensibly being all charming and complimentary. He was certainly putting pressure on wade's lawyers not to file a continuance to the summary judgement motion under 437(c)(h) and reiterates over and over again that if they want to delay to get more discovery, it's got to be a really significant fact. He's not even interested in giving a time delay to wade's side so they can look at discovery that's been late in arriving - he just wants to get the case going forward to summary judgement. I think that's pretty positive.

 

[ivy]

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

just a fyi

interrogatories and RFA's are two different things. so Estate agreed to answer 35+8 interrogatories and they want to answer 35 RFA's.