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

[HIStory]

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

^ Yes, apparently they try to have it both ways and do not realize that they cannot logically claim both this "I did not know it was wrong" and this "I was so trapped in fear"/"MJ is a bad man" thing. The two things are just logically not compatible. If you did not think it was wrong then why did you have fear, why did you think MJ was a bad man and why did you think in 2005 he should have been convicted but he wasn't only because of "celebrity justice"? If you did not think it was wrong you should have been OK with his aquittal, shouldn't you?

The "I did not know it was wrong" thing would be delayed discovery as the Estate pointed it out in their first demurrer, and as such would not help him to get around statutes of limitations. So now Safechuck is moving more into the direction of this "I was intimidated" narrative (hence these new inclusions about MJ's alleged indimidating phone calls, control etc.), but the "didn't know it was wrong" is still there too.

They do not seem to realize how messy and how logically contradictory his claims are. They are just throwing in every trick there is hoping that one would stick.

 

[Justthefacts]

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

It makes no sense to claim you were afraid of his celebrity, or afraid of anything at all, when you didn't even believe it was bad or abusive at the time.

Trying so hard to find a way to make it seem reasonable and work with either statute, and by doing so negating both of them.

At least claim you knew it was wrong but he terrified you so much you felt you had no choice. At least go down that most reasonable argument against abuse.

But with MJ, they can be both terrified of this monster, but also act like he was the nicest guy alive and so you didn't even know he was abusing you till 20 years after the fact.

This is what I don't understand. Everytime you say you were afraid you are confirming you knew it was wrong. I mean wtf

 

[Bubs]

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

It makes no sense to claim you were afraid of his celebrity, or afraid of anything at all, when you didn't even believe it was bad or abusive at the time.

Trying so hard to find a way to make it seem reasonable and work with either statute, and by doing so negating both of them.

At least claim you knew it was wrong but he terrified you so much you felt you had no choice. At least go down that most reasonable argument against abuse.

But with MJ, they can be both terrified of this monster, but also act like he was the nicest guy alive and so you didn't even know he was abusing you till 20 years after the fact.

Now that you put it that way, it made me lol. Hopefully judge can see through this nonsense.

Btw, is there is limit how many times they can amend their claims before judge shows them to the door?
I know some of the cases got 3, so is that a limit or is it depending on creative writings of Wade's and Safejunks attorneys?

 

[whateverhappens50]

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

they didnt file a case till the estate was out of the red, the didnt have any trouble understanding that fact.

 

[InvincibleMJ]

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

Some more thoughts about this latest Safechuck declaration.

Also notice how the Plaintiff in the precedent case acted within a reasonable time when he was first contacted by sheriffs who told him Defendant was under investigation for pedophilia. In Safechuck's case we have a Plaintiff who could have got his alleged abuser in jail in 2005 (and spare me of the tirade about "celebrity justice" - all law enforcement and 99% of the media were anti-MJ) but he did not want to testify. But now when there is money in it he suddenly "realizes" he was abused and that it was wrong and wants to take it to civil court, 5 years after the death of the defendant. Ugh, okay.

Great post respect thanks for sharing

Again it looks like the lawyers hoping the people that will handle this case are stupid. The precedent they brought up is irrelevant! It's just another case of someone being abused. So what? There are many people who were abused. Most of them were scared to come forward at first. That's not really the issue here, is it? It's not a lawsuit against a dead man, it wasn't filled more than 20 years late. Are they missing the point on purpose? I don't see how this precedent is helping them.

 

[whateverhappens50]

did anyone read the latest about wade and the home alone story

i heard its not true because the visit was split into two wwekends as per Joy's testimony and so wade was never left alone, he's spreading lies again

""Wade Robson’s Fake Story of HOME ALONE AT NEVERLAND. ( 4)
Instead let us approach the matter from a different side and see whether Robson ever mentioned staying in Neverland alone, without his mother. Is there anything in his testimony to suggest that at some point he could really be alone there?
No, there is absolutely nothing to suggest it. He remembers one occasion when his mother was not accompanying him to Neverland. It was just once and it took place three years after their first visit to the US, in 1993. By then he had already met Jordan Chandler and actually the reason why he stayed on his own at Neverland was that there were other children there, including Jordan Chandler, Macaulay Culkin and Brandy Jackson.
See some more excerpts from Robson’s then testimony:
...most of the time my mother and I went to the ranch together. I think once I was there by myself without my mother. There was other people there.
Q. Were there occasions that Mr. Jackson would summon you to Neverland Ranch?
A. Summon me?
Q. Yes. Call you up and ask you to come and be there; invite you to Neverland Ranch?
A. Invite us, yeah.
Q. All right. Without your mother?
A. Like ask if I could come without my mother, do you mean?
Q. Or just ask you to come, and you came by yourself.
A. The only time I remember being there – sorry. The only time I remember being there was that — that trip that we spoke of by myself with Jordie Chandler and Macaulay.
Q. Now, how often do you recall your mother going to Neverland with you?
A. It’s been every time except for that one time that I spoke of when I was there with Jordie Chandler and Macaulay and I.
So despite all those insistent questions Robson recalled only one occasion when he was at Neverland without his mother. It was three years after his first visit there and he was actually not alone there but with Jordan Chandler and Macaulay Culkin.
And that was all.
LET US SUM UP.
Remember Robson’s nightmarish account that “on the second night” this and that started, and the Decedent told the Plaintiff to keep it a secret, and “the sexual activities took place every night during the entire week that followed”, etc. ? Horrible, isn’t it?
And what was the reality?
* On the first night of their first weekend at Neverland there was no abuse as Robson himself did not say anything about that day.
* On the second night nothing happened either as Chantal already explained to us the circumstances of the second night.
* The entire week between the weekends the whole family was away from Neverland, so there was no episode called “leaving him behind for a week” and consequently there was no sexual activity allegedly going with it.
* And on the second weekend at Neverland Chantal again slept in the same bed with Wade. Both of them confirmed it, so in terms of sexual activity the second weekend is also ruled out.
So what is left as a result of all these deductions from Robson’s nightarish account?
The only point we are left with is a trip made by Joy, Wade and Chantal together with Michael to Los Angeles and staying there for a few days before they finally went back to Australia. These few days in LA are a thrilling story in and of itself, so let us leave it for a later time.
However while we are not yet on that subject let us agree at least about the interim result – everything Wade Robson said in his complaint up to this point is a LIE.
EVERYTHING!
There was no “second night”, no “week all alone at Neverland” and no “continuation of it later”. ALL of it is a lie, with absolutely no exception to it.
For reasonable people that would be enough to close the subject of Wade Robson once and for all, so I leave you to decide whether you really need any more proof of his lies. However I myself am very much intrigued why Robson decided to invent a horrible story about him being abandoned by the family at the tender age of seven. Wasn’t it clear to him that it could be easily refuted by his mother’s words, so why did he go for it at all?
WHY THIS LIE?
The first reason I see here is that Robson hoped that no one would really check up the testimonies of his mother and sister at the 2005 trial and didn’t expect these inconsistencies exposed.
The second reason is that his aim is not really to prove anything to anyone. His aim is to shock and run and make as many shocking statements as it is only possible and spread them via the media without any proof whatsoever. His case is meant solely for the public and is a sort of bargaining process with the MJ Estate – “unless you give me a billion and a half, I will continue to drag Michael through the mud. Groundless or not groundless but the shock of my accusations is still there”.
The third reason is that Robson’s story is a pure skeleton and needs some meat to grow on it. It is not enough to claim that he was just “molested” – it should be a story with all respective details and horrors of it. So the more picturesque details are added to it, the more the public will have to talk about. Hence the tearful story of a lonely boy left behind by the family and picked up only a week later. Let the people discuss the poor boy’s fate, his unscrupulous family and their possible motives. It will give them something to talk about and will keep them from thinking that even the very basics of the story are totally crazy.
And finally, the main reason why he made up that fiction story is because he needed to make his present complaint consistent with his testimony at the 2005 trial. The transcript of the testimony conveniently contained the word “week” which resulted from the vague and uncertain memory of a child and therefore provided an opportunity which Robson did not intend to lose. He took advantage of it and built a horror story around it about being abandoned by his naive parents and a week-long abuse by his idol.
We have already seen that there is absolutely nothing in the testimonies of the three Robsons to confirm this crazy scenario. He was not there for a week as his mother said several times under oath (though his childhood memory left him with that impression), his family and sister stayed with him the entire time (as he himself said) and the first time he was alone at Neverland was not in 1990 but three years later when he was there with other children (as Robson himself clarified).
And there was no molestation on the second night either (as Chantal explained) and there was no discussion of the matter with MJ as there was simply nothing to discuss. All of it is a simple invention.
And the funniest thing of all is that now Robson remembers every small detail of his horror story while ten years ago he remembered absolutely none of it."

article from facebook post

 

[ivy]

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

These showed up on case summary for the probate case

03/24/2015 Response (TO SEPARATE STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT )
Filed by Attorney for Claimant
03/24/2015 Declaration - Probate (OF CLAIMANT WADE ROBSON IN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT )
Filed by Attorney for Claimant
03/24/2015 Statement of Facts (OF ADDITIONAL UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT )
Filed by Attorney for Claimant
03/24/2015 Memorandum - Other (OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT )
Filed by Attorney for Claimant
03/24/2015 Proof of Serv of Ntc by Mail (OF CLAIMANT WADE ROBSON'S OPPOSITION TO THE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT )
Filed by Attorney for Claimant
03/24/2015 Declaration - Probate (OF MARY ANN R. MARZANO IN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO THE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT )
Filed by Attorney for Claimant

which shows us that there is a summary judgment against Robson's late claim in probate court.

 

[HIStory]

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

So does that mean it passed the demurrer phase? That's not good. Damn, I hoped it would be thrown out on demurrer, although the probate court proceeding always was a blind spot, because we didn't get much report about that. So did the Judge buy the whole "I didn't know about the Estate until March 2013" argument? Damn.

ETA: Or was there a demurrer in the probate court at all? I'm a bit confused about now about how we suddenly jumped from demurrers to summary judgement. But if a demurrer by the Estate was denied should we not see that in the court system?

The last judgement we heard about was a Demurrer sustained with leave to amend at the end of December - that was regarding the companies in Wade's case. To which he recently submitted an amended complaint in which we saw there was still no real cause of action stated and there was another demurrer filed by the Estate on March 10. But all that has to do with the civil proceedings. Although I'm not sure which is which now because it shows up under probate court:

12/30/2014 at 08:31 am in Department 51, Mitchell L. Beckloff, Presiding
Ruling on Submitted Matter - Demurrer sustained with leave

At least I believe this was the Robson - MJ companies demurrer, wasn't it?

However when I want to see the Estate's recent demurrer (to Robson's amended complaint), I have to enter the Robson civil case, not the probate case.

In any case there should be somewhere a denied/overruled demurrer if there was one in the probate case?

The only overruled demurrer I can see is the one that they discussed at the October 1 hearing:


10/01/2014 at 08:30 am in Department 51, Mitchell L. Beckloff, Presiding
Hearing on Demurrer ((2); Motion to Compel) - Overruled

This shows up under Robson civil case, not probate. That's the hearing about which we had the transcript and we know the Judge overruled the Doe 1 demurrer and he ordered Robson to amend the companies complaint. But again, these are all about the civil case, not the probate.

So I'm a bit confused now about what is happening in probate court. Any idea, Ivy?

I assume (assume - because we do not see much from the probate proceedings) that the probate proceedings revolve much around Probate Code 9103 and whether Robson claimed things to put him within statutes of limitations. 9103 says that you have to file a creditor's claim within 60 days of learning about the facts giving arise to your claim AND knowing about the administration of the Estate. Robson's claim is that he went to a therapist in May 2012 and realized for the first time that he had been abused by MJ. Yet, he did not file a complaint until one year later. So there he slipped out of the 60 days. To circumvent that he claims that he did not know about MJ's Estate until March 2013. We know that at this phase the Judge has to accept Robson's claims as true, no matter how unreasonable or improbable. And if we accept this claim of Robson about not knowing about the Estate until March 2013 as true then that would put him within statutes of limitations to file a creditor's claim.

For the Estate to counter that, I'd assume, they would need to show facts why what Robson claims is not true. Eg. showing evidence that he knew about the Estate before. Maybe that's why it becomes a case of summary judgement rather than demurrer?

I don't know, I'm just speculating about what it means now.

From a tactical perspective, there are two basic types of summary-judgment motions. One requires a full evidentiary presentation, and the other requires only a more limited, targeted one.
First, a plaintiff may seek summary judgment on any cause of action, and similarly, a defendant may seek summary judgment in its favor on any affirmative defense. But in either case, the moving party must produce evidence in support of each and every essential element of the claim or defense (as it would have to do at trial). To be successful, this type of summary-judgment motion must be drafted as a written preview of a party's entire case-in-chief (that it would put before the finder of fact at trial) because all parts of an entire claim or defense are at issue.


Second, a different and very common tactic is where a defendant seeks summary judgment on a plaintiff's cause of action. The key difference is that in this latter situation, the defendant need only attack one essential element of the plaintiff's claim. A finding that the plaintiff cannot prove one essential element of its claim necessarily renders all other elements immaterial and results in summary judgment for the defendant. So these motions tend to be precisely targeted to the weakest points of the plaintiff's case. It is also possible for a plaintiff to seek summary judgment on a defendant's affirmative defense, but those types of motions are very rare.


A party seeking summary judgment may refer to any evidence that would be admissible at trial, such as depositions (or deposition excerpts), party admissions, affidavits in support from witnesses, documents received during discovery (such as contracts, emails, letters, and certified government documents). The evidences should be accompanied by a declaration from the moving party that all copies of the documents are true and correct, including deposition excerpts. Each party may present to the court its view of applicable law by submitting a legal memorandum supporting, or opposing, the motion. The opposing party may also file its own summary-judgment motion (called a "cross-motion"), if deadline still allows. The court may allow for oral argument of the lawyers, generally where the judge wishes to question the lawyers on issues in the case.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_judgment#United_States

We know from those records that here it's the Estate who is the moving party for summary judgement. I'd assume based on what I said above that here it would be the second type, because if they can show that Robson knew about the Estate before March 2013 that would render all other elements of the case immateral, because then he would not be within statutes of limitations.

Of course, this is all just my speculation about what is happening.

 

[HIStory]

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

Wrong thread

 

[Bubs]

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

These showed up on case summary for the probate case

03/24/2015 Response (TO SEPARATE STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT )
Filed by Attorney for Claimant
03/24/2015 Declaration - Probate (OF CLAIMANT WADE ROBSON IN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT )
Filed by Attorney for Claimant
03/24/2015 Statement of Facts (OF ADDITIONAL UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT )
Filed by Attorney for Claimant
03/24/2015 Memorandum - Other (OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT )
Filed by Attorney for Claimant
03/24/2015 Proof of Serv of Ntc by Mail (OF CLAIMANT WADE ROBSON'S OPPOSITION TO THE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT )
Filed by Attorney for Claimant
03/24/2015 Declaration - Probate (OF MARY ANN R. MARZANO IN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO THE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT )
Filed by Attorney for Claimant

which shows us that there is a summary judgment against Robson's late claim in probate court.

I'm not sure whether I have this right, in probate case the estate goes for summary judgement and civil case they filed demurrer

Last time I heard anything legal stuff from this civil case was this bit:
02/11/2015 Stipulation and Order (extending time to respond )
Filed by Attorney for Defendant/Respondent

So the estate asked more time to reply and they filed demurrer then
03/10/2015 Demurrer
Filed by Attorney for Deft/Respnt

Do we get to read demurrer?

 

[marc_vivien]

http://www.dailymichael.com/lawsuits/robson-v-estate/283-robson-v-estate-september-2014-case-updates

Possible extension in probate claim
As of now there’s a November 6 hearing set for Estate’s summary judgment motion about Robson’s probate claim. Robson’s lawyers wants rescheduling of this hearing based on judge’s September 16th ruling about discovery issues. Robson lawyers want several weeks to get discovery and prepare their oppositions. Estate isn’t agreeing with this request and state their motion argues there’s no legal basis for Robson’s claims and Robson lawyers doesn’t need any discovery for reply, they only need to argue the law. It’s very possible that Robson will ask for a delay / extension in probate case.

 

[HIStory]

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

Do we get to read demurrer?

Yes, the demurrer was discussed before here. It was posted by Ivy.

ETA: Here : http://www.scribd.com/doc/258435718/MJ-Estate-Robson-Civil-Case-Second-Demurrer

 

[HIStory]

http://www.dailymichael.com/lawsuits/robson-v-estate/283-robson-v-estate-september-2014-case-updates

Possible extension in probate claim
As of now there’s a November 6 hearing set for Estate’s summary judgment motion about Robson’s probate claim. Robson’s lawyers wants rescheduling of this hearing based on judge’s September 16th ruling about discovery issues. Robson lawyers want several weeks to get discovery and prepare their oppositions. Estate isn’t agreeing with this request and state their motion argues there’s no legal basis for Robson’s claims and Robson lawyers doesn’t need any discovery for reply, they only need to argue the law. It’s very possible that Robson will ask for a delay / extension in probate case.

Oh thanks. So there was no demurrer at all in probate court. It was always summary judgement?

 

[marc_vivien]

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

Oh thanks. So there was no demurrer at all in probate court. It was always summary judgement?

I think so.

 

[Bubs]

Yes, the demurrer was discussed before here. It was posted by Ivy.

Sorry, I'm getting confused with all the summary judgements and demurrers, and not to mention there is two cases, so I seemingly started mixing them together.

Anyways, I found it


"Estate isn’t agreeing with this request and state their motion argues there’s no legal basis for Robson’s claims and Robson lawyers doesn’t need any discovery for reply, they only need to argue the law."

Robson's attorney is trying to slow down the process because at the moment they have nothing, and wants to do discovery stuff to find something - anything that their claim can go forward. Good answer from the attorneys, first they need to argue the law why they should be allowed to bring in the late claim, and after if they successfully passes they can start discovery process. That sound to me like they are trying to cart before the horse

 

[ivy]

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

So does that mean it passed the demurrer phase? That's not good. Damn, I hoped it would be thrown out on demurrer, although the probate court proceeding always was a blind spot, because we didn't get much report about that. So did the Judge buy the whole "I didn't know about the Estate until March 2013" argument? Damn.

ETA: Or was there a demurrer in the probate court at all? I'm a bit confused about now about how we suddenly jumped from demurrers to summary judgement. But if a demurrer by the Estate was denied should we not see that in the court system?

as far as I can tell there hasn't been a demurrer in Robson probate case and Estate went straight to a summary judgment. The last we know it was delayed due to discovery issues. So I'm thinking this would be the first time court ever consider Robson's late protabe claim

The last judgement we heard about was a Demurrer sustained with leave to amend at the end of December - that was regarding the companies in Wade's case. To which he recently submitted an amended complaint in which we saw there was still no real cause of action stated and there was another demurrer filed by the Estate on March 10. But all that has to do with the civil proceedings. Although I'm not sure which is which now because it shows up under probate court:

12/30/2014 at 08:31 am in Department 51, Mitchell L. Beckloff, Presiding
Ruling on Submitted Matter - Demurrer sustained with leave

At least I believe this was the Robson - MJ companies demurrer, wasn't it?

no that was demurrer in Safechuck's probate case

So I'm a bit confused now about what is happening in probate court. Any idea, Ivy?

As far as I can follow this is what's happening in my opinion

Safechuck civil case

No action at all. Civil case is waiting for probate outcome.

Safechuck probate case
Safechuck filed late probate claim
Estate filed demurrer
Demurrer hearing was on December 16, 2014
December 30, 2014 Judge sustained the demurrer with leave to amend
March 18, 2015 Safechuck filed the second amended complaint
Now we are waiting for Estate to file their second demurrer
Next hearing is set for July 21 2015

Robson Probate Case
Robson filed his late probate claim
Estate went for a summary judgment
There was a hearing set for November but it doesn't look like it happened
Robson lawyers were talking about asking an extension to go over the discovery
It seems like the summary judgment motions are still ongoin

Robson civil case

Robson filed his civil complaint
Estate filed a demurrer
October 1, 2014 Judge sustained the demurrer with leave to amend
December 16, 2014 Robson filed his amended complaint
March 10 2015 Estate filed second demurrer
Next hearing is June 30 2015

 

[InvincibleMJ]

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

Wasn't there something scheduled for mid April? Delayed to June 30th?

 

[HIStory]

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

Wasn't there something scheduled for mid April? Delayed to June 30th?

In the Robson civil case:

Future Hearings

04/10/2015 at 08:30 am in department 51 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
Status Conference

06/30/2015 at 08:30 am in department 51 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
Hearing on Demurrer(to Third Amended Complaint

 

[InvincibleMJ]

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

Thanks. What's the difference between the two hearings?

 

[Vici]

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

- and not one of these kids bursts into tears and says something stupid to a police officer or a friend or a teacher or their parents? Not one bursts into tears at any point with the stress at all? Not one says something stupid like "if he loves you then there's nothing wrong with it" or something else a kid would say? Not one?

Seriously, MJ managed to find the most incredible hardened group of victims ever. Didn't experience trauma or failed schoolings or drug problems or sexuality issues or even going onto sexually abuse others as they supposedly all thought it was so normal they became obsessed with wanting to molest only their sons only right after they were born 20 years later, experiencing none at the time or EVER, and didn't reveal a word about it until 20 years after to a single soul, despite being hounded to death over it and 2 court cases. Just amazing.

THIS!!

Last year there were two highly publicized molestation cases in my country where two male teacher had abused kids.
How did this come out? Well, the kids let it slip, they started to say something, a word here and there that alarmed their parents and other teachers. They did not say "X has abused me" but they said some alarming words about their bodyparts, scenarios and wanted to play different playgames that wasnt appropriate etc so the parents started to slowly ask their kids some questions. Depending on the answers they put two and two together and contacted the police. The predators had also told the kids to not say a word to anyone but you know, its kids... you cant control what they say at that age, just a word or simply a demonstration of a sexual act/sexual playgame can sometimes be enough to alarm someone... you know like 'Ok, I havent talked to my child about penetration so how does my child know how its consumed in details'. Those kinds of questions.

There was also a case where a young women had been abused by her uncle. People at school started to eventually know because she never wanted to go home (her uncle lived there), her grades dropped and she became really depressed.

Im not saying all kids are like this and Im not psychiatrist but I believe that abused kids do in some way reveal, either by words or in how they start to behave and act. If they are afraid to speak, you can tell by other factors like their behaviour changes etc.

I have a hard time believing someone that has been abused over 100 times can hide it so good from basically everyone. For me it just doesnt make any sense that these kids did not act out being so abused during their teens, because we all know that those years are the hardest with hormones running high. What we know is that nobody in the accusers families suspected anything at all. The kids showed no signs of abuse.

I can also only laugh at the fact that supposedly Safechuck told his mom in 2005 that "MJ was a bad man and that something had happened". MJ was on trial for molestation and when your son tells you this, you act and demand to know what exactly happened, force him to file a police report and make a witness statement in the trial. Isnt this a pattern from the other mothers of the accusers?? Evidence #19538, the accusers families aint shit either, but we already knew that

 

[SarahJ]

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

I'm going to have to go back and read Ivy's site again. I'm starting to get lost in all the filings etc... Honestly I wish the damn thing could just be thrown out.

 

[barbee0715]

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

I'm going to have to go back and read Ivy's site again. I'm starting to get lost in all the filings etc... Honestly I wish the damn thing could just be thrown out.

Me Too. Maybe that's the idea. Crazed confusion. I also still think it should have been thrown out day one.

(I have yet to see anything that fits the laws or makes logical sense.)

 

[HIStory]

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

THIS!!

Last year there were two highly publicized molestation cases in my country where two male teacher had abused kids.
How did this come out? Well, the kids let it slip, they started to say something, a word here and there that alarmed their parents and other teachers. They did not say "X has abused me" but they said some alarming words about their bodyparts, scenarios and wanted to play different playgames that wasnt appropriate etc so the parents started to slowly ask their kids some questions. Depending on the answers they put two and two together and contacted the police. The predators had also told the kids to not say a word to anyone but you know, its kids... you cant control what they say at that age, just a word or simply a demonstration of a sexual act/sexual playgame can sometimes be enough to alarm someone... you know like 'Ok, I havent talked to my child about penetration so how does my child know how its consumed in details'. Those kinds of questions.

There was also a case where a young women had been abused by her uncle. People at school started to eventually know because she never wanted to go home (her uncle lived there), her grades dropped and she became really depressed.

Im not saying all kids are like this and Im not psychiatrist but I believe that abused kids do in some way reveal, either by words or in how they start to behave and act. If they are afraid to speak, you can tell by other factors like their behaviour changes etc.

I have a hard time believing someone that has been abused over 100 times can hide it so good from basically everyone. For me it just doesnt make any sense that these kids did not act out being so abused during their teens, because we all know that those years are the hardest with hormones running high. What we know is that nobody in the accusers families suspected anything at all. The kids showed no signs of abuse.

I can also only laugh at the fact that supposedly Safechuck told his mom in 2005 that "MJ was a bad man and that something had happened". MJ was on trial for molestation and when your son tells you this, you act and demand to know what exactly happened, force him to file a police report and make a witness statement in the trial. Isnt this a pattern from the other mothers of the accusers?? Evidence #19538, the accusers families aint shit either, but we already knew that

I agree 100%.

There is no way that with all these things going on parents would never realize anything. These were not some at home neglected kids. Joy Robson was a very controlling mother, always up in her son's business, so how come she never noticed anything while her son was being anally raped? And when you read Safechuck's declaration it's full of what I only call "preemtive strikes" - ie. elements which attempt to explain why no one ever saw or realized anything. Like that stupid story about MJ coaching him to dress up fast. IMO he needed to include this to explain why no one ever saw or noticed anything while he often had friends and cousins with him at Neverland (one friend is mentioned in his declaration and the other we know about is that cousin that tweeted back in September 2013 that MJ was a great guy and he used to hang out with his cousin at NL.). "Oh, it's because I could dress up and run away faster than lightning." Whatever. Just ridiculous IMO. Or that story about Michael coaching him (in advance of the Chandler allegations and all, no less!) that if the police ever tells him MJ already confessed don't fall for the trick, just keep denying. It makes me wonder if the police did actually tell Safechuck such a thing in 1993 and he now needs an explanation for why he did not fall for it. Because sure if you are a kid sexually abused over 100 times and the police is asking you about it and they are telling you your abuser already confessed you sure need an explanation for how you did not break down at that point and tell everything. There are a lot of such elements in his declaration.

 

[SarahJ]

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

Me Too. Maybe that's the idea. Crazed confusion. I also still think it should have been thrown out day one.

(I have yet to see anything that fits the laws or makes logical sense.)

Logic doesn't seem to have a place when it comes to Michael.

 

[barbee0715]

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

I agree 100%.

There is no way that with all these things going on parents would never realize anything. These were not some at home neglected kids. Joy Robson was a very controlling mother, always up in her son's business, so how come she never noticed anything while her son was being anally raped? And when you read Safechuck's declaration it's full of what I only call "preemtive strikes" - ie. elements which attempt to explain why no one ever saw or realized anything.
There are a lot of such elements in his declaration.

EXACTLY!!! All of this has been nothing short of ridiculous and stupid. If Michael were not involved, I would probably be laughing hysterically.

 

[la_cienega]

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

THIS!!

Last year there were two highly publicized molestation cases in my country where two male teacher had abused kids.
How did this come out? Well, the kids let it slip, they started to say something, a word here and there that alarmed their parents and other teachers. They did not say "X has abused me" but they said some alarming words about their bodyparts, scenarios and wanted to play different playgames that wasnt appropriate etc so the parents started to slowly ask their kids some questions. Depending on the answers they put two and two together and contacted the police. The predators had also told the kids to not say a word to anyone but you know, its kids... you cant control what they say at that age, just a word or simply a demonstration of a sexual act/sexual playgame can sometimes be enough to alarm someone... you know like 'Ok, I havent talked to my child about penetration so how does my child know how its consumed in details'. Those kinds of questions.

People who say "all victims don't behave the same" are repeating a mantra without even considering what goes into it.

Exactly. YES some children don't speak about it for years or even ever, but that abuse is normally very different.

First of all it's almost always involving sexual abuse within a family so the child can't escape and has to deal with it all the time, even to adulthood, unless they cut off contact with their family.

Secondly, kids who are only fondled or groped or something only happens once or twice can contain it because that's not ongoing so they can escape and try and force themselves to forget about it, especially if there's also no physical trauma.

Thirdly, in ALL these instances, the children were not repeatedly asked by their parents, friends, teachers, colleagues, POLICE officers, laywers, journalists, their entire lives about being sexually abused, including with specific details about the supposed abuse that are identical to your own experiences. They claim they didn't realize it was wrong, which means they would be more likely to reveal something incriminating without even realizing it.

We're to believe these kids were so severely damaged, so sexually ruined that they believed molesting their own baby 20 years later was a normal obsession and nothing wrong until prophecies or lawsuits. So if they thought this degree of sexual relations was normal, how comes they've never acted out in any way before then? How comes this didn't come out when they were kids and couldn't control it? How comes nobody ever noticed this?

This is just unheard of. Just look at the Saville case - none of the abuse was ongoing, as far as I know none of it was repeated abuse, it wasn't in the family and nobody asked them about it at the time or ever until after he died. The Sadunsky case involved children from bad homes who had nobody else to turn to, he was caught in the act, the reason it first came to light was because a boy told his mother about it after it happened and she immediately reported it, and then the rest of the boys all broke down under police interviewing to confess, one of the victims described as being in a "fetal position" in tears telling them about it.

People who act like all victims behave differently are choosing to ignore the trauma they're claiming was inflicted. You can't claim this was so awful it scarred him for life and they deserve millions and millions, and also act like it's reasonable to assume none of this traumatized them at the time.

 

[dannyboy72]

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

The thing about it is, they're not just claiming simple acts like kissing, groping or masturbation. They're claiming oral sex, anal rape, penetration with foreign objects, and so on. All these horrific acts yet it took them 20 years to realize that it was wrong?

 

[InvincibleMJ]

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

Did James and Wade go to the same therapist? Is it possible to know their names? And the laywers' firm?

 

[HIStory]

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

The lawyers are Henry Gradstein and Maryann Marzano.

The therapist who vouches for Robson is David Arredondo. I think you have to have two therapists in such cases. One that you initially go to and another that vouches for you being a victim. I think Arrendondo was used for the latter for both of them. Although I do not have definite knowledge about Safechuck but the therapist certification of merit (at least the parts that were referenced in a court doc of his) was almost word by word the same as for Robson. That's why I think for vouching for their claims the same therapist is used.

As for the first one they went to, I think that is different since Safechuck mentions that the therapist he went to in May 2014 was specialized more in women's post-partum depression, not child abuse.

 

[InvincibleMJ]

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

Thanks respect. Why two therapists?

You posted some time ago about the kind of therapy Wade went through, was it the first or second one?

Wouldn't they have to give the names? or they might wanna call the second one as an "expert"?