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

[castor]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I guess it just wasn't needed at the time since Robson himself denied it.
Exactly. Not one of these prosecution witnesses did what normal people would usually do after witnessing such things. Which is that you either tell authorities or to someone in authority. And no, the "I feared to lose my job" excuse does not work. One because many of these witnesses actually lost their job with MJ way before they made their allegations and even then they did not turn to authorities, second, who the heck would want to keep working for a guy who is molesting children? In fact these people kept bringing their own children around Michael - Blanca Francia included. Why if they saw things they claim to have seen? Adrian McManus too said in a deposition in December 1993 that she would have no problem leaving her son alone with Michael. Then her story changed when she realized she could file a lawsuit against Michael. I think Kassim Abdool too took his child to Neverland. Why if he witnessed Michael molest a boy?

I mean maybe there are some people who are so utterly clueless and useless, but each one of them? Like you said, very, very hard to believe.

I saw you express concern about these stories and now Robsons and Safechuck saying the same thing could present a problem in a civil trial.

Don't you think these arguments would be enough to discredit both Francia and Robson and the Quindoys and Safechuck?
The question is it more likely than not that these people had an ax to grind and/or saw an opportunity to make tons of money?
If the answer is yes you win the case.

There is a paid version and a non-paid version or the shower story.
The paid version is what Francia told Hard Copy for 20 000 the non-paid version what she told in her desposition.
The paid version is that Robsons saying now to win money from the Estate the non-paid version is what the told in 2005 under oath.

Who would accept the paid version especially when there are other things that makes the whole story highly dubious?

Also the Neverland 5 and Charlie Michaels cannot argue that they didn't report it to the police because they thought noone would believe them since
they were working together on a lawsuit against MJ! If they all saw MJ molest this and that that subject would have come up and they would have learned
that they are not alone! Did they believe that the police wouldn't believe them not even if all of them says essentially the same thing?

 

[HIStory]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I saw you express concern about these stories and now Robsons and Safechuck saying the same thing could present a problem in a civil trial.

Don't you think these arguments would be enough to discredit both Francia and Robson and the Quindoys and Safechuck?
The question is it more likely than not that these people had an ax to grind and/or saw an opportunity to make tons of money?
If the answer is yes you win the case.

^ I agree with you completely about these points and of course these people are full of it. We know that. But the relatively low burden of proof at a civil trial makes me nervous. You cannot predict a jury, and much less one at a civil trial. That's my worry, although I think the Estate's chances are much higher than Tygger's 1%. Hopefully.

 

[castor]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

^ I agree with you completely about these points and of course these people are full of it. We know that. But the relatively low burden of proof at a civil trial makes me nervous. You cannot predict a jury, and much less one at a civil trial.

If jurors are biased against MJ than no matter what they will vote against him.

But if they really don't care one way or the other I don't see how they could believe Francia and Robson and ignore that they changed their story.
How could anyone argue that the paid version is the more likely one?


The preponderance of evidence shows that the shower scene never happened and was invented by Francia to make money and now supported by Robson also to make money.

The lawyers should prove each and every piece of Robson's claim to be more likely to be lie than the truth and then the cumulative effect could not be anything else
but a vote against him.

What about his claim that he didn't know about the Estate until 2013?
There is proof that he did in fact know, not to mention the absurdity that anyone would think MJ died without an Estate especially one who was his friend.

What about the fact that he went back to Neverland as a grown man to shoot his short film in 2007 and then thanked MJ for letting him use his "sacred land"?
Would any of the Sandusky victims go back to his house to shoot a movie there and call the place sacred land??

What about him inviting MJ to his wedding and having a BBQ with him and his kids calling it "the most normal thing in the world".

These things could be easily explained if someone was not abused but they are mindblowing if he indeed was.
Hanging out with your rapist is the most normal thing in the world?

Same thing with Safechuck.
When a impartial observer looks at this video can he/she believe that the guy on the left abused the guy on the right 100 times?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6XMmtrQnUE8

 

[InvincibleMJ]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

They want to pressure the judge or what?
The judge must know that prosecution motions prove nothing, that Francia was cross-examined and her testimony wasn't even in line with what the motion said.

I think they tricked their way into getting it and the judge simply allowed it so they won't have other excuses later.

Also, the Estate would not introduce Francia's deposition where she said she never saw anyone with MJ and only heard one voice and Robson's own testimony where
he denied TWICE that he ever took a shower with MJ?

Way ahead of where we are, i agree they should do exactly that but they're not on the evidence part yet.

It's also very interesting that out of the hundreds of people who worked in Neverland between 1988-2005 the only ones who "saw something"
were 1. fired 2. sued MJ 3. were sued by MJ and lost 3. were thieves 4. were felons 5. sold lies to tabloids and most of all
NONE of them said a bad word about MJ BEFORE the Chandler thing opened the opportunity to make loads of money with such claims.

Correct. You can also say that on each of his accusers and their families.

I guess it just wasn't needed at the time since Robson himself denied it.

I think that's right

I know. They cannot even create a coherent story. Was MJ extremely careful and extremely cunning which is why they never found any real evidence on him, or did he not mind doing stuff in front of his employees, like being in bed with kids (half) nude while those employees were around or all those stories that you mentioned (molesting a boy while waiting for an employee to deliver food, molesting Jason Francia while his mother is in the condo, ordering vaseline from an employee to molest a boy etc.) Which one is it?

I always thought it was interesting. Wade does the same thing with his claims. Which one is it? It's like they're describing two different abusers. Sometimes three.

 

[Gold Pants Girl]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

The door alarm was there before MJ bought the house, he didn't have it installed.

 

[InvincibleMJ]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

When you try to make someone look guilty every little thing is scary and dirty, he has locked drawers to hide magazines, he has password protected computers to hide his porn, he has big safe to hide weird things, he has an alarm because he's doing something wrong, he locks his bedroom and the gates are closed for the same reason.

The whole world uses locks, alarms and saves. We all have things we need to keep safe. Especially people worth a lot of money. However for the media and the prosecution every little door with a lock is a smoking gun. With all those locks they broke and computers they hacked you would think they would find something incriminating for sure. They didn't.

 

[Soundmind]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

the 911 call Sandra Bullock made from a closet with a safe door after she locked herself inside was revealed this week. Apparently this saved her life as a man broke into her house with a weapon. When it comes to MJ, such closet must have been used only to abuse kids. i believe the idiot safe**** is claiming he used to abuse him inside that closet.

 

[castor]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

the 911 call Sandra Bullock made from a closet with a safe door after she locked herself inside was revealed this week. Apparently this saved her life as a man broke into her house with a weapon. When it comes to MJ, such closet must have been used only to abuse kids. i believe the idiot safe**** is claiming he used to abuse him inside that closet.

1. That closet was part of the original house, it was not built by MJ. You can see it on the floor plan here:

2. It wasn't a secret, Kelly Parket for example also knew about it. She is showing it to the reporter here at 4:17
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zs7OT0Lgjic

3. There was never any proof that any kid was ever even there, no DNA whatsoever

4. No other accuser even mentioned this place in their story so what on Earth made Safechuck so special that MJ chose to molest him and only him there?
It's obvious that Safechuck picked this from tabloid reports and used it in his story because of the whole "secret room what else was it good for but molestation" narrative

5. If he had this super safe room why on Earth would he have chose the bed to molest him? Why the drills, why messing up the beds to fool the maid why share a bed with him at all?
He simply would have molested him in that closet and noone would have been suspicious.
Does Safechuck specify why MJ would chose the bed sometimes while chose the closet at other times? No. The whole thing doesn't make sense.

 

[Tygger]

Still it is not a good look to say that you lied under oath.

The statue of limitations on perjury has elapsed and Robson’s legal team has already laid the foundation that Robson’s memory was impaired which would be presented by his legal team as he did not fabricate his testimony. In other words: he believed his testimony at the time to be true and he currently believes differently.

So far they are using her testimony from 2005 in the court paper we have seen.

Thank you for the clarification. In a civil trial, interpretation has premium value. Depending on how her 2005 testimony is presented by Robson’s legal team, a possible jury may view such testimony as opportunity and spun to suggest protection of a minor.

Nice that you see the Estate's chances of winning this at 1%.

That's my worry, although I think the Estate's chances are much higher than Tygger's 1%.

Allow me to correct your addition. There is at least a 33% chance of a hollow victory for the Estate in a possible civil trial which leaves at least a 66% chance of a monetary remedy for Robson/Safechuck (settlement or civil award). That is a total of 99% probability. Feel free to decide which of the three scenarios will weigh greater with the remaining 1%.

Hopefully you understand that a victory for the Estate in this possible civil trial(s) will only lead to similar creditors. Despite the believed futility of such claims, each frivolous action must be taken seriously by the Estate and each frivolous action drains Estate funds in the process.

And your point is apart from wanting to bring up Branca and the Will?

The judge assigned to the MJ Estate did not view Branca retaining documents he should have surrendered upon his termination with suspicion. As I said, it is not unusual for a terminated employee to retain property after termination. I understand you have suspicion for Francia retaining the key and may believe there was a conspiracy between herself and SBPD. Fortunately Mesereau did not focus on conspiracies targeting Michael by anyone other than the Arvisos as that may have left a negative aftertaste for some jurors.

No. They were just reading Stacy Brown's article. Those are quotes from that one.

Thank you again for the clarification. I have not read Brown’s article but, if he is suggesting a legal strategy based on opportunity, he is indeed correct and that was the crux of my response. The strategy lead to settlement in the past.

Bubs, Respect77 seems to have understood I was referring to Chandler civil trial that was settled before trial proceedings. As for how the will/trust was discovered and who drafted the documents, you may want to perform another Google search. Such a search would alert you that Branca's law firm did draft the will/trust and Branca was in possession of it after his termination.

 

[HIStory]

Robson’s legal team has already laid the foundation that Robson’s memory was impaired which would be presented by his legal team as he did not fabricate his testimony. In other words: he believed his testimony at the time to be true and he currently believes differently.

How did they lay the foundation for his memory being impaired? Could you quote that part from his complaint?

The judge assigned to the MJ Estate did not view Branca retaining documents he should have surrendered upon his termination with suspicion. As I said, it is not unusual for a terminated employee to retain property after termination. I understand you have suspicion for Blanca retaining the key and may believe there was a conspiracy between herself and SBPD. Fortunately Mesereau did not focus on conspiracies targeting Michael by anyone other than the Arvisos as that may have left a negative aftertaste for some jurors.

I did not suggest they should focus on "conspiracy theories" but I do suggest they should pay attention to every detail. Retaining the key was only one part of the story.

 

[castor]

Robson’s legal team has already laid the foundation that Robson’s memory was impaired

No, Robson made it very clear that he remembered everything.
He says he didn't think it was abuse and he didn't think it was wrong and it didn't affect him negatively.
Which is nonsense of course but that's what he wants everyone to believe.

a legal strategy based on opportunity, he is indeed correct and that was the crux of my response. The strategy lead to settlement in the past.

What exactly do you mean by "legal strategy based on opportunity" and how was that responsible for the 1994 settlement?

It's obvious that if the judge had not sided with the Chandlers in November there wouldn't have been any kind of civil settlement.

 

[castor]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

double post

 

[HIStory]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

4. No other accuser even mentioned this place in their story so what on Earth made Safechuck so special that MJ chose to molest him and only him there?
It's obvious that Safechuck picked this from tabloid reports and used it in his story because of the whole "secret room what else was it good for but molestation" narrative

5. If he had this super safe room why on Earth would he have chose the bed to molest him? Why the drills, why messing up the beds to fool the maid why share a bed with him at all?
He simply would have molested him in that closet and noone would have been suspicious.
Does Safechuck specify why MJ would chose the bed sometimes while chose the closet at other times? No. The whole thing doesn't make sense.

Safechuck's allegations are a best of collection of 20 years of tabloid crap. This whole thing with the closet is one of the many givaways about that. That closet has been a tabloid obessession for all these years but no kid claimed to have been molested there. But now Safechuck is claiming this. So transparent. As far as I remember from his declaration he claims MJ laid a blanket on the floor and molested him there. No explanation what was the point of that when - as you pointed out - allegedly he had no problem sleeping with him in a bed all the time. It just reeks of a forced way of somehow including that closet in his story.

 

[castor]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

As far as I remember from his declaration he claims MJ laid a blanket on the floor and molested him there. No explanation what was the point of that when - as you pointed out - allegedly he had no problem sleeping with him in a bed all the time. It just reeks of a forced way of somehow including that closet in his story.

And why would a blanket be necessary to molest someone?
As MJ put it once you don't need a bed to have sex.

You don't need any particular furniture or item to molest someone.

 

[InvincibleMJ]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

And why would a blanket be necessary to molest someone?
As MJ put it once you don't need a bed to have sex.

You don't need any particular furniture or item to molest someone.

It's true. When did Michael say that?

 

[castor]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

It's true. When did Michael say that?

I actually don't know I myself read it on another forum but there is no source

And as Michael said him self. 'You don't need a bed to have sex'!
http://www.lipstickalley.com/showth...Out-With-Related-Kids-To-Avoid-Trouble/page13

 

[jaydom7]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Why is Francia Blanca's lying behind even being mentioned? what is the plaintiff's explanation for getting around the statute of limitations? They still haven't proven that have they?

 

[Justthefacts]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

And why would a blanket be necessary to molest someone?
As MJ put it once you don't need a bed to have sex.

You don't need any particular furniture or item to molest someone.

That's the problem with the story it's way to detailed he laida blanket on the floor. Since when doyou need to be on the floor to molest anyone and like you said since when doyou need a blanket? It's like Francasaying Michael put his index finger on him for two minutes. Do you know how ridiculous that sounds? About has ridiculous as a person saying heremembers the color shorts he was wearing when he says he was abused but couldnot remember being in a meeting with Sneddon and others four months before thetrial and coming up with a new story

 

[HIStory]

Sorry, the closet story is not in his declaration but in his complaint. We do not have that but that hater website apparently got hold of it somehow and they wrote a detailed article about it some time ago and it was there:

At the Ranch, James recalls Jackson’s ‘closet within a closet’ — the mythologized ‘secret room’ used by the original owners of the Ranch to store expensive fur outerwear. Jackson not only kept jewelry within this passcode-secured closet, but also used it as a secluded place to molest the boy. In a larger closet located on the other side of his two-story bedroom, James remembers the star would lay a blanket down on the floor in preparation for the abuse, to make for “more room to engage in sexual activities with Plaintiff.”

There is no explanation for why the heck he would do this when allegedly he had no problem molesting him in a bed. Like I said it just reeks of forcing ages old tabloid myths into his story.

 

[myosotis]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

.

^ I could do with a magic blanket like that, to make my rooms bigger...never enough space to store everything.....

 

[HIStory]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Looking at that video that Castor posted about Kelly Parker showing that closet at 4:04, it's very small and I guess when it's full of clothes and other stuff it's even smaller. Just would be a very inconvenient place for such purposes as Safechuck alleges. I guess that's why he also alleges that he was molested in a bigger closet as well on a blanket. Neither makes sense when you supposedly had MJ's whole room and king size bed at your disposal.

 

[terrell]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

^ I agree with you completely about these points and of course these people are full of it. We know that. But the relatively low burden of proof at a civil trial makes me nervous. You cannot predict a jury, and much less one at a civil trial. That's my worry, although I think the Estate's chances are much higher than Tygger's 1%. Hopefully.

I agree but it is better to fight in court (win or lose) than to just give a settlement. Estate should fight tooth and nails.

 

[terrell]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

If jurors are biased against MJ than no matter what they will vote against him.

But if they really don't care one way or the other I don't see how they could believe Francia and Robson and ignore that they changed their story.
How could anyone argue that the paid version is the more likely one?


The preponderance of evidence shows that the shower scene never happened and was invented by Francia to make money and now supported by Robson also to make money.

The lawyers should prove each and every piece of Robson's claim to be more likely to be lie than the truth and then the cumulative effect could not be anything else
but a vote against him.

What about his claim that he didn't know about the Estate until 2013?
There is proof that he did in fact know, not to mention the absurdity that anyone would think MJ died without an Estate especially one who was his friend.

What about the fact that he went back to Neverland as a grown man to shoot his short film in 2007 and then thanked MJ for letting him use his "sacred land"?
Would any of the Sandusky victims go back to his house to shoot a movie there and call the place sacred land??

What about him inviting MJ to his wedding and having a BBQ with him and his kids calling it "the most normal thing in the world".

These things could be easily explained if someone was not abused but they are mindblowing if he indeed was.
Hanging out with your rapist is the most normal thing in the world?

Same thing with Safechuck.
When a impartial observer looks at this video can he/she believe that the guy on the left abused the guy on the right 100 times?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6XMmtrQnUE8

I agree. And I think most common sense jurors will see this just like 2005 jurors did

 

[InvincibleMJ]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

It seems difficult for even one person to enter the closet that leads to the secret closet. Plus you have to take some stuff out of the bigger closet if you want to get to the secret door and when you do that anyone who comes to the main room will know you're in there.

And what's so secret about it if the maids and other children like Kelly knew about it too?

 

[InvincibleMJ]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I actually don't know I myself read it on another forum but there is no source

And as Michael said him self. 'You don't need a bed to have sex'!
http://www.lipstickalley.com/showth...Out-With-Related-Kids-To-Avoid-Trouble/page13

I don't know about this one. It could be true but my advice to you is to stay away from this board and never use it as a source.

 

[Tygger]

Respect77, Castor, I never suggested Robson’s memories were repressed. Impairment equates to damaged memory. Memories can be impaired through manipulation, brainwashing, etc. as per Robson’s comment from the Today show posted below. Again, the statute of limitations for perjury has lapsed for Robson's 2005 testimony so there will be no legal repercussions.

This is not a case of repressed memory," said Robson. "I have never forgotten one moment of what Michael did to me, but I was psychologically and emotionally completely unable and unwilling to understand that it was sexual abuse."

He says there was no bribe money offered for him to lie on the stand -- nor, apparently, was it needed. "It was complete manipulation (by Jackson) and brainwashing," said Robson. "He would role play and train me for these (trial) scenarios."
http://www.today.com/popculture/wade-robson-pedophile-michael-jackson-abused-me-7-years-1C9948163

I did not suggest they should focus on "conspiracy theories" but I do suggest they should pay attention to every detail. Retaining the key was only one part of the story.

Can you show that Mesereau did not pay attention to that detail? As I said before, it is not unusual for a terminated employee to retain property after their termination. Therefore, Mesereau wisely did not distract the jury’s attention to a possible conspiracy orchestrated by another other than an Arviso.

What exactly do you mean by "legal strategy based on opportunity" and how was that responsible for the 1994 settlement?

In a civil trial, the Chandlers' legal team did not have to show Michael committed the acts he was accused of beyond shadow of doubt. The team only need to show that Michael had the opportunity to commit the acts. Michael had plenty opportune time with the child alone and it would have been extremely difficult to defend against those facts and guarantee a victory. Cochran wisely knew the risks and chose to settle instead of suggesting a victory at trial because he could not guarantee Michael a victory. A liable verdict for Michael would effectively end Michael's professional career which clearly would have a negative effect on Michael personally and would also have a negative effect on Sony who also had a vested interest in Michael's professional career continuing.

 

[Justthefacts]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

You never miss a chance to drag Sony or Branca into to it do you? Cochran was buddies with Feldman in fact Feldman did legal work for free for Cochran not long after the settlement. We're having useful conversation about the case and you are carrying on a vendetta with the estate. Later

 

[Tygger]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

^^

Oh?

Prove that a made a response about Sony and/or Branca only to express distaste. I will wait.

Why would Feldman not want to work with Cochran when Cochran was considered one of the best? Are you aware Michael attended Cochran's funeral during Michael's criminal trial? It is interesting when some fans prefer to vilify a man who actually helped Michael but, support those who Michael did not trust.

Simply prove me wrong. Tell me: how would Michael be victorious in the Chandler civil trial? Please do not confuse a civil trial with a criminal trial and respond you can prove Michael did not have an opportunity to commit the acts he was accused of. Please also stop attempting to suggest that stating Michael could not be victorious in the Chandler civil trial is the same as saying Michael committed those acts.

 

[Justthefacts]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Can't hear your from down here

 

[Tygger]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

^^ Indeed.