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

[HIStory]

He knew in May 2012 that he was going to sue the Estate.
I just wonder what he was doing between May 2012 and March 2013

I wonder too what he did between May 2012 and March 2013. My guess is that he was building his story, reading child abuse text books to assist his story, possibly preparing his friends and relatvies. Actually he says in his latest declaration this:

Robson says he sent an email to friends and family members in September 2012 concerning what he called a “transformational time” in his life.

“The transformational period in my life that I was referring to came about as I began to understand that I had been sexually abused by Jackson when I was a child,” he says. “In the email, I wanted to to let my friends and family members known what was happening in my life at that point in time.”

Robson says he explained to the readers of his email “what was going on so they would not be worried about me.” He says he asked them to keep what he was revealing confidential, knowing that anything about him and Jackson was newsworthy in the tabloids.

(This was not mentioned in his original declaration and I wonder why.)

I am pretty sure he is lying to most of his friends and relatives as well, but I wonder if he is lying to his mother and sister too or they are voluntarily on the plot with him. In any case, I'd imagine he would need time, either to convince them of his story (if he is lying to them as well) or to convince them to support his plot. Either of these might have needed time.

Also he and his family needed time to "transform their lives" before he went public with this: to sell off property in the US and arrange their moving to Hawaii. His mother too flee to Australia when Wade's allegations became public. Fans say they saw Chantal selling off MJ memorabilia on her FB a couple of months before Robson made these claims publicly (which is a bit odd to me, because if my brother had been molested by this man I would have burnt his memorabilia not sold them, but maybe that's just me). So I guess they needed some time to rearrange their life, to sell property and whatever memorabilia they cynically wanted to make money of at a good price before they smeared MJ's name.

I think he probably also needed time to construct a story. To go to a therapist and convince him of anything is relatively easy. A therapist will not have knowledge about your back story, possible contradictions and pitfalls and a therapist's job is not to question you. But if you want to go to court you will need some more work on your story. Which is probably what he did between May 2012 and March 2013. He also attended group meetings by sexual abuse survivors at the time - IMO to study how real victims behave, what they say and to incorporate certain elements to his story. So in short: I think he used that period to prepare for this "performance of his life".

BTW, we do not know if he had not visited other lawyers too before Gradstein and Marzano. Only they might have told him his case doesn't have much chance and maybe he had to look and look for a lawyer who finally took his case. I always found it odd why he has a lawyer whose speciality isn't child abuse cases but copyright cases. I have looked into another case Gradstein represents (the Turtles vs. Sirius XM) and he is indeed looks like (as Meserau put it) a "very creative" lawyer in terms of interpreting and reinterpteting the law, which could be the reason why Robson took him and not some lawyer specialized in child abuse cases. Perhaps child abuse lawyers earlier told him his case did not have much chance.

 

[HIStory]

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

To me his demeanour is so different in these old interviews and in the new ones since his turn around. Almost like a different person. Here he is sitting and talking very casually, with a very open body language, he talks about Michael and everything else very naturally. But when you compare it to his interview on Today's show - he has a very "closed" body language: legs crossed, he kept his hand between his legs for most of the interview, his way of speech is not natural at all but sounds rehearsed with lots of child abuse textbook language. His whole demeanour and the way he looks turned a lot darker. I am not sure how to explain it, just what I realized and to me it's almost like watching two different people, or the Jekyll and Hyde sides of one person.

 

[Bubs]

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

So still no word from judge? I think it is going to come today.

Is this related to Wade's case?
04/21/2015 at 08:30 am in Department 51, Mitchell L. Beckloff, Presiding
Motion for Summary Judgment - Submitted

 

[InvincibleMJ]

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

To me his demeanour is so different in these old interviews and in the new ones since his turn around. Almost like a different person. Here he is sitting and talking very casually, with a very open body language, he talks about Michael and everything else very naturally. But when you compare it to his interview on Today's show - he has a very "closed" body language: legs crossed, he kept his hand between his legs for most of the interview, his way of speech is not natural at all but sounds rehearsed with lots of child abuse textbook language. His whole demeanour and the way he looks turned a lot darker. I am not sure how to explain it, just what I realized and to me it's almost like watching two different people, or the Jekyll and Hyde sides of one person.

I agree. His voice in Today Show was not natural. To me it looked like he was putting a victim act and he was afraid to slip so he was keeping his voice very low and controlled.

 

[HIStory]

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

Is this related to Wade's case?
04/21/2015 at 08:30 am in Department 51, Mitchell L. Beckloff, Presiding
Motion for Summary Judgment - Submitted

I think yes. What does "submitted" mean in this case? That the judge's verdict is submitted, or just the motion being submitted? ETA: I guess just the latter. It just means the motion has been submitted. I think it will later change to either "Granted" or "Denied" depending on what the Judge decides.

 

[InvincibleMJ]

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

Why would they submit a motion while they're still waiting for the verdict?

 

[HIStory]

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

Why would they submit a motion while they're still waiting for the verdict?

I think it just means it's been submitted - in the past, not now.

 

[InvincibleMJ]

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

What's more likely to happen faster - one of the parties will leak the judge decision or the website will show it once the judge issues it?

 

[Justthefacts]

We may not know what Roberson was doing before he made his claim but the one thing he was not doing was studying the law. Neither he or Safechuck or their lawyers it seems were not bothered by the fact by law they there CC claims had to be submitted 60 days after discovery of fact. I especially don&#8217;t understand the Safechuck one. I&#8217;m more then sure they learned from the mistake Roberson made that they waited too long but did not care it seems. Or maybe just maybe they always knew what the law was and were hoping for a few coins to go away. Hey it worked once<o></o>

 

[InvincibleMJ]

We may not know what Roberson was doing before he made hisclaim but the one thing he was not doing was studying the law. Neither he or Safechuck or their lawyers itseems were not bothered by the fact by law they there CC claims had to besubmitted 60 days after discovery of fact. I especially don&#8217;t understand the Safechuck one. I&#8217;m more then sure they learned from themistake Roberson made that they waited too long but did not care it seems. Or maybe just maybe they always knew what thelaw was and were hoping for a few coins to go away. He it worked once<o></o>

I think Safechuck came first as supporting witness for Wade's case so they didn't really mind how late he was. IMO they thought it would affect the judge's view if they have more alleged victims.

 

[HIStory]

I especially don&#8217;t understand the Safechuck one. I&#8217;m more then sure they learned from themistake Roberson made that they waited too long but did not care it seems.

Yes, that's what makes me wonder too. I mean Safechuck contacted his lawyers in October 2013. The lawyers knew damn well - if for nothing else then learning from Robson's case - that they have to file a complaint as soon as possible, at least try to be within 60 days of the date when he contacted them, but they still waited until next May. It almost looks deliberate. And maybe that's because it was more important to them to try to stir bad publicity around the launch of some big Estate project (Robson filed close to the premier date of ONE and Safechuck filed just a couple of days before the release of Xscape - and made sure the info was leaked to Dimond as soon as possible, right in time so that she could write an article on the eve of the release of Xscape...). So to me it's almost as if they do not really want to go to court with it, or at least that is not Plan A, but the whole point is to try to put publicity pressure on the Estate to make them settle.

ETA: And by the way, the fact that in Safechuck's case they did not even try to argue that he is within the statutes of PC 9103, did not try to say that he did not know about the Estate etc. - it shows that they themselves know that is a weak argument and in Safechuck's case they went straight to equitable estoppel rather than try to claim some BS about him not knowing about the Estate. If the lawyers felt it was such a strong argument and the lawyers believed in that argument then they would have had Safechuck file by December 2013 and say he did not know about the Estate before he met them.

 

[Justthefacts]

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

I think Safechuck came first as supporting witness for Wade's case so they didn't really mind how late he was. IMO they thought it would affect the judge's view if they have more alleged victims.

I understand that but the reality is a judge is has to follow the law not his own personal views. Case in poin the Kevin Clash case the judge threw out all of those lawsuits because to much time had passed. I don't know how he feels about Kevin Clash but the one thing for certain is he followed the law

 

[InvincibleMJ]

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

I understand that but the reality is a judge is has to follow the law not his own personal views. Case in poin the Kevin Clash case the judge threw out all of those lawsuits because to much time had passed. I don't know how he feels about Kevin Clash but the one thing for certain is he followed the law

I think it was just like the anal rape claims - showing MJ was the worst pedophile ever. Then they went victims haunting to show he had many victims. Not saying the judge would fall for that but I think that's what they were tying to do.

 

[Bubs]

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

What's more likely to happen faster - one of the parties will leak the judge decision or the website will show it once the judge issues it?

I'm 98% certain that this case is denied and Robson's lawyers will give the info either to Radar or other tabloid they use, and they will present Wade as victim of justice system and MJ got away because time limit etc....

Hopefully the estate attorneys has statement drafted and get to media before Wade's garbage, and I'm serious when I say that I expect it to be big bang.

 

[SarahJ]

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

I like to think the Estate would come out with a strong statement first, but I'm not sure that will happen. And it depends on how the press wants to report it. For some media groups what they say and how they say it won't matter at all. They'll just spin it anyway they want to.

 

[Justthefacts]

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

I think it was just like the anal rape claims - showing MJ was the worst pedophile ever. Then they went victims haunting to show he had many victims. Not saying the judge would fall for that but I think that's what they were tying to do.

I think they went with the rape claims because it'sshocking. And they thought the estate would read Wade's claims and settle with him before it hit the news. Let's remember this whole thing was filed under seal they wanted to protect Michael's privacy :smilerolleyes: but when it got out all of the sudden it was about talking about it as loud as he could. Leaking stuff hoping the story would spread to pressure the estate and none of that has happened. And uh can please stop saying anal rape, its stomach turning

 

[InvincibleMJ]

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

I think they went with the rape claims because it'sshocking. And they thought the estatewould read Wade's claims and settle with him before it hit the news. Let's remember this whole thing was filedunder seal they wanted to protect Michael's privacy but when it got out all ofthe sudden it was about talking about it as loud as he could. Leaking stuff hoping the story would spreadto pressure the estate and none of that has happened. And uh can please stop saying anal rape, its stomach turning

agreed

 

[InvincibleMJ]

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

I like to think the Estate would come out with a strong statement first, but I'm not sure that will happen. And it depends on how the press wants to report it. For some media groups what they say and how they say it won't matter at all. They'll just spin it anyway they want to.

I'm 98% certain that this case is denied and Robson's lawyers will give the info either to Radar or other tabloid they use, and they will present Wade as victim of justice system and MJ got away because time limit etc....

Hopefully the estate attorneys has statement drafted and get to media before Wade's garbage, and I'm serious when I say that I expect it to be big bang.

I hope so too but they still have to see if the claim against the companies gets dismissed too.

 

[jaydom7]

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

that interview did not take place in July 2012. It was in March 2012.

He actually looks very slimy and fake in this pic like he's up to something..

 

[castor]

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

Fans say they saw Chantal selling off MJ memorabilia on her FB a couple of months before Robson made these claims publicly (which is a bit odd to me, because if my brother had been molested by this man I would have burnt his memorabilia not sold them, but maybe that's just me).

WTF? Is that true???
If it is I wonder how that would play out in a courtroom. It sure as hell wouldn't make them look good.
Just another example of exploitation.

I agree. His voice in Today Show was not natural. To me it looked like he was putting a victim act and he was afraid to slip so he was keeping his voice very low and controlled.

The most telling part is when he says what he is feeling now.
Heartbreak, anger, compassion.

He says anger without showing any anger whatsoever, his words and his behavior are not in line at all and he says compassion after
telling everyone that he would kill whoever would do those things with his son.
Now that makes sense. He would kill him out of compassion I guess.

 

[jaydom7]

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

I think they went with the rape claims because it'sshocking. And they thought the estate would read Wade's claims and settle with him before it hit the news. Let's remember this whole thing was filed under seal they wanted to protect Michael's privacy :smilerolleyes: but when it got out all of the sudden it was about talking about it as loud as he could. Leaking stuff hoping the story would spread to pressure the estate and none of that has happened. And uh can please stop saying anal rape, its stomach turning

Exactly! They were trying to force a settlement 2 years ago when he first filed.. His fake appearance on the Today show was so fraudulent and fake that no one took him seriously. They went with the rape claims to force a quick settlement because they knew MJ One was about to start also, They planned all of this around MJ ONE for sure., It's still selling well and MJ's back catalog is doing phenomenally.. Wade should be ashamed of himself for even pulling some mess like this for his supposed 'friend' of 25 years who is now dead. I really hope he pays for this mess in some way.

 

[ivy]

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

So still no word from judge? I think it is going to come today.

Is this related to Wade's case?
04/21/2015 at 08:30 am in Department 51, Mitchell L. Beckloff, Presiding
Motion for Summary Judgment - Submitted

I think yes. What does "submitted" mean in this case? That the judge's verdict is submitted, or just the motion being submitted? ETA: I guess just the latter. It just means the motion has been submitted. I think it will later change to either "Granted" or "Denied" depending on what the Judge decides.

Why would they submit a motion while they're still waiting for the verdict?

I think it just means it's been submitted - in the past, not now.

Yes that is related to Robson. Submitted means everything is completed (motion,opposition, reply, hearing) and it is now submitted to the court/judge for a decision. We will later see "court makes order" or "granted" or "denied".

What's more likely to happen faster - one of the parties will leak the judge decision or the website will show it once the judge issues it?

I think it depends. If TMZ is following the summary judgment motion, they can break it as soon as he judge rules and the decision is filed with the clerk's office.TMZ has multiple people at the courthouse, I don't think Radar has that. Parties might comment about the decision to media, when they hear it. If there isn't much media interest, then probably we'll see that the judge made a decision from the court system and media will report it several days later (it took them a week to report Safechuck demurrer)

Regardless of how quick they report it, when they report it , it would be big news. this is a significant decision for the probate claim. It is going to determine if Robson can sue the Estate or not.

 

[castor]

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

The Safechuck demurrer was sustained because Safechuck knew about the Estate and knew about the facts giving rise to his claim way before the deadline.

So did Robson and that is no longer disputed. Except unlike Safechuck Robson simply lied about not knowing about the Estate.

If the judge didn't find a legal basis for Safechuck's claim how could he find for Robson's?

Also, does anyone know a precedent case where the solely owned corporation of a dead alledged perpetrator could be sued?

 

[Justthefacts]

And I just thought about something else. Roberson's lawyers say he deserves his day in court but the person he says hurt him is dead. Nothing can be done to him ever he can't be punished you can't throw him in jail, there is nothing that can be done to Michael. If he really wanted to hurt Michael he would have just said he molested me and not bothered with trying to blame his estate and the people running it for something they had no control over and were not around when it happened. But when you think about his cousin Johnathan being more angry at Michael&#8217;s estate then Michael that says it all <o></o>

 

[Justthefacts]

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

The Safechuck demurrer was sustained because Safechuck knew about the Estate and knew about the facts giving rise to his claim way before the deadline.

So did Robson and that is no longer disputed. Except unlike Safechuck Robson simply lied about not knowing about the Estate.

If the judge didn't find a legal basis for Safechuck's claim how could he find for Robson's?

Also, does anyone know a precedent case where the solely owned corporation of a dead alledged perpetrator could be sued?

I think his was sustained because he said he told Michael not to call me again, proving that he could break away from Michael

 

[HIStory]

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

So did Robson and that is no longer disputed. Except unlike Safechuck Robson simply lied about not knowing about the Estate.

I think by the time Safechuck came along Robson's lawyers realized it's not worth lying about that because it won't take them anywhere. Safechuck might not have negotiated with Branca a year before his big "realization" like Robson did, but he would have had other problems with that story. Just imagine this: "Mr. Safechuck, so you say you did not know about the Estate before you met these lawyers, so tell me why did you contact them in the first place and what did you think Robson was talking about when you say you saw him on TV talking about suing the Estate?"

Also, does anyone know a precedent case where the solely owned corporation of a dead alledged perpetrator could be sued?

Sued for what? For these type of cases I don't think there is such a precedent. If there was Robson's lawyers would have dug it up already. Plus the law seems to be very clear about on what basis a company can be sued re. alleged child sexual abuse and I think the Estate also pointed out in their papers that a company cannot be sued for something that its owner allegedly did in his bedroom as a private person. The law does not allow that.

 

[HIStory]

And I just thought about something else. Roberson's lawyerssay he deserves his day in court but the person he says hurt him is dead. Nothing can be done to him ever he can't bepunished you can't throw him in jail, there is nothing that can be done toMichael. If he really wanted to hurtMichael he would have just said he molested me and not bothered with trying toblame his estate and the people running it for something they had no controlover and were not around when it happened. But when you think about his cousin Johnathan being more angry atMichael&#8217;s estate then Michael that says it all <o></o>

Yes, that says it all, doesn't it? If it's not about money why lie about things like not knowing about the Estate just to get around statutes? If it's not about money but speaking out loud why do you file your complaint under seal, citing the privacy interests of your alleged abuser, no less? If it's not about money but justice then why are you and your cousin more angry with people running Michael's Estate than with your own mother? It's not John Branca who should have taken care of you but your mother. If it's not about money why try to sue Michael's companies when you cannot even state a viable cause of action about how they are supposedly responsible for your alleged abuse? Why not blame your mother instead who was the closest to the whole situation and who had the duty of taking care of you? If it's not about money then why didn't you just put a paid advert in the New York Times about it to speak "your truth" and be done with it? Everything he's been doing so far IS aimed at money.

 

[Soundmind]

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

ivy and respect thanks a lot for taking the time to explain to us over and over again the facts of the case.

 

[Justthefacts]

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

Yes, that says it all, doesn't it? If it's not about money why lie about things like not knowing about the Estate just to get around statutes? If it's not about money but speaking out loud why do you file your complaint under seal, citing the privacy interests of your alleged abuser, no less? If it's not about money but justice then why are you and your cousin more angry with people running Michael's Estate than with your own mother? It's not John Branca who should have taken care of you but your mother. If it's not about money why try to sue Michael's companies when you cannot even state a viable cause of action about how they are supposedly responsible for your alleged abuse? Why not blame your mother instead who was the closest to the whole situation and who had the duty of taking care of you? If it's not about money then why didn't you just put a paid advert in the New York Times about it to speak "your truth" and be done with it? Everything he's been doing so far IS aimed at money.

They went so far as trying to get Branca to answer questions about his alleged abuse like he would know. I mean wtf, no you were not there but answer these questions about what Michael did to me.

 

[ILoveHIStory]

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

I am not sure, but have you seen Robsons behaviour during the years, especially during his shocking interview in 2013 about MJ, because it seems to me like he was ... kind of... addicted to something...
His eyes, the style of behavior, the face features, the hair style.
I have seen and talked to a few people addicted to alcohol or drugs and... they have some particular face/behavioral features that are very easily recognisable by addicted people or after a rehab!

Is there something he is hiding?