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

[redfrog]

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

You should watch this about Clyde Ray Spencer an innocent man who was falsely accused by three kids, including a 9 year old boy, and entered an Alford plea, pleading guilty without admitting guilt, because he didn't believe he had a chance for a fair trial and he thought he didn't have the strength to go through a trial anyway. His wife invented the allegations and she had an affair with the lead investigator. While Chandler didn't have an affair with Sneddon or Bil Dworin they sure were in the same boat and had their own agenda attached to the same goal. Spencer's situation was very similar to MJ's in Jan 1994.

Spencer was also on drugs to treat his depression the false allegations caused.
Like MJ he just couldn't believe that he was accused of such things. Like MJ he always maintained his innocence.
Like Chandler the wife is adamant that something happened, she will never admit that she lied.
The DA who prosecuted Spencer also never admitted that he was wrong. Just like Zonen and Sneddon.

In this case an innocent person did much more than just settle a civil case. He actually went to prison without a trial!
Next time someone ask why an innocent person would settle show them this:

His kids recanted their allegations:

He sued the state and won 9 million:

 

[#MJforever57]

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

I hope Beckloff does keep it at a professional level and not hold this against the Estate and look at the facts in this summary judgement which show Wade has no proof that show the companies had a reason to know or was aware this was going on so with no proof the only thing to do here is dismiss where else can this case go.

Wade is suing the companies and like it was mention him mother had asked for help from the companies so how can you sued if it was not for Michael Wade his mother and his sister would not even be here. Wade and James also defend Michael in 2005 so how can you say you was abuse by Michael questions with no answers to them it all lies no proof to them it all about the money. And another thing if this happen to them like it was mention more would come out and say this happen to me also that we do not see here either.


Thank you for share this video.

 

[Bubs]

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

Future Hearings

03/03/2017 at 09:00 am in department M at 1725 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401
Final Status Conference(JT 3/13/17)

03/13/2017 at 09:00 am in department M at 1725 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401

Last thing that happened in this case was this bit:
10/09/2015 Answer (TO THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT OF WADE ROBINSON )
Filed by Attorney for Defendant/Respondent

Yesterdays they had conference:
03/02/2016 at 08:30 am in Department WEM, Mitchell L. Beckloff, Presiding
Status Conference - Trial Set
Jury Trial(10 DAYS)


Ivy, does that mean that the estate's answer was rejected by Beckloff and trial goes on 2017 timer?

 

[HIStory]

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

How can it go to trial when there was not yet a summary judgement?

My guess is rather that it is just a case management thing. They always set these trial dates in case management but that does not mean it will indeed actually go to trial. For example if the Estate wins summary judgement then it won't.

 

[ivy]

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

Trial dates are always set after the demurrer. They probably set all the other dates as well - such as discovery cut off date, expert discovery date etc. Summary judgment would happen a few months before the trial date and depending on the outcome trial may or may not happen.

In other words - just routine case scheduling. doesn't mean it will go to trial.

 

[#MJforever57]

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

Any news yet on the summary judgement?

 

[ivy]

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

Any news yet on the summary judgement?

summary judgment won't be this quick. there will be discovery first. summary judgment comes a few months before the trial so late 2016 - early 2017.

edited to add: unless there are discovery disputes and motions gets filed, this will get silent during the discovery phase. don't expect much news until it's time for summary judgment.

 

[Bubs]

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

Trial dates are always set after the demurrer. They probably set all the other dates as well - such as discovery cut off date, expert discovery date etc. Summary judgment would happen a few months before the trial date and depending on the outcome trial may or may not happen.

In other words - just routine case scheduling. doesn't mean it will go to trial.

Shoot, I'm getting more confused with this case:scratch:

What was the purpose of this:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/285207028/MJ-Estate-answer-to-Robson-Civil-Complaint
which was filed on 10/09/2015?

"Proceedings held" doesn't show reply for that or anything at all, but at the end of that The Estate answer document, they ask
"Wherefore, the Corporate Defendants respectfully pray for judgement against Robson as follows:
1, That WR take nothing by way of his complaint, and that judgement be rendered in favour of the Corp Def and against WR
2, Costs of suit incurred here...
3 For such other....

What was the point of filing that answer if it required nothing from noone, and judge did nothing with it?




PS, by the time this goes on trial, we have been "hanging there" for 4 years! Unacceptable and judge better start speeding up with these proceedings:timer:

 

[ivy]

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

Shoot, I'm getting more confused with this case:scratch:

What was the point of filing that answer if it required nothing from noone, and judge did nothing with it?

It's actually quite simple.

Robson made some claims by filing a case. That's Estate's answers to those claims - denying them. So that's the purpose of it. It doesn't require any action from the judge. It's basically Robson saying "Michael abused me" and Estate replying "nope we are denying those claims".

What happened here was that the demurrer / a dismissal attempt came before it.

In other words this has happened until now

- Robson files a case with claims about childhood sexual abuse.
- Estate filed a demurrer to get the case dismissed.
- Demurrer process happens.
- Judge rules the case will survive demurrer.
- Estate responds to Robson's claims.

Now the case will go through the rest of the process. That's is discovery, depositions, expert witnesses and so on. After all that there will be the summary judgment - with a motion by estate and opposition from robson and a hearing. Judge will rule on the summary judgment motion. If the judge dismisses the case at summary judgement it will be over. If the case survives the summary judgment there will be pretrial motions (such as trying to exclude each other's witnesses etc.) followed by trial.

Unacceptable and judge better start speeding up with these proceedings

It won't speed up, they need this time to handle all of the stuff. It's quite probable that there might be extensions if discovery disputes happen.

Discovery first starts with asking documents. Those needs to be prepared and turned over. Then it is followed by the depositions. After all of that is completed, experts are given the information and asked for their opinions and later deposed. That completes the discovery. Then defendants prepare the summary judgment, plaintiff opposes to it, defendant files another reply of support, a hearing scheduled and judge rules on it. IF it is determined that the case is going to trial then there will be all the pretrial motions , hearings and decisions. In short what am I trying to say it, all of this takes time. I wouldn't be surprised if they ask multiple extensions due to discovery issues.

 

[Bubs]

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

Ok, thanks Ivy
I've been waiting judge's reply to that estate's answer (scribd doc) because the way it was written

 

[ivy]

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

Ok, thanks Ivy
I've been waiting judge's reply to that estate's answer (scribd doc) because the way it was written

If you are talking about the requests at the end of the document, those aren't something decided by the judge immediately. Robson also made a bunch requests - aka money- in his documents. That would be decided by either a dismissal or a trial.

 

[#MJforever57]

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

So far Wade is yet to proven anything to back up his stories that the companies where aware or should have know that this was going on a reason to know.

 

[redfrog]

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

summary judgment won't be this quick. there will be discovery first. summary judgment comes a few months before the trial so late 2016 - early 2017..

How can they set final status conference without summary judgement?
And how can summary judgement come shortly before a trial?
Preparing for a trial takes a lot of time including getting all the witnesses. Am I missing something?

Also, how the heck do they want to handle this case without talking to Norma Staikos who is in Greece
if she is still alive?

 

[elusive moonwalker]

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

Yeah doesnt really make sense to do discovery before summary judgement or is the discovery used as evidence in the S.J.

Nothing to say norma wont be deposed.whether she will be willing is another issue

 

[HIStory]

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

Why doesn't it make sense? That's how the process goes. Discovery can be done before summary judgment to support the points the parties want to make in summary judgement. Discovery can include depositions - for example, talking to Norma Staikos and others. No need to jump to conclusions (ie. that they won't talk to Staikos).

And a final status conference is just the last status conference before a trial, so if they set a trial date they can set a date for FSC in relation to that. Doesn't mean it and a trial will necessarily happen. This is simply scheduling. It can be re-scheduled if it goes to trial and the parties need more time for trial preparations. It's not something set into stone that cannot be changed.

 

[redfrog]

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

And a final status conference is just the last status conference before a trial, so if they set a trial date they can set a date for FSC in relation to that. Doesn't mean it and a trial will necessarily happen. This is simply scheduling. It can be re-scheduled if it goes to trial and the parties need more time for trial preparations. It's not something set into stone that cannot be changed.

OK I get it. I still don't see the point of setting a date for a trial and FSC for a trial that may not even happen but whatever.

What kind of evidence can be used for summary judgement?
Can the Estate use the specific statements of Robson in his 2005 testimony and Blanca Francia's deposition where she denied seeing more than one person in the shower and said she only heard one voice?
Does the judge consider credibility for summary judgement?

And what evidence does Robson have to show to go through summary judgement? Is it enough to show that someone
said that Norma said something?

What about Chantal's 2005 testimony which flat out contradicts Robson's current version of what happened during their first
trip to Neverland in 1990?
Chantal said she slept on the second floor the first night and in MJ's bed the second night. Robson now says that she slept in the bed in the first night and on the second floor the second night and that's when the abuse started. Obviously if Chantal was telling the truth that pretty much proves that Robson is lying now as no abuse could have happened while Chantal was in the same bed.
Chantal also said that she slept in Mj's room 4 times that means she slept in Mj's bed during the second weekend too while Robson claims that he was alone with MJ and the family slept elsewhere.

Can the Estate use these facts and is the judge allowed to decide that Chantal was telling the truth so Robson is lying now?

 

[HIStory]

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

Summary judgement is still about whether the case should or should not go to trial. It is still about whether the case fulfills the the requirements of CCP 340.1, ie.

1) the companies knew or had a reason to know
2) MJ was an agent, representative of his companies
3) the companies failed to take reasonable steps, and to implement reasonable safeguards - eg. placing MJ in positions where he could not meet children etc. - to avoid abuse (this comes down to the question whether the companies had control over MJ)

The issues are still these on SJ. It's not about credibility and issues like Blanca Francia's testimony or what the Robsons said about the first night in 2005 will probably have little to do with SJ. All those issues would be for the trial to discuss, as well as whether Francia or Robson are credible or not. It's up to a trial jury to decide whether someone is credible or not.

SJ is not much different from demurrer in terms of its issues, the difference is only that during demurrer the Judge just had to take it at face value what the Plaintiff said, now evidence pro and contra can be brought in. It's exactly why the Judge said it needs to go to SJ rather than decided on demurrer. For example, he said he doesn't know enough about the company culture and structure of these companies to decide about the argument whether the companies could have control over MJ or not. Now contracts, documents about the chain of command at the companies etc. can be brought in so the Judge would have a better picture of it.

 

[redfrog]

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

Summary judgement is still about whether the case should or should not go to trial. It is still about whether the case fulfills the the requirements of CCP 340.1, ie.

Yes I guess that's what their second affirmative defense is all about.

But if it's only about CCP 340.1 why did the Estate argue that Robson's 2005 testimony is a reason why the case has no merit in fact or law? That has nothing to do with company structure or reason to know.
If they can use Robson's general denial in 2005 then why don't the specific claims he is making now matter?

When Michael Egan falsely accused Bryan Singer one of Singer's weapon was a previous Egan testimony where he
said that he never travelled outside the continental US. Also Singer had evidence that he was not in Hawaii when the alleged
rape happened. Obviously those facts had nothing to do with statutes of limitation but the credibility of Egan's specific claims
and Singer's lawyers did use those facts to dismiss the case. why can't the Estate do the same?
For example if they can prove that Robson wasn't even in Neverland between Feb 5-10 or there wasn't even a bed in Westwood
in which Robson claims he was molested isn't that the same kind of evidence as Singer's?

There are a bunch of affirmative defenses which go way beyond CCP 340.1. Laches or equitable estoppel for example.
They are also using his mother's statements and testimonies in their "no causation" defense. Obviously it would make no sense to make such an argument without having those testimonies and if the judge is not supposed to take his mother's words and actions into account then why include this defense at all?

The first aff. defense is about whether the companies owned a duty of care. That too goes beyond CCP 340.1.
Does Robson have to explain what the companies should have done specifically? How exactly they should have separated
Robson from MJ?

 

[HIStory]

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

Maybe other issues will be brought in as well, but the main one is still whether the case fulfills CCP 340.1 because if it doesn't then it's all over and all other points are moot.

 

[redfrog]

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

Maybe other issues will be brought in as well, but the main one is still whether the case fulfills CCP 340.1 because if it doesn't then it's all over and all other points are moot.

So Robson has to explain what exactly the companies should have done to "protect" him, doesn't he?
What the reasonable steps should have been.

So far he hasn't done so. What the heck could he come up with? That Norma Staikos should have informed his mother
that MJ was molesting him? Joy Robson was aware of those allegations and flat out rejected them and kept taking Wade back to MJ.
Is it up to the judge to decide if such a step would have been reasonable? Clearly it wouldn't have been given Joy Robson's reaction to the whole idea of MJ being a child molester.

 

[ivy]

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

How can they set final status conference without summary judgement?
And how can summary judgement come shortly before a trial?
Preparing for a trial takes a lot of time including getting all the witnesses. Am I missing something?

Also, how the heck do they want to handle this case without talking to Norma Staikos who is in Greece
if she is still alive?

Yeah doesnt really make sense to do discovery before summary judgement or is the discovery used as evidence in the S.J.

Nothing to say norma wont be deposed.whether she will be willing is another issue

Respect already answered it but this is routine scheduling. they set dates for everything including the trial. Discovery needs to happen before summary judgment. In demurrer judge just looks to see if there is a legal basis for the case or not. At summary judgment a judge determines based on all available evidence if the plaintiff can or can't provide legal requirements of a claim. So you see why the discovery needs to happen first. as for Norma she could be in Greece or in USA. and even if she is in Greece she can be deposed. If she can't be deposed her previous interviews with law enforcement or testimony at Grand Jury can be used.

 

[#MJforever57]

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

Imo this case does not fulfills the requirements of CCP 340.1, Looking at the facts and the law that is in this thread given by Ivy and Respect is very clear.

Wade is suing the companies he feel that their are resposible for what happen to him (a reason to know) because Wade can't sue Michael because he is no longer with us. I would love for them to use (The Estate) what Wade said in 2005 that Michael never abuse him and how his mother Joy ask for Michael help by get a green card so Wade and his sister can stay here in the USA. If it was not for Michael helping them their would not be here. I pray that this case does not get pass summary judgment it need to end here. Wade has no proof to backup his story.


Any news yet?

 

[redfrog]

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

Wasn't there a hearing in March scheduled for the Safechuck demurrer ?
No info about that yet?

 

[HIStory]

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

I don't think it's a case of false memories. It's a case of a very conscious money grab. The way he constructed his story is aimed at money very clearly, when you realize the legal ins and outs and how those relate to his aim of getting money. I don't believe he really thinks he was molested. I was pondering the possibility at the beginning, but reading his complaint and how it is all geared toward one goal - money -, I am not going to give him the excuse of false memories. It's a despicable backstab, deliberate lying for the sake of money - nothing else.

 

[HIStory]

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

I don't see why the two are mutually exclusive tbh. You can still be a money-grabber and belueve you're a victim. Infact, a lot of lawyers make a lot of money by convincing people they're victims. Here in the UK, you only have to say Jimmy Savil once brushed up against your leg and you can file a claim.

I guess I have a hard time seeing it from your perspective respect77, as I can't see how somebody who knew MJ for as long as Wade did would do something as dispicible as this just for a payout. Maybe I'm naive, but I would rather believe that at least Wade himself has convinced himself of something that never happened than doing something that callous.

There is a difference between someone convincing you that a man brushing your leg was abuse and making you sue based on that claim, and between what Robson is alleging - which is the most brutal rape.

It's a fact that he has consciously lied in his court documents for money. A fact. For example, during the probate case for him to go forward and get paid there was a requirement that he should prove that he did not know about the existence of the Estate and the possibility of suing them until at least 60 days before he filed his complaint. This meant he had to claim he did not know about the Estate until March 2013 (he filed in May 2013). Guess what, as ridiculous as it sounds (since everyone and their mother knew about the Estate) he claimed just that. Fortunately the Estate could prove he was lying through his teeth since he sent out e-mails to friends in September 2012 in which he basically talked about suing the Estate. I guess he did not expect the Estate would find out about that e-mail. Moreover, in the Spring of 2012 he met with John Branca to talk about Robson's desire to direct the Cirque du Soleil show. But he did not know about the Estate. Yeah, right.

Also, if he truly believes his own BS how come he isn't furious at his mother? I mean if you really believe (whether rightly or wrongly) that you have been molested under the circumstances that Robson claims, then the first person you should be mad at was your mother who put you in that situation and who was negligent enough to look the other way. But nope. In fact, Robson's cousin had the nerve to say that they are not really angry with Michael but with the people in charge of his Estate who - according to them - enabled all that. LOL! So you are mad at John Branca and you are mad at MJ's companies, but not at Joy Robson? How convenient that you aim your anger at the people who are in charge of the money rather than the parent who should have taken care of you. Makes sense. NOT!

How many people stabbed MJ in the back over the years? How many of them sounded and seemed nice and good friends at the beginning? Robson wouldn't be the first one to do it so why is it so unimaginable to you?

I can't see how somebody who knew MJ for as long as Wade did would do something as dispicible as this just for a payout.

"Just for a payout" is a favourite of mine. Do people realize how many amoral things people are willing to do "just for a payout"? Money is the number one reason why people lie and cheat. Hell, some people even kill "just for a payout". And in this case we talk about the possibility of millions of dollars that would set him for life. We have evidence that before he made up his allegations his wife and him already contemplated leaving LA and his wife expressed a desire to move to Hawaii. Problem is you cannot really work in mainstream, big time showbiz from Hawaii. Plus Robson obviously has an inherited mental problem that made work hard for him at the end. So what is the solution that would enable you to go into an early retirement in Hawaii and still not be worried about how you would be able to pay your bills? Guess what happened next? Wade suddenly realized that he was allegedly molested by MJ. To me it screams pre-meditated and opportunistic.

 

[Bad7]

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

Just because two people know each other for a long time doesn't mean one won't backstab the other. It happens throughout life. Such as affairs and not paying back loans etc.

Wade gave an interview to I think it was ABC and he had absolutely no emotion on his face whatsoever. When asked what words he'd describe MJ as now he said 'heartbreak, pain, anger and compassion' . Two of those words are bizarre choices. 'Heartbreak' is often associated with love and compassion basically means pity or concern for another person. Compassion doesn't fit what he is claiming. If Wade believed he'd been molested then surely he'd show emotion?

Also look at Jimmy Safechuck. He just so happens to make allegations when Wade's case was faltering and he has the same lawyer representing him as Wade does. I find it incredibly hard to believe they're not in this together. If Wade really thought he had been abused what is the need for 'back up' in the form of Safechuck?

Another aspect is the possibility of this being Wade's revenge on the estate for the MJ Cirque Du Soleil show. If I remember correctly he was telling people he was choreographing it and then he didn't get the job in the end.

Also factor in him filing a claim against numerous other parties. Now why would he do that? I can't think of any reason other than in the hope of a settlement due to pressure from other people and companies who's name and integrity is on the line. The biggest culprit in all of Wade's supposed story is actually his mother, yet he has no issue with her. In what he is telling now his Mother was basically a pimp! She instigated a friendship with MJ.

Edit: Also what would Jimmy Safechuck's reasoning me for making a claim besides stabbing MJ in the back? If Wade's is due to all the people having teased, made jokes and insinuate (and leading to him thinking maybe he was molested) then what about Safechuck? He's not famous and has kept a very low profile as opposed to Wade who has a profile.

 

[Bad7]

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

Wow, I hadn't heard what his cousin had said. Just searched through the thread and have now seen the quotes. Do you know where he said it, respect77?

Absolutely laughable 'no anger for Michael'. He supposedly raped your cousin, ffs!

 

[HIStory]

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

Wow, I hadn't heard what his cousin had said. Just searched through the thread and have now seen the quotes. Do you know where he said it, respect77?

Absolutely laughable 'no anger for Michael'. He supposedly raped your cousin, ffs!

It was in the comment section of a Radar Online article (this one http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2...ccuser-claims-dad-destroyed-by-alleged-abuse/ ). It's his cousin Jonathan Keller who since committed suicide due to sever deppression that he had for many years. (Once again pointing to a genetic mental problem in Robson's family on his father's side.)

After talking with Wade, I can
now see that there is some sort of need to receive recompense when you
are a victim and asking for compensation is part of his healing. He also cannot work in his profession anymore because it is so psychologically linked to Michael for him. What most people don't understand is that the same indoctrination about the abuse Wade received was the same indoctrination to be successful and well known in the entertainment industry, "Be the best, or be nothing".

There
is also many people who knew what Michael was doing, and potentially
facilitated it because he was making them money, who are still alive,
and still profiting from Michael's estate. People for example who
organised for Wade to come from Australia to America, and other children
like Wade.

I don't have anger for Michael, he had a very
troubled life (although it doesn't excuse what he did). But there was
people around Michael who at the very least turned a blind eye, and
those are the people that make me very upset

Yet, these people that they have anger for because they supposedly turned a blind eye don't include Joy Robson the main one who turned a blind eye if what Wade claims is true (it's not, but hypothetically). They conveniently only involve the people and organizations in charge of MJ's money...

 

[HIStory]

Another aspect is the possibility of this being Wade's revenge on the estate for the MJ One show. If I remember correctly he was telling people he was choreographing it and then he didn't get the job in the end.

Oh yeah, that too. Consider the timeline of his allegations:

Some time in 2010 - First approached about Cirque which he turns down (no reason given)
Some time in 2010 - Jamie King is hired to direct MJ Immortal (article dated November 3, 2010: https://www.cirquedusoleil.com/en/press/news/2010/mj-presale.aspx)
November 2010 - Son born
December 2010 - Offered to direct Step Up 4
April 2011 - He's out of the movie citing personal reasons
April-August 2011 - 1st nervous breakdown
Early 2011 - Charles Joron from Cirque "considers" giving him an offer about Immortal, but he tells him it needs to be validated by MJ Estate.
First quarter of 2011 - Meets with Branca about Cirque plans. (But he didn't know about the Estate. LOL.)
May 16, 2011 - Starts cognitive therapy for about a month. Does not make allegations.
May 21, 2011 - Sends e-mail to Estate telling them he wanted to do the Cirque show "badly". (But he didn't know about the Estate. LOL.)
Mid-July, 2011 - Returns to work with "former sense of invincibility".
July 30, 2011 - Announces he's gonna direct Cirque du Soleil's MJ show. (This is extremely weird and bizarre video because in reality he did NOT actaully have the job. Jamie King did.)
http://www.tmz.com/2013/05/11/wade-robson-michael-jackson-cirque-du-soleil-video/
March, 2012 - 2nd nervous breakdown
Mid-April, 2012 - Starts insight-oriented therapy with another therapist.
May 8, 2012 - Makes allegations to his therapist, the first time ever.
September, 2012 - Sends e-mails to relatives and friends about a “transformational time” in his life and about it being "an extremely sensitive legal matter". (But he still didn't know about the Estate and the possibility that he can sue. LOL.)
March 2013 - Hires attorneys Gradstein and Marzano.
May 1, 2013 - Files complaint.

 

[Bad7]

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

It was in the comment section of a Radar Online article (this one http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2...ccuser-claims-dad-destroyed-by-alleged-abuse/ ). It's his cousin Jonathan Keller who since committed suicide due to sever deppression that he had for many years. (Once again pointing to a genetic mental problem in Robson's family on his father's side.)



Yet, these people that they have anger for because they supposedly turned a blind eye don't include Joy Robson the main one who turned a blind eye if what Wade claims is true (it's not, but hypothetically). They conveniently only involve the people and organizations in charge of MJ's money...

Thanks. Shame Radar deleted all the comments. I see his cousin also posted more messages.

http://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/t...tate/page269?p=3864426&viewfull=1#post3864426

My
mum (the sister in this story) wrote a word document back in 1996 after
committing Uncle Denny to hospital when he was experiencing a bad
depression episode. For a long time the family suspected that Wade might
have been abused, and she wrote about the peculiar events surrounding
Wade's interactions with Michael. I shared this document with Wade after
he let us know that Michael did in fact abuse him. It is possible that
he has submitted this to the court as new evidence.

This one strikes me as odd. 'For a long time the family suspected that Wade might have been abused'... what family members? His mother and sister never had any suspicions.

'I shared this document with Wade after he let us know that Michael did in fact abuse him. It is possible that he has submitted this to the court as new evidence.'

WTF? A word document, created by Wade's suspicious Auntie, is possibly submitted as evidence? Is this the best evidence they can submit(?) There's no proof who typed it out and these words are his Father's supposed suspicions with no evidence (Evan Chandler came to my mind typing that sentence out).