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

[BadTour87]

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

The estate made a statement on Billboard:

Seven years ago this coming Saturday, the world lost an amazing artist and humanitarian devoted to helping children in need in all corners of the world. Michael Jackson's fans, including the Executors of his estate, prefer to remember the wonderful gifts Michael left behind instead of having to once again see his good name dragged through the mud by tabloid trash.

Everything in these reports, including what the County of Santa Barbara calls "content that appears to be obtained off the Internet or through unknown sources" is false, no doubt timed to the anniversary of Michael's passing. Those who continue to shamelessly exploit Michael via sleazy internet "click bait" ignore that he was acquitted by a jury in 2005 on every one of the 14 salacious charges brought against him in a failed witch hunt.

Michael remains just as innocent of these smears in death as he was in life even though he isn't here to defend himself. Enough is enough.

 

[Smooth72]

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

I don't know what to say anymore. I'm disgusted by all this B.S. It's time to keep fighting the fight I guess. I'm not a violent person but I feel like kicking the shit out of someone (Wade)(Safechuck). If there is the possibility of a song Mj has in the vault that goes straight to this issue that has not been released now is the time to bring it out even if it's explicit! This is so old and so rehashed it is tiring. We just can't give up ever!

 

[ivy]

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

And BTW, it is also a dangerous game by the Estate not to refute it because IMO Robson is now laying the groundwork for a public atmosphere where the Estate would be in a more difficult situation if the Robson/Safechuck case goes to trial. More difficult to find jurors who have no prejudice against MJ (of course, you try to filter that with jury selection but there is a bigger risk now). Lots of people feeling he got away with it in 2005, so Robson and Safechuck's claims should almost automatically be believed. Public pressure on the jurors because it becomes "common (un)wisdom" that he was guilty. It really puts them in a more difficult situation regarding the civil case where there is a lesser burden of proof.

I disagree with this. In 93 there was a grand jury refusing to indict. In 2005 jurors found MJ not guilty despite media non stop calling him guilty. Despite everything jurors did not fail MJ and they deserve more credit to be able to limit themselves to what is presented to them at court and make rational decisions solely based on evidence presented.

If anything this shows how desperate Robson and Safechuck are. People with strong cases don't need to try it in the media, they don't need "leaks" or stories. TMez was the one who asked for a gag order. He didn't need to try the case in media, he didn't need to change public perception. He tried and won it in court.

All I see is desperation.

 

[Mike P.]

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

I couldn't believe it when I saw this bull**** popping up in my Facebook news feed yesterday. I just got done convincing my aunt of his innocence a few days prior. I told her all the crap published in the media were lies and sent her multiple links showing the facts, and then this crap comes out. I told her yesterday not to pay any attention to this crap it's just more lies and twisted information.

Sadly, I know a lot of people are going to believe this garbage no matter what I say.

 

[mj_frenzy]

Don't worry about MJ's legacy. As long as there are millions of people who love his music and believe in his character, then his legacy will be just fine. It has endured far worse than this.

Each new generation (even before it gets to know his music) will be exposed to such defamatory stories about MJ. So, his legacy is not fine just because there are millions of people who love his music & believe in his character.

People who legally represent MJ’s legacy (Estate, his family) have to take precautionary steps & sue anyone who tries to disseminate obscure & damaging stories about MJ. Otherwise, his legacy will be forever tarnished by the tabloids.

 

[Soundmind]

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

I totally understand fans anger. I also don't say that tabloids and allegations didn't cause any issues. They did but the impact of it happened in 93 and 05. I personally think people have already made up their minds - good or bad- and stuff said now doesn't have much impact anymore.



Like we both said MJ Estate can't sue for any slander, defamation or libel. The artists can sue but as they are public figures (at least to an extent) need to show actual damages. How many people look to the books in detail, pay attention to the name of the artist and believe they are shooting "child porn" and decide not to buy their art books again? You can argue that this is such a terrible accusation that they don't need to show damages. But again how many people are paying attention to the books and the artists of the books?



I disagree with that. If people on the fence changed their opinion that's because of Robson and Safechuck allegations. I don't think people change opinions due to Radar or any tabloid.



I'm not quite sure what are you trying to hint in your usual passive aggressive way and sorry I don't do conspiracy theories based on thin air. That being said, I really don't get why people get so pressed about Estate and money though. Their job definition is to pay debts and provide for beneficiaries. How does that happen? Yes, Money.

As he is the most earning deceased celebrity, I'm quite sure he is earning good enough money and doesn't suffer much from the smear campaigns.

I am pretty sure you said when the news broke about the catalogue that he was no longer making that much money and that's why they had to sell the catalogue. But now you are advancing the exact opposite argument because it is favorable to the estate. I am not talking about any conspiracy theories here. I defended the estate for years but lost any faith in them after the repeated failures whether regarding his music, the allegations, and last straw was selling the catalogue. Weizmann refused to say positive things about MJ during the 2005 fiasco, and he is now in charge of this molestation case. We should not be surprised at all at the lack of effectiveness. This guy failed miserably in 1993, was not willing to say any thing positive about mj in 2005, still we are supposed to ignore all that and pretend that he is the best for the job. Not to forget that his ego will not allow him to ask Mez for help.

 

[Soundmind]

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

I disagree with this. In 93 there was a grand jury refusing to indict. In 2005 jurors found MJ not guilty despite media non stop calling him guilty. Despite everything jurors did not fail MJ and they deserve more credit to be able to limit themselves to what is presented to them at court and make rational decisions solely based on evidence presented.

If anything this shows how desperate Robson and Safechuck are. People with strong cases don't need to try it in the media, they don't need "leaks" or stories. TMez was the one who asked for a gag order. He didn't need to try the case in media, he didn't need to change public perception. He tried and won it in court.

All I see is desperation.

You are ignoring one important piece of information, in 2003 mj had a lawyer who sincerely believed in his innocence. That's something we lack now.

 

[Bubs]

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

Wade and his team has gone full blown attack mode with help from Radar.
How many articles Radar have posted about old stories?

The whole thing reminds me of Sneddon's tactics, like raiding Neverland the day Number Ones was released

 

[ivy]

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

I am pretty sure you said when the news broke about the catalogue that he was no longer making that much money and that's why they had to sell the catalogue. But now you are advancing the exact opposite argument because it is favorable to the estate.

I don't memorize my posts but I'm quite sure my post were about the buy/sell option. We might have discussed the income potential of the estate but our take on it is obviously different. Sure Estate was earning more in 2009 and that was due to the extreme interest in MJ. Right now the income has decreased but still in tens of millions and still makes MJ the biggest earning deceased artist. You seem to think the decrease of income is due to smear campaigns, I don't. I think it's normal. It's quite normal to see a sudden increase in income due to public interest but then that interest die and have steady income.

Weizmann refused to say positive thinks about MJ during the 2005 fiasco and he is now in charge of this molestation case. We should not be surprised at all at the lack of effectiveness. This guy failed miserably in 1993, was not willing to say any thing positive about mj in 2005, still we are supposed to ignore all that and pretend that he is the best for the job. Not to forget that his ego will not allow him to ask Mez for help.

Not quite. Although Weitzman is listed as counsel in all lawsuits, he doesn't personally handle all of them. He is more like the supervisor. Listed on cases as a lawyer gives him access to documents being filed - probably making it easier to keep track of developments. I believe Jonathan Steinsapir is doing most of the work in Robson/Safechuk cases. They also regularly hire expert law firms when needed. For example even though Weitzman is listed as a lawyer at IRS case, they actually hired a law firm with expertise in tax law. Who knows if they would bring in other lawyers if this goes to trial. As for TMez, I believe he will play an important role as a witness. We know the prosecution Auchincloss and Zonen are in contact with Robson/Safechuck lawyers and "willing to speak". Who do you think would be the best to counter them? Yep, TMez.

 

[HIStory]

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

Jermaine does some defending of MJ through several tweets: https://twitter.com/jermjackson5

Great to see it. More than some people who should be doing the defending.

 

[Bubs]

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

"Is It Scary?"

There's a ghost out in the hall
Theirs a goul beneath the bed
Now it's coming through the walls
Now it's coming down the stairs

Then there's screaming in the dark
Hear the beating of his heart
Can you feel it in the air
Ghosts be hiding everywhere

I'm gonna be
Exactly what you wanna see
It's you whose haunting me
Your warning me
To be the stranger
In your life

Am I amusing you
Or just confusing you
Am I the beast
You visualised
And if you wanna to see
Eccentrialities
I'll be grotesque
Before your eyes

Let them all materialise

Is that scary for you baby
Am I scary for you oh
Is it scary for you baby
Is it scary for you

You know the stranger is you
Is it scary for you baby

There's a creak beneath the floor
There's a creak behind the door
There's a rocking in the chair
But nobody sitting there
Their's a ghostly smell around
But nobody to be found
And a coughin' and a yawnin'
Where restless soul's spoke

I'm gonna be
Exactly what you gonna see
So did you come to me
To see your fantasies
Performed before your very eyes

A haunting ghostly treat
The foolish trickery
And spirits dancing
In the light

But if you came to see
The truth the purity
It's here inside
A lonely heart

So let the performance start

Is that scary for you baby
Am I scary for you oh
Am I scary for you baby
Am I scary for you
So tell me is it scary for you baby
So tell me is it crazy for you baby
Am I scary for you

You know the stranger is you
Am I scary for ya

Masquerade the heart
Is the height of haunting souls
Just not what you seek of me
Can the heart reveal the proof
Like a mirror reveals the truth
See the evil one is you

Is that scary for you baby
Am I scary for you oh
Am I scary for you baby
Is it scary for you
So tell me am I scary for you baby
Am I scary for ya baby
Is is scary for ya baby
Am I scary for you
(I don't wanna talk about it)

Am I scary for you baby
Am I scary for you
I'm tired of being abused
You know you're scaring me too
I see the evil is you
Is it scary for you baby


... sad story of his life.

Somehow the whole tabloid circus reminded me of that song and I read lyrics 5 minutes ago:bogeyed:

Ps, thanks for people trying to lighten up the mood on this thread with comments about MJ magical closet - so funny and needed some laughs.

 

[innuendo141]

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

Jermaine does some defending of MJ through several tweets: https://twitter.com/jermjackson5

Great to see it. More than some people who should be doing the defending.

A hell of a lot more. I am glad to see that it is easing up on Twitter tonight. Children these days are dangerous. They retweet everything and anything.

 

[marc_vivien]

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

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...son-police-report_us_576ad5d1e4b09926ce5d611b

 

[HIStory]

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

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...son-police-report_us_576ad5d1e4b09926ce5d611b

What does it say? I don't want to click on it if it's another trash fest.

 

[maja]

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

It's not trash. It's a good article. Thanks for posting!!

 

[Soundmind]

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

It's not trash. It's a good article. Thanks for posting!!

It is trash. The only thing positive about it is that it admits most of what was in that report was shown to jurors. But they went on and on about books and photographs of nude children found at never land although they do not meet the requirement of being qualified as childpornagraphy. Moreover, they made sure to mention that there were many homosexual and heterosexual material in his possession but those heterosexual material had the arvizos fingerprints on them and those of mj which supported the arvizos claims that the heterosexual material were used to lure and abuse them. They claimed that this report was not made public record before. Although I did read it in 2005, which again prove how little research these so called journalist do.

 

[Paris78]

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

Paris Jackso? ?@ParisJackson

During the trial in 2005 when tabloids reported the same B.S, the Defence AND the Prosecution denied the story!

 

[Paris78]

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

Brett Barnes retweetet
Paris Jackso? ?@ParisJackson
Unfortunately negativity will always sell. I urge you all to ignore the trash & the parasites who make a career trying to slander my father.

Corey Feldman@Corey_Feldman
@heapsajo it's not a "new report" this all came 2 surface during the trial in 05! And guess what? He was found innocent on all counts!!

 

[HIStory]

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

It's not trash. It's a good article. Thanks for posting!!

It's so-so. More reasonable than the rest but still has some mistakes. I wrote a comment.

Thanks for a more reasonable approach of the subject than most articles. However, I still have some issues. The fingerprint evidence found on porn magazines by the accuser did not prove anything because testimonies showed (even the accuser's brother's testimony which contradicted the accuser's testimony on the issue) the accuser and his brother went to MJ's bedroom when he wasn't there. Clearly they could have touched those magazines then. (And it was interesting the brothers contradicted each other on the issue. While the accuser Gavin denied that they had ever been in MJ's bedroom in MJ's absence, the brother Star had very vivid memories of not only going there with his brother but also sleeping in the room while MJ wasn't there. There were also witnesses who testified to the fact that the brothers begged staff to let them in MJ's room while he wasn't there. So Gavin was caught in another lie with that denial.)

MJ wasn't only aquitted because the accuser admitted to a teacher that he wasn't molested. That's just one small tiny part of the many reasons why he was aquitted. The timeline didn't make sense. The accuser changed his story on many important points when new emerging evidence showed his original story did not hold up. The brothers contradicted each other on many important details and they also contradicted their own earlier statements. Basically they clearly lied on the stand.

There is a good summary about the 2005 case on this website (and also about the 1993 case): http://michaeljacksonallegations.com/the-2005-allegations/

As for books that had nude pics of children, those weren't a lot of books. The context was a collection of over 10,000 books much of them art photography books as MJ was a huge photography fan. The prosecution took everythig with a nude (or sometimes just semi-nude) person with it. This meant confiscating about 17 books out of a 10,000 collection. Most of those about adults (both male and female). Some had nude or semi nude kids, but it wasn't the focus of MJ's collection. It really cannot be estbalished from them that he had some sort of weird sexual inerest in kids. It seems more like he had an interest in art photography and in a collection like that you are bound to have some nudes.

I am very bothered by the fact that the media can get away with lying and twisting facts the way they do with this tabloid stuff that Radar Online started. It went viral within hours and other publications uncritically reposted them as if the claims in the article were facts. Claims like that Simen Johan's book Room to Play was a "sex book" and some sort of perverted horrific thing. That guy is an acclaimed artist, so is the media now accusing him and the other artists of being child pornographers? The same media has no problem promoting these rt works and artists, and now their work is all of a sudden criminalized just because someone has an interest in smearing Jackson's name beyond the grave? And do we accuse the Library of Congress of keeping child porn? http://lccn.loc.gov/2004297659

I looked up all of those books and they are just not what the media claims them to be. How the media manipulates us is just extremely disturbing.

 

[#MJforever57]

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

I agree too it is a good article i just read it.

 

[maja]

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

It is trash. The only thing positive about it is that it admits most of what was in that report was shown to jurors. But they went on and on about books and photographs of nude children found at never land although they do not meet the requirement of being qualified as childpornagraphy. Moreover, they made sure to mention that there were many homosexual and heterosexual material in his possession but those heterosexual material had the arvizos fingerprints on them and those of mj which supported the arvizos claims that the heterosexual material were used to lure and abuse them. They claimed that this report was not made public record before. Although I did read it in 2005, which again prove how little research these so called journalist do.

Well, I don't agree. Compared to the trash I've read over the past few days, this is the first article that admits that no child porn was found, that the jury saw this evidence and found him not guilty, that the 'evidence' radaronline posted was amended and not the official evidence provided by the sheriff's department and so on and so forth.

Obviously it could be more detailed, but compared to the articles that were posted in the last hours and days, it's not trash at all.

 

[#MJforever57]

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

Well it is the top of the ninth and Wade and James have two out one more to go and this game is over.

 

[terrell]

Sorry, but ...

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

Those "new facts", those images ... looked at from a different angle it looks like a hysterical satire. Sad thing: It isn´t.

See, this is the kind of thing you need to post when anyone who want to talk about this. Fight with facts. that is the difference between those who know Mj was innocent to those who think he was guilty. those who think he was guilty can not give you no facts.

 

[HIStory]

Brett Barnes 4 mins · Twitter · Just because they call it "news", doesn't mean that it's the truth

 

[terrell]

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

Paris Jackso? ?@ParisJackson

During the trial in 2005 when tabloids reported the same B.S, the Defence AND the Prosecution denied the story!

This need to be spread just like the article was spread.

 

[Tony R]

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

So, to confirm, nothing new was found after he died, and ail this is rehash from 2005?

 

[barbee0715]

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

So, to confirm, nothing new was found after he died, and ail this is rehash from 2005?

Yes, that's correct.

 

[Carmour260]

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

So, to confirm, nothing new was found after he died, and ail this is rehash from 2005?

Nothing new was found. The tabloids are being tabloids, no surprise.

 

[Themidwestcowboy]

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

And some people wonder why MJ did so many Anti Tabloid songs? F the press!

 

[Tony R]

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

Yes, that's correct.

Thanks, I admit to feeling rather concerned yesterday when something I read told me otherwise.

Should've known better!