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

[#MJforever57]

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

What a waste of time.

 

[elusive moonwalker]

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

When its so blatent ie using pics from 2012.then dont tell me the estate or the kids or who ever couldnt sue them. If that doesnt prove malice then nothing does. And ignorance should not be a defence.if they are gonna publish such a damaging story all it took was a google to see the info given to them by robson (if thats their defence) was blatently false.

 

[#MJforever57]

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

The picture could not get no clear then this Wade/James and they lawyers still have no proof if i was the judge i would throw this all out it is a waste of court time and taxprayer money.

 

[terrell]

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

The picture could not get no clear then this Wade/James and they lawyers still have no proof if i was the judge i would throw this all out it is a waste of court time and taxprayer money.

I am sure at this point that the court and the judge know this is BS but they still have to listen to the plantiffs. Wade is hoping someone would give him a settlement but the Estate bet not do it. this was where MJ (Johnny Cochran) went wrong with the Chandlers.

 

[redfrog]

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

And if it was a mistake they should not have just silently removed the pics from the docs, but should have apologized for the misinformation. But they did not. They are all too happy to leave the myth that they created out there.

This is Goebbelsian propaganda indeed. Tell the masses a BIG lie they won't question it because it's so big they'll think it cannot be a lie.

I think we all should write an email to Isabella Burley to urge her to speak out against this manipulation.
If Fourth sex and Larry Clark: Berlin 2012 are among his favorite books she should be outraged that the media called
someone else a pervert sicko for merely owning one of those books.

http://www.isabellaburley.com/

Jonathan Hobin spoke out the media ignored him but at least we have one article we can use to inform
the morons how Radar used his photo to smear MJ.
Would be great if the other artists protested.

For example what does Ed Templeton think about the police not being sure whether his book is child porn or not?
How freaking ridiculous to think that this book is in any way child porn?
https://vimeo.com/54012676

Another thing, Room to play and Fouth sex both were published long after Robson say the abuse stopped.
So exactly who did MJ "manipulate and groom" with those books? The Arvizos never mentioned any
book whatsoever. Only magazines they found on their own while MJ wasn't even there.
It makes me mad how people don't know how much the whole story doesn't make any sense.

I hope the judge sees through this. He has to know that nothing illegal was found in Neverland.
He has to know that possession of child porn is an automatic jail sentence.

 

[8701girl]

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

I seriously think we all need to be private investigators

 

[terrell]

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

I seriously think we all need to be private investigators

Because we are out for the truth, NOT nonsense.

 

[#MJforever57]

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

Terrell is right we are for the truth and nothing else. That why i don't see Wade/James and they lawyers getting pass summary judgement these are all lies. We have the proof right here in this thread. You can see how Radar Online has altar the pictures to make the story look like Michael had these pictures in 1993 and 2003 which we have proof Michael never own these pictures.

 

[redfrog]

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

In short it seems to be a note added by the Robson/Safechuck lawyers. Seems like they would try to bring the "drug addiction" to argue sex addiction as well.

How exactly do they plan to argue THAT?
MJ as a sex addict? LOL
A sex addict who went without molestation for years then months then years again?
Robson rarely even saw MJ during those 7 years so exactly who was he addicted to?
And after 1997?
What a joke.

Putting together the allegations we should believe that out of the blue, between 1988 and 1992, MJ molested Safechuck and Robson hundreds of time, while he didn't do it at all before 1988 even though Emmanuel, Sean, Corey, Jonathan, Frank, Alfonso were his good friends during those pre-1988 years, then took months long breaks in 1993 then even longer breaks between 1993-1997
then gave up on the whole thing until 2003 when suddenly he got the hots for that pig right after the Bashir mockumentary aired
then after 2003 March he gave up molesting for good.


I hope if this shit goes to trial the Estate will demonstrate how all the allegations together don't make a freaking sense not only because they are way too random for an actual serial molester but because they don't show a pattern at all, they are like stories
invented by different people instead of committed by the same person.

 

[#MJforever57]

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

How exactly do they plan to argue THAT?
MJ as a sex addict? LOL
A sex addict who went without molestation for years then months then years again?
Robson rarely even saw MJ during those 7 years so exactly who was he addicted to?
And after 1997?
What a joke.

Putting together the allegations we should believe that out of the blue, between 1988 and 1992, MJ molested Safechuck and Robson hundreds of time, while he didn't do it at all before 1988 even though Emmanuel, Sean, Corey, Jonathan, Frank, Alfonso were his good friends during those pre-1988 years, then took months long breaks in 1993 then even longer breaks between 1993-1997
then gave up on the whole thing until 2003 when suddenly he got the hots for that pig right after the Bashir mockumentary aired
then after 2003 March he gave up molesting for good.


I hope if this shit goes to trial the Estate will demonstrate how all the allegations together don't make a freaking sense not only because they are way too random for an actual serial molester but because they don't show a pattern at all, they are like stories
invented by different people instead of committed by the same person.

Okay this take the cake has Wade/James and they lawyers lost they minds do they really think this is going to stick?

Redfrog i like your post well said i don't know how they are going to explain this. You think the ppls are confuse now their are really going to be more confuse with this story.

 

[analogue]

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

I seriously think we all need to be private investigators

I wouldn't be surprised if the fans know more than the estate

 

[prettyyoungthaang]

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

I wouldn't be surprised if the fans know more than the estate

If I'm honest I can't say that the Estate appear like they really care about MJ's image... they seem more willing to preserve his musical legacy and nothing more. They know that no matter what is published about him, his music will still sell, so perhaps they don't care enough about his public image being tarnished, which I think is pretty despicable.

 

[barbee0715]

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

If I'm honest I can't say that the Estate appear like they really care about MJ's image... they seem more willing to preserve his musical legacy and nothing more. They know that no matter what is published about him, his music will still sell, so perhaps they don't care enough about his public image being tarnished, which I think is pretty despicable.

Actually, I don't think that's true-I don't agree. If Michael had been an actual child molester, my heart would have been broken and I would have destroyed his albums and never listened to him again. I don't think I'm alone-
They know from past experience they have to fight these cases or the musical legacy is over too.

 

[Ms. BlueGangsta]

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

They know from past experience they have to fight these cases or the musical legacy is over too.

Agreed.
They could do a lot more in the way of protecting MJ's name though. :yes:

 

[redfrog]

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

Agreed.
They could do a lot more in the way of protecting MJ's name though. :yes:

Once again Branca and Weitzman showed that they don't give a **** about MJ or his kids for that matter.
It's now the third time that they failed to counter a smear campaign with a strong argument using
FACTS which support Mj's innocence. They failed to contact the media outlets to demand correction,
they could have found someone in the media who is honest enough to print the truth or let them
tell the truth on TV. They did nothing.
Their response was lame and it makes me think that they know very little about MJ, how he lived
why he had those books and magazines, who they actually prove he was into women not boys.
They don't seem to know what happened during the trial either.

I just can't see this gang effectively defending MJ in court. They are not passionate, they are ignorant
and they only care about how much money they can make of off MJ's music.

They are also idiots if they believe this smear campaign has not affected sales and projects.
Most people are morons, they they don't question the media, they don't question the police or the DA.
unless they is a strong factual response proving that the media lied the lie will become the truth
for millions.

How is it that Branca and Weitzman and McClain don't understand that?

 

[analogue]

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

I just can't see this gang effectively defending MJ in court. They are not passionate

Just compare the estate to Tom Mesereau. Even to this day Tom Mesereau defends MJ with tons of passion, when he doesn't even need to. The estate need to take a page out of his book

 

[elusive moonwalker]

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

If I'm honest I can't say that the Estate appear like they really care about MJ's image... they seem more willing to preserve his musical legacy and nothing more. They know that no matter what is published about him, his music will still sell, so perhaps they don't care enough about his public image being tarnished, which I think is pretty despicable.

Very true. I remember back in the 90's a journo said you could be accused of being a chainsaw carrying mass murderer but if the musics good people will buy it. The estate know regadless they will always make money.mj went through 93/03 and he still made and sold millions.. so the estate arent that bothered as nothing can ever be as bad as that

 

[Soundmind]

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

The executors probably are not sure he was innocent. Weitzman already confirmed his doubts in 2005. Don't mention Mez to them, they hate his guts. The incompetent weisman prefers to lose the case than to bring Mez on board.

 

[LindavG]

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

The executors probably are not sure he was innocent. Weitzman already confirmed his doubts in 2005. Don't mention Mez to them, they hate his guts. The incompetent weisman prefers to lose the case than to bring Mez on board.

Nonsense.

 

[analogue]

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

Actually, I don't think that's true-I don't agree. If Michael had been an actual child molester, my heart would have been broken and I would have destroyed his albums and never listened to him again. I don't think I'm alone-
They know from past experience they have to fight these cases or the musical legacy is over too.

I will never understand the people who think MJ was guilty, but still buy and listen to his music. If MJ was guilty, I would have been done with him and his music a long time ago. I wouldn't feel right supporting and giving money to a child molestor.

 

[ChrisC]

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

I will never understand the people who think MJ was guilty, but still buy and listen to his music. If MJ was guilty, I would have been done with him and his music a long time ago. I wouldn't feel right supporting and giving money to a child molestor.

Even if Michael had been found guilty in 2005 - despite my belief of his innocence - I wouldn't have listened to him again.

 

[HIStory]

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

Even if Michael had been found guilty in 2005 - despite my belief of his innocence - I wouldn't have listened to him again.

What reason would you have not to listen to him if you believe in his innocence? Wrong verdicts can happen. A lot depends on what kind of jury a case has, how smart they are, how good job a defendant's lawyer is doing etc. (You can ruin even a good case. Brian Oxman, for example was heading in that direction with his foolishness of trying to make it a race issue etc.) The jury system is vulnerable. People can get wrongly convicted. It happens. That doesn't change a thing about the fact they are innocent if they are innocent. So how does a verdict in itself influence you if otherwise you are convinced of someone's innocence based on everything that you know about a case? In fact, that's exactly the situation when a person would need support and not abandonment by those who believe in his innocence.

Just like I find it a bad argument when fans says "he was innocent because he was acquitted", this one is a weird thing to say as well IMO. It's not the verdict why I believe in MJ's innocence. The verdict in itself doesn't influence me one bit in what I think of the case. It is only the facts of the case that influence me. It is because I researched the case thoroughly why I believe in his innocence, not because 12 other people thought so too.

 

[redfrog]

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

The executors probably are not sure he was innocent. Weitzman already confirmed his doubts in 2005. Don't mention Mez to them, they hate his guts. The incompetent weisman prefers to lose the case than to bring Mez on board.

****ing Weitzman shouldn't be anywhere near the MJ Estate. MJ hated his guts in later years. Branca too.

Branca became the administrator after MJ fired him in 2002! How ****ed up is that?
The Estate should be run by people who love and care about MJ deeply who know every detail of the lies against him.

As for Mez he shouldn't have said over and over and over again that he believes the Estate will settle with Robson/Safechuck.
There was no evidence that the Estate wanted to do that why did Mez keep saying that? It was stupid.
I also don't like that Mez suggested Sandusky may have been framed like MJ!
The two case are nothing alike and Mez should use the Sandusky case to show how different a real molester is from MJ.


Anyway, do you guys go around the websites where this child porn bullshit was copypaste published?
I think we should post the facts in the comments sections as much as possible.

 

[Bubs]

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

****ing Weitzman shouldn't be anywhere near the MJ Estate. MJ hated his guts in later years. Branca too.

Branca became the administrator after MJ fired him in 2002! How ****ed up is that?
The Estate should be run by people who love and care about MJ deeply who know every detail of the lies against him.

As for Mez he shouldn't have said over and over and over again that he believes the Estate will settle with Robson/Safechuck.
There was no evidence that the Estate wanted to do that why did Mez keep saying that? It was stupid.
I also don't like that Mez suggested Sandusky may have been framed like MJ!
The two case are nothing alike and Mez should use the Sandusky case to show how different a real molester is from MJ.


Anyway, do you guys go around the websites where this child porn bullshit was copypaste published?
I think we should post the facts in the comments sections as much as possible.

Is that MJ hating Weitzman fact or your take?
That Michael firing Branca in 2002 is old tired nonsense and has no legs to stand.
This photo is taken from Michael's bedside table from the house hi died by LAPD
http://www.tmz.com/photos/2013/06/1...os-inside-death-house-drugs-propofol-0234-jpg
He makes a notes to himself for Branca to plan out in the future, which he by the way has done as Michael wished.
Branca is right there where Michael wanted him to be, executor of his estate if something happens to him, so you need to get over yourself.
You do not get to choose who runs Michael's estate, only Michael had a say.

Who do you think would be the person to run his estate, who loved and cared of him deeply and knew every detail of the lies against him?
Nobody.

TMezz can say anything he likes, but even he cannot know what is going on because he is outside.
By the way, TMezz said that Branca is the best man to run Michael's estate:cheeky:


"Anyway, do you guys go around the websites where this child porn bullshit was copypaste published?
I think we should post the facts in the comments sections as much as possible."

Don't you think this is a bit ridiculous? First you throw a hissy fit because the estate doesn't release statements to satisfy your demands, then you want to go on tabloids to give them more clicks and support tabloid's livelihood. Do you understand when MJ was golding "Burn the Tabloids" sign, it wasn't meant to "others", but fans.
By the way, seemingly the estate is ignoring tabloids as much as Michael, why can't you. Why you want to feed them?

 

[elusive moonwalker]

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

What reason would you have not to listen to him if you believe in his innocence? Wrong verdicts can happen. A lot depends on what kind of jury a case has, how smart they are, how good job a defendant's lawyer is doing etc. (You can ruin even a good case. Brian Oxman, for example was heading in that direction with his foolishness of trying to make it a race issue etc.) The jury system is vulnerable. People can get wrongly convicted. It happens. That doesn't change a thing about the fact they are innocent if they are innocent. So how does a verdict in itself influence you if otherwise you are convinced of someone's innocence based on everything that you know about a case? In fact, that's exactly the situation when a person would need support and not abandonment by those who believe in his innocence.

Just like I find it a bad argument when fans says "he was innocent because he was acquitted", this one is a weird thing to say as well IMO. It's not the verdict why I believe in MJ's innocence. The verdict in itself doesn't influence me one bit in what I think of the case. It is only the facts of the case that influence me. It is because I researched the case thoroughly why I believe in his innocence, not because 12 other people thought so too.

Bravo. A different verdict wouldnt have changed the facts

 

[redfrog]

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

Is that MJ hating Weitzman fact or your take?
That Michael firing Branca in 2002 is old tired nonsense and has no legs to stand.
Who do you think would be the person to run his estate, who loved and cared of him deeply and knew every detail of the lies against him?
Nobody.

He was fired.
https://www.scribd.com/document/101281102/John-Branca-You-are-FIRED#fullscreen&from_embed
There is no evidence that MJ wanted Branca to be the executor in 2009.
Branca became executor based on that 2002 will which was signed (if it was signed by MJ at all) before he fired him.
That note is a far cry from "planning out the future" and I don't know any evidence that he had any dealing with Branca in 2009.
Do you?
Was there another will MJ signed later?
And even if he had wanted Branca to be the executor in 2009 that does not change the fact that Branca has done a horrible job
defending MJ against these massive assaults. Even when he had the opportunity to set the record straight in the 60 minutes interview he failed miserably.

If out of the hundreds of people MJ knew throughout his adults like there was noone who cared about him and
knew the facts of his innocence that's absolutely tragic. But the minimum Branca, McClain and Weitzman should have done
the moment they grabbed the Estate for themselves is to educate their lame ass about how to defend MJ.

As much as I despise Raymone Bain I don't see why she would make all these up under oath:

Don't you think this is a bit ridiculous? First you throw a hissy fit because the estate doesn't release statements to satisfy your demands, then you want to go on tabloids to give them more clicks and support tabloid's livelihood.
Do you understand when MJ was golding "Burn the Tabloids" sign, it wasn't meant to "others", but fans.
By the way, seemingly the estate is ignoring tabloids as much as Michael, why can't you. Why you want to feed them?

My demands? Where have you been in the last two weeks? MJ was massacred in the press like never before but you think it's no big deal that the Estate failed to fight back.
In case you missed it this story went waaay beyond the tabloids and they got plenty of clicks from millions of people
who won't see the truth unless they read it in the comments. Quite frankly the few clicks it takes to set the record straight does not affect their livelihood.

Do you think we should just put our head in the sand and pretend nothing happened?

 

[ivy]

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

As much as I despise Raymone Bain I don't see why she would make all these up under oath:

you don't? how about suing the estate for tens of millions of dollars as a reason?

 

[HIStory]

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

He was fired.
https://www.scribd.com/document/101281102/John-Branca-You-are-FIRED#fullscreen&from_embed
There is no evidence that MJ wanted Branca to be the executor in 2009.
Branca became executor based on that 2002 will which was signed (if it was signed by MJ at all) before he fired him.
That note is a far cry from "planning out the future" and I don't know any evidence that he had any dealing with Branca in 2009.
Do you?
Was there another will MJ signed later?

That 2002 Will is MJ's last known Will. It does not get invalid just because MJ fired Branca. The two have nothing to do with each other. If MJ did not want Branca as his executor all he had to do was writing another will (regardless whether Branca would hand him back his old Will or not, the latter one would trump the older). There is no later Will than the 2002 one. Moreover, ALL older Wills that MJ had were the same in naming Branca as the executor, the only difference was updating it with his later born kids. You can speculate and daydream all you want about some later Will existing somewhere in someone's basement but the fact is no one submitted any such will. The rest is just speculation by conspiracy theorists and Branca haters.

Like Bubs showed MJ made notes in 2009 about the things he wanted Branca to do. That shows they did reconnect, despite of the denial of Branca haters. Whether they do a good job or not, is another matter, but the fact is the valid Will names Branca as the executor. Whoever disputes that is the one who needs to provide evidence for why that is not so.

 

[terrell]

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

What reason would you have not to listen to him if you believe in his innocence? Wrong verdicts can happen. A lot depends on what kind of jury a case has, how smart they are, how good job a defendant's lawyer is doing etc. (You can ruin even a good case. Brian Oxman, for example was heading in that direction with his foolishness of trying to make it a race issue etc.) The jury system is vulnerable. People can get wrongly convicted. It happens. That doesn't change a thing about the fact they are innocent if they are innocent. So how does a verdict in itself influence you if otherwise you are convinced of someone's innocence based on everything that you know about a case? In fact, that's exactly the situation when a person would need support and not abandonment by those who believe in his innocence.

Just like I find it a bad argument when fans says "he was innocent because he was acquitted", this one is a weird thing to say as well IMO. It's not the verdict why I believe in MJ's innocence. The verdict in itself doesn't influence me one bit in what I think of the case. It is only the facts of the case that influence me. It is because I researched the case thoroughly why I believe in his innocence, not because 12 other people thought so too.

So true. That I why I know MJ is innocent as well due to the EVIDENCE. even look at those who want to think he is guilty. they use lies, twisted truth, false statement, etc to try to say MJ is guilty. And with the accuser, they change their stories, their actions does not match what they are claiming, people were paid to say one thing but in court, they changed thier story. Michael ALWAYS cooperated with the authority, MJ story NEVER changed, he spoke openly and everything he said make sense in the actions of the accusers and their families. That is an innocent man. Also respect, you are right about wrong verdicts. PERFECT EXAMPLE is MIKE TYSON.

 

[terrell]

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

If I'm honest I can't say that the Estate appear like they really care about MJ's image... they seem more willing to preserve his musical legacy and nothing more. They know that no matter what is published about him, his music will still sell, so perhaps they don't care enough about his public image being tarnished, which I think is pretty despicable.

I do not totally agree with this. sometime silence is best. To speak out more will only give it legs. Paris and Jermaine spoke out. that is enuf UNLESS it gets bigger. And look, this story has moved on (a few internet trolls is trying to still talk about it, but they are getting shot down some o their post are now even being deleted by moderators because it is clear they are internet trolls) . Today people care more Clinton email stuff and the two shootings in the United States.