Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate
I don't know if you are being thick or just annoying. Don't you get that it would depend on what the mental examination uncovers? don't you get that they can use it in their motions? Don't you get it that Robson will probably have experts countering it? so it's not something definitive. Don't you get that it clearly won't be the only thing used in summary judgment?
Nowhere did I say that this could be the only thing used in summary judgment in fact I said twice that this could be used
among other things. I wanted to see a possible scenario where they could use the the exam to win summary judgement.
There is an EXCEPTION to the three years you keep mentioning. So your fixation on 2012 is meaningless.
That's only an exception to 340.1. (b) (1)
No action described in paragraph (2) or (3) of subdivision (a) may be commenced on or after the plaintiff's 26th birthday.
It's NOT an exception to 340.1. (a).
You don't have to be younger than 26 to sue a third party but the lawsuit still have to be filed
within three years of the date you reasonably should have discovered the injury stemming from the abuse.
Real sex abuse victims may not come forward for decades but they don't have the history like Robson
and they don't claim that they thought at age 29 that rape was just fine, at least I never heard of any such case.
Do you know any lawsuit against the Church in California where someone older than 26 who testified
in a child molestation trial and claimed that even at age 29 he didn't know rape was wrong survived summary judgement?
My point is that Robson's claim that he could not reasonably discover the injury before 2012 is obvious bullshit.
He is NOT like the Church victims who remained silent for decades.
Your Clash accusers example is also flawed. They sued an individual not a third party entity. Different set of rules and time limitations.
Their case was still thrown out because the judge didn't buy that they didn't realize until recently the injuries they suffered due to the abuse.
It didn't matter whether they sued Clash or a third party their underlying argument as to why they should be allowed to file this late was bogus.
He did a podcast with Diane Dimond in which MJ was discussed. I listened to some of it and didn't get around to listening to it in full. From what I heard Diane, once again, lied. She spoke about the settlement and claimed Jordan received $15.3 million, the parents got $1.5 million each, and Larry Feldman $5 million. Basically she tried to make the settlement amount out to be larger than it was. When infact the $15.3 million, which Jordan received says Diane, was infact spread out amongst the Chandlers and Feldman. If I recall correctly this contradicts what she said in her own book.
No Jordan got 15 million and the parents got 1.5 each and I don't know how much Feldman got but the rest of it.
MJ paid this over 4 years so it was a few million dollar per year for him nothing compared to how much money he would have lost
if he had had a trial. He lost tens of millions due to the 2005 trial.
When was this podcast? Is this some radio station in the US? Which one?
Funny how they don't see anything strange about the PARENTS wanting money for themselves. Like that happens in legit child molestation cases. I never heard of any real child molest case where the parents wanted money for themselves.
Why would they deserve any money if this had been going on they should be in prison for negligence not getting richer!
Blanca Francia did the same. She wanted money for herself.
Then Larry Feldman said in court that the parents didn't ask for money they just accepted it. Gimme a break.
The man who hosted the podcast claims to have knowledge of MJ having been CAUGHT abusing a child and it was covered up (during the Victory tour I believe he claimed). Most telling to me was when he said that he was told this and his response to the person who told him was (I'm paraphrasing here) 'Let's go to the media.' He'd rather go to the media than the police. Typical!
Geez I wonder how Sneddon could miss this bombshell witness! Opperman himself said that he knows MJ was caught?
I assume he didn't say which child, just another phantom victim.
Did he name who told him that and why he didn't call the police? Why he was not a witness in 2005?
They obviously didn't go to the media with any such story. Not even Sneddon claimed that MJ was caught molesting someone
during the Victory tour.
