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

[SarahJ]

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

I'm concerned about the continued attacks they bring out in the press because it may really ugly as they press for a settlement. I hope the estate will stick with it even though the effect on his children privately must be devastating , which is what I think Sleaze & Co. also are banking on. But then again it also shows how desperate WR's team is. I wish someone would go after them big time. I know they won't but I still wish someone could.

 

[redfrog]

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

I don't know if it is just your writing style but please calm down and think before you post.
Evidence/information etc. is found during discovery process - which has started March 2016 and is/was still ongoing. You don't need to provide any evidence in your initial complaint. You make claims and it's considered to be truth until after demurrer. Furthermore depending on the protective order - meaning if an information is classified as confidential - no lawyer can mention it publicly. It can only come out during a proper legal proceeding.

I did think before I posted. If Robson had strong evidence he would have already mentioned it in his story.
That is not dependent on any discovery the question is whether Robson himself has anything like a recorded phone call
or fax or letter.
Such evidence was mentioned in Safechuck's complaint
the medallion the letter MJ sent to him or the recorded interview. Of course they don't prove anything
but it just shows that they grabbed whatever they could to make the story sound credible.

Even if we talk about evidence that can only be found through discovery there was already discovery during the probate case
they got all the police reports, depositions connected to the 1993 2005 cases AND Robson's lawyer
said they looked at thousands of documents already that's why they discovered "shocking evidence"
that the companies procured kids for abuse AND if Finaldi said watch out 2 3 weeks from now you will
see the evidence in the press then obviously Finaldi already knows what that evidence is.
Asking the question why can't you reveal that evidence now why do you want to send it to the press
2-3 weeks later would have been logical.

They DID include "evidence" found during discovery in the complaint, namely the statements of those four employees.


So if Robson had anything "explosive" it would have been mentioned in his complaint especially in the latest version
which was written after his new lawyers looked at all the documents and certainly Finaldi could reveal it
during that interview. If it was classified he wouldn't have said watch the press.
Assuming of course that he was not talking out of his ass and making shit up just to make himself sound more credible, which is quite possible also.

we don't have any info that they are contingency lawyers.

I bet I read that in one of these articles recently and I don't know which one was it.

He makes a comment saying that those men abused as kids are afraid as Robson/Safechuck initially were

Which is yet another lie. They didn't claim that they were afraid. They claimed they didn't know it was abuse and
didn't realize they were molested and were fine with the whole thing. That's the opposite of being afraid.
And what exactly would they be afraid of anyway? The whole ****ing media and the police were on Arvizo's and Chandler's side
and now once again nobody in the media challenges Robson or Safechuck. Accusing MJ is safe.

Actually American justice system strongly believes everyone deserves their day in court. That's why you would see them give plaintiffs all the chances they can.

And that's pretty good evidence that the system is irrational. Not everyone deserves their day in court!
Obvious liars crooks who copy paste another case filled with absurd nonsense like the company controlled the president and sole owner of the company should not get their day in court. That MJ was fined for not showing up in court during the Bartucci case
is just another example of this insanity.
That a grown man can say before age 29 I didn't know child rape was wrong so I couldn't have possibly filed this lawsuit
before that and get his day in court itself shows how rotten the US system is. It a system that rewards sheer madness.

 

[#MJforever57]

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

So basically the Judge will keep granted they amend given them enough time to amend the complaint before the judge B make that finale decision. Wade and his lawyers are going to try to delay summary judgement as many time as they can. Look like this will be the plan given Wade and his lawyers more time to put more stories out there.


He we go backward and forward.


Ivy
Actually American justice system strongly believes everyone deserves their day in court. That's why you would see them give plaintiffs all the chances they can.



I agree with this but the problem that we have is ppls who are really sexual abuse victims some of them do not get they day in court because we have a system where you can lie and the court will believe it and the real victims go un notice and it is sad.

 

[elusive moonwalker]

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

Surprise surprise. See you all in 2020 ??

 

[#MJforever57]

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

Wade and his lawyers keep this up we will have to see in the G Book Of World Records how many time was a Plaintiff grant amend to stop summary judgement.

 

[Bubs]

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

Surprise surprise. See you all in 2020 😄😨

Yes, it looks like it:-(

Future Hearings
03/13/2017 at 08:30 am in department M at 1725 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401
Trial Setting Conference

So it could easily be 2018 before trial starts.

 

[SarahJ]

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

No wonder California courts are so back logged.

 

[Bubs]

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

^^Its ridiculous considering Wade was on brink of suicide just a few weeks ago, and now they want to drag this case for years.

 

[HIStory]

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

Yes, it looks like it:-(

Future Hearings
03/13/2017 at 08:30 am in department M at 1725 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401
Trial Setting Conference

So it could easily be 2018 before trial starts.

That is if there will be a trial.

I think there is a deadline of 5 years for civil cases so it must be finished until May 2018. Robson's lawyers mention it in their amendment motion.

 

[Soundmind]

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

I visited the website of these blackmailers. It is pathetic how they make sure to highlight the settlement figures they were awarded. There is no sense that they are after justice at all, sleazy blackmailers who are chasing every opportunity to get a payment from an institution. It explains why the accuser of Xmen director went to them and now wade and safef@ck.

 

[ivy]

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

I did think before I posted.

Sorry to say but most of the time you sound in a panic mode and posting stuff that shows you have no basic understanding of the system. Or that you just don't care about the rules of the system and post a bunch of "why?why?" that doesn't make much sense.

Even if we talk about evidence that can only be found through discovery there was already discovery during the probate case

That was a limited discovery and cannot be compared to this one. This full discovery has mental examinations, depositions etc. So discovery in probate case was old information. this is new information.

They DID include "evidence" found during discovery in the complaint, namely the statements of those four employees.

no, they included "evidence" known for a long time and was in public domain.

So if Robson had anything "explosive" it would have been mentioned in his complaint especially in the latest version
which was written after his new lawyers looked at all the documents and certainly Finaldi could reveal it
during that interview. If it was classified he wouldn't have said watch the press.

see this is tiring because we already talked about it. Initial complaint doesn't require to provide any proof of the claims. And an evidence that is confidential now could become public info during a legal proceeding. In other words that it is possible to have information right now that is confidential and therefore cannot be shared with media/public/anyone. But the same information can become public information during a motion or a hearing etc a short while later.

Right now I agree with Respect77 and Soundmind that he is probably referring to a deposition etc that has just happened or about to happen. Personally I'm expecting him to file a discovery motion, such as a motion to compel etc. and do a press release about it. But we will see.

Assuming of course that he was not talking out of his ass and making shit up just to make himself sound more credible, which is quite possible also.

Yes that's possible too. It's also possible what he considers explosive could be just old stuff, or tabloid stuff that he chooses to believe. In his initial public letter/press release he made a reference to the dozens of kids MJ allegedly settled with and that's a false tabloid story. We also know Radar recirculated a decades old document as new info. So that's possible too. We will wait and see.

I bet I read that in one of these articles recently and I don't know which one was it.

Unless you can back it up with proof, please not present it as a fact.

And that's pretty good evidence that the system is irrational. Not everyone deserves their day in court! Obvious liars crooks who copy paste another case filled with absurd nonsense like the company controlled the president and sole owner of the company should not get their day in court. That MJ was fined for not showing up in court during the Bartucci case
is just another example of this insanity.
That a grown man can say before age 29 I didn't know child rape was wrong so I couldn't have possibly filed this lawsuit
before that and get his day in court itself shows how rotten the US system is. It a system that rewards sheer madness.

Again you are sounding manic here. Who determines if the people are crazy or not? If they deserve a chance or not? You cannot have judges arbitrarily allow some people to sue and not allow others to sue. Unless they make a really really crazy claims - such as aliens abducted them etc.- they will get their day in court. We have seen people like Billie Jean Jackson to get a hearing, we have seen Antony Jackson's motions being heard even he doesn't have standing to be heard.

Plus you are confusing yourself with the judge. We have the luxury of looking into the all available information from 93 and 05 and question Robson's claims. Judge is making decisions only based on the information presented to him and only based on legal basis. For example it's not judge duty to determine whether Robson is lying or not. Judge's duty is only to determine if he can sue or not. That company information will be considered when it's time according to the procedure.

Surprise surprise. See you all in 2020 ????

So it could easily be 2018 before trial starts.

5 year rule says it has to be tried by May 2018.

A demurrer takes around 6 months. Assuming no more delays it is possible the summary judgment to happen and determined at the end of 2017.

we'll see.

 

[#MJforever57]

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

Wade and his lawyers main goal now it to force the Estate into a settlement that all they want. These lawyers know this case will not go to trial there is no evidence no proof to backup his claims it all about the money.

 

[InvincibleMJ]

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

Guys, I know it sucks Wade's lawyer got to amend their complaint again but is it really that good for them? When I first read their motion to amend and the opposition, I thought their goal with this complaint is to stall and postpone summary judgment and nothing more. I don't think that the content of the amended complaint is stronger than the one before.

In my opinion the negligence part is weak. The hiring of MJ can be easily proven as irrelevant once they show MJ was the sole owner of the companies as we can see in the opposition. The mandated reporting part seems ridiculous to me. Just because they call MJJP/V a school doesn't make it a school and I think they will have hard time convincing anyone that MJJP/V is a school or a day care. Wade's previous lawyers knew it too.

 

[#MJforever57]

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

it clear what is happening here Judge B. is give Wade and his lawyers what they want he want to make sure they have every chance to fix their amend complaint so when the judge make that finale ruling that Wade and his lawyers will not be able to appeal his ruling because they were given enough time to fix it. And yes it does suck but this is what it is. We know this case has no chance it is very weak.

 

[redfrog]

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

Unless you can back it up with proof, please not present it as a fact.

I found it. Of course nothing that is written in an article can be considered proof as anyone can write anything.

Southern California contingency lawyer John Manly, who has pocketed millions of dollars by suing the Catholic Church, has now admitted that his office has obtained clients for abuse lawsuits by making unsolicited phone calls to Catholic Church parishioners.

The obvious question for Manly is this: For what other reason would a Church-suing contingency lawyer "investigate" a Catholic priest except to garner clients?

http://www.themediareport.com/2012/11/13/john-manly-fished-victims-fr-michael-kelly/

Sorry to say but most of the time you sound in a panic mode and posting stuff that shows you have no basic understanding of the system. Or that you just don't care about the rules of the system and post a bunch of "why?why?" that doesn't make much sense.

Actually if someone doesn't understand how the system works it makes sense to ask why something is done or not done.
But basically this is what you said when I was talking about the Estate using the mental exam to win summary judgement
based on the statutes of limitations in 340.1(a) and later it was confirmed that that's exactly what they want to do so my assumption was correct.
Asking Finaldi what that explosive evidence is, why he can't reveal it now and why Robson didn't mention it in three years
is logical given that it could be any evidence , something that Robson may have, something that was already found during discovery
something that is not confidential and if it is Finaldi could have said just that. The bottom line is he wasn't even challenged and got away with a threat without any explanation.

no, they included "evidence" known for a long time and was in public domain.

It's not either or. Yes that info was publicly known AND also found during discovery in the police interviews. They didn't just pick those statements from the Quindoys press conference or what Blanca Francia told Hard Copy they refer to the SBSD interviews.
As for Safechuck they included evidence which was not public domain before (the letter and the interview the medallion)
if Robson had similar evidence let alone explosive evidence (like a recorded phone call where MJ coached him)
they would have mentioned it in the complaint.

Again you are sounding manic here. Who determines if the people are crazy or not?

There is nothing manic about recognizing that a man who claims
"I didn't file earlier because before age 29 I didn't think rape was molestation and I didn't think anything was wrong with that
and I lied during a child molestation trial because I didn't think what MJ was accused of was molestation even though
I knew it was illegal but in 2012 May I looked at my son and imagined those acts and I slowly realized that those acts are abuse
and molestation not consensual sex"
should not get his day in court.
And if you can determine that alien abduction is crazy you can sure determine that Robson's
tale is crazy too and an obvious lie.
Don't try to rationalize what the court is doing with these complaints. There is nothing rational about this process. It's madness as was letting the Arvizo case go to trial or allowing the civil case go before the criminal case in 1993 just because Chandler was not yet 14.

We have seen people like Billie Jean Jackson to get a hearing

And with that you've confirmed how ridiculously irrational the American justice system can be.

A demurrer takes around 6 months. Assuming no more delays it is possible the summary judgment to happen and determined at the end of 2017.

If it's likely it would survive demurrer can't the Estate go right to summary judgement like they did in the probate case?

 

[ivy]

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

Actually if someone doesn't understand how the system works it makes sense to ask why something is done or not done.

I don't mind people asking questions. What I find annoying is that people not reading and/or not bothering to understand what was said and keep asking the same questions repeatedly.

The bottom line is he wasn't even challenged and got away with a threat without any explanation.

Of course he wasn't challenged. He is going to the radio shows of people who are his friends. If you are expecting these interviews he pick and choose would challenge him, you are very very naive.

they would have mentioned it in the complaint.

here we are talking about apples and oranges. you are talking about information they already have and I'm talking about new information they can learn during discovery.

There is nothing manic about recognizing that a man who claims
"I didn't file earlier because before age 29 I didn't think rape was molestation and I didn't think anything was wrong with that
and I lied during a child molestation trial because I didn't think what MJ was accused of was molestation even though
I knew it was illegal but in 2012 May I looked at my son and imagined those acts and I slowly realized that those acts are abuse
and molestation not consensual sex"
should not get his day in court.
And if you can determine that alien abduction is crazy you can sure determine that Robson's
tale is crazy too and an obvious lie.

Unfortunately a judge can't and it's not really a judge's job. See let me give a Michael related example. There was a woman who claimed Michael followed her, inserted a device into her and stole the song ideas from her brain and released them. A judge has denied that complaint in a few months stating the claims were frivolous.

On the other hand Robson filed his complaint with an affidavit from a doctor. Whether what he claims can happen or not, repressed memory, compartmentalized memory or whatever you call it is a debate for experts. Not a judge.

I get it that you approach to this from a common sense perspective and I agree with that. But once again it's not a judge's job to determine if Robson is credible or not, if Robsons "I didn't recognize abuse" claims are possible or not. Judge only looks to this from the legal perspectives to determine if he can file a lawsuit or not. That's what demurrer is. Everything else, the merits of the claims etc are a topic of summary judgment. and if needed a verdict is the job of a jury.

and that's is exactly why I said this can survive demurrer but fail at summary judgment.

Don't try to rationalize what the court is doing with these complaints.

It's not limited to these complaints. It is like that for all the other cases and other people. and it's not a matter of rationalizing anything. These are the rules. Whether you like it or not, that's how the case will be handled step by step. That's what makes your complaining here moot.

 

[terrell]

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

Ivy, you know your stuff.

 

[Annita]

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

Did anyone hear what Meserau said yesterday in the radio-Show?

 

[gerryevans]

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

In the old radio show, he mentions that they believe that MJ abusing kids were a long term thing and there were a lot of kids abused. He makes a comment saying that those men abused as kids are afraid as Robson/Safechuck initially were. To me it sounded like they don't have anyone else. and his explanation is they are too afraid to come forward. If I have time, I'll type the transcript for that show too.

These guys make a head spin with their forever changing positions, especially Robson. Robson first had repressed memory...no wait, he always knew what MJ did to him, but even as an adult he thought anal sex with a child was a form of love...no wait, he was really afraid to come forward. No wait...that makes less sense than all the other junk, because he would have been hailed a hero if he had LIED in 2005 and said he had been molested. So what was he afraid of? MJ's fans outcry would be nothing in comparison to the national and international "voice" and sympathy he'd have had with the media in 2005. His face would have been on every television screen and newspaper touting his bravery for coming forward. But nope, he was afraid and only got courageous when he looked at his infant son, and had a lightbulb moment, oh wait...I was actually molested. And how does this new found courage manifest itself? He quietly seeks to cash in on it.

The only fear Robson and Safechuck should have is of karma, because if there is any truth to it at all, they should be quivering in their shameless boots for proceeding with this travesty.

Please please let this judge do the right thing in the end and bring this thing to an end in the summary judgment.

As always Ivy, your updates and deciphering are greatly appreciated.

 

[redfrog]

I don't mind people asking questions. What I find annoying is that people not reading and/or not bothering to understand what was said and keep asking the same questions repeatedly.

Exactly what did I ask repeatedly? The issue was if Robson had explosive evidence he would have already mentioned it in his complaint as even weak evidence like the letter, interview, medallion were mentioned and they sure filled Robson's complaint with the statements of those ex-employees, scraping the bottom of the barrel. Looks like they used anything which sounds even remotely incriminating like this innuendo:

And if they found something only recently and it's still confidential then Finaldi still could have been asked about that.
I don't think that those hosts are Finaldi's friends (is there any proof?) they just like everyone in the media fail to challenge these accusers and their lawyers. My rhetorical questions pointed out how biased and/or stupid they were for not asking those questions.

See let me give a Michael related example. There was a woman who claimed Michael followed her, inserted a device into her and stole the song ideas from her brain and released them. A judge has denied that complaint in a few months stating the claims were frivolous.

On the other hand Robson filed his complaint with an affidavit from a doctor. Whether what he claims can happen or not, repressed memory, compartmentalized memory or whatever you call it is a debate for experts. Not a judge.

This discussion is about whether the American justice system respects reason and common sense while evaluating complaints.
A justice system which needs "experts" to decide whether a 29 year old sophisticated man who testified during a child molestation trial understands that molestation is molestation is irrational and corrupt. Letting everyone from loony Billie Jeans to crooked Wade Robson have their day in court should not be the guiding principle of a civilized justice system.

If the Estate raises the issue (and it looks like they will) the judge will have to make a decision on whether the SOL in 340.1 (a) applies or not which means it will be the judge's job to decide whether Robson should have reasonably discovered his injuries before 2010 or not.

The only reasonable and fair ruling on that issue alone would kill the case.
But the judge couldn't make that reasonable and fair decision in May 2013 because the "rules" make it necessary
to first go through demurrers, then discovery, get a mental health expert's opinion.
I hope you see the fundamental flaw in that process.


Moreover the judge could have accepted the Estate's logical arguments as to why this amendment should not be allowed
but the he did not. What's his excuse? That judges usually give as many chances to the plaintiff as possible? That there is plenty of time until May 2018?
Read your own headline:
Sheer Absurdity of Wade Robson’s Revised Complaint

Well what happened here is that the wonderful American justice system once again rewarded sheer absurdity.

And if the judge overrules the Estate's demurrer because Safechuck all of a sudden believes he was employed by the companies
and was paid with food and wardrobe what exactly will you call that? Due process?

 

[ivy]

Did anyone hear what Meserau said yesterday in the radio-Show?

I didn't. But they post the podcast Monday/Tuesday etc. We will learn it then.

These guys make a head spin with their forever changing positions, especially Robson. Robson first had repressed memory...no wait, he always knew what MJ did to him, but even as an adult he thought anal sex with a child was a form of love...no wait, he was really afraid to come forward.

Technically they didn't claim he was afraid in their complaint. The whole thing is that they need to explain why he waited this long to come forward.

In the second radio interview (I'm working on the transcript btw), The lawyer says Wade compartmentalized the abuse and then with his kids birth he reflected on it. So their theory is that Robson was fully aware of everything, groomed by MJ to believe it was a loving thing. He put those memories on back of his mind, didn't think about them for decades and then with his child's birth he brings them forward and then realizes no those weren't loving acts. To me that still sounds some sort of repressed memory

Exactly what did I ask repeatedly?

Your whole post is repeating the same stuff over. Can't you see that?

I don't think that those hosts are Finaldi's friends (is there any proof?)

Both show hosts acknowledged that Finaldi's law firm regularly attends to their radio shows. That alone is enough for me to demonstrate that they were more friendly with Finaldi than Michael.

This discussion is about whether the American justice system respects reason and common sense while evaluating complaints.

No it's not. This is a thread about Robson and Safechuck cases. Your thoughts about American system is totally irrelevant. None of the complaining here would change the legal system. So you are wasting time.

Sheer Absurdity of Wade Robson’s Revised Complaint

You need to read the content of it and not get fixated on the a word in the title. That article and the follow up opposition motion article pointed out the weak arguments Robson had, their circular logic, their constant changing position etc. That's what I called as absurd. However the articles also mentioned that an amendment is possible and it can survive demurrer but pointed out it doesn't stand a chance at summary judgment.

So unlike you I don't spend time on complaining about the American Justice system, something we have no control over. I never called the American legal system as "wonderful", sure it has its flaws. However I understand and acknowledge how it works and form my opinions accordingly.

In other words you can type "this should be dismissed at demurrer, stupid judge, stupid legal system" for 1,567,890 times. It won't change how the system works. So you will be wasting your time and other people's time.

 

[redfrog]

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

Your whole post is repeating the same stuff over. Can't you see that?

But exactly what did I ask repeatedly?
You said I repeatedly asked questions you already answered. I did not.

No it's not. This is a thread about Robson and Safechuck cases. Your thoughts about American system is totally irrelevant. None of the complaining here would change the legal system. So you are wasting time.

I said this discussion (as in the current one between you and me) not the thread itself.
If you think it's irrelevant then you shouldn't have reacted to my comment on the system
in the first place. You wasted your time.

You need to read the content of it and not get fixated on the a word in the title. That article and the follow up opposition motion article pointed out the weak arguments Robson had, their circular logic, their constant changing position etc. That's what I called as absurd. However the articles also mentioned that an amendment is possible and it can survive demurrer but pointed out it doesn't stand a chance at summary judgment.

Yes and by allowing this amendment the judge rewarded that absurdity . Killing it during summary judgement won't change that
It shouldn't have been allowed in the first place.

So unlike you I don't spend time on complaining about the American Justice system, something we have no control over.

You and everyone else express opinions about things you don't have control over don't pretend that
I am the only one. I elaborated only because you tried to defend the system and the process by pointing out that in America everyone is allowed to have their day in the court like that somehow justifies this madness that has been going on for three years. It does not. Just my opinion.

 

[ivy]

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

you tried to defend the system and the process by pointing out that in America everyone is allowed to have their day in the court like that somehow justifies this madness that has been going on. It does not. Just my opinion.

I didn't defend, I tried to explain it. Whether it justifies or not doesn't matter. That's the system. That's what's going to happen no matter how much you complain. The end.

 

[terrell]

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

I didn't defend, I tried to explain it. Whether it justifies or not doesn't matter. That's the system. That's what's going to happen no matter how much you complain. The end.

I agree. Didn't I also give the example of how including me was supeona because a person wanted me to testify and this went on for a year that had me tied up (and I was not even there).

 

[redfrog]

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

I didn't defend, I tried to explain it.

This sounded to me like you thought letting everyone have their day in court actually makes sense.
If that's not what you meant, fine.

Quote Originally Posted by redfrog View Post
Yeah just more evidence that the American justice system doesn't give a **** about common sense.

Actually American justice system strongly believes everyone deserves their day in court. That's why you would see them give plaintiffs all the chances they can.

http://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/t...ate/page1049?p=4169800&viewfull=1#post4169800

Whether it justifies or not doesn't matter. That's the system. That's what's going to happen no matter how much you complain. The end.

If we only talked about things we can change this thread wouldn't even exist.
Few things you or anyone say about this case will change anything we still express our opinion about it.
Similarly I just expressed my opinion about a system which allows such a travesty to flourish.
Let's move on.

 

[#MJforever57]

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

it may take more time but summary judgement will happen Wade and his lawyers can't stop it.

 

[myosotis]

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

.

Did anyone hear what Meserau said yesterday in the radio-Show?

I've listened to the recording, and I didn't hear TMez say anything unexpected. He basically said that they started with Wade as a defence witness in 2005 because he was such a strong witness for the case, and so were his mother and sister, who were also strong and powerful witnesses. When asked if he had any concerns about the complaint by Wade and JS against the MJ companies, TMez said that he hoped that the Estate lawyers would 'stick to their guns and fight this all the way'. He expressed some uncertainty about Weitzman doing that because he was on the team that settled in 1993. TMez said that he would never settle the case, and he would defend Michael again. If he was asked to be involved, he would consider the situation put to him (re. legal approach, witnesses etc).
I didn't hear Gurvey ask TMez about the challenge to a debate by Finaldi. I don't think it was mentioned.

https://audioboom.com/boos/5149022-gurvey-s-law-10-08-16

 

[redfrog]

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

.

I've listened to the recording, and I didn't hear TMez say anything unexpected. He basically said that they started with Wade as a defence witness in 2005 because he was such a strong witness for the case, and so were his mother and sister, who were also strong and powerful witnesses. When asked if he had any concerns about the complaint by Wade and JS against the MJ companies, TMez said that he hoped that the Estate lawyers would 'stick to their guns and fight this all the way'. He expressed some uncertainty about Weitzman doing that because he was on the team that settled in 1993. TMez said that he would never settle the case, and he would defend Michael again. If he was asked to be involved, he would consider the situation put to him (re. legal approach, witnesses etc).
I didn't hear Gurvey ask TMez about the challenge to a debate by Finaldi. I don't think it was mentioned.

https://audioboom.com/boos/5149022-gurvey-s-law-10-08-16

Unfortunately Tom did exactly what I thought he would
only repeat that Wade was picked as the first defense witness because he was so convincing
and once again he said that he is concerned Weitzman will settle. This doesn't help MJ.
I very much hope that he won't debate Finaldi because it's obvious that he doesn't know
the details of this case.

Tom once said he read Gutierrez's book but he never mentions him as the main sources
of many of these allegations, he didn't connect the dots. And it seems he doesn't know enough about
the Chandler case either.
Allan mentioned Safechuck's claims about code words and hand scratching and he said how do you defend
someone when the allegations are so specific? And Tom said nothing when it would have been so easy
to debunk that. For one thing a false accuser knows that the more detailed his story sounds
the more people he can fool. The Arvizos did the same with the Got milk?, sex with mannequin, Jesus Juice
Devil's backbone, head licking stories and none of it was true.

It sucks that there is noone who could effectively defend MJ in the media
against these bogus claims.

 

[terrell]

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

.

I've listened to the recording, and I didn't hear TMez say anything unexpected. He basically said that they started with Wade as a defence witness in 2005 because he was such a strong witness for the case, and so were his mother and sister, who were also strong and powerful witnesses. When asked if he had any concerns about the complaint by Wade and JS against the MJ companies, TMez said that he hoped that the Estate lawyers would 'stick to their guns and fight this all the way'. He expressed some uncertainty about Weitzman doing that because he was on the team that settled in 1993. TMez said that he would never settle the case, and he would defend Michael again. If he was asked to be involved, he would consider the situation put to him (re. legal approach, witnesses etc).
I didn't hear Gurvey ask TMez about the challenge to a debate by Finaldi. I don't think it was mentioned.

https://audioboom.com/boos/5149022-gurvey-s-law-10-08-16

That tells me they even know that Finaldi lawyer is a full of it.

 

[terrell]

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

Unfortunately Tom did exactly what I thought he would
only repeat that Wade was picked as the first defense witness because he was so convincing
and once again he said that he is concerned Weitzman will settle. This doesn't help MJ.
I very much hope that he won't debate Finaldi because it's obvious that he doesn't know
the details of this case.

Tom once said he read Gutierrez's book but he never mentions him as the main sources
of many of these allegations, he didn't connect the dots. And it seems he doesn't know enough about
the Chandler case either.
Allan mentioned Safechuck's claims about code words and hand scratching and he said how do you defend
someone when the allegations are so specific? And Tom said nothing when it would have been so easy
to debunk that. For one thing a false accuser knows that the more detailed his story sounds
the more people he can fool. The Arvizos did the same with the Got milk?, sex with mannequin, Jesus Juice
Devil's backbone, head licking stories and none of it was true.

It sucks that there is noone who could effectively defend MJ in the media
against these bogus claims.

I disagree. I think what he said was the right things to say. Tmez fight in the courtroom. And lets be real, NO ONE is following this trash of Wade and James but us.