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

Re: [Discussion] Sexual abuse claims against MJ Estate (Robson/ Safechuck/ Doe)

Doesnt fit her agenda. She and her like dont care about any "victims" this story has gone against her mantra for the last 20 plus years so its a case of lets ignore it.
 
Re: [Discussion] Sexual abuse claims against MJ Estate (Robson/ Safechuck/ Doe)

Saw this post from Smooth Criminal in LSA. I think she will happy to apear in any future documentation again to describe MJ as a child molester even when the girl not fits for her.


She still cares. She appeared in a documentary about the MJ trials that aired a month or so back.

She took great pleasure in Safechuck coming forward. She stated 'it gives a whole new meaning to the term Jackson 5'.
 
Last edited:
Re: [Discussion] Sexual abuse claims against MJ Estate (Robson/ Safechuck/ Doe)

She still cares. She appeared in a documentary about the MJ trials that aired a month or so back.

She took great pleasure in Safechuck coming forward. She stated 'it gives a whole new meaning to the term Jackson 5'.
Diane thinks she is so clever.

Yeah, I'd be surprised if she turned her back on this new story, girl or not. It's quite odd that she said she had no interest. It's like admitting you were writing about it only because it was more salacious with boys.
 
Re: [Discussion] Sexual abuse claims against MJ Estate (Robson/ Safechuck/ Doe)

Diane thinks she is so clever.

Yeah, I'd be surprised if she turned her back on this new story, girl or not. It's quite odd that she said she had no interest. It's like admitting you were writing about it only because it was more salacious with boys.
That heffer been lost creditbility in reporting on Jackson. When she was fired from courttv, DD looked like an obsessed fool who wanted to bother MJ even when everything prove he was innocent. I loved how the female lawyer for Katherine Jackson and others bursted her out on her bias. DD has no choice but to let it go. she looks like a fool each time she talks. No one of is substance listening to her and her old buddy Sneddon is dead.
 
Last edited:
Re: [Discussion] Sexual abuse claims against MJ Estate (Robson/ Safechuck/ Doe)

Saw this post from Smooth Criminal in LSA. I think she will happy to apear in any future dokumentation again to describe MJ as a child molester even when the gril not fits for her.


She still cares. She appeared in a documentary about the MJ trials that aired a month or so back.

She took great pleasure in Safechuck coming forward. She stated 'it gives a whole new meaning to the term Jackson 5'.
She wish. What new meaning? three who were liars and two who defended Jackson even after he died but now want to lie to get money. That is her logic. She is crazy.
 
Last edited:
Re: [Discussion] Sexual abuse claims against MJ Estate (Robson/ Safechuck/ Doe)

Yes it has Chandlers dad behind it, of course... Jordan is an adult now and it's his choice what to do with it!
 
Re: [Discussion] Sexual abuse claims against MJ Estate (Robson/ Safechuck/ Doe)

Ivy, do you know what this mean:
11/01/2016 Ex-Parte Application (for an order approving certificate of merit )
Filed by Attorney for Pltf/Petnr

and what ever it means, it was denied?
11/01/2016 at 08:30 am in Department 97, Benny C. Osorio, Presiding
Exparte proceeding (FOR AN ORDER APPROVINGCERTIFICATES OF MERITWILL BE TRANSFERRED) - Denied without prejudice
 
Re: [Discussion] Sexual abuse claims against MJ Estate (Robson/ Safechuck/ Doe)

Only from google but something to do with having a expert filing a report supporting the claim. So that filing has been denied???
 
Re: [Discussion] Sexual abuse claims against MJ Estate (Robson/ Safechuck/ Doe)

Not quite.

Whenever they file a late claim for sexual abuse they need to file a certificate of merit by a doctor. For example if someone claims "I didn't realize I was abused until now", a doctor needs to file a statement saying that it's possible.

A judge will look to the complaint and the accompanying certificate and start the case. Only after that the person who filed the lawsuit can serve the defendants.

Finaldi asked the judge to look over the certificate, approve it, start the case so that they can serve the Estate.

Estate had already filed a motion saying even though the defendants aren't named this is clearly against MJ Estate and they asked the case to be transferred to Beckloff.

The judge has denied to look over the certificate saying "it will be transferred". So my educated guess is he will transfer the case to Beckloff and Beckloff will handle anything and everything.
 
Re: [Discussion] Sexual abuse claims against MJ Estate (Robson/ Safechuck/ Doe)

The judge has denied to look over the certificate saying "it will be transferred". So my educated guess is he will transfer the case to Beckloff and Beckloff will handle anything and everything.

So this is yet another accuser we don't even know about yet or this is Jane Doe?
 
Last edited:
Re: [Discussion] Sexual abuse claims against MJ Estate (Robson/ Safechuck/ Doe)

So this is yet another accuser we don't even know about yet or this is Jane Doe?

No it's not. It's Jane Doe.

Seriously it's not that hard. Bubs posts from case summaries, case summary requires a case number so it should be a case we already know. A complaint that has been filed, a case number assigned but not yet properly started equals Jane Doe. My reply makes it a lot more clear with serving Estate, Estate filing a motion etc. , all of which means a case that's been around some time and not a new complaint. It is perfectly clear that we aren't talking about an new accuser.

And logically we can't talk about a new accuser "we don't even know about yet", can we? If we are talking about it, it means we already know about the accuser.
 
Re: [Discussion] Sexual abuse claims against MJ Estate (Robson/ Safechuck/ Doe)

No it's not. It's Jane Doe.

Seriously it's not that hard. Bubs posts from case summaries, case summary requires a case number so it should be a case we already know. A complaint that has been filed, a case number assigned but not yet properly started equals Jane Doe. My reply makes it a lot more clear with serving Estate, Estate filing a motion etc. , all of which means a case that's been around some time and not a new complaint. It is perfectly clear that we aren't talking about an new accuser.

And logically we can't talk about a new accuser "we don't even know about yet", can we? If we are talking about it, it means we already know about the accuser.

Logically, knowing about the existence of an accuser and knowing who she or he is are two different things.
I meant someone we don't know anything about except that he or she decided to accuse MJ
filed a complaint and COM and his/her case has not yet been accepted by the court
(one reason could be because the COM is obvious junk I wouldn't put that past Manly and Finaldi).
The Estate could have filed that motion shortly before the application to approve the COM was filed
or even on the same day, does not mean the case had to be around since Oct 25 when Jane Doe's complaint was filed.


I didn't know how Bubs got the case summaries. It thought it was possible to get this info
by simply searching for any and all court cases related to a particular plaintiff/defendant/judge or
even content of the complaint, which would include MJ's name, no need for a case number.
 
Last edited:
Re: [Discussion] Sexual abuse claims against MJ Estate (Robson/ Safechuck/ Doe)

this beyond drawn out and overdone... I mean what are we doing in 2016 still dealing with allegations.. 1090 pages here.. this has been a hanting of 23 years.. He's Gone.. This sucked the life out of him and he's not here... and it STILL continues? f**** man!
 
Re: [Discussion] Sexual abuse claims against MJ Estate (Robson/ Safechuck/ Doe)

Logically, knowing about the existence of an accuser and knowing who she or he is are two different things. I meant someone we don't know anything about except that he or she decided to accuse MJ

but that's not what you meant. You wrote "yet another accuser"meaning someone other than Robson, Safechuck and Jane Doe. you furthermore differentiated between Jane Doe and "yet another accuser". And I'm telling it is impossible to discuss a new accuser that we don't know about it. first we learn about the accuser and then we discuss them. So whatever posted were surely about either Robson, Safechuck or Jane.


filed a complaint and COM and his/her case has not yet been accepted by the court
(one reason could be because the COM is obvious junk I wouldn't put that past Manly and Finaldi).

I'm not sure what you are talking about here. Certificate of merit is just a procedure.It is written by a doctor who spends only a few hours with the accuser. Lawyers also file their own certificate merits. It's basically a procedure. The case will be accepted by the court.

The Estate could have filed that motion shortly before the application to approve the COM was filed
or even on the same day, does not mean the case had to be around since Oct 25 when Jane Doe's complaint was filed.

again not sure what is your point here. Both motions were filed the same day on November 1st. You only file "notice of related cases" after the case is filed. So Jane Doe files the complaint on October 25th and Estate files on November 1st .


I didn't know how Bubs got the case summaries. It thought it was possible to get this info
by simply searching for any and all court cases related to a particular plaintiff/defendant/judge or
even content of the complaint, which would include MJ's name, no need for a case number.

the free case summary system allows you to enter a case number and see the updates. That's what Bubs uses. The paid system allows you to search for party name but 1) Michael Jackson is a pretty common name and 2) this case is filed under Jane Doe against Doe defendants so a name search wouldn't work. There is no judge or content search. You can see any judge's calendar but it only shows the hearings for the day so that wouldn't be any help either to determine the cases filed.
 
Re: [Discussion] Sexual abuse claims against MJ Estate (Robson/ Safechuck/ Doe)

Thanks ivy
 
Re: [Discussion] Sexual abuse claims against MJ Estate (Robson/ Safechuck/ Doe)

Finally published the third radio interview of Finaldi. It is actually the first interview he did.
 
Re: [Discussion] Sexual abuse claims against MJ Estate (Robson/ Safechuck/ Doe)

Trying the case in the media is still not working have heard anything yet. Who has time to listen to this nonsense.
 
Re: [Discussion] Sexual abuse claims against MJ Estate (Robson/ Safechuck/ Doe)

but that's not what you meant. You wrote "yet another accuser"meaning someone other than Robson, Safechuck and Jane Doe. you furthermore differentiated between Jane Doe and "yet another accuser". And I'm telling it is impossible to discuss a new accuser that we don't know about it. first we learn about the accuser and then we discuss them. So whatever posted were surely about either Robson, Safechuck or Jane.

Of course I meant someone other than Safechuck/Rosbon/Jane Doe. Someone who, by just looking at that case summary, we know accused MJ, filed a COM but other than that we don't know anything about him or her yet. How is that impossible?

I'm not sure what you are talking about here. Certificate of merit is just a procedure.It is written by a doctor who spends only a few hours with the accuser. Lawyers also file their own certificate merits. It's basically a procedure. The case will be accepted by the court.

I was talking about why that case summary info didn't make it clear whether it was a new claim or Jane Doe.
When I saw Bubs' post I assumed that Jane Doe's complaint, with COM and all, was already accepted by the court on Oct 25, on the same day it was filed, that's why Finaldi was ready to blow it up in the media.
The COM mentioned in the case summary was filed on Nov 1. I was talking about the possibility that Finaldi and Manly paid some quack to issue a bogus COM for a Daniel Kapon type of accuser (no, I don't expect rational let alone ethical behavior from them) and the judge rejecting it because for whatever reason it didn't meet the requirements for a valid COM. I guess Bubs asked you because it wasn't clear from the summary what exactly was denied and why. It wasn't clear to me either.


again not sure what is your point here. Both motions were filed the same day on November 1st. You only file "notice of related cases" after the case is filed. So Jane Doe files the complaint on October 25th and Estate files on November 1st .

Yes that makes sense but the fact that the Estate already filed a notice of related cases did not necessarily mean it was about the Jane Doe case it could have been for a case filed after Oct 25. Based only on Bubs' case summary info and what you said about the Estate's motion both were possible. I wanted to be 100% sure it was Jane Doe.


the free case summary system allows you to enter a case number and see the updates. That's what Bubs uses. The paid system allows you to search for party name but 1) Michael Jackson is a pretty common name and 2) this case is filed under Jane Doe against Doe defendants so a name search wouldn't work. There is no judge or content search. You can see any judge's calendar but it only shows the hearings for the day so that wouldn't be any help either to determine the cases filed.

Thanks, I didn't know these.
If there was an advanced search where you can enter multiple facts about a complaint, like plaintiff/defendants/content/ time period that would reduce the number of results significantly. While Michael Jackson is a somewhat common name
probably there are not too many who are suing two California corporations nowadays AND have the name Michael Jackson all over
their complaint.
 
Last edited:
Re: [Discussion] Sexual abuse claims against MJ Estate (Robson/ Safechuck/ Doe)

Of course I meant someone other than Safechuck/Rosbon/Jane Doe. Someone who, by just looking at that case summary, we know accused MJ, filed a COM but other than that we don't know anything about him or her yet. How is that impossible?

I already explained to you how the case summary and the search options work. By now you should know that finding a new victim from case system is indeed impossible.

When I saw Bubs' post I assumed that Jane Doe's complaint, with COM and all, was already accepted by the court on Oct 25, on the same day it was filed, that's why Finaldi was ready to blow it up in the media.

It cannot get accepted the day it is filed because a judge will look over it. it doesn't happen instantly. however as I already explained, it's a routine procedure so it won't get dismissed either. So Finaldi didn't need to wait for the judge to look over the certificate of merit to blow it up in the media.

The COM mentioned in the case summary was filed on Nov 1.

No, certificate of merit was filed the same day as the complaint. On November 1st they filed a motion asking the judge to speed up the approval of certificate of merit so that they can serve the defendants.

the judge rejecting it because for whatever reason it didn't meet the requirements for a valid COM.

if you knew what is certificate of merit is - a doctor who doesn't treat the "victim" saying abuse is possible- you will know that it won't get rejected. I cannot repeat it enough that it's just a routine procedure.

(g) Every plaintiff 26 years of age or older at the time the action is filed shall file certificates of merit as specified in subdivision (h).
(h) Certificates of merit shall be executed by the attorney for the plaintiff and by a licensed mental health practitioner selected by the plaintiff declaring, respectively, as follows, setting forth the facts which support the declaration:
(1) That the attorney has reviewed the facts of the case, that the attorney has consulted with at least one mental health practitioner who is licensed to practice and practices in this state and who the attorney reasonably believes is knowledgeable of the relevant facts and issues involved in the particular action, and that the attorney has concluded on the basis of that review and consultation that there is reasonable and meritorious cause for the filing of the action. The person consulted may not be a party to the litigation.
(2) That the mental health practitioner consulted is licensed to practice and practices in this state and is not a party to the action, that the practitioner is not treating and has not treated the plaintiff, and that the practitioner has interviewed the plaintiff and is knowledgeable of the relevant facts and issues involved in the particular action, and has concluded, on the basis of his or her knowledge of the facts and issues, that in his or her professional opinion there is a reasonable basis to believe that the plaintiff had been subject to childhood sexual abuse.


If there was an advanced search where you can enter multiple facts about a complaint, like plaintiff/defendants/content/ time period that would reduce the number of results significantly. While Michael Jackson is a somewhat common name
probably there are not too many who are suing two California corporations nowadays AND have the name Michael Jackson all over
their complaint.

you can only enter a party name and you can limit the time frame for the search. that's all. However as I said it won't help you at all when the defendants are all Doe defendants. The search function doesn't search inside the complaint files for names, you cannot do a content search. and neither a search for michael jackson nor a search for mjj productions would bring up a complaint by Jane Doe suing Doe 1.

so the only way a search function would uncover a new complaint is

- you need to have a paid account
- you need to constantly run searches for the newly filed cases
- you need to pay for every search you run
- the accuser need to file the case under their own name & you need to know the name of the accuser or they need to name the MJ companies and not doe defendants.

In other words quite impossible. that's why we learned about all the accusers - Robson, Safechuck and Jane - from media.

So to sum it up - if there is any more new accusers media will be the first to report. Anything we discuss here will come from the already known accusers -aka Robson, Safechuck and Jane. Can we move on now?
 
Re: [Discussion] Sexual abuse claims against MJ Estate (Robson/ Safechuck/ Doe)

this beyond drawn out and overdone... I mean what are we doing in 2016 still dealing with allegations.. 1090 pages here.. this has been a hanting of 23 years.. He's Gone.. This sucked the life out of him and he's not here... and it STILL continues? f**** man!

I agree 100% this should be over.
 
Apparently when Robson decided to rewrite history he forgot to reconcile his lies with Mark Quindoy's lies.
In his second amended complaint, filed Feb 19 2014, he said nothing about being molested in a car.
https://www.scribd.com/document/235319581/Robson-Second-Amended-Complaint
But in the third amended complaint, filed Dec 16 2014, the car story is in.

quindoy_TAC.jpg

Unredacted version:

quindoy.jpg


What's his excuse? He didn't remember it when he filed his first and second complaint?
Someone who quotes what a man told him at age 7 and remembers everything what happened during the first and second night and then in MJ's condo would not remember that during the same period he traveled with MJ alone and was molested in his car?
Looks like Robson injected this into his tale after discovery revealed to him that Quindoy said such a thing.

There are numerous problems with Quindoy's story and not just that he was an opportunist tabloid whore who sued MJ for a ridiculous 283 000 dollar overtime pay.

1. Quindoy's witness statement, as cited by Robson, differs from what Quindoy told the media, which of course,
Dimond happily quoted in her book. In the complaint it was a shopping trip and Quindoy saw MJ kissing and touching Robson
and fondling him around his genital area. In Dimond's book it's not a shopping trip but a trip to Solvang to see a dollhouse
and Quindoy saw MJ kissing Robson everywhere, his neck, head, arms, shoulders and body. No mention of fondling.

quindoy1.jpg



2. Where did Quindoy get this idea? Exactly where his underwear on the floor and molestation in the Jacuzzi
ideas came from. Notice how his story is eerily similar to one of Gutierrez's fantasies involving Brett Barnes.
This version has Melanie Bangall as the driver and MJ is in the backseat talking about kissing and almost kisses Brett Barnes.


page 33 Michael Jackson was my lover

Security guard Melanie Bagnall remembers one trip to the airport with
Jackson and Brett Barnes. "First of all, we have to note that all of Jackson's
vehicles had a miniature curtain in the rear view mirror so the drivers couldn't
see what was happening in the backseat. I mean the vehicles like the 4x4 Jackson
has, not the limousines, since the limousines were equipped with a glass divider between
the passenger and the driver. I drove and Jackson rode in the back with Brett Barnes.
One of Michael's bodyguards rode in the front passenger seat and the others followed
us in a car. In the middle of the trip Michael was talking to Brett about insects, and how
they could enter our mouths without us even realizing it. Later Michael asked the boy
if he thought Madonna had insects in her underwear. The boy laughed, at Michael's
strange humor".
"He then asked Brett if he knew how it felt to kiss someone on the mouth. The boy said
no and he looked at Michael curiously. Michael told the boy that the sensation of
kissing someone that you love is the greatest, and also told him that when you are in
love and you are next to the person and your mouths are getting closer, your heart
starts beating quickly. While Jackson was relating this to Brett he moved his mouth closer to
the boy 's as if to kiss him. When I looked back over my shoulder, Jackson realized it and quickly
added 'too bad I don't have to worry about that since I don't have anyone to kiss!'
For me it was sickening. It just bothered me the way he spoke to children"

Quindoy:
I was utterly stunned -- appalled that he could do that to a seven year old boy.

Bagnall:
For me it was sickening. It just bothered me the way he spoke to children.

Two adults were just stunned and appalled and bothered and found it sickening but did absolutely nothing to protect the kids, didn't intervene, didn't report what they saw to anyone, not the supervisors, not the parents, let alone the police. Amazing that Robson is not blaming them for negligence. I'm sure he has some good explanation why these two, both connected to the same pedo fiction writer and court proven prevaricator had an almost identical reaction to MJ acting with boys like a "lover".

3. In case Robson locates Chandler in the Horsehead Nebula or whatever remote part of the universe his coward ass escaped to and if he is willing to "help" the Estate should question him why his mother flat out contradicted his father about yet another "MJ intimate with boys in his car" story and why the one in their book is virtually identical to Gutierrez's brainchild. Clearly, Gutierrez just loves this whole idea of MJ kissing boys in cars.

page 16 All the Glitters

The germ of June's now forgotten concern had originated on her second
visit to Neverland, back in February, when a young boy about Jordie's age sat
on Michael's lap
in the front seat of the limo for the two hour ride to
Santa Barbara. In full view of June, Jordie and Kelly his four year old sister,
Michael hugged and caressed the boys, kissing him often on the ear and
cheek. Soft, lingering kisses.
This affection continued the following day on
the three-hour drive to Disneyland.

page 21 Michael Jackson was my lover

Friday, February 19 1993. At 7 p.m. Jackson arrived in Los Angeles in his limousine to pick up
Jordie and his family. When Jordie got in the limousine he noticed that there was another
boy inside with Jackson. It was Brett Barnes, who Jordie had spoken to by phone before, and
who Jackson had presented as his cousin. "I found Brett very shy and quiet" Jordie said.
"Michael and he were very close while the limousine headed to the ranch. Brett was seated
between Michael's legs. They hugged a lot and kissed each other on the cheek"
.

June Chandler testimony. Sneddon didn't even ask her about hugs and kisses.
The hugs and kisses, sit on his lap/between his legs are Gutierrez's perverted extra.

4 Q. Was Mr. Jackson actually in the limo himself?
6 A. Yes, he was.
7 Q. Now, let’s ask the question --
8 A. Okay.
9 Q. -- was there anybody else in the limo other than Mr. Jackson and the three of you?
11 A. Yes, there was Brett Barnes.
12 Q. And do you recall where Mr. -- where the child Brett -- let me ask you this: With regard to
14 Brett Barnes, can you estimate about approximately what age you felt Brett Barnes was at this point?
16 A. 11. 10, 11.
17 Q. So he was a child?
18 A. He was a child.
19 Q. And where was Brett Barnes in the car in relationship to Mr. Jackson?
21 A. Sitting next to Michael Jackson.


4. Quindoy's story is curiously missing from Sneddon's and Zonen's 2005 arsenal.
Sneddon didn't question Joy Robson about any shopping trip where MJ and Wade were alone and Zonen did not ask Wade about any incident in any car, either. Instead Sneddon asked Joy Robson about a shopping trip where both Wade and Chantal were present.

3 Q. BY MR. SNEDDON: During the first weekend trip to Neverland, did you go to Toys-R-Us?
5 A. No.
6 Q. Was that the second weekend?
7 A. I never went to Toys-R-Us.
8 Q. Did your children go to Toys-R-Us?
9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Which one of those weekends did they go?
11 A. I don’t recall.
12 Q. But you do recall a trip?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. And they went with Mr. Jackson?
15 A. Yes.

Why ask Joy Robson about a shopping trip where both her kids were present but not ask her about a trip where MJ was supposedly alone with Wade especially if Sneddon knew Quindoy accused MJ of molesting Wade then and there?

Why ask Wade about Charlie Michaels' crotch grabbing story but not ask him whether MJ fondled and kissed him in a car?

15 Q. Were there periods of time when you were at Neverland and working with Mr. Jackson on dance
17 routines?
18 A. No. I mean, we would mess around and dance
19 a little bit in the studio every now and then, yes.
20 Q. Was there ever an occasion where you were on the dance floor with Mr. Jackson and he was showing you a routine and he grabbed your crotch in a manner similar to how he would grab his own crotch while doing those performances?
25 A. No, that’s not true.
26 Q. You have no recollection of that?
27 A. No.
28 Q. That didn’t happen? 9112
1 A. No.


5. This is so stupid it should get an award.

First of all, we have to note that all of Jackson's vehicles had a miniature curtain on the rear view mirror so the drivers couldn't see what was happening in the backseat.

and at the same time

When I looked back over my shoulder, Jackson realized it

Let's put aside that MJ was talking like that to Brett unconcerned that not one but two of his employees could hear everything.
Gutierrez suggests MJ put a miniature curtain on the rear view mirror because he had a lot to hide, nevermind that the driver or his bodyguard could see everything by simply looking over their shoulder!
Exactly how did Quindoy see MJ molesting Robson?
Dimond says "he caught sight of the shocking scene". How? She doesn't tell.
Robson's complaint is equally vague: "he witnessed".
If MJ made it easy for his employees to witness his criminal activity why the curtain on the rear view mirror?
Why the alarm in the hallway?


6. Like Gutierrez's Robson's narrative flip flops between a stealth abuser and a blatant abuser depending on whatever "evidence" he wants to throw at MJ. When he wants to use Quindoy's , Francia's, Michaels' stories MJ just didn't care if his employees saw what he was doing to kids. When he wants to use the alarm, the do not disturb sign, or Norma Staikos' alleged efforts to separate Joy Robson from him all of a sudden MJ does his best to avoid detection.
Sneddon/Zonen did the same throughout the trial. When it was about employees seeing stuff
or MJ sleeping over in Evan's house and June's house, or leaving porn all over the place MJ was heedless.
When it was about multiple interior door locks, proximity sensor alarm devices, keypad
combination locks, video and telephone surveillance equipment he was heedful.

In his closing argument he said his room was a fortress and nobody had access to it (well except of course
the Arvizo boys because MJ obviously wanted them to go in there when he was nowhere around):

27 And at night, they entered into the world of the forbidden. At night they went into Michael 12799
1 Jackson’s room, which is a veritable fortress. It is a room that nobody else has access to. It is a
3 room that has codes and locks and multiple doors and alarm systems, and they knew all of those alarm
5 systems and all of those codes, and they stayed there, and they knew all of that information because
7 Michael Jackson wanted them to know all of that information.

And at the same time he said MJ had an open door policy so everyone and their momma could see his adult magazines
in his bedroom, bathroom, the whole "veritable fortress".

2 This was found in a box at the foot of the bed. Just like that. I mean, it may have been
4 closed, but all you have to do is open it up. Remember the open-door policy that Mr. Culkin talked
6 about? Anybody could walk in there. His children walk in there. The people -- the staff who walk in
8 there and clean his room.
It had to be the case that every single person who works at Neverland
10 understands that he collects material like this. This is his bathroom on the first floor.
12 Look at the -- I didn’t lose it. I didn’t lose it. It’s here. Right down here, that is a suitcase. Right
15 there is the black suitcase. This is in his bathroom on the first floor. Anybody can walk into
17 that bathroom at that time.

Like Zonen Robson doesn't realize or doesn't care that he cannot have it both ways.

Maybe he should be asked why MJ didn't install "beware! driver is looking" alarms in his cars.
 
Last edited:
Re: [Discussion] Sexual abuse claims against MJ Estate (Robson/ Safechuck/ Doe)

^
First of all, we have to note that all of Jackson's vehicles had a miniature curtain on the rear view mirror so the drivers couldn't see what was happening in the backseat

This is possibly a stupid question, but is it legal to drive a car in Cali. with the rear view mirror covered over?
 
myosotis;4175382 said:
^


This is possibly a stupid question, but is it legal to drive a car in Cali. with the rear view mirror covered over?

Very good spot.

This is from 2009, although I would imagine the law has always been very similar.

Under California Vehicle Code 26708 subdivision (a)(2), a person shall not drive a car with any object or material placed, affixed, or installed on the vehicle which obstructs or reduces the driver’s clear view through the windshield or side windows.

Even having a air freshner dangling from the mirror can get you stopped by police.
 
Re: [Discussion] Sexual abuse claims against MJ Estate (Robson/ Safechuck/ Doe)

this beyond drawn out and overdone... I mean what are we doing in 2016 still dealing with allegations.. 1090 pages here.. this has been a hanting of 23 years.. He's Gone.. This sucked the life out of him and he's not here... and it STILL continues? f**** man!
IKR.
It's truly disgusting.
He got treated like shit and had his named dragged though the mud by everyone but his fans and family while he was here and now they're trying to f*** up his legacy too.
In fact, I'm sure that people like Diane Dimond got/get some kind of perverse pleasure out of using Michael as a punching bag.
 
Re: [Discussion] Sexual abuse claims against MJ Estate (Robson/ Safechuck/ Doe)

IKR.

He got treated like shit and had his named dragged thougeople like Diane Dimond got/get some kind of perverse pleasure out of using Michael as a punching bag.

of course she did and probably still does!
 
Re: [Discussion] Sexual abuse claims against MJ Estate (Robson/ Safechuck/ Doe)

I do not visit Diane Dimond's Twitter but someone on another board someone said she said she wasn't interested in MJ or the case any more. When someone asked if it was because the new accuser was a girl or because it had to do with MJ she said "both". LOL. Haters struggle to put Jane Doe in their narrative. If anything it backfired.

She may try to claim that, but her obsession continues. Always has, always will. Her entire career was built on MJ, despite her various attempts throughout the years to appear as anything more than a one trick tabloid gossiper. Yeah, she is so "not interested" in MJ anymore that she appeared front and center in the recent Reelz mockumentary tabloid flick, spreading the same old spiel alongside Zonen and the old clan as always.
 
Re: [Discussion] Sexual abuse claims against MJ Estate (Robson/ Safechuck/ Doe)

The legend TSCM .hello!
 
Re: [Discussion] Sexual abuse claims against MJ Estate (Robson/ Safechuck/ Doe)

She may try to claim that, but her obsession continues. Always has, always will. Her entire career was built on MJ, despite her various attempts throughout the years to appear as anything more than a one trick tabloid gossiper. Yeah, she is so "not interested" in MJ anymore that she appeared front and center in the recent Reelz mockumentary tabloid flick, spreading the same old spiel alongside Zonen and the old clan as always.




Exactly! see told u guys her obsession with mj hasn't stopped
 
Re: [Discussion] Sexual abuse claims against MJ Estate (Robson/ Safechuck/ Doe)

I agree too Diane obsession with MJ will never stop either.
 
Back
Top