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

[elusive moonwalker]

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

Great article ivy cant wait for the info on joy robson ? as the b$*#$ once said "to know him is to love him"

 

[ivy]

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

This is why i was angry bout it , i mean do we all not remember what happened in 2005 and how the media was so mean to michael ! If we thnnk the media have changed their ways now sorry not gonna happen

You did not point out your angry about the press or a manipulative article in your post but on the judge who did nothing wrong.

Annita is right. You did not complain about media reporting. You accused a judge. If anything this shows you let media to manipulate you. The media that you know to be mean to Michael.

 

[myosotis]

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

Waiting for a press release from Manly, Stewart and Finaldi..... 'We put up ridiculous arguments and lost our case....' (I'm guessing that the previous attys' could see that Safechuck had no case).

I'm hoping (assuming that we will get the hoped-for decision on Robson, presumably around August* edit 14th Sept.) that the timing of the Safechuck decision (28th June) and Robson 'Estate motion to dismiss' (26th June) will be a lasting reminder to these two. Fans around the world will always remember the week that we lost Michael, but for these two, that week should always be the 'week they lost their money grabbing case'.

As to the press repeating the Judge's summing up in Safechuck's case, I am a bit surprised that since the case was never 'adjudicated' (in the trial sense) that the judge and press don't still have to use the word 'alleged' when talking about the 'abuse'. I guess that's a point of US law, but maybe a confusing one internationally?

(Edit: I see from the actual case papers that the judge says 'The TAC alleges' and 'the complaint alleges' in the sentences before and after the one where he repeats '...it appears the sexual abuse continued until 1992'...so that middle sentence is the one that the press have picked up on to report.

Also: Apologies, I wasn't sure what the 14th September hearing was for... didn't realise it was the Robson decision. I thought that was only if the case went ahead to trial. Bit confused......).

 

[barbee0715]

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

Well, I am not sure what fans are anti estate and spreading around hatred of the Estate and the judge-but at almost midnight last night only me and one other person read the LA article and commented. And I said I wanted to read the whole thing bc that one sentence was most likely taken out of context. I'm certainly not spreading around stuff and trying to act ignorant of the process. I don't think I'm "some fan" trying to spread around hatred of the Estate.

IMO the Estate and their legal team have done a bang up job of destroying Robson and Safechuck. Judge Beckloff was great with pointing out ridiculous discrepancies in the allegations before. I look forward to reading the entire thing this afternoon.

My only gripe in this whole thing has been the length of time it took bc IMO it should have been dismissed immediately. Robson claimed he didn't know about the Estate and yet he is on film talking about the Estate. Etc. I realize Beckloff is trying to be fair. The whole thing was just frustrating and my hatred is reserved for Robson and Safechuck. Certainly not the judge or Estate.

 

[ivy]

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

Waiting for a press release from Manly, Stewart and Finaldi..... 'We put up ridiculous arguments and lost our case....' (I'm guessing that the previous attys' could see that Safechuck had no case).

Reading the ruling you would see that they made it worse IMO. I think previous lawyers had basic negligence claims. These one brought negligent hiring, retention,supervision etc. and Judge said control issue became more important. Because how are you going to say they are negligent for not firing without first making sure they have the ability to fire?

I'm hoping (assuming that we will get the hoped-for decision on Robson, presumably around August* edit 14th Sept.) that the timing of the Safechuck decision (28th June) and Robson 'Estate motion to dismiss' (26th June) will be a lasting reminder to these two.

I think it would take a little more time than that. Safehuck hearing was May 31st and the ruling was June 28th. 4 weeks. Robson hearing is September 14 so I'm thinking any ruling would be mid to late October. Of course perhaps they will just dismiss their own case.

 

[#MJforever57]

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

Reading the ruling you would see that they made it worse IMO. I think previous lawyers had basic negligence claims. These one brought negligent hiring, retention,supervision etc. and Judge said control issue became more important. Because how are you going to say they are negligent for not firing without first making sure they have the ability to fire?



I think it would take a little more time than that. Safehuck hearing was May 31st and the ruling was June 28th. 4 weeks. Robson hearing is September 14 so I'm thinking any ruling would be mid to late October. Of course perhaps they will just dismiss their own case.

Thanks you Ivy good news this makes my day. I knew they mess up the companies had no control over Michael so their could not fire him. That what they need to do it will save the judge from doing it.

 

[redfrog]

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

So this quack of a judge belives the molestation happened???!! Really really???? Without any kind of substantial evidence???

I swear the justice system in America is no justice system at all !

No he doesn't believe it but of course, as it was predictable, the media ignores that this was a demurrer
and the judge himself made it clear in his ruling that he has to treat Safechuck's allegations
as if they were true. I knew the media would present this like MJ got off again because of some technicality.
And most people don't have a clue how demurrers work so while this is good news once again
MJ didn't get justice from the media. If someone you meet says that the judge believed the allegations
simply explain to her how demurrers works.

Nevertheless I find it absurd that Safechuck's claim he was employed during the Bad tour
and compensated with food clothing etc. was accepted as sufficient to create a special
relationship between Safechuck and the companies as if he had been employed.
his parents got the exact same "compensation" so that means the companies
owned a duty of care to them too?

It's also sad to see once again MJ's kindness and generosity being twisted against him.

And if dancing on stage is considered work then all the other kids who danced with MJ
during that tour were also working for him? Robson was working for him when he danced with him
on stage? Unlike Safechuck he doesn't not claim that. The whole thing is absurd.

Also it appears that if the Estate had filed request for judicial notice of MJ being the 100% shareholder
Robson wouldn't have survived demurrer either. Which makes me wonder why they didn't.

Now will Safechuck pay the Estate's legal fees or he gets away with this stunt unscratched?

 

[PoP]

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

So this quack of a judge belives the molestation happened???!! Really really???? Without any kind of substantial evidence???

I swear the justice system in America is no justice system at all !

California's the worst at it of all US.

 

[morinen]

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

California's the worst at it of all US.

And what prompted the person from Canada to form this opinion, may I ask?

 

[redfrog]

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

This is interesting. I wondered back then why the Estate went for summary judgement
right away after the fourth revised complaint they say here it was a strategic move.
What do you think that is?

My guess is they wanted to defeat Robson on more than one front not just
on the control issue but I may be wrong.

And Finaldi is either a moron or plays moron. As if he doesn't know
the Estate didn't demur the fourth amended complaint.

Once I told someone that Robson's own lawyers dropped him obviously because they know
he is full of shit. Other person said no Robson dropped them to get BETTER lawyers.
Finaldi is so much better indeed.

 

[ivy]

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

Nevertheless I find it absurd that Safechuck's claim he was employed during the Bad tour
and compensated with food clothing etc. was accepted as sufficient to create a special
relationship between Safechuck and the companies as if he had been employed.

I see Beckloff as very careful in regards to appeals - that he makes decisions that cannot be turned over in appeal. It's why he gives people ample chances to amend complaints and even approaches the complaint liberally. That's why I think we have seen Beckloff to give him multiple amendments and even end it with a ruling which is basically "okay I'll assume this and that but nope you lost on this other thing".

If you remember way way back, I repeatedly said I believed safechuck will be dismissed at demurrer and robson at summary judgement. I didn't say that because Robson had a stronger claims - he doesn't. It was because of the relationship with companies - Robson and his family was employed and sponsored by the companies so they actually had a connection. Safechuck had to claim a so called employment - which I'm pretty sure wasn't even a real employment back in 94-95. So that's why I assumed the judge might dismiss Safechuck at demurrer - due to lack of connection with companies and Robson may survive further.

What happened was judge was pretty generous towards Safechuck with "let's assume you were employed" and so on. This basically means Judge equaled Safechuck to Robson and that's why Robson's case is doomed as well.

Now will Safechuck pay the Estate's legal fees or he gets away with this stunt unscratched?

we'll see but you know they can only ask for filing fees and such and not lawyer fees. So it's won't be that much. They might not bother.

This is interesting. I wondered back then why the Estate went for summary judgement
right away after the fourth revised complaint they say here it was a strategic move.
What do you think that is?

probably they want this to be over with. In SJ they can bring in evidence and discovery and judge's demurrer ruling did state that he needed more information to decide. So rather than another demurrer, they might have chosen to go to SJ where they can give the judge the information he asked for.

And Finaldi is either a moron or plays moron. As if he doesn't know
the Estate didn't demur the fourth amended complaint.

Well I think Finaldi meant to say "robson survived demurrer and so should Safechuck". It was a flawed statement that Robson survived demurrer with the previous complaint and not their revised complaint that changed everything.

What he doesn't realize that this is a two way street. With the same logic if Safechuck cannot succeed, Robson shouldn't either.

Once I told someone that Robson's own lawyers dropped him obviously because they know
he is full of shit. Other person said no Robson dropped them to get BETTER lawyers.
Finaldi is so much better indeed.

Just so you know, we can't tell if the old lawyers dropped Robson or if he changed them.

 

[redfrog]

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

I see Beckloff as very careful in regards to appeals - that he makes decisions that cannot be turned over in appeal..

Yeah that could be the reason but it's sad that there is even a possibility an appeal court
might consider this obvious non-employment as some real employment. the so called compensation
was something his parents and other families who traveled with MJ got too and if dancing
on stage makes him an employee then Robson was an employee for a day because he danced
with MJ in Australia? Just ridiculous.

Just so you know, we can't tell if the old lawyers dropped Robson or if he changed them.

We don't know for sure but we know the Estate said in their opposition to Robson's 4th complaint
"Plantiff's prior counsel withdrew from the case and new counsel was brought in"

That language indicates the lawyers decided to leave, if I was fired I would never
say I withdrew from the case. Of course the Estate could be wrong or could lie
or could mean that the lawyers withdrew after Robson fired them but that they left
both Robson and Safechuck at the same time also makes it more likely they left on their
own volition unless both Robson and Safechuck had a falling out with them at the same time
or both suddenly saw Finaldi and Manly as their saviors.

 

[8701girl]

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

I see Beckloff as very careful in regards to appeals - that he makes decisions that cannot be turned over in appeal. It's why he gives people ample chances to amend complaints and even approaches the complaint liberally. That's why I think we have seen Beckloff to give him multiple amendments and even end it with a ruling which is basically "okay I'll assume this and that but nope you lost on this other thing".

If you remember way way back, I repeatedly said I believed safechuck will be dismissed at demurrer and robson at summary judgement. I didn't say that because Robson had a stronger claims - he doesn't. It was because of the relationship with companies - Robson and his family was employed and sponsored by the companies so they actually had a connection. Safechuck had to claim a so called employment - which I'm pretty sure wasn't even a real employment back in 94-95. So that's why I assumed the judge might dismiss Safechuck at demurrer - due to lack of connection with companies and Robson may survive further.

What happened was judge was pretty generous towards Safechuck with "let's assume you were employed" and so on. This basically means Judge equaled Safechuck to Robson and that's why Robson's case is doomed as well.



we'll see but you know they can only ask for filing fees and such and not lawyer fees. So it's won't be that much. They might not bother.



probably they want this to be over with. In SJ they can bring in evidence and discovery and judge's demurrer ruling did state that he needed more information to decide. So rather than another demurrer, they might have chosen to go to SJ where they can give the judge the information he asked for.



Well I think Finaldi meant to say "robson survived demurrer and so should Safechuck". It was a flawed statement that Robson survived demurrer with the previous complaint and not their revised complaint that changed everything.

What he doesn't realize that this is a two way street. With the same logic if Safechuck cannot succeed, Robson shouldn't either.



Just so you know, we can't tell if the old lawyers dropped Robson or if he changed them.

I get the feeling he felt his lawyers "werent helpimg his lies enough" and dropped them

 

[myosotis]

New article in the NYPost, where Finaldi talks about going to Europe to track down Jordan Chandler, so Wade and Safechuck could look him in the eye and convince him to help. Yeah, good luck with that.

No mention whatsoever about Safechucks claims being tossed out of court.

This sounds increasingly as though it's intended to be an anti-MJ press campaign, more than a genuine court case. (Finding Chandler wouldn't make the MJ companies any less 'under the control' of MJ)
It makes me wonder all the more who is paying for Finaldi and co. (and possibly Robson, Safechuck etc to come forward and make these claims. Just because it's a conspiracy theory doesn't preclude an actual conspiracy ......And I'm not usually a conspiracy theorist at all!)

The lawyers bringing a $100 million sex-abuse lawsuit against Michael Jackson’s former companies are on a worldwide manhunt, searching for the late pop star’s first molestation accuser in hopes of convincing him to testify.

After scouring the U.S., investigators have turned to the UK and other European locales trying to track down Jordan Chandler, who in 1993 received a $20 million payoff after his father brought a suit alleging that Chandler, then 13, had been molested by Jackson at the singer’s Neverland Ranch.

Lawyers for Wade Robson and Jimmy Safechuck, who, as children, were companions of Jackson, and now claim they were sexually abused by the singer, say that they believe Chandler has left the U.S. to avoid them, according to a source close to the case.

Robson and Safechuck believe that if they can find Chandler — who’s never spoken about his experience with Jackson — they can convince him to end his silence, says the source.

Wade and Jimmy want to look Jordie in the eye and talk to him about what they suffered,” said the source. “They feel that they may appeal to him to finally tell his story.”

Speaking from his office in Irvine, California, lead attorney Vince Finaldi confirmed that his investigators are on the hunt for Chandler.

“He’s a key piece of the puzzle surrounding this case, and we’re not going to stop until we find him,” said Finaldi, whose team has tracked down dozens of former members of Jackson’s staff and entourage, including maids, security guards and Neverland office staffers.

Insiders say they have trekked to Greece to find *****’s ex-chief of staff Norma Staikos, who oversaw provisions and contracts for many of Jackson’s child companions and their families.

 

[8701girl]

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

:lol: :lol: :lol: this idiot really thinks they can get jordie to help them??! bwhahhahaha if tom snake ass sneddon couldnt get him what makes him think jordie will come now?! hahah

 

[8701girl]

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

Put it this way as much as i would love that coward to come out he will be in hidng till the day he dies :angry:

 

[elusive moonwalker]

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

? not scraping the barrel much are they. "And now the end is nigh"

I doubt chandler has gone anywhere just makes the story sound better

 

[ivy]

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

Even if we assume they find Jordan and he is willing to help (both of which unlikely btw), he can't help them at this stage IMO. This is a matter of control issue at demurrer / summary judgment.

 

[Miel]

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

LMAO. Finaldi doesn't know much about the case he is on, does he?

Bringing in Jordan Chandler would not help them getting around the statutes of limitations, so it is useless for them.

I suspect he thinks just the mention of Jordan Chandler makes the Estate s**t their pants and he thinks dragging him into this would elevate their chances of a settlement, because otherwise I don't get their insistance on him to the point of harrassing his family members trying to depose them despite of their obvious reluctance.

That they think of Jordan as this big bombshell that would force the Estate on its knees shows two things:

1) they know Robson and Safechucks's case is weak, they need some more support.

2) It also shows they do not know much about the Jordan Chandler case if they think that's a strong case and dragging Jordan into this would help them. If I were them I would be wary of opening that can of worms because it could massively backfire at them. Even if Jordan would stick to his story, dragging him into a trial (which by all likelyhood now won't happen) would only be good for the Estate IMO. The Jordan Chandler story is a very public one, it would be difficult to find a jury that has never heard of it. And what most people heard of it is some twisted tabloid myth, probably negative to MJ. So it would serve Finaldi better to leave it that way. If I was an Estate lawyer and the case went to trial I would welcome the opportunity of finally cross-examining Jordan. I would welcome the opportunity to finally expose all the problems of that case that most of the world has never heard of because the media is just not telling them about it. It would be actually much more beneficial to the Estate then leaving the jury in the dark about that case thinking it was a "strong case" and with who knows what kind of false ideas about it .

I already said this in the past : I would be so glad that Finaldi managed to bring Jordan into this weak case. I also think the Estate would be glad too.

Jordan has done everything in the past to not testify in court, because he knows his side of the story has too many holes to be credible inside of the courtroom.

 

[#MJforever57]

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

Jordan is not coming anywhere. Wade the end is near for you no more lies.

 

[myosotis]

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

Jordan has done everything in the past to not testify in court, because he knows his side of the story has too many holes to be credible inside of the courtroom.

But Finaldi and Co. have such a strong incentive for Chandler to come forward, after all, with a similarly 'cr@p' story, they have shown how they can make millions for Safech......Oh, slight problem....

 

[passy001]

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

LMAO. Compensating much with this Jordan hunt for the lack of real, relevant action?

And you know your case is doomed when you consider Jordan Chandler the "key piece of the puzzle" in your case.

I also wonder if this article is their lame attempt at deflection from the real news of the week, namely that Safechuck has been dismissed.

And I see Jordan is as eager to testify as ever. LMAO.

You are correct. This is a smoke screen to deflect attention away from the real news: safechuck case has been toasted for good. This is very Finaldi and Co. They like using smear tactics. In reality they wished they could do a press conference to tell the press how they will win their scam cases. But as things turned out recently, they could only do a smear spin in the tabloids.


@Ivy: Please hurry and put out another post about the summary judgement on the robson case. This should help keep the focus back on track.

 

[redfrog]

The lawyers bringing a $100 million sex-abuse lawsuit against Michael Jackson’s former companies

Oh but it's not about money at all.
I wonder why Finaldi told the post this number doesn't make them look more credible.

:lol: :lol: :lol: this idiot really thinks they can get jordie to help them??!

No he doesn't believe it at all. This is just tabloid revenge for Safechuck's defeat.

 

[ivy]

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

But Finaldi and Co. have such a strong incentive for Chandler to come forward, after all, with a similarly 'cr@p' story, they have shown how they can make millions for Safech......Oh, slight problem....

Unfortunately for finaldi they cannot dangle money promise in front of Jordan as an incentive. He already got a settlement with no admittance of guilt and which probably protected Michael from any future claims. So even if they can find him, he will have to talk from the "goodness of his heart". It's very clear that Jordan has no interest in being involved in this.

@Ivy: Please hurry and put out another post about the summary judgement on the robson case. This should help keep the focus back on track.

the first post on summary judgment will come monday or tuesday

 

[passy001]

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

LMAO. Finaldi doesn't know much about the case he is on, does he?

Bringing in Jordan Chandler would not help them getting around the statutes of limitations, so it is useless for them.

I suspect he thinks just the mention of Jordan Chandler makes the Estate s**t their pants and he thinks dragging him into this would elevate their chances of a settlement, because otherwise I don't get their insistance on him to the point of harrassing his family members trying to depose them despite of their obvious reluctance.

That they think of Jordan as this big bombshell that would force the Estate on its knees shows two things:

1) they know Robson and Safechucks's case is weak, they need some more support.

2) It also shows they do not know much about the Jordan Chandler case if they think that's a strong case and dragging Jordan into this would help them. If I were them I would be wary of opening that can of worms because it could massively backfire at them. Even if Jordan would stick to his story, dragging him into a trial (which by all likelyhood now won't happen) would only be good for the Estate IMO. The Jordan Chandler story is a very public one, it would be difficult to find a jury that has never heard of it. And what most people heard of it is some twisted tabloid myth, probably negative to MJ. So it would serve Finaldi better to leave it that way. If I was an Estate lawyer and the case went to trial I would welcome the opportunity of finally cross-examining Jordan. I would welcome the opportunity to finally expose all the problems of that case that most of the world has never heard of because the media is just not telling them about it. It would be actually much more beneficial to the Estate then leaving the jury in the dark about that case thinking it was a "strong case" and with who knows what kind of false ideas about it .

Agree to all the points above.

It's really frustrating how the media for decades have invested so heavily on playing the chandler card to falsely imply MJ guilt, despite the lack of corroborating evidence and the lack of credibility of the accuser, including the parents.

And why would Chandler want to help out the very same people who testified against him back in 1993? Both robson and safechuck offered testimonies in support of MJ back then. so it makes no sense for him to try and help them 24 years later even if he could unless they bribe him. Even so, there is a major risk for Chandler, because by testifying chandler will be opening himself to heavy, gruesome cross examination, that will likely expose his scam, and forfeit the millions of dollars he misappropriated from MJ. and this could land him in jail. that would be poetic justice, should that come to happen.

 

[Snow White luvs Peter Pan]

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

Chandler has shown repeatedly he doesn't want to lose his blood money. He won't do anything for them because as soon as he's deposed his story will crumble and will be exposed. He's a coward.

I really hope this mess ends up this year, Robson's and Safechuck's claims are the same. And I also hope bloodsucking bastards stop "coming forward" and leave Michael and his legacy alone once and for all.

 

[Justthefacts]

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

I tell you what I am getting so sick and tired of people throwing Jordan Chandler name around like people are supposed to be afraid of him. Jordan Chandler, if you are reading this and you're probably not you are a punk b****. You're a pussy. I want him to testify let's put him on the stand. Let's ask him about those classmates at NYU who signed affidavits stating you told him it wasn't true. Let's do that. We won't get a chance to because like I said you're a pussy.

 

[redfrog]

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

those classmates at NYU who signed affidavits stating you told him it wasn't true.

I know Tom Mez talked about witnesses saying Jordan admitted it was not true
but what makes you think they signed affidavits ?

 

[barbee0715]

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

I would think and hope that once Robson's case is thrown out, this will end it once and for all. Anybody dreaming of making a quick buck with false allegations can just forget about it because this has set a precedent that there is no settlement and no trial. The legal system is not on your side and the Estate never will be.

 

[redfrog]

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

I would think and hope that once Robson's case is thrown out, this will end it once and for all. Anybody dreaming of making a quick buck with false allegations can just forget about it because this has set a precedent that there is no settlement and no trial. The legal system is not on your side and the Estate never will be.

Yes but if there are other forces financing these accusers and their lawyers they may find others willing to
sell their soul to the devil. There is no question that the owners of the American and British tabloids
are against Michael and they still see money in perpetuating the child molester myth.

The Estate should sue for defamation , or Norma or Jolie Levine should sue for defamation.
I don't even understand how they are not outraged I would be if someone accused me
of procuring kids for molestation.
They should be on the attack for a change not always on the defensive. They have enough
ammunition against Robson to prove malice.

They demanded legal fees from Robson so it will be interesting to see how that will play out.