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

[Nite Line]

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

Finally the nightmare is over. I'm glad this greedy pos robson didn't get a single penny. He can go to hell.

 

[CaptainEoLove85]

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

Finally some good news to end this year off.

 

[Applehead28]

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

WooHoo! Happy holidays everyone! unk:

 

[seany]

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

Done, and most of us should do the same, the more reports of the trolls the sooner they get blocked

What sites are you all referring to that has the Trolls lurking?

I'm in the mood for some troll interactions and winding them
Up and of course reporting them
So they are blocked.

 

[wendijane]

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

*laughing*Now be quiet.

 

[wendijane]

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

And for a time, where everyone is outing all the evils and your case fails because it's built on a bunch of buuuuuuull shit and always has been! And.... everywhere, everyone, sees this! That makes me happy. LOL YEAH this is a great Christmas gift
Wade you have been shamed! Go stick your skanky hoe has been head up a turkeys butt!! You cooked your own goose, bitch!

 

[dannyboy72]

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

Yes it's good news, but at the same time, the damage to MJ's legacy cannot be repaired..There are a lot of people out there who believes Wade..

 

[MJJCommunity]

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

Hello,

Can someone post #17624 with a Booommm title in the N&D section, this is a major outcome and something to celebrate and feel we need to spread this as far and wide as possible, which by posting there it will hit all out social media pages and get much more exposure than in here.

Of course continue with this a more in depth thread and once the other has run its course we can merge them.

But this news needs to be pushed out there as its seems not many in the MSM are doing do.

Best,
Team MJJCommunity

 

[Justthefacts]

Yes it's good news, but at the same time, the damage to MJ's legacy cannot be repaired..There are a lot of people out there who believes Wade..

Listen if people believe Wade let them. You act like Michael never went through atrail in 2005. Almost ten years afterhis death Michael’s estate continues to grow and prosper. Screw Wade and any dummy who believes him

 

[#MJforever57]

Listen if people believe Wade let them. You act like Michael never went through atrail in 2005. Almost ten years afterhis death Michael’s estate continues to grow and prosper. Screw Wade and any dummy who believes him

I agree with you 100%.

 

[#MJforever57]

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

I think most people - even MJ detractors - could see this was a shakedown from a mile off. Wades previous behaviour and testimony in MJs trial sunk him.

I agree with you that what did it Wade defend Michael in 2005 and in 2009 did a tribute with Michael sister Janet it was plain to see Wade was doing this because Michael was not here to defend himself and if Michael was here you would have never seen this.

 

[gerryevans]

While we have to wait again. Just heard that the horses @$$ Gene Simmons is being sued for unnamed radio personality for sexual harassment. Karma’s an his @$$ now!!!

Thank you for giving me this Christmas present nugget of news. I always knew the reason he was on MJ's case and adamant about him not being innocent was because he was a dog himself, out there doing all kinds of salacious stuff, and couldn't accept someone wasn't like he was.

 

[terrell]

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

Yes it's good news, but at the same time, the damage to MJ's legacy cannot be repaired..There are a lot of people out there who believes Wade..

MJ legacy is nailed in stone. This will not hurt it. Look how long this was going on even when he was alive and MJ still trived.

 

[Soundmind]

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

Yes it's good news, but at the same time, the damage to MJ's legacy cannot be repaired..There are a lot of people out there who believes Wade..

Hardly anyone believes him. The hurried sexual abuse allegations against celebrities nowadays in some wicked way helped MJ. The accused were all deemed "normal" in everyone's standards but ended up being the scum of the earth. Endless lists of accusers. Definitely not what happened with MJ who was under scrutiny for decades but not single credible accuser. By the way the judge told Wade that he cannot go after the companies when his mother was the one chasing MJ. This tells us that the judge saw through Wade's lies.

 

[PoP]

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

Thank you for giving me this Christmas present nugget of news. I always knew the reason he was on MJ's case and adamant about him not being innocent was because he was a dog himself, out there doing all kinds of salacious stuff, and couldn't accept someone wasn't like he was.

Well now he should learn that to accept the truth. Now he'll know what's like when Michael's been put thru all these years. I know that his wife Shannon must be very ashamed and livid about his behaviour. I saw her on "Dog & Beth" a few weeks ago and I thought if Gene's involved I'm not watching anymore (though he's not involved in anyway).

Glad Steve Blum and Mary E. McGlynn exposed Gene for what he is and what he's doing to that radio figure. Gotta give them credit for it.

Michael wins, Robson lost and Gene in trouble.

 

[Paris78]

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

Hello,

Can someone post #17624 with a Booommm title in the N&D section, this is a major outcome and something to celebrate and feel we need to spread this as far and wide as possible, which by posting there it will hit all out social media pages and get much more exposure than in here.

Of course continue with this a more in depth thread and once the other has run its course we can merge them.

But this news needs to be pushed out there as its seems not many in the MSM are doing do.

Best,
Team MJJCommunity

Done

 

[Paris78]

https://www.bet.com/music/2017/12/20/michael-jackson-sex-abuse-case-dismissed.html

Michael Jackson Is Finally Free Of All Sex Abuse Cases

Michael Jackson can now rest easy without the burden of his sex abuse cases lingering over him. A judge reportedly dismissed Jackson’s final sex abuse lawsuit filed by choreographer Wade Robson on Tuesday (Dec. 19), according to USA Today. The dismissal comes nearly eight years after the King of Pop passed away in 2009.

Robson reportedly filed the suit in 2013, alleging the singer molested him as a child. Judge Mitchell L. Beckloff reportedly ruled against the now-35-year-old due to the two corporate defendants in the case. Beckloff stated that the remaining defendants were not liable for Robson’s exposure to Jackson, USA Today reports. He did not rule on the credibility of Robson’s allegations however.

Robson's attorney, Vince Finaldi, strongly disagrees with the judge’s ruling and says it sets a dangerous precedent. "What the judge is saying is that you if own a corporation or a company, you can hire people, use these people to facilitate your sexual abuse, use them to facilitate victims," Finaldi said. "So long as you're the sole owner of that corporation, the corporation can't be held liable."

Jackson’s estate attorney Howard Weitzman said in a statement, that he believes the court made the right decision. "In my opinion Mr. Robson's allegations, made 20 plus years after they supposedly occurred and years after Mr. Robson testified twice under oath — including in front of a jury — that Michael Jackson had never done anything wrong to him was always about the money rather than a search for the truth,” Weitzman said.

Michael Jackson was plagued with accusations of sexual abuse for most of his career. The first allegations were made in the summer of 1993. Robson’s dismissed case is the final sex abuse suit brought against the entertainer.

 

[Paris78]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Michael Jackson Posthumous Child Molestation Lawsuit Dismissed <a href="https://t.co/7az5tR4Bnf">https://t.co/7az5tR4Bnf</a> via <a href="https://twitter.com/TMZ?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@TMZ</a></p>&mdash; B Zollicoffer (@zolly_b) <a href="https://twitter.com/zolly_b/status/943531412954796032?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">20. Dezember 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Amaya]

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

Thank. ****ing. God. That's all I gotta say about this. :kickass:

 

[MJMarty]

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

Glad this got dismissed.

I recently watched a couple of the LaToya videos where she accuses Michael of being gay and a child abuser, as well as saying his LMP marriage was a sham. I've never paid much attention to her, and knew that she had said stuff like this in the 90s and then came out saying it was under duress and that Michael had forgiven her. I was wondering what others thought of these clips? LaToya is clearly very attention seeking, but did Michael really forgive her for doing that? She outright called him a pedophile multiple times.

 

[Nite Line]

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

Yes it's good news, but at the same time, the damage to MJ's legacy cannot be repaired..There are a lot of people out there who believes Wade..

MJ's legacy is fine if we go by his catalogue sales. Most people even most of the media outlets (ardent MJ haters) didn't give Wade much attention because they knew that his story was complete bs.

 

[Soundmind]

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

Glad this got dismissed.

I recently watched a couple of the LaToya videos where she accuses Michael of being gay and a child abuser, as well as saying his LMP marriage was a sham. I've never paid much attention to her, and knew that she had said stuff like this in the 90s and then came out saying it was under duress and that Michael had forgiven her. I was wondering what others thought of these clips? LaToya is clearly very attention seeking, but did Michael really forgive her for doing that? She outright called him a pedophile multiple times.

At the minimum he never forgot and she was never in his life again.

 

[PoP]

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

Glad this got dismissed.

I recently watched a couple of the LaToya videos where she accuses Michael of being gay and a child abuser, as well as saying his LMP marriage was a sham. I've never paid much attention to her, and knew that she had said stuff like this in the 90s and then came out saying it was under duress and that Michael had forgiven her. I was wondering what others thought of these clips? LaToya is clearly very attention seeking, but did Michael really forgive her for doing that? She outright called him a pedophile multiple times.

You very well know that she said all those things because of that b@$^@#% Jack Gordon made her say things, those were all his words, not hers and Michael knew she would never say those things in her own words.

 

[Annita]

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

You very well know that she said all those things because of that b@$^@#% Jack Gordon made her say things, those were all his words, not hers and Michael knew she would never say those things in her own words.

I do not agree with you. Latoya is really a money-hungry person. It`s easy to blame the dead husband. She did a lot of shameless other things in the last years. She even gave Guiterz a interview and huges him for just some years and all her deals after Michaels death. It`s all for the money and never for the truth.

 

[MJTruth]

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

To go on TV and call her brother a pedo in front of the world's press, sticking the knife in and twisting it at that time in MJ's life is simply unforgiveable. Even if she believed it to be true at the time then it's still something she should have kept to herself. There will forever be videos of her doing that on the internet for all to see and use a reference - one more reason why some people believe MJ is guilty. Her later excuse that her husband forced her does very little to mitigate the damage she caused.

 

[MJTruth]

Listen if people believe Wade let them. You act like Michael never went through atrail in 2005. Almost ten years afterhis death Michael’s estate continues to grow and prosper. Screw Wade and any dummy who believes him

Some MJ fans act like the result of the trial should vindicate MJ (in the court of public opinion) of any allegation made against him at any time but it simply does not. For most people the fact MJ was acquitted in 2005 holds very little bearing on how innocent he is of separate allegations made in 2013 or any other time. Even if they accept the jury's verdict in the 2005 case, why should they believe he didn't commit the acts Robson and Safechuck allege?

I'm not saying MJ was guilty, far from it, but please stop using the old acquittal as some sort of defense for more recent accusations. It's not a strong argument, particularly if you're debating with trolls.

As for the fortunes of the Estate, well I'm sure there's a strong argument to be made that without the negative stories in the press the Estate's projects could have been more successful over the last few years. I'm sure you'll agree with me that being called a pedo in the press with sensational stories, fresh allegations, published 'evidence' and quotes from Sheriff reports, is not good for PR. Especially when the information is carefully timed to coincide with new MJ releases!

 

[Soundmind]

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

Some MJ fans act like the result of the trial should vindicate MJ (in the court of public opinion) of any allegation made against him at any time but it simply does not. For most people the fact MJ was acquitted in 2005 holds very little bearing on how innocent he is of separate allegations made in 2013 or any other time. Even if they accept the jury's verdict in the 2005 case, why should they believe he didn't commit the acts Robson and Safechuck allege?

I'm not saying MJ was guilty, far from it, but please stop using the old acquittal as some sort of defense for more recent accusations. It's not a strong argument, particularly if you're debating with trolls.

As for the fortunes of the Estate, well I'm sure there's a strong argument to be made that without the negative stories in the press the Estate's projects could have been more successful over the last few years. I'm sure you'll agree with me that being called a pedo in the press with sensational stories, fresh allegations, published 'evidence' and quotes from Sheriff reports, is not good for PR. Especially when the information is carefully timed to coincide with new MJ releases!

Your point exactly? MJ went through a criminal trial where his life was under the microscope and was hit with 105 search warrants still they came up with nothing but testimonies from far from credible witnesses who if anything helped destroy Sneddon's case even though the media tried hard to spin it the other way. In his case, Wade relied on the same stories told during the trial which no one believed, even his own mom insisted in 2017 that those stories her son relied upon were LIES. So??

As for the public opinion. MJ's name is everywhere, he is celebrated around the globe with his estate doing much better than the estates of other celebrities with "clean" image and many A list living superstars.

When the judge overseeing your case stop short of telling you go sue your mom if you are indeed a victim, that's all you need to know how much sympathy Wade has gotten for his LIES. The comments on the Dailymail and Yahoo do not speak for the public. The commentors do not hate MJ only, they hate everyone. You should understand that. We knew what the public thought of MJ the minute MJ died.

 

[MJTruth]

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

My points are very clear.
Similarly, I understand yours perfectly well too but let's be honest here...many people around the world do celebrate MJ, but he is strongly condemned and derided by others due to the allegations (actually derision is often aimed at us fans too). Also, the commentors, whether you like it or not ARE part of "the public". There are negative commentators for every celebrity but MJ gets more than his fair share of negative and slanderous comments on articles or pages related to him because of the allegations surgery, and his own behaviour, that's why comments are often disabled on MJ-related pages. Anyway there's little point arguing.

Allegations are bad for business and he could have been doing better during and after his life without them. Surely we can at least agree on that?

 

[MJMarty]

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

You very well know that she said all those things because of that b@$^@#% Jack Gordon made her say things, those were all his words, not hers and Michael knew she would never say those things in her own words.

I know that's what she said, and what she says Michael said. I recently watched the videos having known of them for years. This wasn't her shakily saying she's devastated to find out something bad about her brother or painfully recanting something she witnessed. She is literally staring down reporters and cameras and proclaiming with conviction that Michael is a monster (and saying that Katherine calls Michael a fa**ot over stuff she's found out). I get that The Jacksons are the American Dream family who ended up becoming warped because of their insane lives from early ages, but I was genuinely shocked listening to LaToya's comments. I'd known of them, but hearing them, she is a very convincing accuser (and I say this as someone who fully believes Michael was innocent of the 1993, 2003/4 and more recent allegations). I'm not sure I can believe this was all under duress of her husband, and despite his naiveity, I really hope Michael kept as distant from her as I think he did afterwards.

 

[Annita]

Robson case dismissed for good, Judge&#8217;s ruling explained
http://dailymichael.com/lawsuits/ro...e-dismissed-for-good-judge-s-ruling-explained
&#61447; ivy Robson v. Estate 21 December 2017 &#61550; Hits: 1206

In his civil case Robson has sued two of MJ&#8217;s companies &#8211; MJJ Productions and MJJ Ventures. According to the law, a person can bring a childhood sexual abuse case against non perpetrator entities until their 26th birthday. However there is an exception. This exception allows lawsuit against third party entities (MJ Companies), if they knew or had a reason to know about the unlawful sexual conduct of their employee/ representative/ agent (MJ) and failed to take reasonable steps to prevent it. A Supreme Court ruling also says that &#8220;the entity defendant must have some ability to control the sexual abuse perpetrator&#8221;.



Robson has been claiming this exception while Estate was arguing against it. After several rounds of revised complaints and demurrers, it was finally time for summary judgment.



On December 19th 2017, Judge Beckloff ruled in favor of MJ Estate and dismissed Robson&#8217;s lawsuit. Below you will find the ruling document and a discussion about what this means. Keep in mind that during both demurrer and summary judgment, the judge is required to treat Robson&#8217;s claims as true and only determine if there is a legal basis for the lawsuit. So the judge summarizing the allegations doesn&#8217;t mean they are actually true or the judge believes them.



Summary judgment ruling : https://www.scribd.com/document/367639167/Robson-Summary-Judgment-Ruling



MJ Companies had no ability to control Michael Jackson

Michael had been the 100% sole shareholder of the MJ Companies during his lifetime. Based on the Corporations Code, no one other than Michael Jackson had the legal ability or authority to control Michael Jackson. Furthermore Neverland Ranch and all of the other residences were owned by Michael personally. This means that the MJ Companies couldn&#8217;t control who visited Michael at his homes.



Robson&#8217;s &#8220;evidence&#8221; that the MJ Companies could control Michael is a joke



Robson argued the MJ Company board of directors (Branca, Gallin and Gelfand) could have fired Michael. Even if they did, Michael as the sole shareholder could have fired all the board of directors and reinstate himself. In his ruling, judge points this reality out.



Using a single security guard&#8217;s deposition Robson claimed Staikos&#8217; orders trumped Michael&#8217;s at Neverland. Judge states he wasn&#8217;t impressed with this so called evidence. He writes while the high-level employees (such as Norma Staikos) might have authority and control over low-level employees (such as Neverland staff), there is no evidence that these high-level employees had any control over Michael.



In a very common sense manner judge writes, &#8220;as a practical matter, everyone involved worked for Michael Jackson and he held the ultimate control.&#8221;. Arguing people like Norma Staikos, Jolie Levine or John Branca who were hired and were paid by Michael and could have been fired by Michael at any time, could somehow have controlled Michael in his personal life is just plain absurd.



The alter-ego argument actually hurt Robson&#8217;s case



Robson argued that the MJ Companies were Michael&#8217;s alter egos. Judge states if MJ Companies and Michael were one and the same, then only Michael could had complete control over the MJ Companies. This actually supports MJ Estate&#8217;s position.



It was Joy Robson who established contact with Michael



Robson won a dance contest sponsored by Pepsi, Target and CBS records - not MJ Companies. It was Joy Robson who reestablished contact with Michael through Staikos at MJJ Productions. It was Joy Robson who asked Michael to sponsor their immigration to US - which Michael did so through MJJ Ventures. So Wade Robson wasn&#8217;t exposed to Michael Jackson through the MJ Companies. He was exposed to Michael because of his mother.



Robson&#8217;s lawyers are being absurd



Last night Robson&#8217;s lawyer Finaldi commented to an AP article stating &#8220;Finaldi said he reasoning sets a dangerous precedent. &#8220;What the judge is saying is that if you own a corporation or a company, you can hire people, use these people to facilitate your sexual abuse, use them to facilitate victims. So as long as you&#8217;re the sole owner of that corporation, the corporation can&#8217;t be held liable.&#8221;



It&#8217;s amazing that this statement came from a lawyer because it&#8217;s plain absurd. Let&#8217;s be clear that the only reason they sued MJ Companies is because they had no other choice and Wade Robson is no &#8220;poor victim&#8221; that didn&#8217;t have his chance in court.



First of all Robson had this chance in 1993 and in 2005. In 2005 as an adult he denied any and all abuse. He could have sued Michael when he was alive. However when Michael was alive and even shortly after Michael&#8217;s death, Wade was trying to make money using his connection to Michael. Wade could have sued the MJ Companies before he turned 26. The only reason this exception rule even applies is because Wade waited until he was 30. Perhaps more importantly, per Beckloff&#8217;s probate ruling Wade could have filed a creditor claim against Michael Jackson&#8217;s Estate until July to November, 2012. (Link) However Robson spent this time trying to shop a book instead.



So to recap. Wade didn&#8217;t need to sue MJ Companies. He could have sued Michael when alive and he could have sued MJ Estate if he filed his claim timely. The only reason MJ Companies were sued was because Michael was deceased and it was too late to sue MJ Estate. So they tried to circumvent the law and it failed miserably. Deal with it.



Let&#8217;s be clear - Wade Robson is a liar



Given how Wade has both claimed he was abused and he wasn&#8217;t abused and how it both cannot be correct, Robson is a liar. He either lied in 2005 or he is lying now. Estate repeatedly said they believe Robson is lying now for money. This also shows that Wade has no problems with lying under oath.



This lawsuit has shown us multiple examples of Wade&#8217;s blatant lies. For example in an attempt to save his probate claim, Robson claimed he didn&#8217;t know MJ Estate existed. It turned out Robson himself reached out to Branca and went to meeting in Branca&#8217;s office wanting to work on Cirque projects. Not only Wade knew about the Estate but he knew about the executors - but he lied to save his probate claim.



In his civil complaint Robson included a story by Charlie Michaels even though his mother told him it's not true. And finally Wade extensively lied during the discovery process, hiding his emails and the book he was shopping around. (Link) There's no ifs or buts about it, Robson blatantly lied during this lawsuit.



&#8220;Why not exonerate him and let a jury decide&#8221;



Another priceless gem by Robson&#8217;s lawyer Finaldi. First of all, Michael isn't here to defend himself. News flash, it already happened, in 2005. Where Robson took the stand and denied any abuse under oath. During his recent deposition, Robson repeatedly stated that he lied during his testimony in 2005. So again, Robson had his chance to let a jury decide.



What&#8217;s next?



An appeal is very likely. Given how unrealistic Robson and his lawyers have acted throughout this process and they appealed Safechuck ruling, they will probably file an appeal in this case as well. The appeal would last 1-2 years, technically keeping this case alive. However odds of any appeal being successful is very low. They can&#8217;t win against Corporations Code, they will never be able to show that MJ Companies or anyone worked for Michael could have controlled Michael's personal life.



Robson has already started the next chapter of his life. He magically healed and went back to dancing - something he claimed he could never ever do and reminded him of his so called &#8220;abuse&#8221;. Robson is also getting ready to play the professional victim, motivational speaker, vedic meditation guru and so on. He might try to get his book published again. So in my personal opinion, neither Robson nor his abuse allegations are going anywhere soon.



During their opposition Robson lawyers filed a bunch of exhibits - some sealed, some publicly available. We are aiming to look back to those exhibits over time, especially some depositions. It&#8217;s always fun to see Wade constantly changing positions and how Wade and Joy can&#8217;t get their stories straight.



P.S.



As Robson&#8217;s lawyers continue to misrepresent the case and the ruling in the media, let us address another comment that one of them, Vince Finaldi made to E! News.



Finaldi&#8217;s comment: "We strongly disagree with the court's ruling, as we firmly believe it is contrary to established California law and sets a dangerous precedent that endangers the State's vulnerable children. For these reasons, we will be vigorously appealing this decision so that Wade's case can be decided on its factual merits before a jury of his peers. The days of Hollywood legal teams' usage of threats, bullying, intimidation, and disingenuous arguments to convince judges to dismiss cases are numbered."



First, the ruling is totally in accordance with California law. Judge Mitchell L. Beckloff is a very meticulous judge who gave Robson all the opportunities in the world to make his case. Among other things, throughout the four and a half years that this case has been going on, the Judge gave Robson four opportunities to amend his complaint, discovery opportunities and everything that is imaginable. So if Finaldi thinks they had a case then they had plenty of time to make it during the court proceeding. They did not.



It does not endanger vulnerable children to say that companies who were incidental to the relationship between the Robson family and Jackson are not to be held responsible for Robson&#8217;s alleged abuse. If what Wade claims is true (and we are convinced it is not, but for arguments sake) then it is his mother's behavior that endangered him as a facilitator of abuse, not Jackson's companies. So why doesn't he sue his mother? Of course, there is no big money in suing his mother.



Second, Finaldi has some nerve talking about "threats, bullying, intimidation, and disingenuous arguments" as their side is the one which is guilty of all of the above.



Considering that Wade claims that his lawsuit is also for helping other victims of child abuse, and especially other "victims" of Michael Jackson, his treatment of those other alleged victims is certainly inconsistent with that. At his 2016 deposition he was asked whether he had ever attempted to reach out to Gavin Arvizo, the boy at the center of the 2005 trial. Wade&#8217;s answer: "No. Not that I recall, no." So despite of his claim that he is doing this lawsuit, not for money but as some sort of advocacy for Jackson&#8217;s other &#8220;victims&#8221;, he never bothered to reach out and apologize to the boy whose justice he had obscured if we believe the current version of his story that he falsely testified at that trial.



He did &#8220;reach out&#8221; to Jackson&#8217;s 1993 accuser, Jordan Chandler, but not in the way one would expect from a compassionate fellow &#8220;victim&#8221;. His &#8220;reaching out&#8221; only meant that he was trying to depose Jordan in support of his lawsuit, despite of Jordan obviously being opposed to it. Jordan, as he always does whenever it is time to tell his allegations in a court, ran away once again and refused to be served with the subpoena. As Wade&#8217;s legal team could not find him, they tried to depose his sister and his fianceé, who filed motions making it very clear that they do not want be dragged into Wade&#8217;s case. Instead of respecting the Chandlers&#8217; obvious wish to stay away from the case, Wade&#8217;s legal team aggressively pursued them, filing counter-motions and trying to force them to testify. They even bragged in a tabloid article that they were trying to &#8220;hunt down&#8221; Jordan wherever he is hiding.



They also aggressively pursued Jonathan Spence, a man who befriended Jackson in the 1980s as a child. Spence never accused Jackson of any wrongdoing and he still says that Jackson never did anything wrong to him, but he was one of those boys that the prosecution at the 2005 trial tried to represent as a &#8220;victim&#8221; despite of him claiming otherwise. Spence called out Robson's lawyers for bullying him in one of his motions. "Plaintiff's bullying behavior toward a non-party is inexcusable and speaks for itself", his motion said.


And the the real disingenuous argument here is to blame Jackson&#8217;s companies and people employed by it for Robson's alleged sexual abuse. Those companies were incidental to the relationship between the Robsons and Jackson, as one could clearly see from the deposition of Wade&#8217;s mother, Joy Robson. Despite of that Wade was suing them instead of his mother who was the one seeking contact with Jackson, who was the one allowing her son sleep in Jackson's room even after the Chandler allegations, who was the one pursuing Jackson to help them move to the United States from Australia. This mother is only mentioned as some distant bystander in Wade's complaint. Meanwhile employees of Jackson's companies, such as Norma Staikos, are called a "madame" or "procurer of child sexual abuse" - that for things like putting the Robsons on the phone with Jackson when they went to Staikos and asked to meet Jackson. There is nothing more disingenuous than Robson's arguments in this case.