The exhibits attached to the Motion are as follows:

Exhibit 1-10: Company documents of MJJ Productions and MJJ Ventures.

Exhibit 11: Deposition of Joy Robson - September 30, 2016 (excerpts)

Exhibit 12: Deposition of Jolie Levine - January 11, 2017 (excerpts)

Exhibit 13: Deposition of Gary Hearne - September 2, 2016 (excerpts)

Exhibit 14: Deposition of Gayle Goforth - October 24, 2016 (excerpts)

Exhibit 15: November 17, 2012 E-mail Between Joy Robson and Wade Robson

Exhibit 16: Trial Testimony of Wade Robson (May 5, 2005)

Exhibit 17: Screenshot of Page on Website of McDonald Selznick Associates

Exhibit 18: Order Denying the Petition of Wade Robson for Order Allowing Filing of a Late Claim Against the Estate of Michael J. Jackson

Exhibit 19: Excerpts of Draft Book of Wade Robson (conditionally filed under seal)

Exhibit 20: E-mail Sent from Wade Robson to Himself, October 22, 2013 (conditionally filed under seal)

Exhibit 21-22 : Declaration and Certificate of Merit of Henry Gradstein in Support of Complaint Against Doe 2 & Doe 3 (conditionally filed under seal)

This post will discuss in detail the bolded exhibits in the list above. Before we start, we would like to add a clarification about the ones are not included in this post. Exhibit 1-10 are company documents of MJJ Productions (MJJP) and MJJ Ventures (MJJV), which prove the Estate’s claim that MJ was the sole shareholder of MJJP and MJJV, at all relevant times. There isn’t much more to add about that, so we have found it it unnecessary to include 85 more pages of company documents. Two other exhibits, Wade Robson’s testimony from 2005 (Exhibit 16) and  Judge Beckloff’s ruling to dismiss Wade’s Probate petition (Exhibit 18) are already well-known and available online. Exhibit 19-22 are conditionally under seal as per Robson’s request and are therefore not available in the redacted  public version of the Motion.The other exhibits and declaration of John Branca can be found below.

Read more ...

It’s summary judgment time! The Estate filed a detailed motion which exposes more of Robson’s lies.

The much anticipated summary judgment motion has arrived. The summary judgment motion is a request by a party (Estate) to dismiss the case before trial, based on the argument that anyone (“any sensible jury”) who looks to the facts of the case and applies the relevant laws, would consequently rule in favor of the moving party (Estate) - which renders the trial unnecessary. For the first time since Robson filed his lawsuit, the Estate can finally introduce any evidence and information that they have uncovered through discovery.

The Estate’s motion for summary judgment focuses on two main aspects: The technical discussion of the relevant laws and the fact Robson cannot satisfy the law requirements. For the second aspect the Estate relies heavily on new details from Joy Robson’s (Wade’s mother) deposition, which debunk many of Wade’s own claims against the companies. It’s poetic justice.

Joy Robson’s deposition and other exhibits that were attached to this Motion will be discussed in detail in another post, coming later. For now, we are going to focus on the Motion alone and the legal aspect that establish this request for summary judgement.

Motion for Summary Judgment - https://www.scribd.com/document/353417846/Mj-Estate-Summary-Judgment-for-Robson

For the case to survive Wade Robson needs to demonstrate two things:

Read more ...

Today – May 31st 2017– is the latest demurrer hearing for Safechuck. (3rd in civil case and 5th overall if you consider the probate claim). With Jane Doe unexpectedly dismissing her case, all eyes are now on Safechuck. (Previous post about demurrer can be found here)

Unlike Jane Doe, Safechuck is still fighting to survive demurrer. However each new argument by Safechuck and his lawyers get more desperate than the last. In this post I will focus on Estate’s reply in support of their demurrer and their brilliant job in highlighting the stupidity of Safechuck’s claims. If you take the time to read the document, you will realize that this case has reached a dead end and now Safechuck and his lawyers are desperate trying to twist the law by making absurd arguments to survive another day.

Link to the document: https://www.scribd.com/document/349975885/Mj-Estate-Safechuck-Demurrer-Reply

The death knell of the case – Safechuck admits MJ Companies had no control over Michael’s access to children.

Read more ...

Finally some excellent news to report. According to the case summary, on June 26th MJ Estate filed their summary judgment motion to dismiss Wade Robson’s case. When we went to the court to get the Robson documents, we also asked about any filings at Safechuck case and we found out that Judge Beckloff ruled on June 28th on the Estate’s demurrer and dismissed Safechuck’s case for good. Time to celebrate.

 

I want to briefly comment on the Judge’s ruling as well as what this means for Robson case. Judge's full ruling can be found here: https://www.scribd.com/document/353219745/Safechuck-Ruling-Demurrer-Dismissal

 

Keep in mind that for the purposes of demurrer, the judge is required by law to accept all the claims by Safechuck as true and only determines if there is a legal basis for the lawsuit. Also I want to emphasize that judge summarizing Safechuck allegations in his ruling doesn’t mean he believes them. In fact, the Judge even notes the requirement on page 9 of the ruling: "Accepting plaintiff's allegations as true (as the court must on demurrer except to the extent such factual allegations are contradicted by prior pleadings or judicially noticeable facts)...". Estate is also limited as they cannot present any new evidence at the demurrer phase. They can only argue against Safechuck’s claims using the law and the precedent cases.

Read more ...

In a surprise development, just 2 weeks before the demurrer hearing Jane Doe dismissed her sexual abuse case against Michael Jackson. Right now, our information is very limited – Jane Doe’s lawyers filed the request for dismissal and the case was dismissed without prejudice – meaning technically it can get refiled. We will try to get more information and especially check the status of the other cases of Robson and Safechuck.

janedoedismissed

In the meantime, I can’t help but wonder why this dismissal, why at this time right before a demurrer. If you read our previous blog posts, you will know how skeptical we have been about Jane Doe. To us it has been clear she had been recruited by the lawyers in an attempt to force a settlement. Personally I don’t think the lawyers ever intended to take this to a trial.

Lately Estate had also mentioned they may challenge Jane Doe using a pseudonym. If she hoped she could make a quick buck while staying anonymous, now she knows that won’t happen. So not wanting her identity become public could be another reason to dismiss the case.

And finally the demurrer. In our last blog post we wondered if these latest demurrers would be the end of Safechuck and Jane Doe cases. As we repeatedly wrote, they are trying to claim non-existent relationship between them & the MJ Companies, that the MJ companies are some sort of children related companies and so on. They are desperate. It seemed like Judge knew this too, giving Safechuck only 15 days to amend his complaint the last time round. So in short, it looked like the judge was getting ready to dismiss Safechuck and Jane Doe cases for good. So is this a preemptive move? To pull the case before the judge dismisses it for good?

Hard to know what the reasons are. Of course technically speaking they can refile the case. So this could also be a "back to the drawing board" situation to come up with more logical legal arguments. Who knows? As I mentioned in the beginning, we will try to get more information but keep in mind we might not be able to learn much. Dismissal request form doesn’t require to list a reason why.

PS: I also want to address a possible speculation. Some might speculate this dismissal by Jane Doe might mean a settlement with MJ Estate. Given this was dismissed as “without prejudice” and Jane Doe may refile if she wants, it shows that there was no settlement. When parties settle, the cases get dismissed “with prejudice” – in other words in a way that they cannot be brought again.