While Helena is preparing her next post, let me give you in short some information about the latest court declaration of Jimmie Safechuck which was presented in a Radar Online article that already made the rounds among MJ fans.
Actually Jimmie Safechuck’s declarations are just a copy of Wade Robson’s allegations, but I still want to point to a few things that became apparent to me at first sight – and this especially because our beloved trash tabloid Radar Online does a special job in this whole story and adds its own spin to the sinister lies of Robson and Safechuck, about which we cannot keep silent.
For those who don’t want to go on their site – which I fully understand – I made screenshots of the points in question.
The article of Radar Online quotes a few parts of Jimmie Safechuck’s declaration and the authors obviously believe this is enough for the readers to form their opinion so they won’t see the necessity to read the declaration itself. But they forgot Michael’s advocates, and so we found out immediately that the article contains a big, fat lie that could not even be found in Safechuck’s declaration. The impertinence and malicious intent of it struck me instantly. However, I even waited a couple of days to see if they would correct it because it could have been an error – but no!
In the lower part of the article we find this paragraph:
Jackson “became very angry and began to overtly threaten me” when he refused to testify on his behalf during the criminal trial, Safechuck claims. He even got a call from the singer’s mother, Katherine Jackson, “asking if something had happened between” him and her son, he says. “I told her I was OK and never answered her question.”
I doubted this at once, and then I read Safechuck’s declaration where he says in point 15:
“Shortly after that call with the DECEDENT, my mother began to call me asking if something had happened between me and DECEDENT. I told her I was OK and never answered her question.”
Nowhere in the whole declaration Safechuck says that Katherine Jackson had called him, he was only talking about his own mother calling him and asking him this question – but Radar Online twisted the whole statement into something different: The manipulation was done with the clear intention to imply to the readers that Michael Jackson’s mother doubted her own son! And this is something Michael’s opponents try to imply time and again, it was also attempted by AEG’s lawyers in the AEG trial when Katherine Jackson had to testify.
The whole article with the salacious headline is written in the typical Radar Online style we know now since the case started. How Radar Online may be involved in the coverage of it you can read here.
I have a few further thoughts on some points in Safechuck’s declaration that came to my mind and raised a few questions immediately, and I just post them as some food for thought.
“He continually brainwashed and drilled into me that what he was doing to me was “love” and that I should deny that anything he had done to me ever happened. I was a child – I believed and worshipped him, and I had no reason to think he wasn’t telling me the truth or that what he was doing to me was wrong.”
I repeat what I said before in a post: Who do they think will believe this? Do they really think anyone can believe that a child does not recognize love opposed to humiliating, painful acts and would mix them up by brainwash? He had “no reason to think he wasn’t telling me the truth or that what he was doing to me was wrong”? No reason?? So the kind of sexual acts that are described elsewhere in the court documents are no reason to think that this was wrong? – Acts that must be horrible for a child, not only psychologically, but also physically injuring, and cannot be taken for “love”? – Well, he only has no reason when nothing happened and that was exactly the case! Ask real victims how they feel about such kind of acts.
“Towards the end of the trial , the DECEDENT called me again to ask if I would meet him in person to talk. DECEDENT immediately launched into what seemed to be a rehearsed speech, as if the call were being recorded. I was afraid that was a possibility, because I knew from the past that DECEDENT recorded phone calls on a regular basis.”
What sense does that make? Why should Michael record a phone conversation in which he pressures a potential victim or witness to testify in his favor? Wouldn’t you do that in secret without keeping an evidence of it which could end up in the wrong hands?
In point 20 Safechuck says:
“I knew the DECEDENT would never be found guilty – he was a superstar and above the law.”
This is contrary to the whole public and the media who were absolutely sure that MJ would be convicted.
Altogether point 20 doesn’t reflect reality at all:
“I saw what happened to Gavin and his family – how they were discredited by the DECEDENT and his lawyers and how they had become pariahs in the media. Because of the DECEDENT and his power and influence, I was trapped, and could never say or do anything.”
This is a very ridiculous statement, as the only one who became a pariah in the media was Michael Jackson who had lost all power and influence at the time of the trial in 2005. It was the best time ever for Safechuck to come out with his accusations because nobody in the general society and the media believed in MJ’s innocence and Safechuck would have been welcomed as a witness against MJ by everybody. So where is the trap?
In addition this is an attack on Tom Mesereau and Susan Yu when they say that MJ’s lawyers “discredited” the Arvizos. I wonder if we will hear a reaction from Tom Mesereau to this.
Point 22 includes this interesting sentence:
“When I found out [about MJ’s death], I felt sad because I realized I would never have the opportunity for a normal relationship with him.”
My first thought: How crazy is that? – A true victim wouldn’t regret any destroyed relationship and wouldn’t be “sad” that “a normal relationship” is no longer possible. Either he would be happy about his predator’s death or he would be furious that his predator never was convicted for his deeds as long as he lived, and that’s all.
The whole declaration is full of lamentations about MJ’s popularity and worldwide adoration, his wealth and his millions of fans, and “even in death he remains a powerful figure in history”.
This contributes to the impression we have since this case started: That this is a major aspect (of anger) to the accusers and they do everything to damage Michael’s place in history and the success of his Estate.
Safechuck presents himself in this declaration as a helpless baby or an imbecile, like a mentally retarded person with whom a predator can do everything because his brain is not able to learn the simplest things, even not as a teenager and adult.
There are certainly more points in the declaration that have to be examined and can be refuted, but I leave that for a later consideration.
The document says that the next hearing date in this case is July 21, 2015, 8:30 a.m., which is after the 10th anniversary of Michael’s acquittal.
So let’s be sure to celebrate the acquittal in adequate form in June before we continue to deal with this rubbish.
I wish Helena a good recovery from her recent surgery on her arm and hope we will soon read her next post.
We are comparing Robson’s complaint, containing fictitious allegations against Michael Jackson, with his own and his mother’s and sister’s testimonies at the 2005 trial. Up till now the process helped us to discover that everything Robson said about his so-called abuse – and I really mean everything - is a fake.
Indeed, the story of a start and continuation of “abuse” allegedly during his first visit to the US and MJ’s Neverland has turned out to be a silly and outrageous lie from its very beginning to end. Pure lies like that seldom occur but Robson’s papers are a rare exception to the rule – the story told by him is a 100% lie.
Due to the abundance of lies the restoration of the truth is a long process and has already taken two posts (see here and here please), and up till now we have only reached point 13 of his “Second Amended Complaint” filed on February 19, 2014.
So this is the point we are starting with now. It says:
“The following Monday, Plaintiff, his mother and sister went to stay with Decedent at his apartment in the Westwood section of Los Angeles in Wilshire Blvd, across the street from a Holiday Inn, while Plaintiff’s father and grandparents continued on their road trip for a few more days. Plaintiff slept with Decedent in his bed at the Westwood apartment; Plaintiff’s mother and sister stayed across the street at the Holiday Inn hotel. The sexual abuse occurred on each of those nights as well. Later that week, the entire family returned to Australia.”
This paragraph is of tremendous importance – it will be instrumental for learning a lot of many other details associated with Michael Jackson and will help us understand a much bigger picture as a whole. Read more…
This post will be a further comparison of Wade Robson’s complaint with the testimonies of all Robsons at the 2005 trial – Wade Robson, his mother Joy and sister Chantal. The purpose of it is to pinpoint Robson’s lies (which are many) and restore the real events the way they really happened and not fantasized by this guy.
All this is purely restoration work, same as in arts, so let it be the way it should be – thorough, methodical and true to the original in its every detail. In slander cases like Robson’s, especially when the defamed person cannot speak for himself, no detail can be regarded as ‘unimportant’. Every fraction matters as these are the fragments of the original canvas, helping us to restore the whole picture to its true self.
Those who are set on Michael Jackson’s character assassination have tried hard to make their false story as consistent as it is only possible. However lies can’t be impeccable in principle as they are the artificial product of an evil mind, so a false detail uncovered here and there and in the essential parts of the story too will point to an obvious fake. Read more…
Sometimes it is just enough to reread some court documents to stop looking into the behavioral intricacies of the ‘poor boy’ Wade Robson and see the simplicity of the case in all its brutal nakedness.
This refreshing change took place with me when I was looking for the $1,62 billion sum the ‘poor boy’ is demanding now and in the process happened to reread not only his present court documents but also the testimonies of the whole Robson family at the 2005 trial.
You cannot imagine what an eye-opening experience it was. Indeed, the present documents read best of all against the background of these testimonies, thus opening your eyes not only to the glaring falsity of Robson’s current story but also to his incredible ego, cynicism, ingratitude, jealousy, callousness, and his lust for money of course. Read more…
Recently a reader asked a question why we should believe that Wade Robson is demanding the sum of $1.62 billion for the alleged abuse from MJ if this news is reported by almost no one, was published in some tabloid and is not mentioned in the court documents available to us.
The question is very interesting because it enables us to ask similar questions about the media coverage of Katherine Jackson’s lawsuit against AEG, compare it with media reports of Wade Robson’s claim and reflect on why the media cover these two civil suits (revolving around one person) in so different a manner. Read more…
“Don’t look for a black cat in a dark room, especially if it is not there…”
This short post was first made as a reply to a reader’s comment, but since the subject is top important I decided to place it here as a point for a separate discussion.
The comment came from Judy and concerned Wade Robson (and Jimmy Safechuck) who decided to get some $1,62 billion from Michael Jackson’s Estate on the charges they suddenly thought of several years after Michael’s death:
“I believe them when they went to court and testified that Michael did nothing to them. No matter what their reasoning is, Wade and Safechuck are, committing a crime, lies, fraud, defamation of character. They aren’t even credible.”
Of course they are not. Read more…
Dear friends, I am very thankful to you for coming to the blog even though I haven’t contributed to it lately. You should believe me that my abandoning it for so long could happen only due to exceptional circumstances. And the circumstances were exceptional indeed.
My country has started a war against a brotherly Ukrainian nation and doesn’t admit it, defying all logic and evidence. My fellow citizens have fallen into a delirium, and don’t realize or notice it. The ruling regime breaks every law, but the majority of the population seems to be still in support of it and is ready to endure any hardship, thinking that the ones to blame for all the trouble are – you will never guess who – Americans (of all people).
The regime is tightening its grip over those who disagree and calls them ‘national traitors’ and very soon there will be a time when the ‘patriots’ will be given free hand to do away with those in dissent (the ‘fifth column’). So it seems that for some of us trouble is only starting here.
When the campaign against Ukrainians – some of whom are actually ethnic Russians – only began, it already cost me an accusation by a Russian MJ fan that I want our country to be destroyed by the US (!). I wondered how the US comes into this and whether Americans know that they are allegedly to blame for the whole thing?
I also wondered how a fan of Michael Jackson could be in support of a war. War, aggression and belligerence had nothing in common with a man like Michael whose very essence was peace, love and compassion.
Well, if this delirium goes on being friends with Americans will be a somewhat fishy business. The Russian regime expects its subjects to be anti-American, you know. However the paradox is that it is exactly now that I want to be critical of Americans least of all.
WHEN THE MAJORITY IS WRONG
Now that millions of my compatriots have fallen victim to the absurdest kind of lies I am no longer surprised or resentful that millions of Americans were also led to believe the nastiest lies about Michael Jackson. Previously I could not understand it. Now I do and even know which emotional strings were pulled in people’s hearts to make them turn on an innocent person as an enemy and villain.
Someone extremely cynical skillfully brainwashed and manipulated the public into hatred and ridicule of Michael taking advantage of the best feeling people have – their natural instinct to protect children. This basic protective function of all normal adults was taken advantage of and used as a tool to incite a witch-hunt against an innocent person while real abusers continued to commit crimes against children walking about unnoticed. The devilish organizers of the game simply nominated Michael for the role and cynically directed the public rage against the man who never deserved it. Read more…