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. 

The last time we reported on Safechuck case, judge had granted Estate’s second demurrer but have given Safechuck 15 days to amend his complaint. (Link) Not surprisingly Safechuck amended his complaint. At that time Jane Doe’s case was recently filed and had to go through a review by the judge. After that happened Jane Doe named MJ Companies as defendants and amended her complaint to copy the latest Safechuck complaint. So this prompted another set of demurrers for both of these cases. Estate have filed the demurrers on April 3rd and a hearing is set for May 31st.

Although this will be first demurrer for Jane Doe, it would be the 3rd civil case demurrer for Safechuck (and 5th demurrer overall for Safechuck if you add the probate claim). We have been reporting on those demurrers for quite a while so we won’t do another summary post as the main arguments stay the same. Rather we will simply point out the new and interesting developments. You can find the demurrer motion documents below:

MJ Estate First Demurrer to Jane Doe - https://www.scribd.com/document/345086855/MJ-Estate-First-Demurrer-to-Jane-Doe

MJ Estate Third Demurrer to Safechuck - https://www.scribd.com/document/345086946/MJ-Estate-Third-Demurrer-to-Safechuck

MJ Estate reserve the right to challenge Jane Doe using a pseudonym

MJ Estate questions if Jane Doe was right to use a pseudonym when she filed her lawsuit. Both Robson and Safechuck were able to file lawsuits under their own names. Given how public and accessible Robson is on social media, it is safe to assume he isn’t receiving any serious backlash from MJ fans. If the most visible and well-known Robson doesn’t need to go into hiding, it is curious why Jane Doe needed to file her lawsuit anonymously. MJ Estate is reserving their right to challenge this.

A little note: Due to a slip up by Robson/Safechuck and Doe lawyers, we here at Daily Michael have some idea about Jane Doe’s identity. However we weren’t able to independently confirm or deny our suspicions. Therefore we won’t be disclosing any unconfirmed suspicions we have.

Read more ...

At the end of January 2017, Judge Beckloff ruled on Estate’s demurer to Safechuck’s second amended complaint. Judge granted Estate’s demurrer but gave Safechuck another chance to amend his complaint. Although we have been through this successful demurrer by MJ Estate followed by another amendment dance before, this time is significant because this is the first time that the judge evaluated the new claims by the new lawyers. Beckloff’s ruling sounds so promising as he questions almost everything Safechuck and his new lawyers claimed. Simply put, Judge Beckloff isn’t buying any of it.

Judge’s ruling on MJ Estate’s demurrer to Safechuck’s second amended complaint: https://www.scribd.com/document/339174005/Ruling-MJ-Estate-Demurrer-to-Safechuck-2nd-Amended-Complaint

A summary of the judge’s ruling can be found below:

Ruling shows that Judge Beckloff mainly focused on is the issue of control. According to the law, Safechuck is required to show that the MJ Companies had control over Michael and prior knowledge of wrongdoing. MJ Estate demonstrated that Michael was the 100% shareholder/ owner/ president of the MJ Companies. Safechuck admitted this was the case and Michael had control over the companies’ activities.

Judge points out that there were no claims in Safechuck’s complaint that someone controlled the 100% shareholder / owner/ president Michael.  Judge states although some of the MJ Companies employees were mentioned, none of them were alleged to have control over Michael. For example Jolie Levine was mentioned as a managing agent of the MJ Companies but there was no allegations that she had the ability to control Michael. Furthermore the complaint did not allege that she had any knowledge of any “abuse”. In his ruling Judge repeatedly brings up the control issue and states as a matter of law the MJ companies did not have the ability to hire, fire or supervise their sole shareholder / owner and president Michael.

Read more ...

At the end of December 2016, MJ Estate filed a motion to compel Wade Robson to produce essential documents. This motion to compel showed us how Wade Robson was blatantly and repeatedly lying to withhold discovery from MJ Estate. Please check the previous two blog posts about this topic at the following links “Busted! Wade Robson got caught hiding evidence and shopping a tell-all book” and “Excerpts from Wade and Joy Robson Depositions and E-mails”.  

A hearing on motion to compel happened on February 2nd, 2017 and from case summary we saw that the judge granted Estate’s request. However we didn’t know the specifics of the ruling. Recently a copy of the order was filed with the court so we were able to get it.

Ruling document: https://www.scribd.com/document/341877298/Order-on-MJ-Estate-Motion-to-Compel-Robson

According to the judge’s ruling, Robson is ordered to

  • -     Produce all responsive documents in his possession, custody and control
  • -     Search his previously produced emails determine whether they have attachments and reproduce each email together with its attachments
  • -     Produce unredacted versions of emails to/from/ cc’ed/bbc’ed to any members of his family
  • -     Produce unredacted versions of emails to/from/cc’ed/bbc’ed to Helen Yu where a third party who is not a lawyer is a sender or recipient of the email.
    • -     This includes emails that were sent to Alan Nevins the literary agent
    • -     Emails solely between Wade Robson and Helen Yu don’t need to be produced.
  • -     Produce all drafts and versions of his book in their original format with all electronic and metadata information intact
  • -     Prepare and sign a declaration that details
    • -     All steps he took to search for and locate responsive documents
    • -     Why he was unable to locate some emails produced by his mother and sister
    • -     All steps he took to preserve potentially responsive documents since filing this case
Read more ...

In our first post, we discussed how Wade Robson and his partners in crime are deliberately withholding evidence, or worse, getting rid of evidence and therefore denying the estate from a productive discovery. In this article we are going to review a 264-page-long document that was filed in support of the Estate’s motion.In the document there are 42 exhibits altogether however unfortunately, the majority of the exhibits are sealed. Nonetheless, what we can see already reveals some interesting things. The document includes a couple of emails between Wade Robson, his mother and other parties, extracts from both Wade and Joy Robson’s depositions, some email correspondence between Robson’s and the Estate’s lawyers regarding discovery matters, and a log file Robson’s lawyers provided of Robson’s emails that they consider privileged.

From Exhibits Robson Emails : https://www.scribd.com/document/336110667/Robson-Emails

From Exhibits Excerpts of Wade and Joy Robson Depositions: https://www.scribd.com/document/336110841/Robson-Deposition-Excerpts

Joy Robson: “Wow. None of that is true…”

In our article about the Estate’s motion to compel we already mentioned an email exchange between Wade Robson and his mother Joy Robson on February 15, 2016. In this email Wade Robson asks his mother about a story by a security guard to which Joy Robson replies “Wow. None of that is true…” This e-mail is included among the exhibits and now we can confirm that our suspicion that it was about Charli Michaels’ claims was correct. Moreover, it is the EXACT same story, almost verbatim, that Robson uses in his latest amended complaint filed in September 2016 as we have shown in our previous post. (Link)

Read more ...