Discussion in 'Off The Beaten Track' started by Whitneyskates, May 8, 2013.
Michael Jackson is dead. He cannot defend himself. Leave him alone at least in death.
I honestly don't understand this logic. So nobody's allowed to bring up any criminal behaviour of dead people? Why? Are MJ's kids' feelings more important than the feelings of potential victims?
Don't forget too that MJ was a well-connected dude when he was alive, one that could probably pull strings with any artist and/or producer in the music industry--people with the power to, say, hire certain budding choreographers for major music/entertainment projects. In addition to getting his hush money, I sure Wade benefitted a lot from his association with Michael over years.
Not saying Wade didn't earn some of his success, but being MJ's "friend" probably opened many doors for him, and no doubt would've opened many more if he was alive today.
Now that he's dead, all that is gone. The Jackson family are ripping themselves apart fighting over his money, so no way they're sharing that with anyone else.
Maybe this trauma was repressed and he's suddenly coming to this epiphany now, but I highly doubt it. I guess I'm just cynical.
The fact that he's essentially suing a dead man doesn't instill much credence IMO. He had so many past opportunities to confess when MJ was alive, and even now he could share his story in an effort to help others and to finally confirm a darker truth to MJ's legacy (which is totally valid and admirable if the molestation did take place)--but why the money if he's so well-off in his career?
Really? Would you tell this to all the Jimmy Saville victims?
There was another negative story about MJ's behavior last week, but it didn't contain molestation allegations. Now I can't find it, but I believe it was about his drug use.
Then there was an article by some white actor from England claiming to believe he was biological father of Michael Jackson's children.
In any event, I find the timing of all this suspicious. His family & estate had just gotten the go ahead to pursue their 40 billion dollar lawsuit against the concert promoters who worked him to his death, so they say. I'm guessing there is actually some merit to the family's case.
It appears that someone is trying to harass Michael Jackson's kids through the media. The timing of Robson's accusations could be a horrible coincidence, but it all seems a bit strange.
TMZ is reporting that Robson had a major nervous breakdown in 2011 and has not worked since. In other words, he hasn't made a dime in over 2 years. I guess the implication is that his break down was because of the molestation coming to the surface but I don't buy it at this point.
I don't think Michael should be left alone because he is dead but I do wonder how this suit will be handled. How is Michael going to defend himself? He could have an alibi or have witnesses to some of the moments when Robson claims he was being molested. Combine that with Robson already testifying under oath that he was not molested and I don't think this is right. He better have some serious proof.
I have no doubt at all that the association with MJ got Wade Robson's foot in the door (and probably a lot of his dance training too), but he is a ridiculously talented dancer and choreographer. And his biggest mainstream fame, which came from choreographing on SYTYCD, never even mentioned his association with Michael Jackson - I didn't know there was one at all until I'd started looking for more info. Whatever career benefit he had from being Michael Jackson's pal as a kid, he stopped using years ago.
i believed the maid when she said she saw them in the shower and i still believe her. i dont know that wade has any other proof than that but i hope coming out with it helps him make peace with himself and move forward.
A better strategy for Robson (if he is only looking for closure) might have been to come forward, but not sue.
Jackson was put on trial and found not guilty.
unless/until more information comes out about his lawsuit, i'm inclined to agree with that. but i assume there is addl info not divulged to the public at this time.
Given the way our justice system works and given how little we know, I can't really say one way or what this guy's motivation is or what would be a better thing to do.
Put on trial and found not guilty in one case. Which doesn't mean he was found not guilty of every accusation against him.
And what does that have to do with the numerous victims of Jimmy Saville and his associates?
And, it sounds like Robson is essentially saying that part of the reason Jackson was found not guilty was because Robson perjured himself during the trial.
I have no idea what his motivation is, but I would think that helping someone you believed to be a child molester might not be easy to live with and who know what his current state of mind/health is. Assuming, of course, that what he is saying now is the truth.
The problem is a good attorney is going to point out that if you were lying then, how do we know you're not lying now? I think it would be very hard for him to win in court.
Yes, and the converse is true too. Maybe Robson feared he would get no work (due to Jackson's influence) if he came out against Jackson while Jackson was still living.
I personally know a couple of dancers who have worked with Wade. Apparently he is a rather tortured sole and extremely difficult to work with. Not saying that I know where his turmoil comes from but it sort of makes a bit of sense. If he is now going through therapy (which was apparently much needed) these statements could be part of the healing. Going for money is not the wisest thing to do though IMHO. Sad situation for everyone involved.
Choreographers are artists and a lot of artists are eccentric and particular in their own way and thus can be difficult to work with. I certainly don't want to rule out that Wade is the way he is because he has been through a trauma, I'm just saying that a choreographer being difficult to work with doesn't necessarily have to mean anything
Deleted. Double post
While I don't believe in lie-detector test, I think a lot of people do believe in it. Wade could offer to take such a test to prove that he's telling the truth, or at least his truth.
They are also inadmissible in court. He would have to release it to the press to make his point but it would do nothing for the court case.
This is one reason why it's difficult to understand what his motivation is.
Looks like Wade has sold his California condo and will be moving to Hawaii with his wife and son in the wake of the molestation allegations.
That's a pretty significant move career-wise, isn't it? I imagine all the work for dancers/choreographers are based in California or New York.
Seems like he might be leaving the industry and his work for awhile--until everything surrounding the accusations and trial are settled. The media circus will be crazy.
Or maybe he's done for good and has decided to retire away from the business and raise his family in Hawaii?
He will need some money to retire this young. He's doing himself no favors.
HI is one of the most expensive places to live as well. For someone out of work for a couple years, that's a pretty pricey move.
I believe his wife is from Hawaii. It would make sense to me to leave LA and go where family is, especially since he's apparently had a rough go of it in the last couple of years.
Only because he was a smooth criminal.
Correct. A lot of victims of childhood sexual abuse don't fully realize just how impacted they were until decades later. It's the reason that some states have lengthened their statutes of limitations on this type of crime. For example, in Pennsylvania, the victim now has until age 50 to take action.
Interesting that fans of Michael like to sing his songs from the 1970s and 1980s, yet a kid who was allegedly abused by Jacko in the 1990s is supposed to just forget those experiences.
I would have no problem if he decided just now to sue Michael's estate for sexual abuse or if he decided to just now begin talking about it or he suddenly had a nervous breakdown because of it all these years later. The problem is that he testified under oath that nothing happened to him. All of this news about Michael supposedly molesting other children and he never once had those memories come up? I am probably being insensitive but I have a VERY hard time believing that he had absolutely no memories of being abused. I just can't give him the benefit of the doubt, here. If Michael were alive then I would eagerly await the outcome because both parties would have a chance to state their claims and defend them but this is being done after Michael died and how can he possibly defend his name? He can't, no one really can because surely Robson will say he was abused when no one else was present and then it is his word against a dead mans. The only thing Robson has is the maid or whomever that claims she saw them in the shower. It would be almost impossible to convince me after you said, under oath, that you were not abused. Was he over 18 when he originally testified? If so, he was an adult and I don't see any way out of it.
Nobody knows what the truth is. In terms of crowd reaction, I see two extreme camps. One camp believes the allegations because they either think Robson psychologically repressed his experiences and is now recognizing it for what it was (which is actually more common than you think from victims of sexual abuse) or people who dislike Jackson because they always believed that Jackson was a predator and want those beliefs to be vindicated with the other camp being full of Michael Jackson fans (due to his music) who think people are again being over-zealous with the witch-hunt with little evidence to back it up.
It's hard to remain neutral, but I think I'd rather keep an open mind about this until more details come out. Of course even then, it's hard to know who to believe because no matter where you stand on this, the timing is suspect (with the estate finally being solidified and Jackson no longer able to defend himself) and we've seen Jackson accused before by people whose motivations were suspect (or has gotten away with it because of his resources depending on what you believe).
Separate names with a comma.