What the HELL is wrong with Wade Robson? Part 3 of 4: Summary and Analysis of Chantal Robson’s Testimony from the 2005 Trial
When Wade Robson’s false claims of child sexual abuse against Michael Jackson became public earlier this week, I didn’t want to believe that it was true. I didn’t want to believe that Wade could humiliate and impugn Jackson’s already tarnished legacy even further than it already has, but unfortunately once I read his lawyer’s motion to seal his creditor’s claims against Jackson’s estate, I knew that it was true.
My next thought was “How is Wade’s mother and sister going to react to all this? They both testified for Jackson and defended him in 2005!” Well, so far we haven’t heard a peep from Wade’s mother Joy, and but earlier today Wade’s sister Chantal broke her silence on her Facebook page:
Knowledge and truth? Are you freakin’ kidding me?
Unfortunately, that particular status update was limited to only her facebook friends, so the general public cannot see it unless she friends them (and it’s highly unlikely that she’ll be accepting any more friend requests at this point!) Fortunately, someone who is already friends with her snitched and posted that screen shot, and it’s clear that she is supporting her brother 100%.
Here are some of her recent tweets, thanking people for their support, and showing her own support for Wade:
Now, let’s get to her testimony and see what she had to say about Jackson in 2005; I’m sure this will be very interesting, to say the least………….
Mesereau began his direct examination of Chantal by asking her to describe the nights that she spent in Jackson’s bedroom suite, and she denied that any improper activity ever occurred. Chantal also stated that her parents and grandparents knew that she was sleeping in Jackson’s bedroom and they had no problem with it, and she never felt that she was excluded from going in there at any time (contrary to the media’s lie that girls were treated as “second class citizens” at Neverland; you can read this post for a list of many, many young girls that Jackson was friends with throughout the years):
23 DIRECT EXAMINATION
24 BY MR. MESEREAU:
25 Q. Good morning.
26 A. Good morning.
27 Q. Ms. Robson, Joy is your mother, correct?
28 A. Yes, she is. 9306
1 Q. And Wade is your brother, right?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Do you know the gentleman seated at counsel
4 table to my right?
5 A. I do.
6 Q. And who is he?
7 A. He’s a friend of mine. Michael Jackson.
8 Q. And how long has he been a friend of yours?
9 A. Since I was ten years old.
10 Q. And how did you meet him?
11 A. First time I met him, a trip to America. We
12 went to Record One Studios. He was a friend of my
13 brother’s.
14 Q. Okay. And have you stayed in contact with
15 Michael Jackson through the years?
16 A. I have.
17 Q. How have you stayed in contact with him?
18 A. Just through phone calls. He would call and
19 say hello to the family. And see him on occasions.
20 Q. And do you think he’s a family friend?
21 A. I do.
22 Q. Okay. Now, when did you last speak to
23 Michael Jackson?
24 A. When did I last speak to Michael Jackson?
25 Q. Yes.
26 A. A couple nights ago.
27 Q. Okay. And where was that?
28 A. At the ranch. 9307
1 Q. Were you visiting the ranch?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Okay. Were you with your mom?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Were you with your brother?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. All right. Now, do you recall when you
8 first visited Neverland Ranch?
9 A. I do.
10 Q. And approximately when was that?
11 A. This was ‘89. I was ten years old.
12 Q. And do you remember who was with you?
13 A. Yes. When we first went, it was my entire
14 family. My grandparents, my father, my mother, Wade
15 and myself.
16 Q. Okay. And do you remember where you stayed
17 at Neverland?
18 A. I stayed in Michael’s room.
19 Q. Okay. And was anyone else in there with
20 you?
21 A. Wade was and Michael was.
22 Q. And how many nights did you and Wade stay in
23 Michael Jackson’s room on that occasion?
24 A. Two nights.
25 Q. Do you recall anything improper ever going
26 on in that room?
27 A. Not at all.
28 Q. Okay. What — what did you and Wade and 9308
1 Michael do during those evenings you stayed in his
2 room?
3 A. We just hung out. Watched cartoons.
4 Watched videos. Played games. You know, what
5 normal kids do. Hang out and have fun.
6 Q. Did you fall asleep on his bed?
7 A. Yes, we did.
8 Q. How many times do you think you’ve been in
9 Michael Jackson’s room?
10 A. I’ve probably been there a lot of times,
11 just sort of in and out. I’ve slept there four
12 times.
13 Q. When you slept in Michael Jackson’s room,
14 has your brother Wade always been there?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And any of those occasions, have you ever
17 seen anything improper go on?
18 A. Not at all.
19 Q. Ever seen Mr. Jackson molest your brother
20 Wade?
21 A. Not at all.
22 Q. Ever seen Mr. Jackson touch your brother
23 Wade in an improper way?
24 A. No.
25 Q. Ever seen Mr. Jackson abuse your brother
26 Wade?
27 A. No.
28 Q. Were you ever suspicious of any touching Mr. 9309
1 Jackson may have done with Wade?
2 A. Never.
3 Q. Has Mr. Jackson ever hugged you?
4 A. Yes, he has.
5 Q. Have you hugged him?
6 A. Yes, I have.
7 Q. Ever been suspicious of the way he hugged
8 you?
9 A. Not at all.
10 Q. Has Mr. Jackson ever kissed you?
11 A. Yes, he has.
12 Q. Have you kissed him?
13 A. Yes, I have.
14 Q. Ever been suspicious of the way Mr. Jackson
15 kissed you?
16 A. No.
17 Q. Ever seen Mr. Jackson hug Wade?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Ever been suspicious of the way Mr. Jackson
20 hugged Wade?
21 A. No.
22 Q. Have you ever seen Wade hug Mr. Jackson?
23 A. Yes, I have.
24 Q. Have you ever been suspicious of the way
25 Wade hugs Mr. Jackson?
26 A. No.
27 Q. Have you ever seen Mr. Jackson kiss Wade?
28 A. Yes. 9310
1 Q. Have you ever seen Wade kiss him?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Ever been suspicious of any of this kissing?
4 A. No.
5 Q. Ever thought any of it was sexual in nature?
6 A. No, it was just a friendly kiss on the
7 cheek.
8 Q. How many times do you think you’ve been to
9 Neverland?
10 A. Millions. I’ve been — so many, I can’t
11 even remember.
12 Q. Okay.
13 A. If — I think an average of four times a
14 year.
15 Q. And have you been there when Mr. Jackson
16 wasn’t at Neverland?
17 A. Yes, I have.
18 Q. Have you been there a lot of times when he
19 wasn’t there?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. The first time you were at Neverland, what
22 do you recall your family doing?
23 A. We hung out. Watched movies. Ride on golf
24 carts. Played in the playground. Ate dinner.
25 Stuff like that.
26 Q. Now, to your knowledge, did your parents
27 know that you and Wade were sleeping in Michael
28 Jackson’s room? 9311
1 A. Yes, they did.
2 Q. To your knowledge, did your grandparents
3 know you and Wade were sleeping in Michael Jackson’s
4 room?
5 A. Yes, they did.
6 Q. Anyone ever have a problem with it?
7 A. No.
8 Q. How would you describe Michael Jackson’s
9 room?
10 A. It’s beautiful. It’s two floors. There’s
11 another bedroom upstairs. His bed is downstairs.
12 There’s two closets.
13 Oh, sorry.
14 Sorry, there’s a closet on the right side
15 and a shower on the left side.
16 Q. How many times do you think you’ve been in
17 that room? Can you guess? Not “guess,” excuse me.
18 Can you estimate?
19 A. Five to ten times.
20 Q. During the times you’ve been to Neverland
21 when Mr. Jackson was there, did you ever feel that
22 you were being kept out of his room?
23 A. No.
24 Q. Have you been in his room during the
25 daytime?
26 A. Yes, I have.
27 Q. Have you been in his room during the
28 nighttime? 9312
1 A. Yes, I have.
2 Q. And you have been in his room late in the
3 evening, correct?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Did Mr. Jackson ever put any restrictions on
6 you not coming into his room?
7 A. Never.
8 Q. Now, the first time you visited Neverland
9 when you and Wade stayed in Mr. Jackson’s room,
10 where did your parents stay, if you remember?
11 A. In the guest units.
12 Q. And where did your grandparents stay?
13 A. In the guest units also.
14 Q. Do you recall your parents staying in the
15 main house before Mr. Jackson had his own children?
16 A. I think my mother did stay in the main house
17 at one point.
18 Q. All right. Do you know that for sure?
19 A. I don’t.
20 Q. Okay. Have you been through all the rooms
21 in the main house?
22 A. Yes, I have.
23 Q. Okay. You’ve been through them many times?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Do you recall a Jacuzzi at Neverland?
26 A. Yes.
27 Q. Ever been in the Jacuzzi?
28 A. I have. 9313
1 Q. Ever been in there with Michael Jackson?
2 A. I have.
3 Q. Ever been in there with Michael Jackson and
4 your brother?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Did you see anything improper go on when you
7 were in the Jacuzzi?
8 A. No, not at all.
9 Q. Do you recall what Mr. Jackson was wearing
10 when you were in the Jacuzzi with him?
11 A. Shorts.
12 Q. Have you traveled with Mr. Jackson?
13 A. No, I have not.
14 Q. To your knowledge, has your family traveled
15 with him?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. What is your knowledge about that?
18 A. I know that my brother and my mother have
19 been to Vegas. I take that back. I have been to
20 Los Angeles with him. On my first trip. I went to
21 Los Angeles, just me and my mom. Sorry, me and my
22 brother.
Before ending his direct examination, Mesereau asked Chantal if she ever felt that Jackson wanted anything in return from her for all of the good things that he did for her family, and she denied it.
23 Q. What is your occupation?
24 A. I’m a dancer.
25 Q. Now, are you aware of any efforts Mr.
26 Jackson made to help your family move to the U.S.?
27 A. Yes. He helped us, like any friend.
28 Q. What do you recall him doing? 9314
1 A. He basically just helps us with immigration.
2 Helped us, you know, get certain attorneys to help
3 us deal with moving over here.
4 Q. Did you ever feel that he was doing this
5 because he wanted something in return?
6 A. No. Never.
7 Q. Did he ever help you with your career?
8 A. No.
9 MR. MESEREAU: No further questions.
Gordon Auchincloss began his cross examination began by asking Chantal to clarify where exactly she slept on the first and second night at Neverland. Chantal explained that on the first night, she asked her younger brother Wade to sleep with her in the second level of Jackson’s bedroom suite because she didn’t want to invade Jackson’s privacy after Auchincloss sarcastically asked if her reason for this was because she felt it was improper for Wade to sleep in Jackson’s bed. Wade ended up sleeping in Jackson’s bed the first night. On the second night, Chantal and Wade slept in Jackson’s bed, and it wasn’t their idea; it just happened because they were both tired.
11 CROSS-EXAMINATION
12 BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS:
13 Q. Good morning, Miss Robson.
14 A. Good morning.
15 Q. You first met Mr. Jackson in 1990; is that
16 correct?
17 A. ‘89.
18 Q. ‘89. All right. And that was in Australia?
19 A. No. That was in America.
20 Q. All right. So the first time you met Mr.
21 Jackson was the time — the first time that you
22 visited Neverland Ranch?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Did Neverland Ranch seem to you to be an
25 awe-inspiring place when you first visited it?
26 A. I’m sorry, an awe —
27 Q. Awe-inspiring.
28 A. Yes. It’s a beautiful place. 9315
1 Q. Very impressive?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Were you impressed with meeting Mr. Jackson
4 the first time you met him?
5 A. Not really impressed. I was young, so the
6 idea of the fact that he was being famous really
7 didn’t mean anything.
8 Q. Okay. It didn’t strike you as anything
9 remarkable to meet a superstar at that time when you
10 were ten years old?
11 A. No.
12 Q. Had you ever listened to his music?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Did you have any of his albums?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And then after your first visit to
17 Neverland, you returned to Australia?
18 A. Uh-huh.
19 Q. With your family?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And your brother Wade?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And did Wade communicate with Mr. Jackson
24 during that period of time?
25 A. Yes.
26 Q. Did he call him?
27 A. Yes.
28 Q. Did Mr. Jackson call Wade? 9316
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Would this be a frequent occurrence?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And would they talk on the phone for hours?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Weekly?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. More than once in a week?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. During that period of time, did your brother
11 seem to be fascinated with his relationship with
12 this star?
13 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; vague.
14 THE COURT: Overruled.
15 You may answer.
16 THE WITNESS: He was fascinated with the
17 friendship.
18 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: It was something very
19 important to him, wasn’t it?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Did they send faxes back and forth?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. How often would they do that?
24 A. I don’t remember. It wasn’t as often as the
25 phone calls.
26 Q. But this was a very special bond that Wade
27 had with Michael Jackson, wasn’t it?
28 A. Like any other friend, yes. 9317
1 Q. But this was a special friend, wasn’t it?
2 A. I don’t know what you mean by “special.”
3 Q. Well, did Wade have anybody else that he had
4 a relationship with that you could compare to his
5 relationship with Mr. Jackson?
6 A. Me.
7 Q. Okay. But let me paraphrase — or let me
8 rephrase that.
9 Any relationship with an adult like he had
10 with Mr. Jackson, an adult who’s not a member of his
11 family?
12 A. No.
13 Q. And your first night at Neverland you stated
14 that you slept in Mr. Jackson’s bed?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Bedroom?
17 A. The second night. The first time I was in
18 the room.
19 Q. All right. So the very first night that you
20 went to Neverland you spent the night in Mr.
21 Jackson’s bedroom?
22 A. In his bedroom, yes.
23 Q. And on that first night, you slept
24 downstairs in the bedroom, correct?
25 A. No.
26 Q. You slept upstairs?
27 A. Yes.
28 Q. Did you — or I’ll rephrase that. 9318
1 Were you interviewed by Scott Ross, an
2 investigator for Mr. Jackson, on May 2nd, 2005?
3 A. Yes. Not quite sure if that was the date,
4 but, yes.
5 Q. That was just a few days ago?
6 A. Yeah.
7 Q. And did you tell Mr. Ross that you recalled
8 the first night that you slept downstairs, and Wade
9 went upstairs and slept with Mr. Jackson?
10 A. No. It would be the other way around.
11 Q. Okay.
12 A. Michael and Wade slept — Michael and Wade
13 slept downstairs and I slept upstairs on the first
14 night.
15 Q. All right. So Mr. Jackson and Wade slept
16 together separately from the area that you slept in?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Why was that?
19 A. Because I left and went upstairs.
20 Q. Why did you leave and go upstairs?
21 A. Because I was a little older at that point
22 and I felt like I was interfering in Michael’s
23 bedroom, so I left and went upstairs.
24 Q. Because you wanted to give Mr. Jackson some
25 privacy?
26 A. Yes.
27 Q. And he was alone with your brother at that
28 time? 9319
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And your brother was seven years old?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And that night, your brother slept in the
5 same bed with Michael Jackson?
6 A. Yes. I told him to come up with me.
7 Q. You told him to come up with you?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Was that because you felt like he shouldn’t
10 be sleeping in a bed with a grown man?
11 A. Not at all.
12 Q. Then why did you tell him to do that?
13 A. Because I didn’t want to make Michael feel
14 like two people were invading his space.
15 Q. Something about that first night made you
16 feel uncomfortable, didn’t it?
17 A. No, not at all.
18 Q. Didn’t you say you felt more comfortable the
19 second night to Mr. Ross when you spoke to him a few
20 days ago?
21 A. Comfortable with my friendship with Michael,
22 yes.
23 Q. And that next night, you slept in the same
24 bed with Michael Jackson?
25 A. I did.
26 Q. And your mother knew about it?
27 A. Yes.
28 Q. He was 35 years old? 9320
1 A. Yep.
2 Q. And you were ten?
3 A. Yep.
4 Q. Was that the first time you’d ever done
5 anything like that?
6 A. Done anything like what?
7 Q. As a young girl, sleeping with a grown man
8 who’s unrelated to you, that you just met.
9 A. That was the first time I’d ever done that.
10 It’s not the first time I’ve ever slept with
11 somebody over 35.
12 Q. As a ten-year-old, did you sleep with
13 someone over 35, other than Michael Jackson?
14 A. I’ve slept with my dad.
15 Q. I’m talking about an unrelated person.
16 A. No, that was the first time.
17 Q. As a child, how many unrelated men did you
18 sleep with that were over the age of 30?
19 A. None.
20 Q. Just Mr. Jackson?
21 A. Other than my father, yes.
22 Q. Whose idea was it that you sleep in Mr.
23 Jackson’s bed?
24 A. It was actually our idea.
25 Q. Sorry?
26 A. My brother and I. It was actually not an
27 idea. We just fell asleep.
28 Q. Did Mr. Jackson discourage this? Did he say 9321
1 in any way that this is not appropriate for two
2 small children to be sleeping in the bed with a
3 35-year-old unrelated man?
4 A. No.
5 Q. And as you sit here today, as an adult, you
6 think it’s appropriate for a ten-year-old girl to
7 sleep in the same bed with an unrelated 35-year-old
8 man that she’s just met?
9 A. I think it’s appropriate for a ten-year-old
10 girl to sleep in a bed with a friend.
11 Q. All right. What about a 35-year-old man
12 that she has just met. That’s my question. Do you
13 think that’s appropriate?
14 A. If she feels comfortable that he is a
15 friend.
16 Q. If the ten-year-old thinks it’s okay, she
17 should do it?
18 A. And the parents. Yeah.
19 Q. Something you would allow?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. What about a seven-year-old boy?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. You would allow your own seven-year-old son
24 to sleep with a 35-year-old man that he has just
25 met?
26 A. If I trusted the man, yes.
27 Q. Do you think that type of trust can be
28 earned in one day? 9322
1 A. I don’t think trust is always earned.
2 Q. How do you gain trust, other than earning
3 it?
4 A. I think it’s a feeling. It’s a friend.
5 Q. Mr. Jackson’s pretty good at that, isn’t he,
6 at gaining trust?
7 A. I don’t understand how you could say
8 somebody’s good at gaining trust.
9 Q. He makes you feel very comfortable when you
10 first meet him; isn’t that true?
11 A. I think it depends on who’s meeting him.
12 Q. Well, you felt very comfortable, true, the
13 very first day?
14 A. Well, I was his friend.
15 Q. And your mother felt very comfortable the
16 very first day, true?
17 A. My mother had already met him two years
18 prior.
19 Q. But she just met him as an acquaintance.
20 You know that, right?
21 A. They spent a lot of time together before
22 that, though.
23 Q. They had spent what?
24 A. They spent time together before that.
25 Q. On how many occasions?
26 A. Just the once when they were in Australia.
27 But she actually spent hours and had conversation
28 and got to know Michael, so she had a relationship 9323
1 prior.
2 Q. So your testimony is that your mother knew
3 you were going to be sleeping in the same bed with
4 Michael Jackson that night?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Did Michael Jackson ever refer to you as a
7 member of his family?
8 A. No.
9 Q. Did he ever refer to Wade as a member of his
10 family?
11 A. Not to my knowledge, no.
12 Q. Are you aware that there are other boys that
13 have spent the night in Michael Jackson’s bed?
14 A. I am.
15 Q. Do you know their names?
16 A. Some of them.
17 Q. Which ones do you know?
18 A. Jordie Chandler, Macaulay Culkin and Brett
19 Barnes.
Next, Auchincloss tried to paint the picture of Neverland being a place of no rules and regulations, where boys ran wild and girls were treated as “second-class citizens”, which was a regular theme throughout the trial. Chantal’s credibility was also impugned when Auchincloss snidely stated that she really had no idea what happened behind closed doors when Wade slept in Jackson’s bedroom. When Chantal answered that she believed what she was told by Wade, Auchincloss attempted to refer to the testimony of Dr. Urquizo, who stated that up to 50% of all child abuse victims never admit to being abused, but Mesereau’s objection was sustained. Auchincloss was clearly trying to discredit Wade’s denials, despite his testimony from the previous day.
20 Q. Mr. Jackson has been very generous to you,
21 hasn’t he?
22 A. It depends on what you mean by “generous.”
23 Q. Well, he’s allowed you the run of his ranch
24 anytime you wanted, true?
25 A. Yes.
26 Q. And he picks up the tab, correct?
27 A. The tab at his house. It’s like me going to
28 any other friend’s house and spending time there. 9324
1 Q. Neverland’s not like any other friend’s
2 house, is it?
3 A. No, but I have a lot of friends that have
4 beautiful homes. And when I go there, they allow me
5 to eat for free.
6 Q. And Mr. Jackson has given your mother loans
7 in the past?
8 A. Loans?
9 Q. Yes.
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And at Neverland, you pretty much have —
12 get to do whatever you please as a child?
13 A. Well, I don’t know about “whatever you
14 please.” I mean, you’re protected. You can’t —
15 Q. Within the bounds of safety.
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. You pretty much have the run of the ranch,
18 true?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Get to stay up late?
21 A. Yep.
22 Q. Eat all the candy you want?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. There are really no rules, are there, except
25 for your safety?
26 A. Depending on whether your mother has certain
27 rules for you or —
28 Q. But when you’re away from your parents and 9325
1 when you’re with Mr. Jackson, you get to do whatever
2 you want?
3 A. Well —
4 Q. Pretty much, true?
5 A. As long as they’re not what your mother’s
6 told you not to do.
7 Q. All of these families that you’ve mentioned
8 spend time with Mr. Jackson, right, the boys of
9 families?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And all of these families have one thing in
12 common, don’t they? They all have boys?
13 A. And sisters.
14 Q. Right. But each one has boys?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And each one of those families has a boy
17 that forms a special relationship with Mr. Jackson;
18 isn’t that true?
19 A. Your idea of special relationship, yes.
20 Q. Well, Mr. Jackson had a relationship with
21 Wade that was far closer than the relationship that
22 you had with Mr. Jackson, true?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And Mr. Jackson chose Wade to sleep in his
25 bedroom night after night after night?
26 A. I don’t think Michael Jackson chose Wade to
27 sleep in his bedroom.
28 Q. Well, he allowed it, true? 9326
1 A. There’s a difference between allowing and
2 choosing.
3 Q. Well, you don’t really know what he chose,
4 do you?
5 A. I think that we had the ability to leave.
6 Q. That’s a “yes” or “no” question. Do you
7 know what Mr. Jackson was choosing when he and Wade
8 were sleeping in the same bed together?
9 A. No.
10 Q. Ever heard of the “Apple Head Club”?
11 A. No.
12 Q. Never?
13 A. Apple Head Club? No.
14 Q. How about the “Doo-Doo-Head Club”?
15 A. No.
16 Q. Have you ever heard those expressions?
17 A. Yes. Not “Club.”
18 Q. Was Wade an “Apple Head”?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Do you know how many times Wade slept with
21 Mr. Jackson alone in his bed?
22 A. I do not.
23 Q. And Miss Robson, you really have no idea
24 what happened between Mr. Jackson and Wade on those
25 many nights that they slept alone behind closed
26 doors in Mr. Jackson’s bedroom, do you?
27 A. Yes, I do.
28 Q. You weren’t there, though, were you? 9327
1 A. It doesn’t matter.
2 Q. You’re just judging that based upon what
3 Wade told you?
4 A. Based upon what my brother tells me and my
5 friends tell me, yes. But just like anything, we
6 base a lot on what people tell us.
7 Q. Would it surprise you to learn that there
8 has been an expert who testified in this case that
9 up to 50 percent of all children —
10 MR. MESEREAU: Objection to the question.
11 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: I haven’t finished the
12 question.
13 MR. MESEREAU: Referring to other testimony.
14 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Based to challenge her
15 credibility.
16 THE COURT: Sustained.
17 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Do you think all child
18 molest victims divulge, as children, that they’ve
19 been molested?
20 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. Assumes facts not
21 in evidence; beyond the scope; improper opinion.
22 THE COURT: Overruled.
23 You may answer.
24 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Do you think that?
25 A. Can you repeat the question, please?
26 Q. Do you think that all child molest victims
27 divulge the fact that they’ve been molested when
28 they are children? 9328
1 A. I honestly have no idea. I haven’t studied
2 up on all the requirements of a child molester.
3 Q. Do you have an impression of the type of
4 shame that would be associated for a child to admit
5 that he’s been molested?
6 A. Again, I don’t really know what goes through
7 somebody’s mind.
8 Q. There would be a great deal of guilt
9 associated with a family, parents, that allowed
10 their child to sleep with Michael Jackson or an
11 adult, any adult, if they found out that that child
12 had been molested by that person, wouldn’t there?
13 A. I don’t think there would necessarily be
14 guilt. I think there would be anger and they would
15 do whatever they could to have that person not
16 around.
17 Q. It would upset them, though. It would be
18 disturbing, wouldn’t it?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. That’s a feeling they’d like to avoid,
21 wouldn’t it?
22 A. No, I think it’s a feeling that they would
23 want to solve.
24 Q. But if they chose to deny that feeling, you
25 could understand why, couldn’t you?
26 A. I don’t know. I’ve never been put in that
27 position.
28 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: I have no further 9329
1 questions.
Under redirect examination, Mesereau questioned Chantal about her relationship with Jackson, and her thoughts on why she thought that Wade felt his relationship with Jackson was so important to him. She also explained that she felt she had a special bond with Jackson because he was her friend, and she loves him, and because she trusts him she felt comfortable with him sleeping in the same room as other children:
3 REDIRECT EXAMINATION
4 BY MR. MESEREAU:
5 Q. Miss Robson, if you thought your brother had
6 been molested by Michael Jackson, would you go to a
7 lawyer first to seek money?
8 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection. Requires
9 speculation; argument.
10 THE COURT: Sustained.
11 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: The prosecutor asked you
12 questions about whether or not you believed your
13 brother Wade felt his friendship with Michael
14 Jackson was important. Do you remember that
15 question?
16 A. Yes, I do.
17 Q. And you said you thought so, right?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Why do you think so?
20 A. Because I think that anybody that gains a
21 friendship with anyone thinks that that relationship
22 is important, otherwise they would not be friends
23 with that person.
24 Q. And was it your belief that your brother had
25 a good friendship with Michael Jackson?
26 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection; leading.
27 THE COURT: Overruled.
28 THE WITNESS: Yes. 9330
1 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Did you ever see a problem
2 with that?
3 A. No.
4 Q. The prosecutor asked you about a special
5 bond between Wade and Michael Jackson. Remember
6 that question?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And did you think he had a special bond with
9 Michael Jackson?
10 A. I think like any other friend.
11 Q. Do you think you have a special bond with
12 Michael Jackson?
13 A. I do.
14 Q. Why?
15 A. Because he is my friend and I love him.
16 Q. Do you think Mr. Jackson has a special bond
17 with your mom?
18 A. I do.
19 Q. Why do you think that?
20 A. Same reason. We’re friends, and we’re there
21 for each other.
22 Q. Now, the prosecutor asked you about whether
23 or not you were comfortable with the fact that
24 children have slept in Mr. Jackson’s room. Remember
25 that?
26 A. Yes.
27 Q. Are you comfortable with that?
28 A. Yes. 9331
1 Q. Why?
2 A. Because I trust Michael Jackson.
3 Q. Why?
4 A. Because it’s a feeling that I have. He’s a
5 friend, and he’s never, ever made me feel like I
6 shouldn’t trust him.
Mesereau finished up his redirect examination by having Chantal once again deny that she felt that Jackson was guilty, and she stated that both she and Wade was upset that people were saying that he was molested by Jackson:
7 Q. Now, the prosecutor asked you questions
8 about the words “Apple Head” and “Doo-Doo Head,”
9 right?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Have you heard those words before?
12 A. Yes, I have.
13 Q. Let’s start with “Apple Head.” Where have
14 you heard the word “Apple Head”?
15 A. Michael has called me and my brother “Apple
16 Head.”
17 Q. Where have you heard the word “Doo-Doo
18 Head”?
19 A. Michael has called me or my brother “Doo-Doo
20 Head.”
21 Q. When Michael Jackson called you “Apple
22 Head,” did you ever get suspicious that some crime
23 was occurring?
24 A. No.
25 Q. When Michael Jackson called you “Doo-Doo
26 Head,” were you ever suspicious that there was some
27 sexual reason for that?
28 A. No. 9332
1 Q. When Michael Jackson called your brother
2 “Apple Head,” did you ever suspect some abusive type
3 of thing was going on?
4 THE WITNESS: No.
5 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection; leading.
6 MR. MESEREAU: I think he opened that, Your
7 Honor.
8 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Same objection.
9 THE COURT: The answer was, “No.” Next
10 question.
11 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: When Mr. Jackson called
12 your brother “Doo-Doo Head,” did you ever suspect
13 something nefarious was happening?
14 A. No.
15 Q. The prosecutor asked you questions about
16 victims of child molestation, okay? Did you ever
17 think your brother was the victim of a child
18 molestation?
19 A. I did not.
20 Q. Why not?
21 A. Because he would have told me.
22 Q. Did he ever tell you that he had been
23 improperly touched?
24 A. No, he did not.
25 Q. Did your brother ever tell you that he had
26 been molested?
27 A. No.
28 Q. In fact, did your brother ever tell you, “I 9333
1 have never been molested by Michael Jackson”?
2 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection; hearsay.
3 THE COURT: Sustained.
4 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Isn’t it true you don’t
5 think for one second that Mr. Jackson ever abused
6 your brother?
7 A. That is true.
8 Q. You don’t think for one second that Mr.
9 Jackson ever molested your brother, do you?
10 A. That is true.
11 Q. You don’t think for one second Mr. Jackson
12 ever touched your brother in a sexual way, right?
13 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection; leading.
14 THE COURT: Overruled.
15 You may answer.
16 THE WITNESS: I do not think for one second.
17 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Why not?
18 A. Because —
19 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection; asked and
20 answered.
21 THE COURT: Sustained.
22 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Prosecutor Auchincloss
23 asked you questions about a family feeling guilty
24 for allowing molestation to occur.
25 Do you feel guilty about anything involving
26 your relationship with Michael Jackson?
27 A. I do not.
28 Q. Why not? 9334
1 A. I have no reason to feel guilty. It’s a
2 normal friendship.
3 Q. To your knowledge, does your brother feel
4 guilty about anything involving his relationship
5 with Michael Jackson?
6 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection. Speculation;
7 hearsay.
8 THE COURT: Sustained.
9 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Have you discussed with
10 your brother the prosecutor’s allegations that
11 Michael Jackson improperly touched him?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Have you had many discussions with him?
14 A. A couple.
15 Q. Your brother’s pretty upset with these
16 allegations, isn’t he?
17 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection. Hearsay;
18 leading.
19 THE COURT: Overruled.
20 THE WITNESS: Yes, he is.
21 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Why?
22 A. Because they’re not true.
23 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection; hearsay.
24 THE COURT: Sustained.
25 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Are you upset with these
26 allegations?
27 A. I am.
28 Q. Why? 9335
1 A. Because they’re not true. And a friend of
2 mine is being accused of something that’s not true.
3 Q. Have you ever felt guilty about having a
4 friendship with Michael Jackson?
5 A. I have not.
6 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection; asked and
7 answered.
8 THE COURT: The answer is in. Next question.
9 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Do you feel guilty about
10 ever staying in Michael’s room?
11 A. I don’t.
12 Q. Do you feel guilty about ever visiting
13 Michael’s room?
14 A. I do not.
15 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection; leading.
16 THE COURT: Overruled. The answer was
17 given.
18 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Did you ever get the
19 feeling Michael Jackson was trying to talk you into
20 being in his room?
21 A. Never.
22 Q. Did you ever get the feeling Michael Jackson
23 was trying to talk your brother into being in his
24 room?
25 A. Never.
26 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection; leading.
27 MR. MESEREAU: No further questions.
28 THE COURT: Overruled. 9336
Under recross-examination, Auchincloss asked a series of hypothetical questions, and Chantal admitted that if Jackson was guilty of showing adult erotic material to children and plying them with alcohol, she’d have to (hypothetically) reevaluate her trust in him (this is the same scare tactic that Zonen used on Wade during his testimony). Auchincloss really tried to grasp at straws by insinuating that Jackson was irresponsible for having “figurines of nude women in bondage attire” in his office, or that he left his porn magazines lying around all over the place for children to find (they were stored in a briefcase, and locked inside of a drawer, FYI):
1 RECROSS-EXAMINATION
2 BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS:
3 Q. You said that you trusted Michael Jackson?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Would you trust him never to give alcohol to
6 a child?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Would you trust him never to show
9 pornography — well, excuse me, erotic — adult
10 erotic materials to a child?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Would you trust him not to keep those things
13 laying around his bedroom when he has children in
14 that room?
15 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. Assumes facts not
16 in evidence; improper question.
17 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: There’s evidence that he
18 had —
19 THE COURT: Overruled.
20 You may answer.
21 THE WITNESS: Can you please repeat your
22 question?
23 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Would you trust him not
24 to have adult erotic materials sitting around his
25 room when he had children in his room?
26 A. I don’t know if that’s a trust issue.
27 Q. Well, would you like him — would you trust
28 him enough to think that he’d keep those materials 9337
1 separate from children?
2 A. It would be nice. But I also understand
3 it’s somebody’s house and sometimes things are lying
4 around.
5 Q. Would you trust him enough to — would you
6 trust him not to have statues, figurines of nude
7 women in bondage attire sitting around on a desk
8 where he has his own children visiting him?
9 A. I don’t know if he’s ever had that, so —
10 Q. I’m asking you, would you trust him not to
11 do that?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. So if he did any of these things, he would
14 be violating your trust, wouldn’t he? You’d have to
15 evaluate your level of trust, wouldn’t you?
16 A. No, I don’t think it would violate my trust.
17 Q. If he showed — if he showed erotic — adult
18 erotic materials to a child that he’s been giving
19 alcohol to, wouldn’t you have to reevaluate whether
20 you trust this man or not?
21 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; argumentative.
22 THE COURT: Overruled.
23 You may answer.
24 THE WITNESS: Repeat the question, please.
25 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: My question is, if Mr.
26 Jackson showed adult erotic material to a child that
27 he’d been giving alcohol to, you’d have to
28 reevaluate whether you really trust this man or not, 9338
1 wouldn’t you?
2 A. If Michael Jackson did do that, yes, you
3 would have to reevaluate.
4 Q. So you wouldn’t trust him if he did that?
5 A. If he did that, yes. But I don’t believe he
6 did it, so….
7 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: I have no further
8 questions.
Mesereau asked Chantal a series of questions in order for her to show her trust and dedication to Jackson, and to prove that her hypothetical answer about reevaluating her trust in Jackson was based solely on Auchincloss’s questions, and not on her true feelings, or any new doubts that she had about Jackson’s innocence:
10 FURTHER REDIRECT EXAMINATION
11 BY MR. MESEREAU:
12 Q. You’ve heard about the allegations in this
13 case, right?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. You’ve discussed them with your family,
16 right?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. You don’t believe Michael Jackson ever
19 molested the Arvizo children, do you?
20 A. I —
21 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection. That calls for
22 a conclusion; impermissible question.
23 THE COURT: Sustained.
24 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Do you trust that Michael
25 Jackson never molested any alleged victim in this
26 case?
27 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Same objection.
28 MR. MESEREAU: He raised the issue of trust, 9339
1 Your Honor.
2 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: It is — well —
3 THE COURT: Sustained.
4 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Do you trust Michael
5 Jackson?
6 A. I do.
7 Q. Why do you trust Michael Jackson?
8 A. Because he is my friend.
9 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection. Asked and
10 answered; beyond the scope.
11 THE COURT: Overruled.
12 You can complete your answer if you didn’t.
13 MR. MESEREAU: Let me withdraw the question.
14 THE COURT: She answered it.
15 MR. MESEREAU: Okay.
16 THE COURT: But I’m not sure she wasn’t cut
17 off in the middle.
18 THE WITNESS: That’s okay.
19 He’s my friend.
20 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Are there any other
21 reasons why you trust Michael Jackson?
22 A. He has never, ever given me any reason not
23 to trust him.
24 Q. Do you think he’s honest?
25 A. I do.
26 Q. Do you think he’s a sensitive man?
27 A. I do.
28 Q. Do you think Mr. Jackson would ever, ever 9340
1 harm a child?
2 A. I don’t, no.
3 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection; leading.
4 THE COURT: Sustained.
5 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Do you trust —
6 THE COURT: Wait a minute.
7 I’ll strike the answer.
8 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Do you trust that Mr.
9 Jackson would —
10 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Your Honor, I’m going to
11 object. I’m going —
12 MR. MESEREAU: Your Honor, the prosecutor
13 asked her all these questions about her trust in Mr.
14 Jackson. I’m just —
15 THE COURT: That’s correct.
16 MR. MESEREAU: I’m just examining on those
17 issues.
18 THE COURT: You may on some issues. And some
19 you may not.
20 MR. MESEREAU: Okay.
21 THE COURT: So take it one question at a
22 time.
23 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Do you trust that Mr.
24 Jackson would never give alcohol to a cancer patient
25 so he could commit the crime of molestation?
26 A. I do.
27 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection; leading. Also
28 calls for an ultimate issue, ultimate conclusion. 9341
1 THE COURT: I’ll sustain the objection.
2 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Please tell the jury every
3 reason why you trust Michael Jackson.
4 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection; asked and
5 answered.
6 THE COURT: Overruled.
7 You may answer that.
8 THE WITNESS: He has been my friend for many
9 years. He has cared for me like an older brother
10 and a father. There has never been one time in my
11 life where he has ever turned his back on my family.
12 Vice versa. My family has never turned our back on
13 him. We love him.
14 It’s hard to explain. When you have a
15 friendship with someone and you know that it’s a
16 true person and it’s a friend —
17 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: I’m going to object as a
18 narrative.
19 THE COURT: Overruled.
20 Were you through with your statement?
21 THE WITNESS: It’s just that he’s a true
22 person and he’s a friend, and I trust him always.
23 MR. MESEREAU: No further questions.
Ironically, Auchincloss completed his recross-examination by asking Chantal if Jackson could do no wrong in her eyes, and of course she answered no! It was very odd that he chose to ask her this question; what on earth did he expect her to say? As much love and trust that Chantal felt for Jackson, she knew that he was a normal human being, so it would have been irresponsible for her to say that Jackson could do no wrong, and it’s great that she was smart enough to realize that if she had said he could no wrong, it would make her look bad and lose credibility.
25 FURTHER RECROSS-EXAMINATION
26 BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS:
27 Q. Just one last question.
28 In your eyes, Mr. Jackson can do no wrong, 9342
1 can he?
2 A. That is not true.
3 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: I have nothing further.
4 MR. MESEREAU: No further questions.
5 THE COURT: All right. You may step down.
6 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
7 THE COURT: Call your next witness.
8 MR. MESEREAU: Yes. The defense will call
9 Lisbeth Barnes.
10 THE COURT: When you get to the witness
11 stand, please remain standing.
12 Face the clerk right here, and raise your
13 right hand.
Summary of Chantal Robson’s Testimony:
1. Mesereau began his direct examination of Chantal by asking her to describe the nights that she spent in Jackson’s bedroom suite, and she denied that any improper activity ever occurred. Chantal also stated that her parents and grandparents knew that she was sleeping in Jackson’s bedroom and they had no problem with it, and she never felt that she was excluded from going in there at any time (contrary to the media’s lie that girls were treated as “second class citizens” at Neverland; you can read this post for a list of many, many young girls that Jackson was friends with throughout the years). Before ending his direct examination, Mesereau asked Chantal if she ever felt that Jackson wanted anything in return from her for all of the good things that he did for her family, and she denied it.
2. Gordon Auchincloss began his cross examination began by asking Chantal to clarify where exactly she slept on the first and second night at Neverland. Chantal explained that on the first night, she asked her younger brother Wade to sleep with her in the second level of Jackson’s bedroom suite because she didn’t want to invade Jackson’s privacy after Auchincloss sarcastically asked if her reason for this was because she felt it was improper for Wade to sleep in Jackson’s bed. Wade ended up sleeping in Jackson’s bed the first night. On the second night, Chantal and Wade slept in Jackson’s bed, and it wasn’t their idea; it just happened because they were both tired.
3. Next, Auchincloss tried to paint the picture of Neverland being a place of no rules and regulations, where boys ran wild and girls were treated as “second-class citizens”, which was a regular theme throughout the trial. Chantal’s credibility was also impugned when Auchincloss snidely stated that she really had no idea what happened behind closed doors when Wade slept in Jackson’s bedroom. When Chantal answered that she believed what she was told by Wade, Auchincloss attempted to refer to the testimony of Dr. Urquizo, who stated that up to 50% of all child abuse victims never admit to being abused, but Mesereau’s objection was sustained. Auchincloss was clearly trying to discredit Wade’s denials, despite his testimony from the previous day.
4. Under redirect examination, Mesereau questioned Chantal about her relationship with Jackson, and her thoughts on why she thought that Wade felt his relationship with Jackson was so important to him. She also explained that she felt she had a special bond with Jackson because he was her friend, and she loves him, and because she trusts him she felt comfortable with him sleeping in the same room as other children
5. Mesereau finished up his redirect examination by having Chantal once again deny that she felt that Jackson was guilty, and she stated that both she and Wade was upset that people were saying that he was molested by Jackson:
6. Under recross-examination, Auchincloss asked a series of hypothetical questions, and Chantal admitted that if Jackson was guilty of showing adult erotic material to children and plying them with alcohol, she’d have to (hypothetically) reevaluate her trust in him (this is the same scare tactic that Zonen used on Wade during his testimony). Auchincloss really tried to grasp at straws by insinuating that Jackson was irresponsible for having “figurines of nude women in bondage attire” in his office, or that he left his porn magazines lying around all over the place for children to find (they were stored in a briefcase, and locked inside of a drawer, FYI):
7. Mesereau then asked Chantal a series of questions in order for her to show her trust and dedication to Jackson, and to prove that her hypothetical answer about reevaluating her trust in Jackson was based solely on Auchincloss’s questions, and not on her true feelings, or any new doubts that she had about Jackson’s innocence.
8. Ironically, Auchincloss completed his recross-examination by asking Chantal if Jackson could do no wrong in her eyes, and of course she answered no! It was very odd that he chose to ask her this question; what on earth did he expect her to say? As much love and trust that Chantal felt for Jackson, she knew that he was a normal human being, so it would have been irresponsible for her to say that Jackson could do no wrong, and it’s great that she was smart enough to realize that if she had said he could no wrong, it would make her look bad and lose credibility.
So there you go. That is what Chantal Robson had to say about Jackson on the witness stand in 2005, in plain black and white. Let’s compare and contrast it to whatever she says in support of Wade’s false allegations, when and if she decides comment again in public. If you want to let her know how you feel about her for supporting Wade’s lies, you can send her a tweet, or contact the dance agency that she works for.
lynande51
sanemjfan
thetis7
Michael Jackson Vindication 2.0 
as a survivor i can tell you that he is full of shit,because u never forget the pain and the feelings of being hurt,in a nut shell there isnt a thing called abuse amnisia sorry the memories are always with you and being around the monster would only make it worse ,u can be threatened and given speeches as what to do or to say but in the moment of being asked ur body mind and soul reacts and any one that knows u will be able to tell that there is something going on that isnt right,basically u will have signs that something did happen ,u dont need a text book ,a research paper stating this just talk to any survivors of child abuse and they will tell you the same,and i the end the most important thing for u as a survivor would be to have the monster get caught and put away so it doesnt happen again ,no money would be involved,because as a survivor u dont want what u went trough for any one else to live it either,so i call u mr wade a lier,and if u want to talk abuse lets talk and i will show u what it really feels like to be abused,u cannot be involved in anything that would remind u of the monster ,but what do u do ? live the life that he has giving u and his family really we survivors would never be even close to any family members of our monster explain that ,sorry ur life isnt were it should be but hey,i would change with u anyday,because ur life and past wasnt what u want others to believe including ur sister and mother,was it becuase none of u guys were in his will? since u were such a close friend he should have left u something or givin u rights to something right? not,yes his was a friend but he knew the fake ones and the ones that would hurt him wen the time comes,sorry buddy but again ur fake and so is ur story.need more info give me a ring we can talk.survivor talk ,if u can deal with it.
Wait, wasn’t Wade Robson’s hearing on June 2, 2014?
Isn’t odd that the mom’s names are all J’s. Like June Chandler, Janet, and Joy Robson?
Joy uses her middle name.
Oh I didn’t know that.
Michael’s children are ceremonial for those people who are now running MJ estate . These people are benefited most after Michael’s suspicious and tragic death. Michael fought these kind of people hard throughout his career because he didn’t agree with their life.. He wanted to spend his money(actually his fans money!!) in charity works. As long as MJ (brand)is making money, as long as MJ’s family and fans are questioning Michael’s death, as long as there are people after his money, these malicious lies will always be taught by presstitues. We know he is innocent. He already proved his innocence in 1993 strip search and 2005 trial. So we know that the media is with these big corporations like $ony, AEG,… And they know how to hurt people who love Michael Jackson. They torture them by these false accusations just like they did to Michael when he’s alive. So that we will give up, don’t question, just buy their alleged or unfinished MJ songs. For them, Michael is nothing. They can destroy his image and legacy by all means. For us, Michael is an extremely kind human being who worked hard to be prefect in his craft, who wanted to unite people of all races by his voice, and to help the needy to care about the earth and our future generations, our children and orphans. We need to know our real enemy.”I deeply remind you, all i want to say is that they don’t really care about us” Did the media show you what’s happening inside American jails? How many people are imprisoned without charge or by false accusation. Michael could have be one of them even he was innocent. Can you image his look without make up, with burned scar and bald, vitiligo and lupus? There are many things the main stream media would not show to the world.
look at this crap this guy is writing about MJ (daily mirror US editor):
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/michael-jackson-compared-himself-modern-
1901783
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/michael-jacksons-maid-saw-him-1899881
this is a possible email for him:
http://journalisted.com/chris-bucktin#tab-contact
Wade stayed With Michael Jackson less than 3 weeks. Before Moving to America they only went over 3 times and 2 of those were with some interaction with Michael Jackson.
Joy Robsons Transcript says a lot about her.
People have the misconception that Michael persued little kids, the truth be told he didn’t the mothers persue him. For 2 years after the competion there was no contact.
it was his mother who searched for him.
It’s been told many times that Michael Jackson is very polite. If a family has come over to America to see him I couldn’t see him just saying good bye, see you later. He would have invited them to Neverland.
Joy said she wanted a friendship with him, but she took a tape of Wades performances since 1987 to show him that is not looking for friendship that is promoting a talent for a some work.
Michael is has said in the past two things.
First he doesn’t wear Jewlerry because he grew up around artists who if someone said they liked something, they would take it off and give it to the person and he follows the same thing.
It has been mentioning too that when kids are auditioning for parts, he isnt there, the staff record it and send it to him and he makes the decision and his staff informs the parents because he can’t bare turn them down.
Michael also told the rabbi that he couldn’t even tell the women who chased him around the world to leave him alone, he wouldn’t do that to a little kid.
Wade and Chantal asked to sleep at his, he said to ask their parents. Maybe he had hoped they would say no since this was the first time they met him properley but their parents said that it was okay if it was okay with Michael.. Is he going to say No?
I honestly do not think so. If kids wanted to sleep in his room he will let them, he doesn’t like seeing children sad, let alone be the one who made them sad. Wade and Chantel spent 4 nights in Michaels room and then they flew back to Australia.
Joy was the one to persue Michael she asked him about work for Wade if he had any videos coming up, and he offered Wade work 1 in May 1990 for LAGear which they stayed 6 weeks and one in 1991 Black and Black which they went over on a 6 month visa, Joy was the one to ask him for help with gaining a green card
The chances are the story will be similar with them all the families
.
Michael is guilty of not being able to say no. .
I agree ,The mothers all used their kids to put MJ on the spot.
June Chandler asked MJ to call Jordan right in front of her son.
When you hear wade say he was a fan of mj since he was 2 years old? I would think it was his mother who was the fan
The kids dressing like MJ too. who put that in their heads?
Wade had a gig at Disneyland and he said in his testimony , he didnt know how his mother managed to do it, but she found out how to get in touch with MJ through his secretary.
Once she met him again , she pushed for more , so did June, and so did Janet Arvizo.
I always thought it was obvious, that these mothers were perusing him , but as Randy Jackson had said , there was too much testosterone on the DA side.
Did they really think these mothers didnt know exactly what they were doing , and using their kids to get into his life…That they were just some “moms” who were DUPED by mj? he was the one that was duped
Wade put his condo up for sale in March he just sold it on the 8th.Since the news ahd just come out it was hardly because of the grief he was getting.
Sometimes a delusion is shared by two people close to each other. It is callaed Folie a deux.
I don´t think this is what is occurring here, just shared greed, plain and simple.
I don’t think Wade Robson is delusional just desperate for money because in truth he has never been without it and does not know how to live without it. He started earning alot of money as a very young child which to me implies that his life was very much like Michael’s. I also believe that he supported his family monetarily from the time he was very young just like Michael did.
I read that he was going to be part of the Michael Jackson Immortal Tour but his baby boy got sick. It does not say how sick but if you can’t fulfill that kind of obligation then he must have been quite sick.The stress from that alone would have caused the anxiety that he now claims was caused by Michael. He would have been better off just reminding the Executors of the Estate that Michael would have done whatever needed to be done to help him and his son. Not because of any kind of obligation but from love for a friend and his overwhelming love for his and every other baby in the world. I would hope that the Estate would have thought about that but I don’t know the laws about that kind of thing.
Don’t forget at the beginning of 2011, he lost the job of a director for the movie Step up 4 due to personal reason.
http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Scott-Speer-Will-Take-Over-On-Step-Up-4-Then-Likely-Take-Over-The-World-24516.html
The Estate don’t owe anything to Wade Robson.
Wade is a grown man who should look after him self financially instead of going to other peoples estate for money.
Good thing they didn’t give him anything since Wade has proven how much of a low life he really is.
What you are saying is basically “If you do things for me i will always be loyal, BUT if you don’t do this one thing for me then I am going to attach you”
A true friend and a decent person does not do that, Michael Jackson has done more than enough for this undeserving loser.
I had read that he couldnt do the show because his child got sick, but I also thought that the estate added that he didnt have a contract.
So , to me, it sounded like his child got sick , and they passed him over because he didnt have a contract and just went and used somebody else.
If true, that is pretty cold, especially given how supposedly close Wade and MJ were, at one time.
I think he is angry about that and figures he will get his money out of the estate this way, and actually is trying ot ruin MJ brand as well.
He seems to forget that while MJ wouldnt have done that to him , it is out of his hands , because he is dead.
Maybe they had no consideration for his child,and his family so he doesnt care about mj kids . ., to put this garbage out there.
Interesting to me, me , that supposedly his lawyer is going over Blanca testimony , about her saying she thought he was in the shower…Perhaps Wade thinks he is the sole reason no one believed her testimony..
I think his lawyer will be in for a surprise after reading the cross , instead of casually following the trial on tv..
Both WR and his sister are dancers,choreographers, they got a free education by the nr ONE, + living expenses.They should pay up at last.
That’s right about Hollywood and the media misrepresenting the repression of childhood trauma. From “The Three Faces Of Eve” to “Sybil” for Hollywood and the media it is all about the drama.
I just finished reading the synopses of all 53 cases where repressed memory was the issue and was upheld. In all cases the memories resurfaced when the person heard of someone else making the allegation and in all cases where it was upheld there was corroborating evidence. In most of the cases the perpetrator confessed when confronted by one or more of the accusers.
There is no corroborating evidence in Wade Robeson’s case with the exception of proven liars. I hope he is not counting on them. The one question that none of those people could answer to any kind of reasonable explanation is an adults INSTINCT TO PLACE A CHILD BEFORE THEMSELVES. They can say that they were afraid for their jobs but at $7.25 an hour would you not protect the child and go immediately into the situation to stop it. After all you could make the same amount at any convenience store. That is the instinct that I am talking about and everyone has it.
Think about what these people claimed they witnessed and then put yourself in that position. Would you even have time to call 911 before you started pummeling the perpetrator? The sheer magnitude of the supposed selfishness of those adults is mind boggling if you consider what their lies were. The only reasonable explanation for ignoring this and selling a story is they were lying and wanted money for it, because their excuses go completely against reason.
In order for a repressed memory to surface the person must have a similar emotional response. That means that whatever he was experiencing now would have to make him feel the same as the trauma that caused him to repress the event. That is not what Wade is claiming and in fact he vehemently denied it when he should have been claiming it.
Whenever the story is that they came out in therapy it is most questionable because of the methods used in behavioral therapy to have the memory surface. These methods, like guided imagery and hypnosis, do in fact lead to false memories because the images are in fact suggested to you by the therapist. That is what they are claiming and that is why Wade Robson is lying.
Everything about this from the evidence of Robson’s life to his choice of Doctors/Therapists to the timing of the media leaks indicates that his “new allegations” were in fact planned well in advance of the filing of the Creditors claim. Too bad because Robson can want, but that does not mean he will get, his portion of the Michael Jackson pie. In fact I think he has had all of that pie already.
Accrding to the American Psychological Association
“Media and entertainment portrayals of the memory issue have succeeded in presenting the least likely scenario (that of a total amnesia of a childhood event) as the most likely occurrence. The reality is that most people who are victims of childhood sexual abuse remember all or part of what happened to them.”
http://www.apa.org/topics/trauma/memories.aspx?item=4
The theory of “repressed memories” is on incredibly shaky grounds generally and IMO in this case just downright impossible. They claim abuse that was going on for 7 years. All his life Wade was confronted with questions about MJ and whether he molested him. There was a criminal trial where he was confronted with such questions again. How could he have forgot?
However, claiming “repressed memory” is a good way to get around why he said the total opposite for 20 years and it’s also an attempt by them (I don’t think it’s a good attempt though) to get around statue of limitations. The deadline to file creditor’s claims with MJ’s Estate expired. It seems they try to argue that since it was a “recent discovery” by Wade that he was molested by MJ the chance to file a creditor’s claim should be opened for him. I doubt it will be granted but we will see. Unfortunately if he can’t get money from the Estate he will do his media rounds and get paid by them. We have seen it all before.
I don’t know if AEG has anything to do with is. Could be but there’s also suspicion it might have something to do with the fact he didn’t get the job he wanted with the Cirque show. Watch this interview from 2011. At 2:40 he talks as if he’s already got the job, but we know now from the Estate that although he was on a shortlist, there was never a contract signed with him.
Then there is this interesting news piece from 2008: http://www.crushable.com/2008/12/26/entertainment/wade-robson-out-jamie-king-in-for-britney-spears-circus-tour/
Again it seems like initially he was to direct Britney’s tour (and he even said in an interview he would) but then something happened and he was replaced by Jamie King. The same Jamie King who also directs the MJ Cirque show.
@Suzy
Sadly, I also think that this is inevitable. I’m sure that Dimond and Orth have already attempted to contact him, and he’ll surely get big bucks once he decides to sell his story. I’m also sure that his lawyers told him not to do any interviews until this matter has been heard in court, otherwise he would have cashed in by now.
Hopefully Mr Robson will not get very far, maybe they will throw it out. They will see it for what it is , just another gold digger wanting cash. Anything for money
Wade’s lawyer stated that the civil suit will impact lives beyond his client..What does he mean? Is wade planning on naming other “victims” in the claim just like jordie chandler?
There are actually 3 other defendents that he names but are referred to as Does 1,2,and 3. I would say that Wade doesn’t care about anyone but himself at this point.It is speculation at this point who he thinks i responsible for his actions but I can tell you that repressed memory just doesn’t work with Wade.The way that repressed memory workes his memory would have been triggered by either the announcement of another victim in 2003 or while he was being cross examined in 2005.It takes a similar emotional response to the memory in order to trigger it.That has been what happened inevery cas of repressed memory.Aso he claims that he was molested from age 7-14 and in the midst of that he was extensively questioned by the police and subjected to a deposition. That would have made him recall any previous abuse for sure because a 10 year old can’t supress something wile it is happening.He has everything back asswards.
@Lynade
I’m confused..what do u mean by 3 defendants? You mean 3 does that he will claim were also molested?
The 3 DOES are defendants, not alleged victims. He may want to claim (or at least leave open the possibility to claim) that there were others enabling/helping MJ in what he allegedly did to him.
Thanks Lynade this seems to have been a well orchestrated thing.but it still remains BS,’harvey Levin said Wade has left LA because he is getting so much grief.Maybe people are giving him grief because he is a damn LIAR
Well who could give him grief about it? He took down his webpage, had no public phone number, no Twitter and the only people that got his private number was the media. I would guess that it was the tabloid media that was giving him grief.
The Does 1,2,3 are something that Mesereau said is common writing in suits , in case they end up adding on ,,he says it is always done..
I think they are pulling a feldnam , sneddon move, casting a fishing net and if someone comes forward , then they can add them easliy….
remember sneddons website and press conference looking for victims
stacey Brown immediately said more would come forward , so to me this was planned in the tabloids, just like sneddon called dimond for the raid., or perhaps he is trolling for more people..
Wade is full of it, but it seems to me , he was left on the side of the road by mj estate regarding those shows..I remenver hearing them say that his child was sick and he didnt have a contract..
What does that mean , did they dump him when he planning and needed a job?
That would be pretty stupid of these lawyers considering how loyal he was to MJ, imo..
And I think his lawyers are money smart but people stupid, becasue I am prettty sure weitzman told mj to sign off on the chandler thing , to get rid of them and look how that turned out….
Maybe these people figure he will do the same thing , particulary since mj is dead and they have the vegas thing starting, just like the chandlers planned their heist , just as mj tour was starting and , same as this time, a lot of money riding on business ventures..
As far as other people being effected, they could mean, other people catching a wave or they could mean this could be detrimental to Michael children and the memory of their father..
Nan the Does 1,2 and 3 are defendents,Robson is the Plaintiff. And they are named in the filing of the creditors claim just not in the file to seal. My suspicions are that is is Michael’s former attorneys, investigators and I think he is reserving a spot for Howard Weitzman becaus he was Michael’s criminal attorney in 1993.
It was this part that Stacy Brown recently capitalized on when he fist tweeted that others were going to come forward and he got that from a “legal person closely associated to the family”. He said he did not write the story in the Daily Mail.That doesn’t mean he didn’t sell the story to the Daily Mail. They are hoping that people will misunderstand that portion o the file to seal and jump on their spin of what this really is.He told one person on Twitter that he refused to write this story but that does not mean he did not sell this story.
Maybe the mental breakdown was a psychosis.During a psychosis many strange ideas may emerge.Now there are 2 different points in time when this breakdown occurred. Breakdown is a colloquial term for a variety of things,it is not ever used in psychiatry unless you quote a patient or lay person.
Sorry for typos.My computer was very unsteady.The connection to AEG and lots of savings sounds very suspicious.He has had much more success than any other man his age. So any supressed memories can not have been too heavy a burden on him.
It would be useful to know the exact date of the sc nervous breadown. And he could tell what kind of distress he felt(if he can be trusted).Apparently there were difficulties with family,wife? and joblessness. Why that after such a great career thanks to Michael Jackson.
Wihtout Michael he old be a nobody. Supposedly he has lots of avings, so no job does not matter just now.. How did he manage to save up so much, the economy has not been good. Ae the savings maybe money from AEG?
The way I see it is that AEG has thrown a stink bomb into the crowd and the jury, to make us busy with it. Of course they know that this will likely leave a trail of innuendos.
It has been reported that Wade Robson is late in filing a creditor’s claim against the Jackson Estate. I don’t think that the aim here is to win or get money from the Jacksons. I think there has been a deal already made — between Wade Robson and AEG. I think Wade Robson and AEG certainly know that the likelihood of the judge trashing this allegation is very high. The goal of this new allegation is to hit and run and leave a trail of ugly innuendos on Michael Jackson, to distract the public and give the jury a bad impression of Michael Jackson.
If indeed, the judge trashes this allegation, I do hope the Jackson estate sues Wade to clear Michael’s name on this big lie and give Wade a BIG lesson. Wade can easily be found guilty of perjury and slander.
Of course Wade Robson’s sister Chantel Robson is supporting her brother Wade, duh! She thinks Wade will provide her with some cash if she ever needs some. She wants her brother to be rich and stop working at age 30, and settle down and take care of his family living off MJ’s money. The whole family thinks they’re going to be rich and never have to work. It’s obvious, Wade is getting up in age, he’s 30, and he’s tired of making a living off of dancing, he wants to settle and live for free, without having to work. He wants to support his family and live off MJ’s money. He’s a lazy wore out scumbag who wants to live for free off MJ’s money!
It was all planned from the beginning. The whole purpose of going to W.R’s psychiatrist Dr David Arridono, was so that he could say MJ molested him. He has to make his story look probable. He can’t just say, “oh MJ molested me”, he has to make his tory seem real. But he’s a lying piece of scum. The timing of his false accusations and the AEG MJ death case is too convenient. Your a liar Wade Robson! and you will fail! The only thing you will accomplish is making a big fool of yourself. God is not mocked, whatever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.
Hi, I have been looking into this whole Michael Jackson abuse claims and came across your page.
I really do believe Michael is innocent, and I think it is great that you are taking the time to show people what I believe to be the truth.
I have noticed a few things that aren’t quite right about this whole thing. I have more questions than answers, but want to share them with you anyway.
1.) Please look up W.R’s psychiatrist Dr David Arridono – I found out he is only qualified to work with children. – What is he doing working with a 30+ year old man?? – It doesn’t make sense.
2.) W.R’s lawyer Helen Yu who is helping him at the moment actually wrote a article on her website in 2009 is ironically titled “Musical Artists: Worth More Dead Than Alive? Michael Jackson and Elvis Generate Millions for Their Estates” – ??
3.)Also look up about mental/nervous breakdowns and the link it has with psychosis. It is possible he believed it happened especially if he has his sister believing in this too. – But of course wouldn’t explain why would he want money? unless of course he is actually scamming his sister ?- or she is in on the scam too?
I am interested in anyone’s thoughts or if you can clear any of my questions up.
Thank you.
Hey MJ, I’ll try my best to answer your questions:
1. I don’t know much about Dr. Arridono; I hadn’t heard about him until this story broke. Personally, I don’t believe in the “repressed memory” theory because it is flawed, and there have been far too many innocent people who have had their lives ruined because of it. Sure, there may be a few extremely isolated cases where this theory has proven to be true, and the victim’s memory truly was “repressed” or whatever, but IN THIS CASE it is a disgusting lie. If he’ s only qualified to work with children, then that certainly raises red flags. We’ll see once more of the facts come to light in early June, after Wade’s case is heard in court.
2. That’s a great find! I wasn’t aware of this. Unfortunately, I don’t think this really has any relevance now, unless her prior knowledge of the financial success of MJ’s estate is now motivating her to represent Wade and hope she gets a % of a huge settlement from the Estate.
For anyone who wants to read her article, here’s the link: http://www.yuleseberg.com/news/worthmoredeadthanalive.php
3. No, I do not believe for one nanosecond that it’s possible that Wade legitimately feels he was abused do to some “nervous breakdown”. If you watch those videos that I included in part 1 of this series, the ones that were recorded after the breakdown, you’ll see that he shows no symptoms of any legitimate stress or anxiety. This is just a money grab to me. I believe that he is CONSCIOUSLY LYING in order to sabotage the upcoming MJ One shows in Vegas, and get back at Cirque Du Soleil and Jamie King for not allowing him to be a part of it. That’s just speculation on my part, but I think it’s very plausible.
thanks for your comment!
@skywriter58forever
Don’t you realize that saying and doing stuff like that only makes MJ fans look crazy and psychotic?
but WHY? If i ever had the chance to kill him, I would DO IT!
they better leave MIke alone!!!
@skywriter:
Your behavior is the very reason why people don’t take us seriously.
HI,SKYWRITER- I AGREED TO ‘they better leave Michael rest in Peace” but please don’t say anything about killing – MICHAEL would not like us his fans to say things like that – those words make us look bad – but believe me I do understand where you come from I myself feel very upset and can not believe this still happening — L.O.V.E AND PEACE for ever LOVE MJ
I’m just so damn angry! I can’t help.. I mean MJ is my life,he’s everything for me. & these “people” still keep going on trashing him,destroying his image/legacy
that’s so unfair! I hope u guys can feel what i feel,pls try to understand me, my heart is broken. MJ didnt deserved all this, he was a wonderful man, too good for words.
and I don’t care if they take me serious or not, I just speak whats in my heart and mind! I’ll never fake anything.thx
muchlove
There is not a bit of truth to his accusations, Wade is clearly a lieing SOB
It is shocking and none of it makes sense!
We’ll make his life a LIVING HELL! that fucked up liar! aren’t u all scared of GOD?? huh? DON’T FUCKING MESS WITH MJ, WITH HIS FANS or ANY OF THE JACKSON FAMILY!
fuck yall bitches! HE AINT SHIT, MJ’s A LEGEND.
I’m very shocked by all of this, but I understand that Wade is her brother, so of course she’s going to support him. As the bible states, blood is thicker than water.