NEW CHILD MOLESTATION CLAIM By Wade Robson

  • 330 Replies
  • 24998 Views

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline ShyBleuEyes

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 623

Re: NEW CHILD MOLESTATION CLAIM By Wade Robson

  • on: March 02, 2015, 03:36:20 PM
.... I have toyed with the idea that the latest allegations are designed to keep Michael in his place of being 'dead' as well. His career has been reinvented since he 'died' and the estate has made mega bucks. I think that there would be many who would like this gravy train to continue without him reappearing. So throw some more fabricated bullshit out there and give him the option of stay gone, where they can't reach you and let us deal with this, or go back and face a repeat of 2005 with the added surprise element of having faked your death thrown in there for added effect. 
I think he has chosen option 1. He is a father who has the well being of his children to take into account.

This could be the sad and terrible truth ... that MJ is still not 'free' and in control. I posted a similar idea a few days ago and asked the question of whether legally he'd be in sticky waters if he later resurfaced, having stayed dead knowing there were these allegations being made against him. Has he missed the window of opportunity to come back and face this head on and is now forced to stay dead?

But, RK, who are you suggesting threw the 'fabricated bullshit'?

Horrible if the whole hoax idea that was meant to be such an adventure for all concerned, has monumentally backfired in such an ugly way.


I’ve thought about this a lot as well, Curls and RK—wondered if these new allegations are being presented, as well as consequent suggestion of guilt regarding old allegations being maintained, in an effort to paint MJ as an unreliable source regarding something more sinister if and when he ever does choose to come back, i.e., like a just in case . . . let’s keep the fabrications rolling as a monumental distraction (and destroyer of credibility) from anything significant he might want to reveal. IDK  :icon_e_confused:                       

But yes, it seems the bottom line question regards the who and why. I’ve never been one to believe the hoax was primarily conducted as an adventure but have rather always seen the “adventure” part as a side activity. However, I thought I read somewhere that a person has seven years from the alleged date of death to return without suffering legal loss/repercussion (?).

agree, wow i never heard of that starchild, but it gives new perspectives , i already had let go of the thought MJ would ever come back. but never lose hope.
“In a world filled with hate, we must still dare to hope. In a world filled with anger, we must still dare to comfort. In a world filled with despair, we must still dare to dream. And in a world filled with distrust, we must still dare to believe.”
― Michael Jackson

Offline ShyBleuEyes

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 623

Re: NEW CHILD MOLESTATION CLAIM By Wade Robson

  • on: March 02, 2015, 03:40:12 PM
.... I have toyed with the idea that the latest allegations are designed to keep Michael in his place of being 'dead' as well. His career has been reinvented since he 'died' and the estate has made mega bucks. I think that there would be many who would like this gravy train to continue without him reappearing. So throw some more fabricated bullshit out there and give him the option of stay gone, where they can't reach you and let us deal with this, or go back and face a repeat of 2005 with the added surprise element of having faked your death thrown in there for added effect. 
I think he has chosen option 1. He is a father who has the well being of his children to take into account.

 RK, it's a great thought and totally makes sense to me.
This could be the sad and terrible truth ... that MJ is still not 'free' and in control. I posted a similar idea a few days ago and asked the question of whether legally he'd be in sticky waters if he later resurfaced, having stayed dead knowing there were these allegations being made against him. Has he missed the window of opportunity to come back and face this head on and is now forced to stay dead?

But, RK, who are you suggesting threw the 'fabricated bullshit'?

Horrible if the whole hoax idea that was meant to be such an adventure for all concerned, has monumentally backfired in such an ugly way.


I’ve thought about this a lot as well, Curls and RK—wondered if these new allegations are being presented, as well as consequent suggestion of guilt regarding old allegations being maintained, in an effort to paint MJ as an unreliable source regarding something more sinister if and when he ever does choose to come back, i.e., like a just in case . . . let’s keep the fabrications rolling as a monumental distraction (and destroyer of credibility) from anything significant he might want to reveal. IDK  :icon_e_confused:                       

But yes, it seems the bottom line question regards the who and why. I’ve never been one to believe the hoax was primarily conducted as an adventure but have rather always seen the “adventure” part as a side activity. However, I thought I read somewhere that a person has seven years from the alleged date of death to return without suffering legal loss/repercussion (?).

agree, wow i never heard of that starchild, but it gives new perspectives , i already had let go of the thought MJ would ever come back. but never lose hope.
“In a world filled with hate, we must still dare to hope. In a world filled with anger, we must still dare to comfort. In a world filled with despair, we must still dare to dream. And in a world filled with distrust, we must still dare to believe.”
― Michael Jackson

Offline curls

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 3111

Re: NEW CHILD MOLESTATION CLAIM By Wade Robson

  • on: March 03, 2015, 08:07:22 AM
Starchild, I'm not 100% sure, but isn't that 7 year thing to do with people who have gone missing, and after 7 years they are declared legally dead, their estate can be settled and their spouse is free to remarry. MJ has not 'gone missing'.

While I'm pretty certain MJ did nothing fraudulent or legally wrong at the time he faked his death, I really don't know, but am concerned, with how he would stand regarding 'avoidance of law enforcement', in cases such as Robson and Safechuck's allegations, that have arisen since June 2009.  I haven't been able to find any information on this as yet - seems like a unique, one-off case.
« Last Edit: March 03, 2015, 04:57:35 PM by curls »

Offline Starchild

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 374

Re: NEW CHILD MOLESTATION CLAIM By Wade Robson

  • on: March 04, 2015, 06:46:38 AM
Thanks, Curls.
It's all for L.O.V.E.

Offline iamhere4mj

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 479

Re: NEW CHILD MOLESTATION CLAIM By Wade Robson

  • on: March 07, 2015, 12:47:21 PM
In my opinion these claims have more than one side to them.

Robson and Safechuck could have spoken up earlier and stated the truth but chose not to. Why? Repressed memory? I don't think so.

I think the claims do have something to do with both allegations brought against Michael and somewhere inside the claim filings by Robson and Safechuck lies the answers.

It was brought up that Robsons father committed suicide in 2002 but yet this didn't shake Wade up enough to come forward with the truth about Michael at that time? I think that would have shaken anyone to the core.

I went looking for the 7 year legally dead thing that curls was talking about and I put a spin on it from the hoax side of it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declared_death_in_absentia

Most countries have a set period of time (seven years in many common law jurisdictions) after which an individual is presumed dead if there is no evidence to the contrary. However, if the missing individual is the owner of a significant estate, the court may delay ordering the issuing of a death certificate if there has been no real effort to locate the missing person. If the death is thought to have taken place in international waters or in a location without a centralized and reliable police force or vital statistics registration system, other laws may apply. From the hoax side there really isn't true evidence that Michael is dead. Just what appears to be facts. There is no marking on the tomb, the family has not told the believers we are delusional, the family has stated that they believe more than just Murray is involved in this but yet Murray was the only one investigated.


Facts, circumstances, and the "balance of probabilities"[edit]

In most common law and civil code jurisdictions, it is usually necessary to obtain a court order directing the registrar to issue a death certificate in the absence of a physician's certification that an identified individual has died. Murray didn’t sign the death certificate!

Legal aspects[edit]

United States[edit]

The law calls people who disappear missing or absent. Several criteria affect declaring someone dead by assumption:

A person's being missing from their home or usual residence for, typically, seven years (the period varies from state to state) In this case 100 North Carolwood Drive or the Hayvenhurst compound

Such absences being continuous and without explanation The believers keep wondering when is this going to end? There has been no explanation on anything since the family needs to maintain that Michael is dead but yet everything that has been said or implied leads to him being alive which means he is missing.

Such absences being accompanied by a lack of long-distance communication with those most likely to hear from them Since we are not privy to this type of information we have no idea if the immediate family has been contacted or not. We don’t even know if Michael is in plain sight.

Diligent but unsuccessful search for that person and inquiry into their whereabouts This belongs to the believers who have been extremely diligent in ‘searching’ but unsuccessful

Professor Jeanne Carriere, author of “The Rights of the Living Dead: Absent Persons in Civil Law” (published in the Louisiana Law Review), stated that as of 1990, the number of such cases in the United States was estimated at between 60,000 and 100,000.[7] Often the missing person's bank accounts are checked for activity, and possible sightings investigated.[citation needed] Michaels bank accounts are now overseen by the Estate  which would cover any activity needed to get money to Michael and the possible sighting were never investigated because everyone thinks Michael is dead.


Love you Michael!
« Last Edit: March 07, 2015, 12:53:35 PM by iamhere4mj »

Offline RK

  • *
  • Global Moderator
  • Hoaxer
  • ****
  • Posts: 3542

 

SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal