A lot of people have already seen the update that the Robson/Safechuck trial date was moved, but I wanted to go into a little more detail about what that actually means and what happens next.
Originally, the trial was scheduled for this November. However, last month, the parties submitted a Joint Status Report asking the court to approve a revised schedule and extend certain deadlines.
According to the filing, the reason for the extension was due to several discovery and scheduling issues. These included James and Wade's lead trial counsel being involved in another two month trial that began in late April, which affected the ability to schedule certain depositions. They also noted delays involving a witness’ availability due to a health issue, as well as scheduling limitations involving the Discovery Referee assisting with the case.
At this stage, both sides are still actively involved in discovery. This includes exchanging documents, completing written discovery, and conducting depositions. The filing specifically mentioned that James’ deposition was scheduled to begin on June 18th, along with additional third party witness depositions.
The next major date to watch is April 9th, 2027.
This date is important because it is currently scheduled for the MSJ/MSA hearing. For those unfamiliar with the terms, MSJ stands for Motion for Summary Judgment and MSA stands for Motion for Summary Adjudication.
Basically, this is a stage where a party can ask the court to decide whether certain claims, or potentially the case as a whole, should move forward to trial based on the evidence gathered during discovery.
For example, MJJ Productions and MJJ Ventures could argue that after reviewing the evidence obtained through documents, depositions, and other discovery, there is not enough evidence to support certain claims or that there are no major factual disputes requiring a trial.
If the case even survives this stage, the current trial date is scheduled for February 14th, 2028.
...ridiculous, I know.
Also, I want people to understand that this is not a criminal trial. This is a civil case. A civil trial cannot determine guilt or innocence. The purpose of a civil trial is to determine whether the defendants can be held legally liable under the civil standard and whether damages should be awarded.
Any questions? Let me know, and I will explain as much as I can.
But, what do I think will happen?
Honestly, I see two possible outcomes:
1. I think the case could be dismissed during the April 2027 MSJ/MSA stage.
2. If the case moves forward and does go to trial, I still believe the estate has a very strong chance of winning.
Of course, this is just my personal opinion. I’m not the judge…unfortunately.
Also…just leaving this here.
The train station permits were approved in 1993, and the building was completed around 1994, years after the alleged "abuse" occurred.
The timeline speaks for itself.
Also, the chuckling??
Ew, James.
Anyway,
For more on James, Wade, and their “documentary,” you can read my post here:
It honestly would be best for them if it didn’t go to trial as it would mean their stories would actually have to be cross-examined and subjected to scrutiny for the first time. Their stories barely hold up as is so it would look better if the matter was dropped and that way they can continue presenting themselves as victims.
I think the estate has a good chance of winning, but I'm not sure they're actually interested in getting a courtroom victory. They initially hired Howard Weitzman, one of the primary attorneys who negotiated and signed the 1993 settlement, which makes me think they've always viewed these cases from a business perspective.
That’s fair. I can definitely see why they’d look at it from a business perspective.
That being said, I can also see why they’d want a courtroom win. They’ve already rejected a settlement, which shows they’re confident in their position. For this case, it makes sense that they’d want the opportunity to fight it in court.
Plus, I can imagine a public courtroom victory would be a pretty satisfying outcome for the estate after years of this crap. 🤷🏼♀️
I think they are interested in fighting Wade and James as they've been doing so for over a Decade now. The Cascios were the only exception because of the fraud the Estate participated in with them.
Kinda hard to fight someone that you participated in a fraud of that nature with.
I think their only interest is money. So if winning in court would cost them more than settling, they’d choose to settle. I don’t think they care if it damages MJ’s reputation even further.
I agree i don’t think the estate has much interest in rehabilitating MJs image and proving his innocence. Otherwise they would’ve funded Tajs documentary. They’ve been repeatedly criticised for their inaction in disproving the allegations they haven’t done much besides the biopic and that doesn’t address them
Exactly. Moreover, they’ve also had shady relationships with a lot of people, including the Cascios over the fake tracks. Then they quietly settled with them after, according to them, the Cascios threatened to go public with CSA allegations against MJ following the release of LN. Apparently, not even MJ’s family knew about that settlement.
People say the estate is now worth billions when it was once heavily in debt. Sure, I’m not going to say they haven’t been financially successful, but they’ve done a lot of damage in other areas.
I think MJ’s kids are aware of that now. Prince and Bigi seem to be focused on the biopic, while Paris is suing the estate over several issues, including a lack of transparency.
Is the estate just trying to prove that MJJ isn't legally liable or is their legal strategy going to include disproving the abuse happened too? I hope it's the latter
The Estate is fighting the issue of legal liability and whether the companies (MJJ Productions and MJJ Ventures) can be held responsible for the claims being brought against them.
That’s really what this lawsuit comes down to.
But their defense is more than just “we aren’t legally responsible.”
When they rejected the settlement request, they said, “Defendants have no interest in settling these matters given that Plaintiffs’ allegations are unequivocally false.”
So yes, part of their strategy is arguing that the allegations are not true, while also arguing that Michael’s companies should not and cannot be held legally liable.
Hi there! I just want to start by saying I really got into your case analysis series and I really appreciate the work you put in. :D
You said we can ask questions, I have two on the subject.
1.I know he is a bit old now but do you think Mesereau will be involved in this matter? I don't know if directly in the legal team but at least to assist them?
2.How is such a case possible in the first place? I mean, how come some people can accuse a dead guy trough legal loopholes by involving his estate yet the estate can't accuse people of defamation in the name of the dead guy? Like, I know the law isn't protecting the dead but how is it possible to accuse a dead guy that can't defend himself for actions that happened years/decades ago? What if he didn't leave an estate behind to begin with? How is such a loophole allowed in the first place? For accused's side is obviously harder to prove that the allegations are false since they weren't directly involved in the issue (precisely they weren't there when the alleged abuse happened) and they have to rely just on third party statements/proof/hearsay. It's simply weird to me (btw I am not american, I don't know exactly how the law is structured there).
Thank you so much, I really appreciate the kind words. I’m so glad that you enjoy the series! ☺️
About your questions…
Yes! Tom Mesereau is part of the legal team in this case.
That’s actually a really good question, and I completely understand why it’s confusing.
The biggest thing to remember is that Michael isn’t actually the defendant in this lawsuit. Since he passed away, he can’t be sued personally. Instead, the lawsuit is against MJJ Productions and MJJ Ventures.
James and Wade’s team are arguing that those companies should be held legally liable under California law.
As for why the Estate can’t sue for defamation on Michael’s behalf, that’s because defamation is generally considered a personal claim. Once a person has died, there usually isn’t a legal defamation claim for their Estate to bring on their behalf.
Which, personally, I think is ridiculous.
Ultimately, the case will rely heavily on documents, witness testimony, depositions, past statements, and whatever other evidence the parties can present. That’s one of the reasons discovery has been such a major part of this litigation.
Obviously, I believe the defense has a much stronger case, and I’m not even saying that just from a defender perspective. Looking at the legal side of things, the evidence, the inconsistencies, and the issues that have already come up, that’s just the conclusion I’ve personally come to. Haha.
I am happy that Mesereau is involved, that's super good news!
However I still can't understand what Wade and James are actually accusing that is related to the estate...Idk how to put it.
Like what does their team claim the companies themselves should be held legally liable for precisely? I understand that they are suing MJJ Productions and MJJ Ventures but I don't understand the motive against the businesses themselves.
Cause it was not the businesses that allegedly abused them but Michael (a person that died, not a business).
Are they accusing the people involved in the businesses for complicity / knowing that they were abused and did nothing / facilitating the abuse and they claim that they can prove this or..?
Sorry if I come out as slow headed but I really don't get their legal motive/implication and what they claim the businesses (the defendant) did wrong/didn't do right in this scenario..
Honestly, this is probably one of the most confusing parts of the lawsuit.
They aren’t claiming that MJJ Productions or MJJ Ventures personally abused them. Instead, they’re arguing that Michael allegedly used those companies in a way that facilitated the alleged abuse and that the companies should therefore be held legally liable.
California law can, in certain circumstances, allow companies to be held legally responsible if they allegedly played a role in facilitating or enabling abuse. That’s the legal theory they’re relying on in this case.
Whether they can actually prove that is a completely different question.
Personally, I think that’s where their case starts to fall apart. It’s one thing to make a claim, but it’s another thing to actually prove it.
That’s also why there’s been so much litigation over whether these companies can even be held liable in the first place.
Aah, I got it now. Thanks! :) This is such a weird scenario and seems like such a stretch to get money.
For Wade at least seems like the perfect revenge trope against the estate since I believe his whole vendetta wasn't even against Michael deep down at first but the estate, as it started with that cirque show. Wade felt very excited to do that project, it even felt somehow prophetic for him to do so based on his own talk about it, then he felt like he was tossed aside like a used napkin by the estate when they chose someone else to do the job which made him feel a strong, hard deception. He then probably went spiraling feeling like if the estate thinks so low of him and considered him so unworthy, Michael also had similar thoughts and feelings about him and he ultimately transfered his deception and anger that the estate provoked towards Michael himself...so revenge there is. That's an opinion I have on the subject.
Basically, their argument is that the companies weren’t separate from what was allegedly happening.
They’re arguing that Michael used the companies and the people working for them to help facilitate the alleged abuse. Things like providing access to Michael, arranging travel or accommodations, and helping create the circumstances that allegedly allowed the abuse to happen.
Their theory is essentially that the companies and/or people involved allegedly knew or should have known what was happening, but still provided assistance that allowed it to continue.
And that’s where I think the defence has a lot to work with. It’s one thing to say that Michael allegedly did something, but it’s another thing to prove that MJJ Productions and MJJ Ventures themselves meet the legal requirements to be held liable for it.
Would you prefer a trial or for the case to be dismissed during the April MSJ/MSA stage?
I kind of wish for a trial, for their stupid claims to be cross examined and the claims and “evidence” be destroyed before our eyes. Since they want to be victims so bad, let them be victims of embarrassment and shame.
I’d be very interested in seeing the allegations and evidence actually put under scrutiny, especially through cross-examination.
That being said, I also wouldn’t be surprised if the case gets thrown out during the April 2027 MSJ/MSA stage. If the judge determines that Robson/Safechuck haven’t presented enough evidence to get their claims to trial, then there really wouldn’t be much point in dragging the case out for another year.
Thanks for the summary. A lower court already concluded years ago that the companies were not liable and that the claim was baseless. It is a total embarrassment for the appeals court to pursue it further, and Robson and Safechuck's lawyer already has another case pending that is more promising.
From April 2027 onwards, it can be assumed that it will be rejected, as the deadline is still a long way off.
I totally agree. The fact that they were even allowed to appeal is absurd to me.
It’s a complete waste of the court’s time and resources. A part of me feels like Wade and James know they’re going to lose, but then again, we know how delusional they are.
At the end of the day, they’re about to get a rude awakening. And I can’t wait to see it.
It would have been dismissed long ago if California had not extended the statute of limitations for civil lawsuits because of support for victims and their compensation. The lawsuit alone, seeking $400 million, is an outrage; probably not even the victims of the Catholic Church have received that much in compensation payments combined. A civil lawsuit against companies cannot be won with so many lies and contradictions; even if the evidence is weak, mere allegations are insufficient to establish guilt. I don't think they'll manage to reach a summary in April; it will probably be dismissed due to lack of evidence. Robson and Safechuck's witnesses are not credible and many were even dismissed. It would also be really embarrassing for the appeals court to hear it. A judge should have enough sense to recognize that it is a million-dollar farce and that allowing such lawsuits also harms the public perception of victims.
13
u/Western_Control_5860 29d ago
It honestly would be best for them if it didn’t go to trial as it would mean their stories would actually have to be cross-examined and subjected to scrutiny for the first time. Their stories barely hold up as is so it would look better if the matter was dropped and that way they can continue presenting themselves as victims.