Michael Jackson Abuse Lawsuits Revived as Appeals Court Rejects Corporation’s Innocence Claim
In a significant development, two men who claim to have been sexually abused by Michael Jackson during their childhood have had their lawsuits revived by a California appeals court. The court found that Wade Robson and James Safechuck should not have had their cases dismissed by a lower court, as they can validly argue that the two Jackson-owned corporations named as defendants, MJJ Productions Inc. and MJJ Ventures Inc., had a responsibility to protect them.
This decision comes as a result of a new California law that temporarily broadened the scope of sexual abuse cases, enabling the appeals court to reinstate the lawsuits. It should be noted that this is the second time the suits have been revived following their initial dismissal. Robson first filed his lawsuit in 2013, with Safechuck following suit the next year. Both men received wider recognition for their claims after appearing in the HBO documentary Leaving Neverland in 2019.
The judge who dismissed the lawsuits in 2021 argued that the Jackson-owned corporations cannot be expected to provide the same level of protection as organizations like the Boy Scouts or a church. This assertion was based on the fact that Jackson was the sole owner and shareholder of the companies. However, the higher court judges disagreed with this reasoning. They stated that a corporation facilitating the sexual abuse of children by one of its employees cannot be excused from the duty to protect those children simply because it is solely owned by the perpetrator. The court highlighted that the presence of just one shareholder does not negate the duty to protect.
The Jackson estate’s attorney, Jonathan Steinsapir, expressed disappointment over the court’s decision. He maintained the belief that Michael Jackson is innocent and argued that the allegations against him lack credible evidence and independent corroboration. Steinsapir emphasized that the claims were made years after Jackson’s death and were motivated solely by monetary gain. On the other side, Vince Finaldi, attorney for Robson and Safechuck, expressed pleasure but not surprise at the court’s decision to overturn the earlier rulings. Finaldi believed that the previous judge’s decisions went against California law and would have set a dangerous precedent for child protection.
During the legal proceedings, the defense argued that it would be unreasonable to expect employees to confront their supervisor and accuse them of being pedophiles. However, the plaintiffs’ attorneys countered this by asserting that the defendants’ employees had left the boys alone with Michael Jackson, thereby failing in their duty to protect and warn them.
The specific details of the abuse allegations are as follows: Robson, now a 40-year-old choreographer, claims that Jackson molested him over a seven-year period, beginning when he was just five years old. Safechuck, now 45, alleges that he was nine when he met Jackson during the filming of a Pepsi commercial. He claims that Jackson began sexually abusing him after showering him with gifts and attention.
It is important to note that while the Associated Press typically does not name victims of sexual abuse, Robson and Safechuck have personally come forward and consented to the use of their identities in relation to these cases. This decision is significant, as it allows for a more open and transparent discussion surrounding the allegations and legal proceedings.
The revival of these lawsuits marks a significant milestone in the ongoing legal battles and raises crucial questions about the responsibilities of corporations in cases of alleged sexual abuse. With the lawsuits back in motion, both sides eagerly anticipate a trial on the merits, which will likely shed further light on the allegations made against the late pop icon and the handling of the situation by the Jackson-owned corporations.
Ultimately, this court ruling demonstrates the complexity and far-reaching implications of cases involving allegations of historical sexual abuse. As public awareness and understanding of these issues continue to evolve, it is essential to provide a fair and thorough examination of the evidence while considering the rights and well-being of all parties involved.
