Friday, May 17, 2013

Michael Jackson: More Child Abuse Allegations

Prior statement analysis has shown deception on the part of Michael Jackson specifically related to child molestation allegations.  Even in his own website posting a response to the investigation, Jackson was unable to bring himself to say that he did not do it.

Statement Analysis rule:  If a subject is unwilling or unable to say he did not do it, we are not permitted to say it for him.


Wade Robson: 'Michael Jackson Performed Sexual Acts On Me'

Choreographer claims star molested him over a seven year period
Wade Robson: 'Michael Jackson Performed Sexual Acts On Me'
Photo: Splash News

Choreographer Wade Robson has done an explosive interview on the Today Show in the US, regarding allegations he was sexually abused by Michael Jackson when a child.
The 30 year-old filed a civil case claiming he'd been abused by the singer earlier this month and speaking about the allegations told Matt Lauer the star was a "paedophile and a child sexual abuser".
The Australian born star, who was a visitor at the Jackson's Neverland ranch from the age of seven until 14, claimed he "lived in silence," for 22 years after finally coming forward.
Shooting down previous claims he made the allegations due to memory loss, Robson said: "This is not a case of repressed memory. I have never forgotten one moment of what Michael did to me, but I was psychologically and emotionally completely unable and unwilling to understand that it was sexual abuse."
When Lauer asked what he meant by "sexual abuse", Robson said: "He performed sexual acts on me and forced me to perform sexual acts on him."
Explaining further, he claimed the Thriller star used "manipulation and brainwashing," to coerce him into performing sexual acts.
He added: "He would role play and train me for these (trial) scenarios."
Robson's claims have been criticised by the Jackson family, especially after he testified in court during Jackson's 2005 child molestation trial that the star had never touched him. But the dance expert who has worked with the likes of Britney Spears and Demi Lovato before defended accusations he was only making the claims now to "cash in," when the Jackson family are currently suing concert promoter AEG live for millions, who they claim were responsible for the singer's death in 2009.
Michael Jackson with Wade Robson in the years the alleged abuse took place (Splash News)
Defending himself, Robson claimed: "The idea that I would make all of this up and put myself, my wife, my entire family though this is extremely incomprehensible."
"I feel strong, I feel like this is the right thing to do because this is my truth," he added.
Asked why he'd waiting until now to come forward he said: "Because I've lived in silence and denial for 22 years, I can't spend another moment in that. In order to truly heal. I'm never going to go away with this. I'm never going to be silenced."
When the suit was filed a lawyer for Jackson told TMZ the claims were completely unfounded.
"Mr. Robson's claim is outrageous and pathetic," Howard Weitzman said.
"This is a young man who has testified at least twice under oath over the past 20 years and said in numerous interviews that Michael Jackson never did anything inappropriate to him or with him.
"Now, nearly four years after Michael has passed, this sad and less-than-credible claim has been made."

40 comments:

Hobnob said...

what stands out is

Defending himself, Robson claimed: "The idea that I would make all of this up and put myself, my wife, my entire family though this is extremely incomprehensible."
"I feel strong, I feel like this is the right thing to do because this is my truth," he added.


Embedded is i would make all this up and the qualifiers extremely incomprehensible weakening his statement.

This is MY truth rather than the expected THE truth.
What is the difference between the actual truth and his truth?

Would he say the same thing if , for example, he was informed that he faced perjury charges as he lied on the stand multiple times?

Why has his story changed now? what has caused him to 'come out' and tell his truth?
Is he looking at the money? Is greed his motive?

During the trial michael jackson was essentially bankrupt and would have had no way of paying any compensation had he been found guilty (after legal fees etc) a convicted jackson had no way of ever paying out anything as his records would no longer be played, his brand was extinct.

As it stands, the jackson brand is literally worth billions, especially if the estate wins their case.
I fully expect more to come out the woodwork, either who have recanted their statements of not being molested or are now throwing their hat into the ring so to speak.

Greed trumps truth.

john said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
john said...

Hi Hobs,

Picking up from analysis of a Embedded admission.

Do we have another one here regarding money,and his lack of it.

Asked why he'd waiting until now to come forward he said: "Because I've lived in silence and denial for 22 years, "AND I CANT SPEND" another moment in that.

Esther said...

MY truth stood out to me too! The thing is though, I believe the housekeeper testified she sae Michael molesting this guy when he was a boy. I don't think he should be able to come back and profit from the allegations now when heied under oath previously.

Malaise said...

The 30 year-old filed a civil case claiming he'd been abused by the singer earlier this month and speaking about the allegations told Matt Lauer the star was a "paedophile and a child sexual abuser".

Isn't a child sexual abuser automatically a paedophile? I wonder why he used both terms.

Confused!

Malaise said...

There are a few more snips of what Mr Robson said here ....

http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2013/05/wade-robson-michael-jackson-molestation/

I can't copy/paste from this article. Sorry.

sidewalk super said...

Hmm, his parents left him in the custody of m. jackson for how many young and ,er, delicate years at a time?

Every now and then, a fool who is carrying large amounts of money in big fragile bags, wrecks his vehicle and cash subsequently goes blowing across all the lanes of traffic.
Frenzied helpful people always stop to help, don't they?

Excruciating Headache said...

Perhaps the difference between pedophile and child molester is that one could possibly be attracted to children (a pedophile) without ever touching one inappropriately (molester). I'm no expert.

I suspect MJ was as pedophile but I don't think he ever had sex with a child. Maybe that's why I chose the above interpretation.

"As it stands, the jackson brand is literally worth billions, especially if the estate wins their case."

Yes! The smell of money brings 'em out of the woodwork.

john said...

He uses 143 words.

Out of them, he uses 13 Possessive pronouns.

Pronoun="I" used 6 times..

Pronoun="ME" used 4 times..

Pronoun="MY" is used twice when he is taking possession of his wife and family,and once when he says"My truth"

Pronoun="Iv'e" used once..

Is this a high,or low % rate given the amount of words he uses?

One more thing that i notice,was the word."BrainWASHED"

IN SA,we take note when water,washing etc enters the language in a statement.

If it does,there is a possibility that the person has been abused when they were younger.

Q:Would this come under the catargory of "Water"?

john said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
john said...

Correction to my post.

The word he uses is:Brain"WASHING"

Also he does not say Michael's name.

Is he distancing himself from Michael, given what he says allegedly happened.

Anonymous said...

The painful truth is often extremely difficult to pry loose from victims.

In many instances, the victim both loves and hates their perpetrator. Children, especially, cannot process and/or express the higly conflicting emotions that go along with what they've been exposed to.

Hooray for Wade! What a load taken from his shoulders by finding the courage to come forth!

Texas Anon

Trigger said...

In order to brain wash a child, it is my understanding that they have to be threatened with death or believe that they will die if they tell.

It is not uncommon for children to "adore" their abuser and think that they love them because of all the gifts, attention, and grooming.

It is not uncommon for children like this to deny the abuse because they have guilt and shame.

Little girls who are sold into the sex industry deny that they had sex with paid clients for years because it is so traumatic.

Malaise said...

Thank you! :)

Anonymous said...

Victims often feel shame for what happened to them. They believe they caused it, or they encouraged it, or that it's their fault.

I cannot say why, after all these years, Mr. Robson has decided that now is the time to speak the truth. I can only say that I know, from experience, that children will sometimes, for various reasons, protect their perpetrators by lying for them.

It could be that in the past, MJ was paying Mr. Robson to lie for him, even after Mr. Robson became an adult. But now, no MJ, no more bribes, and so the truth finally comes out. JMO

Look at the men in the Sandusky trial. For years, some of them kept their silence because even though they were being repeatedly victimized, they "liked" being linked to Sandusky, and all the perks they received from being associated with him.

One thing is for sure: while I cannot speak to Mr. Robson's character, this is not the first time MJ has been accused of being a child molester. And my guess is: it wont't be the last. Where there is smoke, there is fire.

Texas Anon

C5H11ONO said...

At first I thought when he stated "the idea that I would make all this up" was an imbedded confession, but then if that was the case he would have stated, "the idea that I made this up". Therefore this statement to me would not be an embedded confession.

If I were to highlight where he needs to explain, then he felt the need to explain that it is the right thing to do because it is "his truth". Wouldn't this pass the lie test? After you are questioned and someone asks you why you should believe, the best answer is because I told you the truth. In this case isn't he explaining that it is his truth. I am not certain because he stated "my truth" as opposed to other truths.

Skeptical said...

I believe he was abused by Michael Jackson. I believe he committed perjury. I believe if it were just about telling the truth, money would not be a factor.

Anonymous said...

NO! Was what I thought. As someone who was abused as a child I can tell you that I would not OWN the abuse. I wouldn't have that kind of closeness to it. See, even there I said 'the' abuse, and 'it,' without even thinking about it.

Ivanna-Anna Lyse said...

... but I was psychologically and emotionally completely (extra word) unable and unwilling to understand (not admit but understand) that it was sexual abuse.

"He would (why would?) role play and train me for these (trial) scenarios."

"The idea that I would make all of this up (confession?) and put myself, my wife, my entire family though this is extremely incomprehensible."
The idea might feel incomprehensible, but we don't always think of what the consequences are. You can do incomprehensible things, and only realize what the consequences were after you stopped to think about it

"I feel strong, I feel like this is the right thing to do because this is my truth," he added.
I feel LIKE this is the right thing, but it might not be.
This is not THE truth, this is MY truth, and someone else has another truth.
He is justifying himself (with because)



"Because I've lived in silence and denial for 22 years, I can't spend another moment in that.
That is distancing. He does not feel as if he is there, otherwise he would have said "i can't spend another moment in this.

I'm never going to go away with this. I'm never going to be silenced."
He thinks people will continue to try to silence him rather than believe him..

Anonymous said...

I believe him.

http://www.today.com/video/today/51902805#51902805

kmn

~mj said...

First, a child does not have to be threatened with death or the like to be kept silent. Threatening them with not loving them is the most common way to keep them silent.

Yes, his coming forward now does indicate wanting to "cash" in. However, in my opinion that does not mean it isn't true.

Speaking from experience on this one...sadly...how he words this sounds very much like he was in fact abused by Jackson.

An abused child doesn't want to admit it, even as an adult. We will add extra words all over the place to spread out or water down the reality that we are confessing. To admit what happened in terms that are "reliable" means something that we were trained to never do, and that is to "tell-on" and accuse the abuser. That is a #1 no-no...so to gain control and strength we start out admitting, but we do it in a way that is less damning...I don't know if this makes sense and I am truly sorry if it doesn't.

I do believe he is telling the truth, I do believe that he lied on the stand (I believed it then too) - I do believe he is coming forward now for $$, perhaps he feels he deserves to get something out of his tragic childhood, I don't know.

I also believe I would never do it this way...but I still unwittingly protect my abusers and my husband reminds me of that AND I am still growing and learning...at 37 years old.

Childhood sex abuse is toxic. I want to express more, but I cannot find the words.

Julie Moon said...

One one hand you have this man admitting he committed perjury, and he could possibly face some serious charges for that, couldn't he? Also, he is admitting that he possibly thwarted justice for another individual that suffered the same abuse? Can that person now sue him?

On the other hand, no matter how well spoken he is some people can lie like crazy and have their words flow out like a well rehearsed actor.

He didn't seem able to say what type of abuse he suffered until the interviewer mentioned two kinds....then his answer to that sounded odd too, like someone asking you if you want chocolate or vanilla and you answer 'yes'.

Baxtie said...

Off topic but I believe Peter would be interested in this about the Madeleine McCann case:

Police: Suspects ID'd in British girl's '07 disappearance

http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/17/world/europe/britain-portugal-disappearance/index.html

Anonymous said...

Waiting 22 years is not uncommon. Lying to courts/LE that it never happened is not uncommon either.

I waiting 25 years to talk about the sexual abuse I went through at the hands of my step father. I was interviewed by police after my sister went to the authorities and I lied and said it never happened. I regret it to this day, but I too was brainwashed by a mother who knew and wanted to save herself.

I believe him.

Peter Hyatt said...

Skeptical said...
I believe he was abused by Michael Jackson. I believe he committed perjury. I believe if it were just about telling the truth, money would not be a factor.
May 17, 2013 at 11:19 AM >>

It is difficult to get people to think this way in lie detection training.

Someone can be telling the truth and still have done it.

Someone could lie under oath about what may really have happened.

Life is complicated and it takes complex thinking.

Anonymous said...

of course it's true

BostonLady said...

I do believe he was sexually abused by Michael Jackson. I also believe he has guilt over lying in the other trials to protect Michael. I also think he is conflicted over the money.

I've seen Wade's choreography and he is a brilliant. He's worked on So You Think You Can Dance and won emmy's for his choreography. He's very talented.

This statement caught my eye:

"I feel strong, I feel like this is the right thing to do because this is my truth," he added."

He "feels" strong and this is the right this to do. It's not a fully committed statement but then he may be afraid to commit to it. Almost like he is testing the waters.

In addition, Wade frames "my truth". Is this because he was forced to tell Michael's truth for so many years?

I do believe him.

Anonymous said...

I take it as he used "my truth" instead of the truth because he knows there are others that this happened to. He is saying "my truth" as in his own personal experience knowing there are others that either have or may come forward.

Anonymous said...

I take it as he used "my truth" instead of the truth because he knows there are others that this happened to. He is saying "my truth" as in his own personal experience knowing there are others that either have or may come forward.

Anonymous said...

You can't have it both ways. It's not fair changing the rules because you don't like Michael Jackson.

Just because you want it to be true don't make it so.

"My truth" - if anyone else had put it that way, you'd have him for lunch.

"The idea that I would make all this up ... blah blah blah... extremely incomprehensible"

Again, if it were any of the other accused on this blog, you'd probably holler for a public hanging.

"I'm never going to go away with this. I'm never going to be silenced."

He thinks people will continue to try to silence him rather than believe him..."

He won't go away until he gets money and he doesn't believe it's really going to happen. If not money from the Jackson estate, then from a book deal.

"I've seen Wade's choreography and he is a brilliant. He's worked on So You Think You Can Dance and won emmy's for his choreography. He's very talented."

Jodi Arias is supposedly really talented, too. She's still a liar.

Anonymous said...

I stayed silent for 40 years because my abuser was a same sex abuser.

I was an adult and I was called a liar.

There was no money involved and yet I was severely scorned for being an attention seeker and money grubber, even though I was successful in my career and marriage.

I believe him.

Anonymous said...

"My Truth" VS "Michael's Truth"? Possible reason to make the distinction. He says MJ would call him and rehearse the 'story" as he needed to be told in court. Robson was telling the story as forced on him by an adult. It happens when you are pressured by seasoned manipulators who are adults & had power over you as a child (you still fear them because of the stress they induced on you as a child).

Now Robson is in therapy and able to claim his power back. Someone takes him seriously.

I believe him. Body language etc. I watched an interview given by his Mom when Robson was a young child left to "hang out" with MJ. His Mom sounds ridiculously naive. His own mom failed to use good sense, and failed to protect him. No one believes a grown man sleeping with child is ok because the grown man (MJ) didn't have a childhood!

Anonymous said...

Jodi Arias's talent lies in fabricating stories....stories that don't add up.

"Her artwork" is traced, beginner's level at best.

My 10 year takes better photos than JA.

JA was/is no "photographer." She was a waitress with a hobby. JA is no bombshell. She looked decent enough at one time & made herself "up."

~ABC said...

Does anyone know where to find the transcripts of Mr. Robson's previous testimony? Has that been analyzed? Wouldn't that give contrast as to whether he was lying then or now or both?

I have no problem believing MJ was inappropriate in many ways with many people. He was a twisted man who died a bizarre death!

Lis said...

Anonymous at 4:26 PM, I was wondering if you could clarify a couple things in your comment-

"You can't have it both ways. It's not fair changing the rules because you don't like Michael Jackson."

-what rule do you see applying to this statement and how do you see it being changed?

"My truth" - if anyone else had put it that way, you'd have him for lunch.

-I'm not sure if we have covered "my truth" before? How do you see it?

"The idea that I would make all this up ... blah blah blah... extremely incomprehensible"

-My understanding is, this is not a reliable statement. Whenever someone starts giving reasons why they must be telling the truth, I get skeptical.

I believe that MJ was a pedophile, but I do not know if Robson is telling the truth. I'm seeing a mixture of reliable and unreliable statements.

Lis said...

ABC, yes, it would be very interesting to compare the statements of Mr. Robson then and now.

Some of my thoughts on his statement:

"The idea that I would make all of this up and put myself, my wife, my entire family though this is extremely incomprehensible."

-Reasons given why someone wouldn't be lying always make them look guilty to me. I'd like to hear Peter teach on this.

"I feel strong, I feel like this is the right thing to do because this is my truth,"

-Many people who endured sexual abuse as children finally deal with it when they are in their thirties. It has to do with the cognitive function at that age; finally realizing and seeing what happened through adult eyes, and the person also finally feels strong and distanced enough to face it and deal with it. He may have gained insight and courage by watching what happened with Sandusky and Jimmy Saville, too.

-He may say "my" truth because this is the truth he has personally had to privately live with, as opposed to what everyone else sees as the truth. I don't like the saying, it's a very post-modern expression- the concept that we all have our own "truth," when what it really means is that we all have differing experiences of reality. I think it is commonly used in therapy, too, so I wonder if he has been getting therapy and picked it up there? It is a reference that makes me uncomfortable and I'd like to hear Peter's thoughts on it. Is it an expression or is he revealing something.

It is possible that greed is his motive yet the charges are also true.

"He performed sexual acts on me and forced me to perform sexual acts on him."

-This part is clear. He will have to get more graphic in his explanations as this moves along.

" I was psychologically and emotionally completely unable and unwilling to understand that it was sexual abuse."

-extra words, not "I was unwilling to understand that it was sexual abuse" but "pyschologically" and "emotionally" "completely" etc., weakens the statement.

...he claimed the Thriller star used "manipulation and brainwashing," to coerce him into performing sexual acts. He added: "He would role play and train me for these (trial) scenarios."

-this is how grooming works.

-I believe MJ was a child predator (his statements have been covered here in the past) but not sure about Robson's claims. It will be interesting to see if his speaking out gives anyone else courage to speak up. It seems that MJ's victims were very loyal to him, overall, though.

~ABC said...

Lis said....
-Reasons given why someone wouldn't be lying always make them look guilty to me. I'd like to hear Peter teach on this.

Agreed Lis. A response of, "What reason would I have to lie?", or any variation of that, is not a reliable denial. I always perceive that response as them tossing the ball back to my court which is an attempt to evade.

~mj said...

I don't know if want to believe him because of my own experiences, or my reasoning is valid.

I honestly read his statements and they resonate truth because the subject he is speaking on is sensitive. His unreliable answers are a product of his abuse. This is exactly how a survivor would admit the abuse, as unreliable and leaving room for another truth, this way the abuser has an out. This way the survivor can back out of the admission.

It is taught, ingrained and forced that the survivor did this to themselves or deserved it or misunderstood the abusers intent. Survivors are taught they are wrong no matter what. That abuse is what is bleeding through into his words, IMO.

Because I can relate? Because I am afraid of not believing an abused child, even as an adult? Because he is telling the truth? I don't know.

veruca said...

Youve given me something to thinkg about...good post :)

Danielle Porter said...

Well said!