Wade Robson's Molestation Lawsuit Against Michael Jackson Has Been Dismissed

Judge Mitchell L. Beckloff rules that the companies controlled by the estate are not liable for the lawsuit and that Robson is too late in filing his lawsuit against the late singer.

AceShowbiz - A California judge has dismissed a lawsuit that claimed Michael Jackson had sexually abused choreographer Wade Robson when he was a child. The judge found that 35-year-old Robson had been too late in filing his lawsuit against the late singer.

Robson first sued in 2013, claiming that he was sexually abused for nearly a decade by Jackson. He then stated that MJJ Productions, Jackson's entertainment label, and MJJ Ventures had a second purpose which was to "operate as a child sexual abuse operation, specifically designed to locate, attract, lure and seduce child sexual abuse victims."

Judge Mitchell L. Beckloff ruled on Tuesday, December 19 that the companies were not liable for the lawsuit as "no one other than Michael Jackson had the legal ability or authority to control Michael Jackson."

"Without control over Michael Jackson," Beckloff stated, "the corporate defendants could not impose 'reasonable safeguards' or take 'reasonable steps' to 'avoid acts of unlawful sexual conduct in the future' by Michael Jackson."

Attorney for the Michael Jackson estate, Howard Weitzman, praised the judge's decision in a statement that was sent to The Hollywood Reporter, saying that he "believes the court made the correct decision in dismissing Wade Robson's claims against it."

He added, "In my opinion, Mr. Robson's allegations made twenty plus years after they supposedly occurred and years after Mr. Robson testified twice under oath -- including in front of a jury -- that Michael Jackson had never done anything wrong to him were always about the money rather than a search for the truth."

On the other hand, Robson's attorney, Vince Finaldi, told E! News that he planned to appeal the decision, believing that "it is contrary to established California law and sets a dangerous precedent that endangers the State's vulnerable children." He added, "We will be vigorously appealing this decision so that Wade's case can be decided on its factual merits before a jury of his peers."

You can share this post!

Related Posts