Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Current Events & Hot Topics Current Events & Hot Topics

Wade Robson: Michael Jackson Was a "Pedophile" Who Sexually Abused Me - Do you believe him?

Posted by   + Show Post

Wade Robson: Michael Jackson Was a "Pedophile" Who Sexually Abused Me

Michael Jackson, Wade Robson Amanda Edwards/Getty Images, Pool Photographer/WireImage.com

Wade Robson has just blown the lid off of Michael Jackson's legacy.

The famed choreographer—who testified eight years ago in Jackson's defense during his 2005 trial on child-molestation charges—is changing his tune, alleging that he was, in fact, abused by the late pop icon and has filed a suit against the Jackson estate.

The 30-year-old dancer sat down with Matt Lauer on Today this morning, where he defended his allegations and lawsuit against his former mentor, claiming Jackson, who died in 2009, was a "pedophile" who sexually abused him from ages 7 to 14.  

NEWS: Exclusive details on Robson's suit

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

The So You Think You Can Dance regular said he never came forward with his claims because he "was scared psychologically and emotionally completely unable and unwilling to understand that it was sexual abuse."

"This is not a case of repressed memory," he insisted. "I never forgot one moment of what Michael did to me."

After Lauer pressed Robson for details concerning the specific nature of the abuse, Wade clarified: "He performed sexual acts on me and I performed sexual acts on him." 

NEWS: 2005 sex-abuse case could be revisited in Jackson wrongful-death trial

Robson, who served as the defense team's star witness back in 2005, recalls Jackson's first criminal investigation in 1993 (he was 11 years old at the time). He claims the "Smooth Criminal" singer would call him "every day" and "role-play," convincing him that if anyone knew what they had done together, "both of us would go to jail."

The father of one, who said his son served as the catalyst to share his story, also insists there was never any monetary compensation for defending Jackson, telling Lauer, "It was complete manipulation and brainwashing. He would role-play and train me for these scenarios."

He said he finally had to face his troubling past after suffering from two nervous breakdowns, and when Lauer read statements from both Jermaine Jackson and the lawyer from Jackson's estate, Robson says their claims that he's lying could not be further from the truth. 

NEWS: Paris Jackson spending time with mother Debbie Rowe

"The idea that I would make all of this up and put my wife, my son, my entire family through this extremely stressful and painful experience all for the sake of money? That's completely incomprehensible," he said. "I've lived in silence and denial for 22 years...In order to fully heal, I have to speak the truth and I have to speak the whole truth." 

And even today, he admits he has mixed feelings about his alleged abuser and late mentor: "There is no excuse for what he did to me, but he was a troubled man...The image that one presents to the world is not the whole explanation of who someone is. Michael Jackson was yes, an incredibly talented artist with an incredible gift. He was many things. And he was also a pedophile and a child sexual abuser."

by on May. 16, 2013 at 2:06 PM
Replies (41-50):
turtle68
by Mahinaarangi on May. 17, 2013 at 5:42 AM

boo...I love the music that Michael bought to this world, the feelings they stirred.  Thank you for that.

As for all the other stuff, Id rather be an ostrich.  Hes dead.

romalove
by Roma on May. 17, 2013 at 6:53 AM
1 mom liked this


Quoting stacymomof2:

Of course I don't know for sure.  But I know for a fact that people can keep something like this inside for a long time and have a nervous breakdown over it.  I have seen it happen.  People feel they will go to their graves with this...not that they don't remember but they are too emotionally fragile to admit it.  Then when they are emotionally strong enough to come out with it, they do, often when they have kids of their own to protect.

I believe him and not only that he should get a settlement, too.  I don't get all this about he is suing for money so he sucks and shouldn't get it.  It is a way he can feel that he is believed.  Why shouldn't he get a settlement from the estate?  That is the least of it, IMO.  Gotta pay the lawyers somehow.

He shouldn't get a settlement from the estate because he had the opportunity while MJ was alive to accuse him and give MJ a chance to defend himself.

I believe this guy and think what he says is true.  But that's not really relevant when we're talking about making accusations that likely are not provable in a "he said/he said" sort of situation without paper trail or other evidence, and one of the two people who would "say" is dead.

lga1965
by on May. 17, 2013 at 7:32 AM

 I believe him. There were others who accused MJ of sexual abuse years and years ago but nothing ever came of it because of money,power,popularity of MJ and attorney manipulations. I really think he was a pedophile.

teri4lance
by Silver Member on May. 17, 2013 at 7:33 AM
Who cares? I mean really.
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
stacymomof2
by Ruby Member on May. 17, 2013 at 8:21 AM
I am of the opinion that it was arguably impossible for him to come forward earlier. People can suffer ptsd from this, permanent mental damage. If he can prove it then then I don't have any problems with him getting a settlement at all.

Quoting romalove:


Quoting stacymomof2:

Of course I don't know for sure.  But I know for a fact that people can keep something like this inside for a long time and have a nervous breakdown over it.  I have seen it happen.  People feel they will go to their graves with this...not that they don't remember but they are too emotionally fragile to admit it.  Then when they are emotionally strong enough to come out with it, they do, often when they have kids of their own to protect.

I believe him and not only that he should get a settlement, too.  I don't get all this about he is suing for money so he sucks and shouldn't get it.  It is a way he can feel that he is believed.  Why shouldn't he get a settlement from the estate?  That is the least of it, IMO.  Gotta pay the lawyers somehow.

He shouldn't get a settlement from the estate because he had the opportunity while MJ was alive to accuse him and give MJ a chance to defend himself.

I believe this guy and think what he says is true.  But that's not really relevant when we're talking about making accusations that likely are not provable in a "he said/he said" sort of situation without paper trail or other evidence, and one of the two people who would "say" is dead.

romalove
by Roma on May. 17, 2013 at 8:25 AM


Quoting stacymomof2:

I am of the opinion that it was arguably impossible for him to come forward earlier. People can suffer ptsd from this, permanent mental damage. If he can prove it then then I don't have any problems with him getting a settlement at all.

Quoting romalove:


Quoting stacymomof2:

Of course I don't know for sure.  But I know for a fact that people can keep something like this inside for a long time and have a nervous breakdown over it.  I have seen it happen.  People feel they will go to their graves with this...not that they don't remember but they are too emotionally fragile to admit it.  Then when they are emotionally strong enough to come out with it, they do, often when they have kids of their own to protect.

I believe him and not only that he should get a settlement, too.  I don't get all this about he is suing for money so he sucks and shouldn't get it.  It is a way he can feel that he is believed.  Why shouldn't he get a settlement from the estate?  That is the least of it, IMO.  Gotta pay the lawyers somehow.

He shouldn't get a settlement from the estate because he had the opportunity while MJ was alive to accuse him and give MJ a chance to defend himself.

I believe this guy and think what he says is true.  But that's not really relevant when we're talking about making accusations that likely are not provable in a "he said/he said" sort of situation without paper trail or other evidence, and one of the two people who would "say" is dead.

How do you think he could prove it without the person who supposedly did it dead?

ms-superwoman
by Silver Member on May. 17, 2013 at 8:39 AM
Quoting LNLMommy:

 Hmm...I'm very doubtful..suing for monetary gain makes his whole story sound fishy..it's one thing to admit to being abused but when you start pursuing money, it kind of ruins your credibility

I agree with this.

Come join us!

  Butt 'N Gut


Created by MyFitnessPal - Free Calorie Counter


stacymomof2
by Ruby Member on May. 17, 2013 at 9:58 AM

I don't really know.  Possibly by unearthing past settlements, this guy's testimony, other witnesses.  This would be a civil trial, so I think the standards of proof are more flexible than in a criminal trial.

If he loses, he loses.  I don't know what evidence he has.  All I am saying is that he has a right to be heard and to ask for a settlement.  I think he's telling the truth, and I don't think he would be saying it if he wasn't.  My big issue was with people saying that he doesn't have a right to ask for a settlement from the estate.  I think he does.  And that doesn't make him a money grubbing loser.  

Quoting romalove:


Quoting stacymomof2:

I am of the opinion that it was arguably impossible for him to come forward earlier. People can suffer ptsd from this, permanent mental damage. If he can prove it then then I don't have any problems with him getting a settlement at all.

Quoting romalove:


Quoting stacymomof2:

Of course I don't know for sure.  But I know for a fact that people can keep something like this inside for a long time and have a nervous breakdown over it.  I have seen it happen.  People feel they will go to their graves with this...not that they don't remember but they are too emotionally fragile to admit it.  Then when they are emotionally strong enough to come out with it, they do, often when they have kids of their own to protect.

I believe him and not only that he should get a settlement, too.  I don't get all this about he is suing for money so he sucks and shouldn't get it.  It is a way he can feel that he is believed.  Why shouldn't he get a settlement from the estate?  That is the least of it, IMO.  Gotta pay the lawyers somehow.

He shouldn't get a settlement from the estate because he had the opportunity while MJ was alive to accuse him and give MJ a chance to defend himself.

I believe this guy and think what he says is true.  But that's not really relevant when we're talking about making accusations that likely are not provable in a "he said/he said" sort of situation without paper trail or other evidence, and one of the two people who would "say" is dead.

How do you think he could prove it without the person who supposedly did it dead?


FromAtoZ
by AllieCat on May. 17, 2013 at 10:17 AM

I saw his interview on the Today Show.

I don't discount what he believes happened.  I also do not believe every thing he has to say.  

His memories were not repressed yet he was not able to tell the truth years ago.   It is safer to do so when the one you are accusing is dead.

I don't know.


sweet-a-kins
by Emerald Member on May. 17, 2013 at 1:56 PM

 

Quoting romalove:


Quoting stacymomof2:

I am of the opinion that it was arguably impossible for him to come forward earlier. People can suffer ptsd from this, permanent mental damage. If he can prove it then then I don't have any problems with him getting a settlement at all.

Quoting romalove:


Quoting stacymomof2:

Of course I don't know for sure.  But I know for a fact that people can keep something like this inside for a long time and have a nervous breakdown over it.  I have seen it happen.  People feel they will go to their graves with this...not that they don't remember but they are too emotionally fragile to admit it.  Then when they are emotionally strong enough to come out with it, they do, often when they have kids of their own to protect.

I believe him and not only that he should get a settlement, too.  I don't get all this about he is suing for money so he sucks and shouldn't get it.  It is a way he can feel that he is believed.  Why shouldn't he get a settlement from the estate?  That is the least of it, IMO.  Gotta pay the lawyers somehow.

He shouldn't get a settlement from the estate because he had the opportunity while MJ was alive to accuse him and give MJ a chance to defend himself.

I believe this guy and think what he says is true.  But that's not really relevant when we're talking about making accusations that likely are not provable in a "he said/he said" sort of situation without paper trail or other evidence, and one of the two people who would "say" is dead.

How do you think he could prove it without the person who supposedly did it dead?

 He could have recordings, communications etc..

or name witness' that knew (like what happened with Sandusky)

Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)