What's REALLY Going ON Volume 1, June 2014 Issue #6 | Page 39

“SHOUT IT OUT”
Corrine Montorfani
Wade Robson in photo

Photo Source

It's unbelievable to me that the
attorneys for these two ex-kids
are saying MJ was responsible
for keeping Jimmy Safechuck out
of school? How was Michael
responsible for keeping him out
of school? What did he do - hold
a gun to his head and force him?
What about his damn parents?
They take no responsibility for
keeping him out of school??

and none of MJ's other accusers has ever alleged real sex, so I
highly doubt that Robson and Safechuck will claim this. They
must have proof to back it up or else it’s just hearsay.
Besides the fact that Robson testified on behalf of Michael during
his trial and said under oath that Michael did nothing
inappropriate...these two accusations don't stand a chance of
going anywhere. It’s way beyond the allowable timeframe to
even attempt this, and they should know it very well!

They have the main responsibility to me. I’m a parent and I know
that schools agree to these kind of permits only if parents
officially require it! No way MJ could go to his school and take
him out! The kid was not going to school because his
parents signed a nice and lucrative contract with MJ
sponsors...... of which they were nicely paid!

Michael Jackson - 2005 Trial Photo

Therefore the child’s school attendance would be the
responsibility of his parent’s and not that of Michael Jackson.
Robson said on Television he
was fully aware that Jackson
was a pedophile, at the time of
his trial in 2005, but decided to
lie under oath, because he had
not really realized at that time
that what had happened was
wrong. Robson was 22 years old
at the time. One might assume
that perhaps he regretted later
his decision, at least to prevent
further "victims."

http:www.albertsondavidsonpost.com/2012/04/30/the-deadlydeadline-for-suing-decedents-californias-toughest-statute-oflimitations-in-trust-probate-estate-and-civil-cases/
Safechuck even denied abuse? If I'm not mistaken he gave a
deposition to the Grand Jury in 1993 and also during the Arvizo
trial discovery phase, and denied anything inappropriate
occurred.
It goes without saying that accusations of abuse must always be
taken seriously. When an individual has told one story very
credibly and convincingly as an adult, however, and then
suddenly changes it with no corroborating evidence (letters,
photos, phone conversations, witnesses, etc.) to file a creditor’s
claim, it deserves a healthy dose of skepticism. Believing such
claims on faith can be dangerous, it mean destroying lives and
reputations with absolutely no proof beyond the accusation. The
best evidence would've been a doctor's thorough examination of
the children during the time of the so-called molestation.
Evidence of signs which could have been attributed to a
molestation of that type. But that never happened did it? My
guess would be because the so-called events never occurred
and they're making it up.

Michael Jackson and Wade
Robson (Photo Source)

NO. It did not happen: he
prepared a barbecue meal with his family and MJ in 2008,
praising him with no pressure or cue in 2009, 2010, 2011, and
2012. This liar who claimed that he didn't know that he had been
"abused" invited his supposedly "abuser" to HIS house, basically
MONTHS before Michael was murdered. What "victim" does
that? See.. this kind of thing the tabloids did not publish as
evident for an example.
Nobody knows what's in the documents except for the courts,
39