Latest news with #Safechuck
Yahoo
09-04-2025
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
Michael Jackson's Accusers Are Back In Court Over A 'Proposed Protective Order'
It has been nearly sixteen years since Michael Jackson's death; however, his legacy remains marred by unrelenting child abuse allegations. Wade Robson and James Safechuck remain adamant about the alleged trauma they experienced at the hands of the King of Pop when they were children. Their recently combined lawsuits against the "Thriller" hitmaker's companies have them fighting against a protective order. The legal drama began in 2013 when Wade Robson filed his scathing allegations against Michael Jackson's companies, MJJ Productions and MJJ Ventures. James Safechuck dropped his bombshell lawsuit the following year before the late singer's accusers teamed up to push their cases. Robson claimed Jackson sexually abused him when he was seven, and it continued for years. Meanwhile, Safechuck alleged he met the entertainer in 1986 when he was cast in a Pepsi commercial. He noted Jackson asked him to hang out months later, leading to many other hangouts. Safechuck claimed Jackson's sexual abuse started in 1988 during his Bad Tour when he was 10 and the singer was 29. The alleged victims sued MJJ Productions and MJJ Ventures for intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligence, and breach of fiduciary duty, among other claims. The companies have vehemently denied all allegations of wrongdoing and submitted a proposed protective order, which Safechuck and Robson opposed in court documents obtained by In Touch. The defendants argued the pair waited years after Jackson's death before making their claims despite once defending the singer. In their response to Safechuck's lawsuit, Jackson's companies noted it took "almost four years after Michael Jackson had died before he made his scurrilous and frivolous allegations." The attorney for the defendants added: "The nature of these false allegations necessarily makes it impossible for the Corporations to fully defend themselves without the assistance of Michael Jackson himself." "The impossibility of fully and completely defending against [James'] false allegations is further magnified by the fact that [James] himself steadfastly denied these allegations during the entirety of Michael Jackson's life," the legal rep argued. Additionally, the defendants demanded the lawsuit be tossed because they could not possibly have been on notice, before Jackson's death, that Safechuck would "bring frivolous claims like those here and that they should have been prepared to defend against such frivolous claims." Safechuck and Robson haven't had a victorious streak in their lawsuits, with a judge shutting their plea for sensitive information. The pair attempted to obtain sensitive photos of Jackson and other evidence via subpoenas sent to the Los Angeles Police Department, Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office, and the Santa Barbara County District Attorney's Office. However, Jackson's companies fought against the subpoenas, and a judge granted their refusal request. Outside court, Robson and Safechuck have pushed their abuse narrative through interviews and the 2019 documentary "Leaving Neverland" and its March 2025 sequel "Leaving Neverland 2: Surviving Michael Jackson." The Blast covered the story, reporting that Safechuck and Robson addressed the aftermath of their allegations ahead of the sequel's release. Robson described the fear of public reaction as "fricking terrifying," while Safechuck recalled feeling anxious about the first documentary's debut. Like the first documentary, "Leaving Neverland 2: Surviving Michael Jackson," revisited Robson and Safechuck's alleged abuse at Jackson's hands. Safechuck recalled some of his painful memories, claiming the late singer performed sexual acts on him when he was asleep. Additionally, the sequel followed their harrowing journey and aimed to shed light on the impacts of their allegations on an influential figure like Jackson. Robson also reflected on having Oprah Winfrey's support following the first documentary's release. In his words: "Winfrey got what I and James had been through, you know, getting to the point in life where it was no longer an option to keep it a secret." Robson and Safechuck accused Jackson of grooming them into silence and ensuring they supported him during his infamous child molestation trial. The pair claimed the late singer coerced them into giving false narratives, alleging he threatened to ruin their lives if they spoke against him. Robson alleged he initially denied Jackson's request to testify on his behalf. However, he kept receiving subpoenas, which made him believe he had no choice but to comply. Safechuck testified in the performer's favor during the 1993 molestation trial but chose not to support him in his 2005 legal battle. Jackson's accusers also addressed their lawsuit against the entertainer's companies, noting this was their way of fighting back and healing from their alleged traumas. Safechuck said: "Pursuing this was the act of fighting back. I wanted to fight for little James. I wanted to fight for him and fight for myself." Will Michael Jackson'saccusers emerge triumphant, or will the late singer's name be redeemed?
Yahoo
15-03-2025
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
‘Leaving Neverland 2' Director Dan Reed On Why HBO Backed Out Of Michael Jackson Sequel, The 'Rough' Road For Docs & Lionsgate‘s King Of Pop Biopic
It's been six years since Leaving Neverland left an indelible impression on Michael Jackson's legacy. The King of Pop was cleared of child abuse charges during his lifetime, but something about the Emmy-winning testimony of Wade Robson and James Safechuck stuck in the collective consciousness, despite consistent denials from Jackson's family and those who manage his business empire. Leaving Neverland 2 picks up the story where the first film left off in 2019, chronicling Robson and Safechuck's legal battle with the Jackson estate as they seek to hold the singer's enablers accountable for the abuse they claim to have suffered. 'I want my day in court,' Robson says intensely. In this sense, the Leaving Neverland sequel feels like a prelude to the main event: a trial next year in which their allegations will be tested in front of a jury. Director Dan Reed calls it a 'stepping stone' documentary. 'The intention is to follow the stories until the end,' he tells Deadline. More from Deadline 'The Last Of Us' Season 2 Trailer Sets Viewership Record For HBO & Max Originals YouTube Brandcast Regulars Like MrBeast And Dude Perfect Slated For Separate Creator Upfront HBO Comedy Chief Amy Gravitt On 'Righteous Gemstones' Departure, Expanding When Comedy Market Contracts & Possible Larry David Return Leaving Neverland 2 sticks with the theme of Robson and Safechuck wrestling with their past, made all the more intimate by Reed filming in their homes. There are moments of resonance as Safechuck talks vulnerably about what he would have told his younger self, cut closely alongside images of him cradling his own child. The documentary also captures the passing of time in their protracted efforts to secure a trial, from mask-wearing in court during the pandemic, to child sexual abuse attorney Vince W. Finaldi declaring his plans to retire. For Reed, the past six years strengthened his belief in Robson and Safechuck's version of events. The BAFTA-winning director never doubted the duo were victims of Jackson, but he says the grind of the legal battle underlines the authenticity of their story. The charge against Robson and Safechuck has always been that they want to make a buck out of their trauma. Reed thinks the lengthy legal action shows the opposite is true. 'I wanted to show how difficult and unrewarding and exhausting it is to try and get justice in the court system,' he explains. 'To people who say, 'They're just after money,' I say: five more victims came out after Leaving Neverland and got paid $16-17M for their life rights. If James and Wade had wanted to make a quick buck, why didn't they just go to the estate?' While Reed has journeyed with Robson and Safechuck through their legal travails, HBO is no longer along for the ride after co-producing the original documentary. HBO informed Reed of its decision late last year, which he described as 'disappointing' because the network was a 'fantastic partner' on Leaving Neverland. HBO has declined to comment on the matter. Its decision is thought to be related to Warner Bros. Discovery's own legal battle with the Jackson estate, which resulted in an opaque arbitration process after Leaving Neverland breached a non-disparagement clause in a 1992 contract for HBO's Dangerous Tour concert special. 'I've not been made privy to the details of that and I'm not sure what happened,' Reed says. Reed does not rule out re-teaming with HBO on a future Leaving Neverland film and points out that the network has a 10-year license for the original documentary. 'We look forward to one day renewing our collaboration on this theme,' he says cryptically. Leaving Neverland 2 will instead premiere in North America on Real Stories, the Little Dot Studios premium documentary channel on YouTube, and Reed is 'genuinely excited' about it reaching as broad an audience as possible. The documentary will first premiere on Channel 4 in the UK on March 18. One of the reasons Reed turned to YouTube is because he believes that major streamers (he namechecks Netflix and Apple) are becoming increasingly risk-averse in their documentary storytelling. Instead, Reed says streamers have sought sanctuary in true-crime docs and scripted series that embrace themes of sex and violence. 'It feels as though maybe the world of streaming is more cautious [about] tricky subjects, political subjects, subjects that put people's teeth on edge and make them upset,' he continues. 'In order not to strike the wrong note with such a vast subscribership, you can't really afford to do anything that isn't absolutely safe.' He's not the only filmmaker to point out this chilling effect. Ezra Edelman, the director of the Prince documentary series canceled by Netflix, says audiences are being served up 'slop' in the quest for sanitized access to high-profile subjects. Reed has been withering about Lionsgate's Antoine Fuqua biopic about Jackson, which he has accused of whitewashing the singer's alleged sins. Reed, who has read a version of the script, says it begins with blue lights and the arrest of Jackson at Neverland, and ends by discrediting Jordan Chandler's child abuse accusations against the pop star. The story will change, however, after the estate discovered post-shoot that it had an agreement with Chandler not to dramatize his story. 'What a massive f*** up,' Reed exclaims, questioning how the movie will hit its October release date amid re-shoots. It all leaves open the suggestion that Leaving Neverland may have been harder to produce in the current climate. Reed agrees, adding that there would likely have been 'blowback' from the 'manosphere' as society 'swings towards' conspiracy and disinformation. 'For long-form storytelling that tries to elucidate complex areas of danger in our society, the road is going to get rougher,' he says. The conditions make him grateful for public service broadcasters like Channel 4, which still have the 'grit and the remit' to tackle the taboo. On the day of our interview, Reed received his first abusive email about Leaving Neverland 2 and he suspects that worse is yet to come from Jackson superfans when the film premieres. The trolls ignore Reed's efforts to offer the estate a platform to rebut Robson and Safechuck's allegations. He shows his workings in the sequel, publishing an email he sent Jonathan Steinsapir, an attorney for the Jackson estate, 'begging' him to appear in the documentary. The film then shows Steinsapir mocking Reed as the lawyer enters court. 'Stil begging?' he asks the director. For Reed, these moments are vital for establishing the authenticity of his work — and in turn lending credibility to the stories of his subjects. 'This is the road we took to get to the place where I can confidently say, 'I tried to make this film showing both sides,'' he explains. 'Being transparent and establishing the credibility of our methods becomes absolutely vital if we're going to survive as a place that people look to for truth.' Best of Deadline 'The White Lotus' Season 3 Release Schedule: When Do New Episodes Arrive On Max? How Jon Gries' Return To 'The White Lotus' Could Shape Season 3 Everything We Know About 'Nobody Wants This' Season 2 So Far
