The two men suing Michael Jackson’s companies over alleged child sexual abuse by the late pop star suffered a huge setback in court, In Touch can report.

According to court documents obtained by In Touch, a Los Angeles Superior Court judge shut down Wade Robson and James Safechuck’s subpoenas seeking records from the Los Angeles Police Department, Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office, and the Santa Barbara County District Attorney’s Office.

Michael’s companies being sued opposed the subpoenas.

Lawyers representing the defendants claimed the subpoenas had been denied by the court back in 2018.

Wade, 41, and James, 46, filed separate lawsuits in 2013 over alleged abuse Michael, who died in 2009 at the age of 50, committed against them as child.

Wade claimed the abuse started when he was seven and continued on for years. James said he met Michael as a child and the alleged abuse started during the singer’s Bad tour and went on for years.

The defendants have denied all allegations of wrongdoing and slammed the accusations. The lawsuits were initially dismissed by the court but then revived in the higher court years later.

The parties are now preparing for trial. Both men were featured in the HBO documentary Leaving Neverland where they revealed details of Michael’s alleged behavior.

The duo recently joined forces and will be going to trial together.

In opposition to the subpoenas, the defendants argued, “Beyond violating the clear language of the Court’s July 2018 Order, Plaintiffs’ subpoenas seek highly sensitive private documents related to non-parties, are an attempt to circumvent the protective order in another case from another court, and fail to comply with California law on pre-subpoena notices to consumers.”

“Specifically, California’s statutory and common law recognize privacy rights to images of deceased persons. Plaintiffs’ demand for certain documents—including photographs of Michael Jackson’s genitalia and naked body taken by police—represents an egregious violation of these privacy rights, and is simply beyond the pale,” the opposition read.

“Plaintiffs’ March 2024 Subpoenas are an appalling intrusion and violation of these privacy interests and have no legitimate purpose. These subpoenas seek, in relevant part, a highly sensitive and discrete set of documents,” the motion added. “Here, there is no legitimate justification for Plaintiffs’ gross attempt to violate the privacy of a man who has been deceased for almost a decade and to disturb his family’s ‘peace of mind and tranquility’ with our ‘sensation-seeking culture.’”

“Plaintiffs’ subpoenas must be quashed insofar as they are seeking these lurid images of Mr. Jackson. Indeed, allowing Plaintiffs to proceed with these subpoenas is particularly inappropriate given the circumstances surrounding the photographs,” they argued.

The judge agreed.

The order read, “Because the information sought in the subpoenas was already encompassed in the Court’s July 5, 2018, order quashing previous subpoenas to SBCDA, LACDA, and LAPD, and because Plaintiffs did not serve third parties with the requisite consumer notices prior to serving the subpoenas at issue, the Court grants Defendants’ motion and quashes the four deposition subpoenas at issue.”

However, the court did deny the defendant’s motion for attorney fees over the matter. The case is ongoing.

Follow us to see more useful information, as well as to give us more motivation to update more useful information for you.
Source: USA Today