Two men who allege Michael Jackson sexually abused them when they were boys should not have had their cases dismissed, judges at a US court have said.
Wade Robson and James Safechuck, who claim Jackson abused them for years, will now be allowed to pursue lawsuits against companies owned by the late singer.
It’s the second time the lawsuits – which were brought by Robson in 2013 and Safechuck in 2014 – have been brought back after dismissal.
Both men detailed their claims of abuse in the 2019 HBO documentary Leaving Neverland.
Image: James Safechuck is pictured aged 10 with Jackson
Robson, now a 40-year-old choreographer, met Jackson when he was five years old. He went on to appear in three Jackson music videos.
His lawsuit alleged that Jackson molested him over a seven-year period.
Safechuck, now 45, said in his suit that he was nine when he met Jackson while filming a Pepsi commercial. He said Jackson called him often and lavished him with gifts before moving on to sexually abusing him.
A three-judge panel from California’s 2nd District Court of Appeal has now found that their lawsuits should not have been dismissed by a lower court.
Legal row over duty to protect children
A judge who dismissed the suits in 2021 found that the corporations – MJJ Productions Inc and MJJ Ventures Inc – who were both named as defendants in the case, could not be expected to function like the Boy Scouts or a church where a child in their care could expect their protection.
But the latest decision means that Robson and Safechuck can now validly claim the corporations had a responsibility to protect them.
Jackson, who died in 2009, was the sole owner and only shareholder in both companies.
In their report, the higher court judges wrote: “A corporation that facilitates the sexual abuse of children by one of its employees is not excused from an affirmative duty to protect those children merely because it is solely owned by the perpetrator of the abuse.”
They added: “It would be perverse to find no duty based on the corporate defendant having only one shareholder. And so, we reverse the judgments entered for the corporations.”
‘We remain fully confident Michael is innocent’
Jonathan Steinsapir, attorney for the Jackson estate, said they were “disappointed” by the decision.
Mr Steinsapir told The Associated Press: “Two distinguished trial judges repeatedly dismissed these cases on numerous occasions over the last decade because the law required it.
“We remain fully confident that Michael is innocent of these allegations, which are contrary to all credible evidence and independent corroboration, and which were only first made years after Michael’s death by men motivated solely by money.”
Vince Finaldi, an attorney for Robson and Safechuck, said in an email that they were “pleased but not surprised” that the court overturned the previous judge’s “incorrect rulings in these cases, which were against California law and would have set a dangerous precedent that endangered children throughout state and country. We eagerly look forward to a trial on the merits”.
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
Mr Steinsapir had argued for the defence in July that it does not make sense that employees would be legally required to stop the behaviour of their boss, saying: “It would require low-level employees to confront their supervisor and call them paedophiles.”
He also said the parents of the boys had not expected company staff to monitor Jackson’s actions.
Holly Boyer, another attorney for Robson and Safechuck, countered that the boys “were left alone in this lion’s den by the defendant’s employees. An affirmative duty to protect and to warn is correct”.
In a concurring opinion issued with Friday’s decision, one of the panellists, Associate Justice John Shepard Wiley Jr, wrote that “to treat Jackson’s wholly-owned instruments as different from Jackson himself is to be mesmerised by abstractions. This is not an alter ego case. This is a same ego case”.
The judges did not rule on the truth of the allegations themselves. That will be the subject of a forthcoming jury trial in Los Angeles.
Jackson always denied any allegations he was involved in abusing underage boys.
His Neverland Ranch, in California, was sold in December 2020 for $22m (£16m).
A university academic who is receiving “substantial damages” for how he was portrayed in a film has told Sky News he hasn’t received an apology from star Steve Coogan – nor the two companies involved in its production.
Richard Taylor said he was “shell-shocked” after seeing The Lost King for the first time, a film about how Richard III’s skeleton was discovered below a car park in Leicester.
He told The UK Tonight with Sarah-Jane Mee:“I wasn’t consulted or even knew I was in the film. The first I hear is I get a phone call while I’m on holiday – and eventually, after press previews, I persuade the producers to let me see a preview.”
Image: Richard III
Last year, a judge ruled that Mr Taylor was depicted as “smug, unruly dismissive and patronising” – with the plot suggesting he “knowingly” misled the public.
“I’m portrayed by someone on screen who looks like me, who sounds like me, who dresses like me – but behaves in a way that falls so far short of the standards I set for myself and what others might reasonably expect of me,” the academic explained.
Mr Taylor revealed he received emails at work telling him to “rot in hell”, while others described him as a “disgrace”.
He added: “Something that was a collaborative effort that showcased the best of British universities in my view was turned into this farce – where I was the villain and portrayed in a way that was completely inconsistent with the reality and the truth.”
Now chief operating officer at Loughborough University, Mr Taylor said “none of the facts” in the 2022 film were ever checked – and the Alan Partridge star, his company Baby Cow and Pathe Productions did not reach out to him before its release.
“The producers just went ahead, filmed it, produced it, stuck it out there and left me to deal with all the flack and all the fallout from it. Grossly unfair and I feel vindicated from the result we’ve achieved,” he told Sky News.
Image: Steve Coogan and two production companies have agreed to pay ‘substantial damages’. Pic: PA
‘The film’s going to look pretty silly’
As part of the settlement, an on-screen clarification will now be added to the start of the film, but no scenes will be removed.
When asked whether he was satisfied with this outcome, Mr Taylor replied: “I’d have liked them to re-edit the film, but one’s got to be realistic about what one can achieve.
“The insertion of the card will say that the person on screen is a fictitious portrayal – and the real Richard Taylor didn’t behave like that … so the film’s going to look pretty silly.”
Image: The statue of Richard III outside Leicester Cathedral. Pic: Shropshire Matt/PA
The case was due to proceed to trial, but a High Court hearing on Monday heard that the parties had settled the claim.
In a statement afterwards, Cooganhad said: “If it wasn’t for Philippa Langley, Richard III would still be lying under a car park in Leicester. It is her name that will be remembered in relation to the discovery of the lost king, long after Richard Taylor has faded into obscurity.”
He went on to add: “That is the story I wanted to tell, and I am happy I did.”
Reacting to the statement, Mr Taylor argued “it’s a pretty strange definition of happy when you’ve had to settle a defamation claim for seven figures in costs”.
He said: “Steve is never anything other than certain in himself and of his own position, but I think he’s got it wrong – basic facts were not checked.”
Prunella Scales, best known for her role as Sybil in Fawlty Towers, has died aged 93, her family has said.
Prunella Scales was watching the sitcom the day before she died, her sons Samuel and Joseph West said.
They said in a statement to the PA news agency: “Our darling mother Prunella Scales died peacefully at home in London yesterday.”
Her seven-decade acting career saw her in multiple roles from the 1950s, including in 1960s sitcom Marriage Lines, before featuring as the wife of John Cleese’s character Basil Fawlty, in two series of Fawlty Towers in 1975 and 1979.
Image: Prunella Scales, pictured in 2017, has died at the age of 93. File pic: PA
The family statement added: “She was 93. Although dementia forced her retirement from a remarkable acting career of nearly 70 years, she continued to live at home. She was watching Fawlty Towers the day before she died.
“Pru was married to Timothy West for 61 years. He died in November 2024.
“She is survived by two sons and one stepdaughter, seven grandchildren and four great-grandchildren.
“We would like to thank all those who gave Pru such wonderful care at the end of her life: her last days were comfortable, contented and surrounded by love.”
Image: Prunella Scales was married to fellow actor Timothy West for 61 years before his death in November 2024. Pic: Geoff Pugh/Shutterstock
Prunella Scales was one of the most successful and popular comedy actresses of her generation – achieving worldwide fame and recognition as Sybil, the long-suffering wife of Basil Fawlty in the sitcom Fawlty Towers.
Her performances, alongside John Cleese, are often regarded as arguably some of TV’s funniest comedy moments ever.
The sitcom, set in a hotel in the seaside resort of Torquay, continues to be broadcast. It was developed into a theatre production that moved to London’s West End in 2024.
Image: Prunella Scales (left), pictured here in 1979 as Sybil, alongside John Cleese (back centre) who played Basil Fawlty. Pic: Eugene Adebari/Shutterstock
But although she was regularly cast in comic roles, alongside comedy giants like Richard Briers and Ronnie Barker, her abilities ranged far more widely than that.
‘National treasure’ and ‘British icon’
Jon Petrie, director of comedy at the BBC which broadcast Fawlty Towers, described her as a “national treasure whose brilliance as Sybil Fawlty lit up screens and still makes us laugh today”.
Meanwhile, Corinne Mills, for Alzheimer’s Society, called her a “a true British icon” and praised her for “shining an important light on the UK’s biggest killer”.
Seven-decade acting career
Prunella Margaret Rumney Illingworth, who was born on 22 June 1932, had a seven-decade acting career.
Her career break came with the early 1960s sitcom Marriage Lines, starring opposite Richard Briers. Scales also played Queen Elizabeth II in the British film A Question Of Attribution, and in 1973, Scales teamed up with Ronnie Barker in the series called Seven Of One.
In 2006, she appeared alongside Academy Award winners Vanessa Redgrave and Maximilian Schell in the mini-series The Shell Seekers.
Scales married West in 1963, and had two sons; the elder being the actor and director Samuel West, and a stepdaughter, Juliet.
Image: Prunella Scales, seen with husband Timothy West in 2024, was living with dementia. Pic: PA
Dementia caused her ‘gradual disappearance’
In January 2013, she revealed her short-term memory was fading and a year later her husband confirmed that Scales was living with dementia.
West told Piers Morgan’s Life Stories: “The sad thing is that you just watch the gradual disappearance of the person that you knew and loved and were very close to.
“When we’ve been to a concert, or a play, or a film, there’s nothing very much we can say about it afterwards because Pru will have a fairly hazy memory.”
The couple appeared together in 10 series of the TV series Great Canal Journeys until Scales’ dementia reportedly progressed to the point where they had to stop in 2020.
The pair appeared in several more specials, where they looked back at their travels.
This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly.
Steve Coogan says he is “proud” of his film about the discovery of Richard III’s remains after he and two production companies agreed to pay “substantial damages” to a university academic.
The Alan Partridge star, his firm Baby Cow, and Pathe Productions have settled a libel claim over how Richard Taylor was portrayed in the 2022 movie The Lost King after he sued them.
Coogan, who co-wrote the screenplay and also starred in the film, said The Lost King was “the story I wanted to tell, and I am happy I did” following the settlement in the High Court on Monday.
The movie tells of how Philippa Langley led the search for the king’s skeleton.
Image: Richard Taylor outside the High Court. Pic: PA
The lost remains of the Plantagenet monarch, who ruled England between June 1483 and August 1485, were discovered in a Leicester car park in August 2012, more than 500 years after his death.
In June last year, Judge Jaron Lewis ruled that the film portrayed Mr Taylor, who was deputy registrar at the University of Leicester at the time of the discovery, as “knowingly misrepresented facts [about the find] to the media and the public”.
Mr Taylor was also shown to be “smug, unduly dismissive and patronising”, which had a defamatory meaning, the judge said.
More on Steve Coogan
Related Topics:
The case was due to proceed to trial, but lawyers for Mr Taylor, who is now chief operating officer at Loughborough University, told a hearing at the High Court on Monday that the parties had settled the claim.
Image: Richard III reigned from 1483 to 1485. Pic: PA
Depiction caused serious harm – lawyer
His barrister, William Bennett KC, said Mr Taylor felt “the depiction of him in this untrue way in the film caused serious harm to his professional and personal reputations and caused enormous distress and embarrassment to him”.
“The defendants have now settled Mr Taylor’s claim in the libel against them for the publication of the film by paying him substantial damages.
“Furthermore, they have agreed to make changes to the film in order to withdraw the allegations complained of and to pay him his legal costs.”
The University of Leicester played a “crucial role in providing funds and academic expertise” for the project to find the remains, with Mr Taylor the “key co-ordinator of the university’s involvement”, Mr Bennett said.
Image: A statue of Richard III outside Leicester Cathedral. Pic: Shropshire Matt/PA
On-screen clarification to be added to start of film
Coogan, and the production companies were not represented and did not attend but in a joint statement following the hearing, they said they were “incredibly proud of this film and are pleased this matter has now been settled”.
An on-screen clarification will be added to the start of the film, saying the portrayal of Mr Taylor in the film is “fictional and does not represent the actions of the real Mr Taylor”, who “acted with integrity during the events portrayed”.
In a separate statement, Coogan said Philippa Langley “instigated the search for Richard III. Philippa Langley insisted on the dig in the northern area of the social services car park where the remains were found. Philippa Langley raised the majority of the money for his exhumation”.
“If it wasn’t for Philippa Langley, Richard III would still be lying under a car park in Leicester. It is her name that will be remembered in relation to the discovery of the lost king, long after Richard Taylor has faded into obscurity.
“The only changes to the film will be a front card, which will follow the existing card, which says that this film is a true story, Philippa Langley’s story. That is the story I wanted to tell, and I am happy I did.”
Mr Taylor said that he felt “cross” and “completely helpless” when the film was released, but the outcome represented “success and vindication” after “a long and gruelling battle”.
He said: “There have been moments over the last three years when I thought, when Philippa Langley approached me for the university’s support, I perhaps should have put the request in the bin, but I didn’t, and I think I was right not to do that.”