Professional Documents
Culture Documents
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
10
Plaintiff,
11
vs.
12
MANLY, STEWART & FINALDI
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
19100 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 800
Irvine, CA 92612
Telephone: (949) 252-9990
14
15
Defendants.
13
16
17
18
19
20
COMES NOW, Plaintiff JANE AA DOE (Plaintiff), who hereby complains and alleges
21
22
against Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2, and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive (Defendants), as
23
follows:
24
///
25
///
26
///
27
///
28
///
PARTIES
1
2
1.
resident of the State of California. The name utilized by JANE AA DOE in this Complaint is not
the real name of JANE AA DOE, but is a fictitious name utilized to protect her privacy as a
victim of childhood sexual harassment, molestation and abuse. Plaintiff was born on February 21,
1974, was a minor throughout the period of childhood sexual abuse alleged herein, and lived with
her parents in Southern California. She brings this action pursuant to C.C.P. section 340.1 for the
childhood sexual abuse she suffered at the hands of MICHAEL JOSEPH JACKSON, DOE 1,
10
2.
11
of the most famous and successful entertainers in pop music history. Plaintiff is informed,
12
believes, and thereupon alleges that, at all times relevant herein, MICHAEL JACKSON was a
13
resident of the State of California, County of Los Angeles. Plaintiff is further informed and
14
believes, and thereupon alleges, that MICHAEL JACKSON died in Los Angeles, California on
15
16
3.
Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereupon alleges, that Defendant DOE 1
17
(DOE 1) is a California corporation, with a principal place of business located in the County of
18
Los Angeles, State of California. Plaintiff is further informed and believes, and thereupon alleges,
19
that at all times relevant herein, DOE 1 was an entertainment company established by MICHAEL
20
JACKSON as his primary business entity and the entity that held most or all of the copyrights to
21
MICHAEL JACKSONs music and videos. Plaintiff is further informed and believes, and
22
thereon alleges, that MICHAEL JACKSON was the president/owner and a representative/agent
23
of DOE 1 at all times relevant herein, and that in that capacity, DOE 1 had the ability to exercise
24
control over MICHAEL JACKSONs business and personal affairs. Plaintiff is further informed
25
and believes, and thereon alleges, that MICHAEL JACKSON, with DOE 1 full knowledge,
26
consent, and assistance, exploited this relationship with DOE 1 to gain access to Plaintiff, and to
27
set up, facilitate and arrange meetings and encounters between MICHAEL JACKSON and the
28
///
1
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
minor Plaintiff and other children for the purpose of MICHAEL JACKSONs engaging in
4.
Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereupon alleges, that Defendant DOE 2
(DOE 2) is a California corporation, with a principal place of business located in the County of
Los Angeles, State of California. Plaintiff is further informed and believes, and thereupon alleges,
that at all times relevant herein, DOE 2 was an entertainment company established by MICHAEL
JACKSON in part for the purpose of employing Plaintiff to work with MICHAEL JACKSON on
various projects, and further, that MICHAEL JACKSON was the president/owner and a
representative/agent of DOE 2 at all times relevant herein, and that in that capacity, DOE 2 had
10
the ability to exercise control over MICHAEL JACKSONs personal and business affairs.
11
Plaintiff is further informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that MICHAEL JACKSON, with
12
DOE 2s full knowledge, consent, and assistance, exploited this relationship to gain access to
13
Plaintiff, and to set up, facilitate, and arrange meetings and encounters between MICHAEL
14
JACKSON and the minor Plaintiff and other children for the purpose of MICHAEL JACKSON
15
16
5.
In performing the acts complained of herein, MICHAEL JACKSON acted with the
17
full knowledge, consent and cooperation of DOE 1 and DOE 2, who were his co-conspirators,
18
collaborators, facilitators and alter egos for the childhood sexual abuse alleged herein. DOE 1 and
19
DOE 2 were held out to the public to be businesses dedicated to creating and distributing
20
multimedia entertainment by MICHAEL JACKSON, however, in fact, they actually served dual
21
purposes. The thinly-veiled, covert second purpose of these businesses was to operate as a child
22
sexual abuse operation, specifically designed to locate, attract, lure and seduce child sexual abuse
23
victims. In fact, under this dual purpose, MICHAEL JACKSON and select few managing
24
agents/employees of DOE 1s and DOE 2s inner circle designed, developed and operated what is
25
likely the most sophisticated public child sexual abuse procurement and facilitation organization
26
the world has known. As a result thereof, Defendants DOE 1 and DOE 2 are liable for MICHAEL
27
JACKSONs acts of childhood sexual abuse within the meaning of CCP 340.1(a)(2) and (3),
28
and 340.1 (b)(2), in that said entities owed a duty of care to the Plaintiff, and their wrongful,
2
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
intentional and/or negligent acts, as well as knowing failure to take reasonable steps and
JACKSON, were a legal cause of the childhood sexual abuse which resulted in injury to Plaintiff
as alleged herein.
6.
Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereupon alleges, that the true names and
DOEs 3 through 50, inclusive, are unknown to Plaintiff, who therefore sues said Defendants by
such fictitious names. Plaintiff will amend Complaint to allege their true names and capacities
when such have been ascertained. Upon information and belief, each of the said DOE Defendants
10
is responsible in some manner under C.C.P. 340.1(a)(1), (2) and (3), and 340.1 (b)(2) for the
11
occurrences herein alleged, and were a legal cause of the childhood sexual abuse which resulted
12
13
7.
Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that at all times
14
mentioned herein, there existed a unity of interest and ownership among Defendants and each of
15
them, such that any individuality and separateness between Defendants, and each of them, ceased
16
to exist. Defendants and each of them, were the successors-in-interest and/or alter egos of the
17
other Defendants, and each of them, in that they purchased, controlled, dominated and operated
18
each other without any separate identity, observation of formalities, or other manner of division.
19
To continue maintaining the facade of a separate and individual existence between and among
20
Defendants, and each of them, would serve to perpetrate a fraud and an injustice.
21
8.
At all times mentioned herein, MICHAEL JACKSON was an adult singer, dancer,
22
entertainer, teacher, mentor, and coach of both DOE 1 and DOE 2, acting as an employee,
23
managing agent, agent, officer, director and/or servant of such and/or was under their complete
24
control and/or supervision. MICHAEL JACKSON was hired by DOE 1 and DOE 2 to serve as a
25
singer, dancer, entertainer, teacher, mentor, and coach to, in part, mentor and train minors in the
26
entertainment industry. In so doing, DOE 1 and DOE 2 held MICHAEL JACKSON out to the
27
public, Plaintiff and Plaintiffs family to be safe and of high ethical and moral repute, and to be in
28
good standing with the DOE 1 and DOE 2, the State of California, and the public in general. In
3
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
this capacity, MICHAEL JACKSON was placed into contact with, taught, mentored, coached,
and advised minors regarding the entertainment industry in general (including but not limited to
singing, dancing, performing, choreography, song writing), personal issues, academics, future
employment prospects, and general emotional and psychological issues. Both DOE 1 and DOE 2
held MICHAEL JACKSON out to the public, Plaintiff and Plaintiffs parents to be a highly
qualified and safe entertainer, teacher, mentor, coach, and advisor who could and would assist
minors in the entertainment industry, and with working through personal and academic issues
they faced. Inherent in this representation was the understanding that MICHAEL JACKSON was
a person of high ethical and moral standing, selected to provide leadership, guidance, mentoring,
10
coaching, and advisement to minors, including Plaintiff. Plaintiff and her family reasonably
11
relied upon these representations and assumed that MICHAEL JACKSON was a person worthy
12
13
9.
Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that at all times
14
mentioned herein, Defendants and each of them and MICHAEL JACKSON were the agents,
15
representatives and/or employees of each and every other Defendant. In doing the things
16
hereinafter alleged, Defendants and each of them, and MICHAEL JACKSON, were acting within
17
the course and scope of said alternative personality, capacity, identity, agency, representation
18
and/or employment and were within the scope of their authority, whether actual or apparent.
19
Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that at all times mentioned herein,
20
Defendants and each of them and MICHAEL JACKSON were the trustees, partners, servants,
21
joint venturers, shareholders, contractors, and/or employees of each and every other Defendant,
22
and the acts and omissions herein alleged were done by them, acting individually, through such
23
capacity and within the scope of their authority, and with the permission and consent of each and
24
every other Defendant and that said conduct was thereafter ratified by each and every other
25
Defendant, and that each of them is jointly and severally liable to Plaintiff.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
26
27
28
10.
parents took her and her brothers on a trip to San Francisco. Plaintiff, admittedly, was a
4
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
tomboy. On the way back to Southern California, they stopped by the Hayvenhurst home of
MICHAEL JACKSON and location where he conducted business for DOES 1-2, to sightsee.
While at the front gates, MICHAEL JACKSON arrived driving his Mercedes motor vehicle. He
drove into the gate and signaled to his security guard to allow Plaintiff and her mother access to
the property, beyond the gates. Plaintiff and her mother obliged, and walked onto the residence
grounds, being escorted by the security guard. They spoke with MICHAEL JACKSON at his car
for several minutes. MICHAEL JACKSON then drove to the residence and entered. The security
guard escorted Plaintiff and her mother to MICHAEL JACKSONs candy room in the residence.
10
11.
While on the property, MICHAEL JACKSON spoke with the security guard
11
through his walkie talkie and asked him to obtain Plaintiffs telephone number. The security
12
guard then requested and received Plaintiffs familys home phone number. MICHAEL
13
JACKSON began calling Plaintiffs home within the week, to speak with Plaintiff. They began
14
conversing over the telephone every day. MICHAEL JACKSON began inviting Plaintiff to spend
15
time with him, groomed her for sexual abuse and began sexually abusing her.
16
12.
17
1986, when she was 12 years old, and continued until just before she turned 15 years old, in 1989,
18
19
13.
20
JACKSON fondling Plaintiff sexually on her genitals and body, digitally penetrating Plaintiff,
21
giving Plaintiff what he termed movie kisses where he tongue kissed her mouth and body,
22
orally copulated Plaintiff, forced Plaintiff to orally copulate him, rubbed his clothed and
23
unclothed body against Plaintiffs, and rubbed his penis on Plaintiffs vagina and attempted to
24
fully insert it into her vagina, only partially inserting it and causing Plaintiff to bleed. These acts
25
by MICHAEL JACKSON, using his position of trust and authority over her, for his own sexual
26
gratification, upon Plaintiff without her consent as she was a minor and unable to give valid, legal
27
consent.
28
5
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
14.
Before, during and after the sexual abuse period Plaintiff suffered, MICHAEL
JACKSON would buy Plaintiff gifts and send her notes and letters of affection. The letters stated
such things as: I love you and miss you very much and I love you sooo much also your
making me love you even more the more I talk to you Im crazy about you all my love Michael.
True and correct copies of these two notes, which are amongst many given to Plaintiff by
MICHAEL JACKSON, DOE 1 and DOE 2, which Plaintiff still possesses, are attached here
collectively as Exhibit A. MICHAEL JACKSON would call Plaintiffs family home very
frequently, requesting to speak with Plaintiff. He would then speak with Plaintiff for hours at a
time, about varying subjects, including his affection for Plaintiff. He would tell her things that
10
were to be kept secret from Plaintiffs parents and everyone else. By giving Plaintiff a
11
nickname, giving her gifts, sending her notes and letters, speaking with her over the telephone for
12
long hours, and telling her secrets which were to be kept from her parents and others,
13
14
15.
15
periods of time on the phone with her, telling her intimate details about his life and his past, in an
16
attempt to gain a closeness with Plaintiffs mother and earn her trust so that she would allow
17
him to spend time alone with Plaintiff. He would tell her about how much he cared for Plaintiff as
18
a friend. He also gave her gifts such as flowers, gift baskets, a television and an autographed
19
20
16.
Defendants DOE 1 and DOE 2 orchestrated, facilitated and enabled the sexual
21
abuse of Plaintiff by MICHAEL JACKSON by assisting in the grooming process (buying gifts
22
for Plaintiff, picking Plaintiff up and taking her to MICHAEL JACKSON to spend time with him,
23
driving Plaintiff home, sending letters and notes to Plaintiff, sending gifts to Plaintiff, setting up
24
meetings between Plaintiff and MICHAEL JACKSON, isolating Plaintiff with MICHAEL
25
JACKSON for extended periods of time, and booking and paying for accommodations for
26
27
28
17.
locations throughout Los Angeles, including but not limited to MICHAEL JACKSONs
6
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Hayvenhurst home, where he lived and conducted business for and on behalf of DOES 1-2, at
Universal Studios while he was on the set for Moonwalker and working for DOES 1-2, at the
Universal Sheraton hotel while he was filming Moonwalker and working for DOES 1-2, at his
Neverland residence, where he lived and conducted business for and on behalf of DOES 1-2, on
the set of the Smooth Criminal video shoot which was being created for and on behalf of DOES
1-2, in the back of his limousine that he used to travel and conduct business for DOES 1-2, at the
Lorimar Studios in Studio City where he was conducting business for DOES 1-2, at his personal
residence apartment/condo he nicknamed the Hideout where he lived and conducted business
for DOES 1-2, all during times that he was working for and on behalf of DOE 1 and DOE 2.
10
During these times, MICHAEL JACKSON, DOE 1 and DOE 2 took physical custody and control
11
of the minor Plaintiff, entering into a special, trusting, confidential and in loco parentis
12
relationship with her, owing her a duty of care to protect her from reasonably foreseeable harm.
PENAL CODE AND CIVIL CODE VIOLATIONS
13
14
18.
As used in C.C.P. 340.1, childhood sexual abuse includes any act committed
15
against the plaintiff that occurred when the plaintiff was under the age of 18 years and that would
16
have been proscribed by Section 266j of the California Penal Code (Penal Code); Section 285
17
of the Penal Code; paragraph (1) or (2) of subdivision (b), or of subdivision (c), of Section 286 of
18
the Penal Code; subdivision (a) or (b) of Section 288 of the Penal Code; paragraph (1) or (2) of
19
subdivision (b), or of subdivision (c), of Section 288a of the Penal Code; subdivision (h), (i), or
20
(j) of Section 289 of the Penal Code; Section 647.6 of the Penal Code.
21
22
19.
As set forth more fully above, on multiple occasions MICHAEL JACKSON and
23
DOES 1-2, inclusive, intentionally committed acts against Plaintiff that occurred when Plaintiff
24
was under the age of eighteen (18), and which would have been proscribed by Section 266j of the
25
Penal Code or any prior laws of California of similar effect at the time the acts were committed,
26
27
transport, provide, or make available to another person, Plaintiff ,who was a child under the age
28
of sixteen (16), for the purpose of any lewd or lascivious act as defined in Penal Code 288, or
7
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
by causing, inducing, or persuading Plaintiff, a child under the age of sixteen (16), to engage in
20.
intentionally committed an act against Plaintiff that occurred when Plaintiff was under the age of
eighteen (18), and which would have been proscribed by Section 286(b)(1) of the Penal Code or
any prior laws of California of similar effect at the time the act was committed, by participating in
an act of sodomy (sexual conduct consisting of contact between the penis of one person and the
anus of another person) with Plaintiff, who was under eighteen (18) years of age. Any sexual
10
11
12
MANLY, STEWART & FINALDI
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
19100 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 800
Irvine, CA 92612
Telephone: (949) 252-9990
As set forth more fully above, MICHAEL JACKSON and DOES 1-2, inclusive,
21.
As set forth more fully above, MICHAEL JACKSON and DOES 1-2, inclusive,
13
intentionally committed an act against Plaintiff that occurred when Plaintiff was under the age of
14
eighteen (18), and which would have been proscribed by Section 286(b)(2) of the Penal Code or
15
any prior laws of California of similar effect at the time the act was committed, by participating in
16
an act of sodomy (sexual conduct consisting of contact between the penis of one person and the
17
anus of another person) with Plaintiff who was under sixteen (16) years of age when MICHAEL
18
JACKSON was over the age of twenty-one (21) years. Any sexual penetration, however slight, is
19
20
21
22.
As set forth more fully above, MICHAEL JACKSON and DOES 1-2, inclusive,
22
intentionally committed an act against Plaintiff that occurred when Plaintiff was under the age of
23
eighteen (18), and which would have been proscribed by Section 286(c)(2)(A) of the Penal Code
24
or any prior laws of California of similar effect at the time the act was committed, by committing
25
an act of sodomy (sexual conduct consisting of contact between the penis of one person and the
26
anus of another person) when the act was accomplished against Plaintiffs will by means of
27
duress. Any sexual penetration, however slight, is sufficient to complete the crime of sodomy.
28
///
8
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1
2
23.
As set forth more fully above, MICHAEL JACKSON and DOES 1-2, inclusive,
intentionally committed an act against Plaintiff that occurred when Plaintiff was under the age of
eighteen (18), and which would have been proscribed by Section 286(c)(2)(C) of the Penal Code
or any prior laws of California of similar effect at the time the act was committed, by committing
an act of sodomy (sexual conduct consisting of contact between the penis of one person and the
anus of another person) with Plaintiff who was a minor fourteen (14) years of age or older when
the act was accomplished against Plaintiffs will by means of duress. Any sexual penetration,
10
11
MANLY, STEWART & FINALDI
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
19100 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 800
Irvine, CA 92612
Telephone: (949) 252-9990
On multiple occasions, as set forth more fully above, MICHAEL JACKSON and
12
DOES 1-2, inclusive, intentionally committed acts against Plaintiff that occurred when Plaintiff
13
was under the age of eighteen (18), and which would have been proscribed by Section 288(a) of
14
the Penal Code or any prior laws of California of similar effect at the time the acts were
15
committed, by willfully and lewdly committing any lewd or lascivious act, including any of the
16
acts constituting other crimes provided for in Part 1 of the Penal Code, upon or with the body, or
17
any part or member thereof, of Plaintiff who was under the age of fourteen (14) years, with the
18
intent of arousing, appealing to, or gratifying the lust, passions, or sexual desires of MICHAEL
19
JACKSON or Plaintiff.
20
21
25.
On multiple occasions, as set forth more fully above, MICHAEL JACKSON and
22
DOES 1-2, inclusive, intentionally committed acts against Plaintiff that occurred when Plaintiff
23
was under the age of eighteen (18), and which would have been proscribed by Section 288(b)(1)
24
of the Penal Code or any prior laws of California of similar effect at the time the acts were
25
committed, by willfully and lewdly committing any lewd or lascivious act, including any of the
26
acts constituting other crimes provided for in Part 1 of the Penal Code, upon or with the body, or
27
any part or member thereof, of Plaintiff who was under the age of fourteen (14) years, with the
28
9
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
intent of arousing, appealing to, or gratifying the lust, passions, or sexual desires of MICHAEL
26.
DOES 1-2, inclusive, intentionally committed acts against Plaintiff that occurred when Plaintiff
was under the age of eighteen (18), and which would have been proscribed by Section 288a(b)(1)
of the Penal Code or any prior laws of California of similar effect at the time the acts were
committed, by participating in an act of oral copulation (the act of copulating the mouth of one
person with the sexual organ or anus of another person) with Plaintiff who was under eighteen
10
11
12
MANLY, STEWART & FINALDI
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
19100 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 800
Irvine, CA 92612
Telephone: (949) 252-9990
On multiple occasions, as set forth more fully above, MICHAEL JACKSON and
27.
On multiple occasions, as set forth more fully above, MICHAEL JACKSON and
13
DOES 1-2, inclusive, intentionally committed acts against Plaintiff that occurred when Plaintiff
14
was under the age of eighteen (18), and which would have been proscribed by Section 288a(b)(2)
15
of the Penal Code or any prior laws of California of similar effect at the time the acts were
16
committed, by participating in an act of oral copulation (the act of copulating the mouth of one
17
person with the sexual organ or anus of another person) with Plaintiff who was under sixteen (16)
18
years of age and MICHAEL JACKSON was over the age of twenty-one (21).
19
20
28.
On multiple occasions, as set forth more fully above, MICHAEL JACKSON and
21
DOES 1-2, inclusive, intentionally committed acts against Plaintiff that occurred when Plaintiff
22
was under the age of eighteen (18), and which would have been proscribed by Section 288a(c)(1)
23
of the Penal Code or any prior laws of California of similar effect at the time the acts were
24
committed, by participating in an act of oral copulation (the act of copulating the mouth of one
25
person with the sexual organ or anus of another person) with Plaintiff who was under fourteen
26
(14) years of age and more than 10 years younger than MICHAEL JACKSON.
27
///
28
///
10
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
29.
DOES 1-2, inclusive, intentionally committed acts against Plaintiff that occurred when Plaintiff
was under the age of eighteen (18), and which would have been proscribed by Section
288a(c)(2)(A) of the Penal Code or any prior laws of California of similar effect at the time the
acts were committed, by committing an act of oral copulation (the act of copulating the mouth of
one person with the sexual organ or anus of another person) when the act was accomplished
10
On multiple occasions, as set forth more fully above, MICHAEL JACKSON and
30.
On multiple occasions, as set forth more fully above, MICHAEL JACKSON and
11
DOES 1-2, inclusive, intentionally committed acts against Plaintiff that occurred when Plaintiff
12
was under the age of eighteen (18), and which would have been proscribed by Section
13
288a(c)(2)(B) of the Penal Code or any prior laws of California of similar effect at the time the
14
acts were committed, by committing an act of oral copulation (the act of copulating the mouth of
15
one person with the sexual organ or anus of another person) upon Plaintiff who was under
16
fourteen (14) years of age, when the act was accomplished against Plaintiffs will by means of
17
duress.
18
19
31.
On multiple occasions, as set forth more fully above, MICHAEL JACKSON and
20
DOES 1-2, inclusive, intentionally committed acts against Plaintiff that occurred when Plaintiff
21
was under the age of eighteen (18), and which would have been proscribed by Section
22
288a(c)(2)(C) of the Penal Code or any prior laws of California of similar effect at the time the
23
acts were committed, by committing an act of oral copulation (the act of copulating the mouth of
24
one person with the sexual organ or anus of another person) upon Plaintiff who was fourteen (14)
25
years of age or older, when the act was accomplished against Plaintiffs will by means of duress.
26
27
28
32.
On multiple occasions, as set forth more fully above, MICHAEL JACKSON and
DOES 1-2, inclusive, intentionally committed acts against Plaintiff that occurred when Plaintiff
11
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
was under the age of eighteen (18), and which would have been proscribed by Section 288a(c)(3)
of the Penal Code or any prior laws of California of similar effect at the time the acts were
committed, by committing an act of oral copulation (the act of copulating the mouth of one
person with the sexual organ or anus of another person) where the act was accomplished against
Plaintiffs will by threatening to retaliate in the future against Plaintiff or any other person, and
there was a reasonable possibility that MICHAEL JACKSON would execute the threat.
33.
intentionally committed acts against Plaintiff that occurred when Plaintiff was under the age of
10
eighteen (18), and which would have been proscribed by Section 289(h) of the Penal Code or any
11
prior laws of California of similar effect at the time the acts were committed, by participating in
12
an act of sexual penetration (the act of causing the penetration, however slight, of the genital or
13
anal opening of another person or causing another person to so penetrate the defendants or
14
another persons genital or anal opening for the purpose of sexual arousal, gratification, or abuse
15
by any foreign object (including any part of the body except a sexual organ), substance,
16
instrument, or device) with Plaintiff who was under eighteen (18) years of age.
17
18
34.
On multiple occasions, as set forth more fully above, MICHAEL JACKSON and
19
DOES 1-2, inclusive, intentionally committed acts against Plaintiff that occurred when Plaintiff
20
was under the age of eighteen (18), and which would have been proscribed by Section 289(i) of
21
the Penal Code or any prior laws of California of similar effect at the time the acts were
22
committed by participating in an act of sexual penetration (the act of causing the penetration,
23
however slight, of the genital or anal opening of another person or causing another person to so
24
penetrate the defendants or another persons genital or anal opening for the purpose of sexual
25
arousal, gratification, or abuse by any foreign object (including any part of the body except a
26
sexual organ), substance, instrument, or device) with Plaintiff who was under sixteen (16) years
27
of age and MICHAEL JACKSON was over the age of twenty-one (21) years.
28
///
12
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
35.
On multiple occasions, as set forth more fully above, MICHAEL JACKSON and
DOES 1-2, inclusive, intentionally committed acts against Plaintiff that occurred when Plaintiff
was under the age of eighteen (18), and which would have been proscribed by Section 289(j) of
the Penal Code or any prior laws of California of similar effect at the time the acts were
committed by participating in an act of sexual penetration (the act of causing the penetration,
however slight, of the genital or anal opening of another person or causing another person to so
penetrate the defendants or another persons genital or anal opening for the purpose of sexual
arousal, gratification, or abuse by any foreign object (including any part of the body except a
10
sexual organ), substance, instrument, or device) with Plaintiff who was under fourteen (14) years
11
of age and who was more than 10 years younger than MICHAEL JACKSON.
12
13
36.
On multiple occasions, as set forth more fully above, MICHAEL JACKSON and
14
DOES 1-2, inclusive, intentionally committed acts against Plaintiff that occurred when Plaintiff
15
was under the age of eighteen (18), and which would have been proscribed by Section 647.6(a)(1)
16
of the Penal Code or any prior laws of California of similar effect at the time the acts were
17
committed, by annoying or molesting Plaintiff when she was a child under eighteen (18) years of
18
age.
19
20
37.
On multiple occasions, as set forth more fully above, MICHAEL JACKSON acted
21
with the intent to cause a harmful and offensive contact with Plaintiffs intimate parts as set forth
22
in California Civil Code 1708.5 regarding sexual battery, and did, in fact, cause such sexually
23
harmful and offensive contact. On each occasion, Plaintiff did not consent to MICHAEL
24
JACKSONs conduct.
25
26
38.
On multiple occasions, as set forth more fully above, MICHAEL JACKSON acted
27
with the intent to cause a harmful and offensive physical contact with Plaintiff by the use of his
28
intimate part as set forth in Civil Code Section 1708.5 regarding sexual battery, and did, in fact,
13
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
cause such sexually harmful or offensive contact. On each occasion, Plaintiff did not consent to
MICHAEL JACKSONs conduct. The physical contact alleged above, offends ones reasonable
39.
MICHAEL JACKSON did sexually harass, molest and abuse Plaintiff, who was a
minor at the time. Such conduct was done for MICHAEL JACKSONs sexual gratification,
while working as an agent, employee, officer and director of, and on behalf of, DOES 1-2, and
under their active control and supervision, and was performed on Plaintiff without his free
consent, as Plaintiff was a mere minor and thus unable to give valid, legal consent to such sexual
acts.
10
40.
11
MANLY, STEWART & FINALDI
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
19100 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 800
Irvine, CA 92612
Telephone: (949) 252-9990
12
41.
As a direct and proximate result of her sexual abuse by MICHAEL JACKSON and
13
DOES 1-2, Plaintiff has suffered, and will continue to suffer, psychological, mental and
14
emotional distress, including but not limited to nightmares, stress, fear, shame, humiliation,
15
depression, physical distress, anxiety, depression, sadness, anger, trust issues, and control issues.
16
She has and will continue to incur expenses for mental and medical care due to the abuse,
17
18
42.
As a direct and proximate result of her sexual abuse by MICHAEL JACKSON and
19
DOES 1-2, Plaintiff has been damaged in her employment, specifically losing wages and earnings
20
and economic benefits according to proof at the time of trial. Plaintiff has lost wages as a result of
21
the abuse she suffered at the hands of Defendants, and will continue to lose wages in an amount
22
to be determined at trial. Plaintiff has suffered economic injury, all to Plaintiff's general, special
23
and consequential damage in an amount to be proven at trial, but in no event less than the
24
25
43.
As is set forth herein, Defendants and each of them have failed to uphold
26
numerous mandatory duties imposed upon them by state and federal law, and by written policies
27
and procedures applicable to Defendants, including but not limited to the following:
28
14
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Duty to ensure that any direction given to employees is lawful, and that
adults act fairly, responsibly and respectfully towards other adults and
minor children;
Duty to properly train teachers, mentors, coaches, and advisors so that they
are aware of their individual responsibility for creating and maintaining a
safe environment;
Duty to supervise employees and minor children in its care, enforce rules
and regulations prescribed for childcare organizations, exercise reasonable
control over minor children in its care as is reasonably necessary to
maintain order, protect property, or protect the health and safety of
employees and minor children or to maintain proper and appropriate
conditions conducive to learning and child development;
16
17
Duty to act promptly and diligently and not ignore or minimize problems;
18
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
MANLY, STEWART & FINALDI
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
19100 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 800
Irvine, CA 92612
Telephone: (949) 252-9990
12
13
14
15
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
44.
and oppressive acts beyond the bounds of decent behavior, which were undertaken, wantonly,
oppressively and with a conscious disregard for Plaintiffs rights as a child. Plaintiff is therefore
entitled to an award of punitive damages in an amount sufficient to punish, deter and make an
example of those Defendants engaging in such behavior according to proof at trial. In subjecting
28
15
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Plaintiff to the wrongful treatment herein described, Defendants DOES 1-2 and MICHAEL
JACKSON acted willfully and maliciously with the intent to harm Plaintiff, and in conscious
disregard of Plaintiff's rights, so as to constitute malice and/or oppression under California Civil
Code section 3294. Plaintiff is informed, and on that basis alleges, that these willful, malicious,
and/or oppressive acts, as alleged herein above, were ratified by the officers, directors, and/or
managing agents of the Defendants DOES 1-2 and DOES 3 through 50, including MICHAEL
determined by the court, against Defendants DOES 1-2, and DOES 3 through 50, in a sum to be
10
11
45.
Before, during and after the sexual abuse of Plaintiff, MICHAEL JACKSON
12
threatened, intimidated and coerced the minor Plaintiff, who was under extreme duress due to his
13
actions, into not informing anyone of her sexual abuse or pursuing legal action therefor. These
14
threats included telling Plaintiff that she would be physically harmed if she ever told anyone, and
15
that she would get in trouble with law enforcement and go to jail, forcing Plaintiff to promise not
16
to tell anyone. These threats, which Plaintiff wholeheartedly believed due to MICHAEL
17
JACKSONs immense fame, fortune and notoriety, as well as the company he kept, including his
18
business manager FRANK DILEO, prevented Plaintiff from coming forward at an earlier time.
19
The coercive effects of these threats, duress, and intimidation did not cease until, after MICHAEL
20
JACKSON passed away, Plaintiff discovered others had filed actions against MICHAEL
21
JACKSON and DOES 1-2 for sexual assault, namely Wade Robson, and were not physically
22
23
24
46.
In the beginning of September, 2016, Plaintiff, while reflecting on the child sexual
25
abuse she had suffered at the hands of MICHAEL JACKSON and DOES 1-2, for the first time in
26
her life, reasonably discovered that her psychological injuries or illnesses occurring after the age
27
of majority, as listed in paragraph 40 herein-above, were caused by the sexual abuse she suffered
28
at the hands of MICHAEL JACKSON and DOES 1-2. As a layperson with no specialized
16
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
training in psychology or the medical field, Plaintiff was blameless for not making this nexus at
an earlier date than she did, and had no way of making such nexus at an earlier time.
INSURANCE CODE 11583
3
4
47.
JACKSON, DOE 1 and DOE 2 paid Plaintiff the sum of $2,500.00, to compensate her for the
sexual abuse she had suffered at the hands of MICHAEL JACKSON. It was purposely falsely
labeled as a gift so as to conceal the true nature and source of the payment. Attached hereto as
48.
10
JACKSON, DOE 1 and DOE 2 paid Plaintiff the sum of $10,000.00, in cash, to compensate her
11
for the sexual abuse she had suffered at the hands of MICHAEL JACKSON. Attached hereto as
12
Exhibit C is a true and correct copy of the currency strap for that cash payment.
13
49.
14
JACKSON, DOE 1 and DOE 2 paid Plaintiff the sum of $150,000.00, to compensate her for the
15
sexual abuse she had suffered at the hands of MICHAEL JACKSON. The check was made out in
16
the name of Plaintiffs friend at the time, who neither MICHAEL JACKSON, nor DOE 1, nor
17
DOE 2, had ever met or known or worked for/with, so as to conceal the true nature and source of
18
the payment. Attached hereto as Exhibit D is a true and correct copy of that check and
19
check stub.
20
50.
On January 21, 1993, MICHAEL JACKSON, DOE 1 and DOE 2 paid Plaintiff the
21
sum of $130,000.00, to compensate her for the sexual abuse she had suffered at the hands of
22
MICHAEL JACKSON. Attached hereto as Exhibit E is a true and correct copy of that
23
check.
24
51.
On December 23, 1993, MICHAEL JACKSON, DOE 1 and DOE 2 paid Plaintiff
25
the sum of $600,000.00, to compensate her for the sexual abuse she had suffered at the hands of
26
27
28
52.
On various dates between the inception of Plaintiffs sexual abuse, in 1986, when
she was a minor, and December of 1993, MICHAEL JACKSON and DOES 1-2 gave Plaintiff
17
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
multiple cash payments intended to compensate her for the sexual abuse she had suffered at the
hands of MICHAEL JACKSON. Included was an October 11, 1993, payment of $10,000.00 Per
correct copy of that cash withdrawal. In total, MICHAEL JACKSON and DOES 1-2 provided
Plaintiff in excess of $900,000.00 to compensate her for the child sexual abuse she suffered at the
Plaintiff for the child sexual abuse suffered did MICHAEL JACKSON or DOES 1-2 inform
Plaintiff, in writing or otherwise, of the statute of limitations applicable to her claims for
10
childhood sexual abuse at the hands of MICHAEL JACKSON and DOES 1-2. To this date,
11
Plaintiff has never received such written notification from MICHAEL JACKSON or DOES 1-2.
12
MANLY, STEWART & FINALDI
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
19100 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 800
Irvine, CA 92612
Telephone: (949) 252-9990
53.
54.
Insurance Code section 11583 states that [n]o advance payment or partial
13
payment of damages made by any person, or made by his insurer under liability insurance... as an
14
15
claim or potential claim against any person or insured shall be construed as an admission of
16
liability by the person claimed against, or of that persons or the insurers recognition of such
17
liability. The Insurance Code further states, however, that any person, including any insurer,
18
who makes such an advance or partial payment, shall at the time of beginning payment, notify the
19
recipient thereof in writing of the statute of limitations applicable to the cause of action which
20
such recipient may bring against such person as a result of such injury or death and that a
21
failure to provide such written notice shall operate to toll any such applicable statute of
22
limitations or time limitations from the time of such advance or partial payment until such written
23
notice is actually given. That notification shall not be required if the recipient is represented by an
24
attorney.
25
55.
26
tolled from the inception of payments to Plaintiff for the childhood sexual abuse she suffered, in
27
1986, to the present. Because the statute of limitations applicable to Plaintiffs child sexual abuse
28
claims against MICHAEL JACKSON and DOES 1-2 had not lapsed as of 1986, and have been
18
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
tolled since such time, Plaintiffs claims herein have not lapsed due to any applicable statute of
limitations.
OTHER SEXUAL ABUSE ALLEGATIONS
3
4
56.
abused, Jordan Chandler, brought a civil lawsuit against MICHAEL JACKSON, which resulted
7
8
9
On September 14, 1993, one of the many boys MICHAEL JACKSON sexually
57.
MICHAEL JACKSON was employed and worked, Plaintiff was under MICHAEL JACKSONs,
10
DOE 1, and DOE 2 direct supervision, care and control, thus creating a special relationship,
11
fiduciary relationship, and/or special care relationship with Defendants, and each of them.
12
Additionally, as a minor child under the custody, care and control of Defendants, Defendants
13
stood in loco parentis with respect to Plaintiff while she was attending events and functions at
14
locations run and controlled by Defendants DOE 1 and DOE 2. As the responsible parties and/or
15
employers controlling MICHAEL JACKSON, Defendants were also in a special relationship with
16
17
58.
Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Defendants knew
18
or had reason to know, or were otherwise on notice, that MICHAEL JACKSON had engaged in
19
unlawful sexually-related conduct with minors in the past, and/or was continuing to engage in
20
such conduct with Plaintiff, and failed to take reasonable steps, and to implement reasonable
21
safeguards, to avoid acts of unlawful sexual conduct in the future by MICHAEL JACKSON, such
22
as that which occurred with Plaintiff, including but not limited to preventing or avoiding
23
24
was an inherent part of that function or environment. Defendants had a duty to disclose to these
25
facts to Plaintiff, his parents and others, but negligently and/or intentionally suppressed,
26
concealed or failed to disclose this information for the express purposes of facilitating MICHAEL
27
28
and wholesome entertainer, and securing their insured employment with DOE 1 and DOE 2. The
19
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
duty to disclose this information arose by the special, trusting, confidential, fiduciary, and/or in
59.
Instead, Defendants ignored and/or concealed the sexual abuse of Plaintiff and
others by MICHAEL JACKSON that had already occurred, and continued to allow hundreds of
children, including the Plaintiff, to visit Defendants property, Neverland, and other properties,
and continue to be in contact with MICHAEL JACKSON, despite this knowledge of MICHAEL
JACKSONs prior, sexually abusive acts towards minors. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and
on that basis alleges, that Defendants and each of them were given notice of incidents of
inappropriate conduct by MICHAEL JACKSON, including such facts as those set forth in this
10
Complaint.
11
60.
Plaintiff is informed and believes, on that basis alleges, that prior to and during the
12
sexual harassment, molestation and abuse of Plaintiff, Defendants knew or had reason to know
13
that MICHAEL JACKSON had violated his role as a dancer, entertainer, teacher, mentor, coach,
14
and advisor to minors, and used this position of authority and trust acting on behalf of Defendants
15
to gain access to children, including Plaintiff, on and off the premises and grounds of Defendants,
16
in which he caused Plaintiff to touch him, to allow him to touch Plaintiff in a sexual manner, and
17
engaged in sexual conduct and abuse, including harassment and molestation, with such children
18
including Plaintiff.
19
61.
20
previously engaged in dangerous and inappropriate conduct, including sexually abusing other
21
minors at Defendants DOE 1 and DOE 2 owned and controlled properties, Defendants conspired
22
to and did knowingly fail to take reasonable steps, and failed to implement reasonable safeguards
23
to avoid acts of unlawful sexual conduct in the future by MICHAEL JACKSON, including, but
24
25
environment in which contact with children is an inherent aspect of that function or environment.
26
62.
Plaintiff further alleges that Defendants failed to report and did hide and conceal
27
from the Plaintiff,, the Plaintiffs parents, other minor children in their care (and parents of those
28
children), law enforcement authorities, civil authorities and others, the true facts and relevant
20
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
information necessary to bring MICHAEL JACKSON to justice for the sexual misconduct he
3
4
63.
made MICHAEL JACKSON's conduct harder to detect including, but not limited to:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
6
7
8
9
10
11
MANLY, STEWART & FINALDI
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
19100 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 800
Irvine, CA 92612
Telephone: (949) 252-9990
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
64.
24
JACKSON demanded and required that Plaintiff respect MICHAEL JACKSON in his position of
25
dancer, entertainer, teacher, mentor, and advisor at Defendants DOE 1 and DOE 2.
26
65.
Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Defendants and
27
each of them, were or had reason to have been aware of MICHAEL JACKSONs wrongful
28
conduct at or about the time it was occurring, and thereafter, but took no action to obstruct, inhibit
21
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
or stop such continuing conduct, or to help Plaintiff endure the trauma from such conduct.
Despite the authority and ability to do so, these Defendants negligently and/or willfully refused
to, and/or did not act effectively to stop the sexual assaults on Plaintiff, to inhibit or obstruct such
66.
Defendants DOE 1 and DOE 2 had the authority and the ability to obstruct or stop MICHAEL
JACKSON's sexual assaults on Plaintiff, but negligently and/or willfully failed to do so, thereby
allowing the abuse to occur and to continue unabated. This failure was a part of Defendants' plan
and arrangement to conceal wrongful acts, to avoid and inhibit detection, to block public
10
disclosure, to avoid scandal, to avoid the disclosure of their tolerance of child sexual molestation
11
and abuse, to preserve a false appearance of propriety, and to avoid investigation and action by
12
public authority including law enforcement. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis
13
alleges, that such actions were motivated by a desire to protect the reputation of Defendants and
14
each of them, and to protect the monetary support of Defendants while fostering an environment
15
16
17
MICHAEL JACKSONs violations of the Penal Code and Civil Code alleged herein-above were
18
committed, Defendants knew or had reason to know, or were or were otherwise on notice of, prior
19
acts of childhood sexual abuse committed by MICHAEL JACKSON, and despite such knowledge
20
and/or notice, placed Plaintiff in MICHAEL JACKSONs custody and/or made Plaintiff available
21
to MICHAEL JACKSON and then failed to take reasonable steps or implement reasonable
22
safeguards to protect Plaintiff from MICHAEL JACKSONs acts of abuse. Plaintiff is further
23
informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that these acts and/or omissions on the part of
24
Defendants were committed in spite of their ability to exercise control over the personal and
25
business affairs of MICHAEL JACKSON. Accordingly, Defendants are liable for MICHAEL
26
JACKSONs acts of childhood sexual abuse in that their wrongful, intentional and/or negligent
27
28
///
67.
Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that at the time
22
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
DUTY OF DEFENDANTS
68.
Defendants owed the Plaintiff a special duty of care. The Plaintiff, as a minor at all
relevant times alleged herein, was placed in the physical custody, control, and dominion of
Defendants and their agents, employees, and/or servants, and was placed in such custody, control,
and dominion in locations including, but not limited to: Neverland, the Hideout, and the
Havenhurst residence. The Plaintiff, as a minor in the custody, control, and under the dominion of
Defendants, stood in loco parentis with Defendants. As entities responsible for the custody,
supervision, care, and dominion of minor children in their care, Defendants owed the Plaintiff a
special duty of care, as they were entrusted with the Plaintiffs safety, security and care. See
10
Pamela L. v. Farmer (1980) 112 Cal.App.3d 206, 21112 (In inviting the children to her home,
11
respondent assumed that special relationship. Respondent recognized that special duty and
12
relationship when she assured plaintiffs' parents it would be safe for them to play at her house.)
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
69.
Defendants' conduct towards the Plaintiff, as described herein, was outrageous and
extreme.
71.
20
JACKSON in positions of authority at DOE 1, DOE 2, and DOES 3-50, which enabled
21
MICHAEL JACKSON to have access to minor children, including Plaintiff, so that he could
22
commit wrongful sexual acts with him, including the conduct described herein above. Plaintiff
23
held great trust, faith and confidence in Defendants, which, by virtue of Defendants' wrongful
24
25
72.
26
27
committing wrongful sexual acts with minor children in their charge, including Plaintiff, or to be
28
incapable of properly supervising MICHAEL JACKSON to prevent such abuse from occurring.
23
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Defendants' conduct described herein was intentional and malicious and done for
the purpose of causing, or with the substantial certainty that it would cause Plaintiff to suffer
74.
suffer great pain of mind and body, shock, emotional distress, physical manifestations of
enjoyment of life; have suffered and continue to suffer and were prevented and will continue to
be prevented from performing daily activities and obtaining the full enjoyment of life; will sustain
loss of earnings and earning capacity, and have incurred and will continue to incur expenses for
10
11
MANLY, STEWART & FINALDI
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
19100 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 800
Irvine, CA 92612
Telephone: (949) 252-9990
73.
12
DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3-50, acted willfully and maliciously with the intent to harm Plaintiff,
13
and in conscious disregard of Plaintiffs rights, so as to constitute malice and oppression under
14
California Civil Code section 3294. Plaintiff is therefore entitled to the recovery of punitive
15
damages, in an amount to be determined by the court, against Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and
16
17
18
19
20
21
76.
As more fully set forth above, the conduct and actions of Defendants served to
22
23
Plaintiff when she was a minor of 12-18 years. These actions include, but are not limited to:
24
arranging for Plaintiff and to stay with MICHAEL JACKSON, without her parents, present, on
25
numerous occasions; arranging for Plaintiff to be separated from her mother and family, and
26
27
arranging for Plaintiff and MICHAEL JACKSON to be taken on shopping expeditions; and
28
78.
As more fully set forth above, Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and Does 3 through 50,
inclusive, were aware and/or on notice of MICHAEL JACKSONs proclivities for engaging in
sexual acts with minors prior to the first occasion on which Plaintiff was placed in MICHAEL
JACKSONs custody through the acts of Defendants. Accordingly, at the time MICHAEL
JACKSON and Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, performed the
acts alleged herein, it was or should have been reasonably foreseeable to Defendants that by
continuously exposing and making Plaintiff available to MICHAEL JACKSON, Defendants were
placing Plaintiff in grave risk of being sexually abused by MICHAEL JACKSON. By knowingly
subjecting Plaintiff to such foreseeable danger, Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through
10
50, inclusive, were duty-bound to take reasonable steps and implement reasonable safeguards to
11
protect Plaintiff from MICHAEL JACKSON. Furthermore, as alleged herein, Defendants DOE
12
1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, at all times exercised a sufficient degree of control
13
over MICHAEL JACKSONs personal and business affairs to prevent the acts of abuse by
14
keeping MICHAEL JACKSON away from Plaintiff. However, Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and
15
DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, failed to take any reasonable steps or implement any reasonable
16
safeguards for Plaintiffs protection whatsoever, and continued to make Plaintiff accessible to
17
18
19
Under the Child Abuse and Neglect Reporting Act, Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2
20
and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, were child care custodians and were under a statutory duty to
21
report known or suspected incidents of sexual molestation or abuse of minors to a child protective
22
agency, pursuant to California Penal Code 11166, and/or not to impede the filing of any such
23
report. Furthermore, Defendants DOE 1 and DOE 2 were under a statutory duty to provide their
24
25
11166.5.
26
80.
Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, knew or had reason
27
to know that their agent, employee, counselor, advisor and mentor, MICHAEL JACKSON, had
28
sexually molested, abused or caused touching, battery, harm, and other injuries to minors,
25
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
including Plaintiff, giving rise to a duty to report such conduct under California Penal Code
11166.
Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, knew, or had
reason to know of in the exercise of reasonable diligence, that an undue risk to minors, including
the Plaintiff, existed because Defendants DOE 1 and DOE 2 did not comply with California's
81.
82.
By failing to report the continuing molestations and abuse, which Defendants DOE
1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, knew of or had reason to known of, and by ignoring
the fulfillment of the mandated compliance with the reporting requirements provided under
10
California Penal Code 11166, Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive,
11
created the risk and danger contemplated by the Child Abuse and Neglect Reporting Act
12
(hereinafter CANRA), and as a result, unreasonably and wrongfully exposed Plaintiff and other
13
14
15
16
83.
The Plaintiff was a member of the class of persons for whose protection California
Had Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, adequately
17
reported the molestation of Plaintiff and other minors as required by California Penal Code
18
11166, further harm to Plaintiff and other minors would have been avoided.
19
85.
20
inclusive, failure to follow the mandatory reporting requirements of California Penal Code
21
11166, Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, wrongfully denied the
22
Plaintiff and other minors the intervention of child protection services. Such public agencies
23
would have changed the then-existing arrangements and conditions that provided the access and
24
25
86.
The physical, mental, and emotional damages and injuries resulting from the
26
sexual molestation of Plaintiff by MICHAEL JACKSON, were the type of occurrence and
27
28
26
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
87.
failure to comply with the mandatory reporting requirements of California Penal Code 11166
also constituted a per se breach of Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50's,
88.
As a direct and proximate result of the failure of Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and
DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, to protect Plaintiff from the acts of childhood sexual abuse to
which she was subjected by MICHAEL JACKSON, Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to
suffer (a) severe mental and emotional distress including, but not limited to, severe anxiety,
stress, anger, fear, low self-esteem, shame, humiliation, depression and physical distress; (b)
10
expenses for mental health professionals and other medical treatment; and (c) loss of past and
11
future earnings and other economic benefits according to proof at the time of trial.
12
13
14
15
16
89.
17
DOES 3 through 50, inclusive,, and Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50s,
18
inclusive, relation to MICHAEL JACKSON, Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through
19
50, inclusive, owed Plaintiff a duty to provide reasonable supervision of MICHAEL JACKSON,
20
21
adequate warning to the Plaintiff, and other children, of MICHAEL JACKSONs dangerous
22
23
91.
Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Defendants DOE
24
1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, by and through their respective agents, servants and
25
employees, knew or had reason to know of MICHAEL JACKSONs dangerous and exploitive
26
propensities and/or that MICHAEL JACKSON was an unfit agent. Despite such knowledge,
27
Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, negligently failed to supervise
28
MICHAEL JACKSON in his position of trust and authority as an authority figure and supervisor
27
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
of children, where he was able to commit wrongful acts against the Plaintiff. Defendants DOE 1,
DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, failed to provide reasonable supervision of MICHAEL
JACKSON, failed to use reasonable care in investigating MICHAEL JACKSON, and failed to
unfitness. Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, further failed to take
reasonable measures to prevent sexual abuse harassment, and molestation of children, including
Plaintiff.
92.
Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Defendants DOE
1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, were put on notice, and knew or had reason to
10
know, that MICHAEL JACKSON had previously engaged and was continuing to engage in
11
unlawful sexual conduct with children and committed other felonies, for his own personal
12
gratification, and that it was, or should have been foreseeable that he was engaging, or would
13
engage in illicit sexual activities with Plaintiff, and others, under the cloak of his authority,
14
confidence, and trust, bestowed upon him through Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3
15
16
93.
Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Defendants DOE
17
1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, were placed on actual and/or constructive notice
18
that, MICHAEL JACKSON had children prior to, and/or during the time he was in contact with
19
the Plaintiff. Plaintiff is informed, and thereon alleges, that Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES
20
3 through 50, inclusive, were informed of sexual abuse, harassment and molestations committed
21
by MICHAEL JACKSON or of conduct that would put a reasonable person on notice of such
22
23
94.
Even though Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, knew
24
or had reason to know of these activities by MICHAEL JACKSON, Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2
25
and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, did nothing to investigate, supervise or monitor MICHAEL
26
27
28
95.
As an institution entrusted with the care of minors, where staff, employees, agents,
and management, such as the MICHAEL JACKSON were placed in contact with minors,
28
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50's expressly and implicitly represented that
these individuals, including MICHAEL JACKSON, were not a sexual threat to children and
others who would fall under MICHAEL JACKSON's influence, control, direction, and guidance.
96.
to supervise MICHAEL JACKSON in his positions of trust and authority as an employee, agent,
counselor and mentor, and/or other authority figure, where MICHAEL JACKSON was able to
commit wrongful acts against the Plaintiff. Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50,
DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50 further failed to take reasonable measures to prevent sexual
10
11
MANLY, STEWART & FINALDI
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
19100 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 800
Irvine, CA 92612
Telephone: (949) 252-9990
Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, negligently failed
97.
At no time during the periods of time alleged did Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and
12
DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, have in place a system or procedure to reasonably investigate,
13
supervise and monitor individuals in contact with minor children, including MICHAEL
14
JACKSON, to prevent pre-sexual grooming and sexual harassment, molestation and abuse of
15
children, nor did they implement a system or procedure to oversee or monitor conduct toward
16
minors, students and others in Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive,
17
care.
18
98.
Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, were or should
19
have known to be aware and understand how vulnerable children were to sexual harassment,
20
molestation and abuse by mentors, advisors, and other persons of authority within Defendants
21
22
23
24
99.
Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50s, inclusive, conduct was a
Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, breached their duty
25
to the Plaintiff by, inter alia, failing to adequately monitor and supervise MICHAEL JACKSON
26
and stopping MICHAEL JACKSON from committing wrongful sexual acts with minors
27
including the Plaintiff. This belief is founded on the fact that employees and staff of Defendants
28
DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, including had suspected the abuse was
29
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
occurring at the time, and failed to investigate into the matter further. Based on these facts,
Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, knew or had reason to know of
MICHAEL JACKSON's incapacity to supervise and stop employees of Defendants DOE 1, DOE
2 and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive from committing wrongful sexual acts with minors.
101.
suffer great pain of mind and body, shock, emotional distress, physical manifestations of
enjoyment of life; has suffered and continues to suffer and was prevented and will continue to be
prevented from performing daily activities and obtaining the full enjoyment of life; will sustain
10
loss of earnings and earning capacity, and/or has incurred and will continue to incur expenses for
11
12
MANLY, STEWART & FINALDI
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
19100 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 800
Irvine, CA 92612
Telephone: (949) 252-9990
13
14
15
16
102.
17
DOES 3 through 50, inclusive and each of them, and Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3
18
through 50s, inclusive, relation to MICHAEL JACKSON, Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and
19
DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, owed Plaintiff a duty to not hire and/or retain MICHAEL
20
JACKSON, given his dangerous and exploitive propensities, which Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2
21
and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, knew or had reason to know had they engaged in a
22
23
104.
As an institution entrusted with the care of minors, where staff, employees, agents,
24
and management, such as the MICHAEL JACKSON were placed in contact with minors,
25
Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50's, inclusive, expressly and implicitly
26
represented that these individuals, including MICHAEL JACKSON, were not a sexual threat to
27
children and others who would fall under MICHAEL JACKSON 's influence, control, direction,
28
and guidance.
30
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that at no time during
the periods of time alleged did Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50's, inclusive,
have in place a system or procedure to reasonably investigate, supervise and/or monitor those
individuals in direct contact with children, including MICHAEL JACKSON, to prevent pre-
sexual grooming and/or sexual harassment, molestation and abuse of patrons, nor did they
implement a system or procedure to oversee or monitor conduct toward patrons and others in
8
9
106.
Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50's, inclusive, and each of them
were or should have been aware and understood how vulnerable minor children were to sexual
10
abuse, harassment and molestation by persons of authority, including the MICHAEL JACKSON,
11
within the control of Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive.
12
MANLY, STEWART & FINALDI
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
19100 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 800
Irvine, CA 92612
Telephone: (949) 252-9990
105.
107.
Plaintiff is informed and believes and on that basis alleges other children and/or
13
employees of Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50's, inclusive, complained of
14
MICHAEL JACKSONs sexual improprieties prior to the sexual abuse of the Plaintiff. Either
15
Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50's, inclusive, knew, or at the very least should
16
have had reason to know of MICHAEL JACKSONs prior criminal history of sexual misconduct
17
18
108.
Plaintiff is informed, and believes, and on that basis alleges, that the Defendants
19
DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, were put on notice, and should have known
20
that MICHAEL JACKSON had previously engaged and continued to engage in unlawful sexual
21
conduct with patrons and other felonies, for his own personal gratification, and that it was, or
22
should have been foreseeable that he was engaging, or would engage in illicit sexual activities
23
with Plaintiff, and others, under the cloak of his authority, confidence, and trust, bestowed upon
24
him through Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive.
25
109.
Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that Defendants DOE
26
1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50's, inclusive, were placed on actual and/or constructive notice
27
that MICHAEL JACKSON had abused, harassed, molested and/or was molesting minor children,
28
both before his sexual abuse, molestation and harassment of the Plaintiff, and during that same
31
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
period. Plaintiff is informed, and thereon alleges, that other third parties, patrons, and/or law
enforcement officials informed Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, of
110.
or had reason to know of these activities by MICHAEL JACKSON, Plaintiff is informed that
Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, failed to use reasonable care in
MICHAEL JACKSON to ensure the safety of the other minor children in his charge, including
the Plaintiff.
10
111.
11
Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50s, inclusive, conduct was a
12
MANLY, STEWART & FINALDI
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
19100 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 800
Irvine, CA 92612
Telephone: (949) 252-9990
Even though Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, knew
112.
13
suffer great pain of mind and body, shock, emotional distress, physical manifestations of
14
15
enjoyment of life; has suffered and continues to suffer and was prevented and will continue to be
16
prevented from performing daily activities and obtaining the full enjoyment of life; will sustain
17
loss of earnings and earning capacity, and/or has incurred and will continue to incur expenses for
18
19
20
21
22
113.
23
114.
Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive owed Plaintiff a
24
duty to take reasonable protective measures to protect Plaintiff and other minor children in their
25
charge from the risk of sexual abuse, harassment and molestation by MICHAEL JACKSON by
26
properly warning, training or educating the Plaintiff and other minors about how to avoid such a
27
risk.
28
115.
Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, breached their duty
32
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
to take reasonable protective measures to protect Plaintiff and other minor children in their
charge, from the risk of sexual abuse, harassment and molestation by MICHAEL JACKSON,
such as the failure to properly warn, train or educate Plaintiff and other minor children in their
Plaintiff and other minor children in their charge from the risk of sexual harassment, molestation
Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, including MICHAEL JACKSON,
from committing wrongful sexual acts with minor children, including Plaintiff.
10
116.
117.
11
suffer great pain of mind and body, shock, emotional distress, physical manifestations of
12
13
enjoyment of life; has suffered and continues to suffer and was prevented and will continue to be
14
prevented from performing daily activities and obtaining the full enjoyment of life; will sustain
15
loss of earnings and earning capacity, and/or has incurred and will continue to incur expenses for
16
17
18
19
20
21
118.
As set forth more fully above, Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through
22
50, inclusive, in concert with MICHAEL JACKSON, recruited, enticed, and encouraged Plaintiff
23
and Plaintiffs mother to give their trust and confidence to Defendants and MICHAEL JACKSON
24
so that Plaintiff could be taken from her mothers care and supervision and placed under the care
25
and supervision of Defendants and MICHAEL JACKSON. In so doing, Defendants DOE 1, DOE
26
2 and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, entered into a fiduciary relationship with Plaintiff whereby
27
Defendants owed Plaintiff an in loco parentis duty of care to take all reasonable steps and
28
33
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
implement all reasonable safeguards to protect Plaintiff while she was in the custody of
Plaintiff and her mother agreed to place their trust and confidence in Defendants
DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, in the expectation that Defendants would
properly supervise Plaintiff, regulate her activities and behavior, and ensure her safety. Further,
Plaintiff and her mother agreed to this because they believed in the integrity of Defendants DOE
1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, and therefore felt comfortable in entrusting the
120.
121.
10
repeatedly subjecting Plaintiff to acts of childhood sexual abuse. As further alleged herein,
11
Defendants DOE 1, DOE 2 and DOES 3 through 50, inclusive, breached this duty to Plaintiff by
12
failing to take any reasonable steps or implement any reasonable safeguards to protect Plaintiff
13
14
15
122.
16
through 50, inclusive, breach of their fiduciary duty to Plaintiff, Plaintiff has suffered and will
17
continue to suffer (a) severe mental and emotional distress including, but not limited to, severe
18
anxiety, stress, anger, fear, low self-esteem, shame, humiliation, depression and physical distress;
19
(b) expenses for mental health professionals and other medical treatment; and (c) loss of past and
20
future earnings and other economic benefits according to proof at the time of trial.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
21
22
23
1.
24
25
2.
For past, present and future special damages, including but not limited to past,
26
present and future lost earnings, economic damages and others, in an amount to be
27
determined at trial;
28
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
5
6
7
8
For such other and further relief as the court may deem proper.
MANLY, STEWART & FINALDI
9
10
_______________________________
VINCE WILLIAM FINALDI, Esq.
Attorneys of Record for Plaintiff,
JANE AA DOE.
11
MANLY, STEWART & FINALDI
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
19100 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 800
Irvine, CA 92612
Telephone: (949) 252-9990
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
35
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1
2
3
4
5
6
_______________________________
VINCE WILLIAM FINALDI, Esq.
Attorneys of Record for Plaintiff,
JANE AA DOE.
7
8
9
10
11
MANLY, STEWART & FINALDI
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
19100 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 800
Irvine, CA 92612
Telephone: (949) 252-9990
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
36
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES