Jump to content
MadonnaNation.com Forums
Crux

Michael Jackson: Paedophile

Recommended Posts

Well every child deserves a parent that would say no to these situations, but it doesn't always go like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Kim said:

The fact that you believe that speaks volumes

Or maybe he decided not to put his son through the further ordeal of a criminal trial? Or any other number of possible reasons.

Yeah, because it's unfathomable that the insurance company of arguably the most famous pop star in the world (at that time) would want to protect his image (and their wallets) by preventing a CHILD SEX ABUSE TRIAL. 

LOL....do you know ANYTHING about Evan Chandler??? I suggest you look into that man. Putting his son through the ordeal of a trial was probably the LAST thing on his mind. Perhaps @Nonoka can confirm but if I'm not mistaken, Jordan emancipated himself from his parents before he was 18 because of how fucked up his father was. This really sounds like a father concerned about the well being of his victimized son huh?

 

That's just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to that man. This is why it's worth actually looking into the facts about the MJ allegations/trial because everything is NOT cut and dry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why was the most famous man in the world surrounding himself with so many shady parents of the boys he was sleeping with? Hmmmmm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Supernatural said:

People can be found guilty when there is enough circumstantial evidence. Scott Peterson for example. His jurors saw that he wanted his wife gone, he was having an affair, he was lying to his girlfriend about his missing wife, he rented a boat shortly after his wife went missing. I think there is more circumstantial evidence in the MJ case than in the Peterson case.

See, the Petersen case is a lot more cut and dry to me despite being mostly circumstantial. I can't agree with the fact that there's more circumstantial evidence with MJ......does he fit the profile in some ways? Sure. But the problem with MJ is that any would be circumstantial evidence, is debunked by shady accusers and their proven lies. Even if they would've found some questionable pornography my stance could be different.....but they didn't. I'm not sure what other circumstantial evidence there is here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Kurt420 said:

See, the Petersen case is a lot more cut and dry to me despite being mostly circumstantial. I can't agree with the fact that there's more circumstantial evidence with MJ......does he fit the profile in some ways? Sure. But the problem with MJ is that any would be circumstantial evidence, is debunked by shady accusers and their proven lies. Even if they would've found some questionable pornography my stance could be different.....but they didn't. I'm not sure what other circumstantial evidence there is here?

How do you call children a grown man is sleeping with liars? They did something wrong? Kids stories change out of fear, embarrassment, not processing it properly etc. Is that what happened here, or are they lying? Maybe there's no way to know, which leaves you back with the circumstantial evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd even be more open to believing this documentary.......if Robson didn't pursue this IMMEDIATELY after he was declined as choreographer for the MJ Cirque Du Soleil  show. That's the thing with ANY of the MJ accusations, there's always a fucked up twist. You mean to tell me he only realized at that exact moment he was a victim all those years ago?? Ok.....I understand all victims of sexual abuse have their own process but nobody can tell me that this isn't all awfully convenient. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Kurt420 said:

I'd even be more open to believing this documentary.......if Robson didn't pursue this IMMEDIATELY after he was declined as choreographer for the MJ Cirque Du Soleil  show. That's the thing with ANY of the MJ accusations, there's always a fucked up twist. You mean to tell me he only realized at that exact moment he was a victim all those years ago?? Ok.....I understand all victims of sexual abuse have their own process but nobody can tell me that this isn't all awfully convenient. 

Well how I see it is he was willing to keep his trap shut so long as he got work out of it. Which of course is disgusting too because how many more kids are being abused in the meantime. But this is probably not too unusual in Hollywood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Supernatural said:

How do you call children a grown man is sleeping with liars? They did something wrong? Kids stories change out of fear, embarrassment, not processing it properly etc. Is that what happened here, or are they lying? Maybe there's no way to know, which leaves you back with the circumstantial evidence.

Of course, I understand that but have you read the trial transcripts in this case? I don't think that's the case with Gavin. He was clearly "groomed" by his mother.....who was a proven liar. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Supernatural said:

Well how I see it is he was willing to keep his trap shut so long as he got work out of it. Which of course is disgusting too because how many more kids are being abused in the meantime. But this is probably not too unusual in Hollywood.

Perhaps......and if that's the case and he is a victim, I don't blame him in the slightest. Alternatively, he could also be blatantly lying since the courts immediately threw his case out back in '13-'14 and he's trying to make a fast buck.....that's also not unusual in Hollywood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Kim said:

Nah, the excerpt from the random documentary reviewer (from The Guardian) is meant to point out how it's not just kids/parents/authorities who get groomed and/or don't always do their jobs properly, but people like you. You've been so groomed by your fandom of Jacko that you think dissecting the few court cases that actually saw the light of day negates  that voice screaming in any normal person's head that his actions were that of an obviously predatory paedophile hiding under the cloak of cooky superstar,

He wouldn't have gotten away with any of his shit NOW, that's for sure. The fact that just 20 years ago he did, should be a source of shame for everyone. His "fans" included.

 

Please. It's cool you (or the Guardian) can apparently look into my head and tell me how think, but unfortunately your assesment is wrong. 

If anyone wants to know my logic, it's the simple equation of weird, off-putting and even suspicious behavior automatical guilt. That's why we have a court & justice system that looks into these things, investigates the person and, if necessary, puts him on a trial (Something that has never happened with Weinstein, Singer, Saville etc. before anyone comes with that shtick again) And not only has this been done thoroughly without a result, past investigations have revealed accusers to have seedy and dubious motives - and in this case, the voice in my head tells me I should maybe think twice before taking allegations at face value and running with them. 

But please continue telling me what think :doh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who here as seen this new documentary?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Kurt420 said:

Yeah, because it's unfathomable that the insurance company of arguably the most famous pop star in the world (at that time) would want to protect his image (and their wallets) by preventing a CHILD SEX ABUSE TRIAL. 

See what I mean? Rich famous man pays off accuser instead of defending (and presumably exonerating) himself in court,  Jacko fan brushes it off as insurance company meddling rather than what any normal person sees. Said pop star paints himself for perpetuity as a padeo who pays off kids in return for their silence.

2 hours ago, Kurt420 said:

LOL....do you know ANYTHING about Evan Chandler??? I suggest you look into that man. Putting his son through the ordeal of a trial was probably the LAST thing on his mind. Perhaps @Nonoka can confirm but if I'm not mistaken, Jordan emancipated himself from his parents before he was 18 because of how fucked up his father was. This really sounds like a father concerned about the well being of his victimized son huh? That's just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to that man. This is why it's worth actually looking into the facts about the MJ allegations/trial because everything is NOT cut and dry.

Lay down with dogs, you get fleas. The thing about paedophiles targeting troubled kids is that while they get easier access to their prey, they also get to deal with their fucked up families. Yet even with THIS father, they still didn't fight to clear Jackson's name, they just paid him off. God knows what kind of damning evidence they must have had against him. And no wonder he made sure not to leave the same evidence for any future investigations. Of course it's at this point that further contact with children should have been terminated. Paedos don't work like that though, especially ones with messiah complexes.

3 hours ago, Kurt420 said:

It's unfortunate he didn't have the sense to change his behavior after '93...if only to protect himself.......

This is the most chilling line of all. Not  "if only to protect any children just in case" but "to protect himself".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Nonoka said:

Please. It's cool you (or the Guardian) can apparently look into my head and tell me how think, but unfortunately your assesment is wrong. 

If anyone wants to know my logic, it's the simple equation of weird, off-putting and even suspicious behavior automatical guilt. That's why we have a court & justice system that looks into these things, investigates the person and, if necessary, puts him on a trial (Something that has never happened with Weinstein, Singer, Saville etc. before anyone comes with that shtick again) And not only has this been done thoroughly without a result, past investigations have revealed accusers to have seedy and dubious motives - and in this case, the voice in my head tells me I should maybe think twice before taking allegations at face value and running with them. 

But please continue telling me what think :doh:

Yep! Thank you!

And can I just say that with high profile trials....in fact, with ALL the ones that have been mentioned in this thread....OJ, Kelly, Cosby etc...I'm quick to immediately think the person is guilty. Even with MJ, I DID do that initially. Yes, I'm an MJ fan but I'm certainly no MJ "apologist" in the sense that I wouldn't call him out on some bullshit if I saw fit. With that said, I do call him out on the fact that he had kids sleeping in the bed with him, even AFTER the '93 ordeal......that's just :banghead: to me but having looked at this case in particular a little more thoroughly, the voice in my head questions anyone that DOESN'T look at this with skepticism AFTER reviewing ALL FACTS. If you've delved deeply into this and STILL determined this man is 100%, without a reasonable doubt GUILTY...then so be it, that's your opinion.....but opinions based on media interpretations and assumptions, I'm sorry, I can't take with 100% validity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Kurt420 said:

I'd even be more open to believing this documentary.......if Robson didn't pursue this IMMEDIATELY after he was declined as choreographer for the MJ Cirque Du Soleil  show. That's the thing with ANY of the MJ accusations, there's always a fucked up twist. You mean to tell me he only realized at that exact moment he was a victim all those years ago?? Ok.....I understand all victims of sexual abuse have their own process but nobody can tell me that this isn't all awfully convenient. 

No, you're just being groomed by your fandom, don't talk about this.

Let's also ignore the fact that the supposed victim was shopping for book rights about a tell-all MJ story and only went ahead with his claims after being rejected everywhere. And of course, once he did go ahead, the claims came with a 1,5 billion $ lawsuit against two of Jackson's former production companies

Receipts:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/joevogel/2019/01/29/what-you-should-know-about-the-new-michael-jackson-documentary/#30f3667a640f

https://themichaeljacksonallegationsblog.files.wordpress.com/2018/07/the-wade-robson-allegations-ebook-format-v2-0.pdf

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgSbSotJgUY

If this documentary is so truthful like some have claimed here (even though nobody here has actually seen it yet), I wonder why it chooses not to mention any of these aspects?

#groomedbyMJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Kim said:

See what I mean? Rich famous man pays off accuser instead of defending (and presumably exonerating) himself in court,  Jacko fan brushes it off as insurance company meddling rather than what any normal person sees. Said pop star paints himself for perpetuity as a padeo who pays off kids in return for their silence.

Lay down with dogs, you get fleas. The thing about paedophile's targeting troubled kids is that while they get easier access to their prey, they also get to deal with their fucked up families. Yet even with THIS father, they still didn't fight to clear Jackson's name, they just paid him off. God knows what kind of damning evidence they must have had against him. And no wonder he made sure not to leave the same evidence for any future investigations. Of course it's at this point that further contact with children should have been terminated. Paedos don't work like that though, especially ones with messiah complexes.

This is the most chilling line of all. Not  "if only to protect any children just in case" but "to protect himself".

🙄 and may I ask what your implication is with the "chilling" comment I made?? 

I think it goes without saying to protect the children....OBVIOUSLY!  But, since I'm primarily speaking on the "defensive" of MJ in this thread then yes, I did specifically call out protecting himself because if HE had done that (assuming he's NOT guilty) then that would've saved HIMSELF a whole lot of trouble. 

Everything else you say is assumption based on your opinion that he's without a doubt guilty. Sure, MAYBE there was "damning" evidence that would've convicted MJ BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT that he's guilty, which is not what ended up happening in '05........on the other hand, maybe a trial would've exposed Evan Chandler for not only the horrible father he was (already proven) but for the extortionist many already think he is. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe Maybe Maybe, Whatabout Whatabout Whatabout.... You can argue about hypotheticals forever. 

The drug addict killed himself in the end, so the possibility of further investigation is over, and the fact that his predilection for little boys hangs over his name forever is his own fault.

You choose to come down on the side of a ("suspected") child rapist. I don't. 

End.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which side is speculating here? 

Proven fact: "All of the porn found in Jackson's home was of adult heterosexual nature". Reply in this thread: "He probably used it to groom the kids"

Proven fact: "The guys now making allegations were telling very different things under oath". Reply in this thread: "They were maybe being threatened by MJ's lawyers"

Proven fact: "The investigations in Jackson's lifetime did not produce any evidence" Reply in this thread: "There was a money settlement, so there must have been damning evidence"

Etc. etc.

But let's just defame the people who point out these things as siding with a child rapist / being apologists / groomed by fandom etc. (pick one) That way, any argument can simply be disqualified. Hooray!

End.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread disgusts me deeply. How victims are turned into liars, how media is turned into a manipulative machine and how a predator is made a smiley innocent weirdo. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Nonoka said:

Which side is speculating here? 

Proven fact: "All of the porn found in Jackson's home was of adult heterosexual nature".

:1251: 

http://www.sbscpublicaccess.org/docs/ctdocs/011805pltreqaseemd.pdf

Boys Will Be Boys - Containing photographs of boys under the age of 14, full frontal nudity. The book is personally inscribed by Michael Jackson
In Search of Young Beauty - Containing photographs of children, both boys and girls, some nude
The Boy, A Photographic Essay - Containing black & white photos of boys, some nude
A photograph of a boy, believed to be Jonathan Spence, fully nude
A photograph of a young boy holding an umbrella; wearing bikini bottoms, partially pulled down
Camp Cove, Photos of Sydney Men - Book of photographs of adult men, full frontal nudes
Scenes D'Interieur - Pictures of nude and semi-nude adult women, some sadomasochistic
Dress Up Playacts and Fantasies of Childhood - 1978 photo book. Contains 3 photos of teenage boys naked
The Art of Dave Nestler, Wicked Intentions - Nude illustrations, female model, some sadomasochicstic
The Gnoids, Genetically Manipulated - Nude illustrations, mostly female, some male, extreme sadomasochistic and body mutilation
Bidgood, James Bidgood - Nude young teenage men, Erotica
2 x Barely Legal magazines - Pornographic magazines
Naked as a Jaybird - 1979 Nude adult male and female erotica, very graphic
12 x pornographic magazines
23 x nudist magazines, vintage 1930's
The Chop Suey Club - Photo book, some nudes, all male, young adult models
The Christy Report - History of ponography, heterosexual photos from 1940's on to recent, some graphic, some sadomasochistic
Robert Maxwell Photographs - Old photos, some nude, some of young children (nude & dressed)
Bianchi Bob & Rod - Nude photos of male couple
Before The Hand of Man - Nude photos of young men
Taormina Wilhelm Von Gloeden - Nude photos of teenage boys from late 1800's
The Golden Age of Neglect - Photos of teenagers, some nudes
Room To Play - Photos of children that are altered, morphed head on older bodies, kids made to look sexualized. Some are nude photos of kids
Man A Sexual Study Of Man - Graphic primer for homosexuals, Gay photos, all nude, featuring a study of masturbation, oral & anal sex, each photo of 2 men. All homosexual erotica. About 2 dozens nudist magazines
4 x Barely legal DVD
1 x Pimps Up - Ho's Down DVD
The Best of Club - pornographic magazine
Couples - pornographic magazine
2 x pornographic magazines
2 x pornographic DVD
7 x pornographic magazines
Hustler Barely Legal - 2002 Anniversary Edition magazine
Naughty Neighbors - December 2002 magazine
21 x graphic nude female images from "Teen Sex" internet site
19 x graphic nude female images
10 x teenage sex imaging

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, karbatal said:

This thread disgusts me deeply. How victims are turned into liars, how media is turned into a manipulative machine and how a predator is made a smiley innocent weirdo. 

This!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, horn said:

:1251: 

http://www.sbscpublicaccess.org/docs/ctdocs/011805pltreqaseemd.pdf

Boys Will Be Boys - Containing photographs of boys under the age of 14, full frontal nudity. The book is personally inscribed by Michael Jackson
In Search of Young Beauty - Containing photographs of children, both boys and girls, some nude
The Boy, A Photographic Essay - Containing black & white photos of boys, some nude
A photograph of a boy, believed to be Jonathan Spence, fully nude
A photograph of a young boy holding an umbrella; wearing bikini bottoms, partially pulled down
Camp Cove, Photos of Sydney Men - Book of photographs of adult men, full frontal nudes
Scenes D'Interieur - Pictures of nude and semi-nude adult women, some sadomasochistic
Dress Up Playacts and Fantasies of Childhood - 1978 photo book. Contains 3 photos of teenage boys naked
The Art of Dave Nestler, Wicked Intentions - Nude illustrations, female model, some sadomasochicstic
The Gnoids, Genetically Manipulated - Nude illustrations, mostly female, some male, extreme sadomasochistic and body mutilation
Bidgood, James Bidgood - Nude young teenage men, Erotica
2 x Barely Legal magazines - Pornographic magazines
Naked as a Jaybird - 1979 Nude adult male and female erotica, very graphic
12 x pornographic magazines
23 x nudist magazines, vintage 1930's
The Chop Suey Club - Photo book, some nudes, all male, young adult models
The Christy Report - History of ponography, heterosexual photos from 1940's on to recent, some graphic, some sadomasochistic
Robert Maxwell Photographs - Old photos, some nude, some of young children (nude & dressed)
Bianchi Bob & Rod - Nude photos of male couple
Before The Hand of Man - Nude photos of young men
Taormina Wilhelm Von Gloeden - Nude photos of teenage boys from late 1800's
The Golden Age of Neglect - Photos of teenagers, some nudes
Room To Play - Photos of children that are altered, morphed head on older bodies, kids made to look sexualized. Some are nude photos of kids
Man A Sexual Study Of Man - Graphic primer for homosexuals, Gay photos, all nude, featuring a study of masturbation, oral & anal sex, each photo of 2 men. All homosexual erotica. About 2 dozens nudist magazines
4 x Barely legal DVD
1 x Pimps Up - Ho's Down DVD
The Best of Club - pornographic magazine
Couples - pornographic magazine
2 x pornographic magazines
2 x pornographic DVD
7 x pornographic magazines
Hustler Barely Legal - 2002 Anniversary Edition magazine
Naughty Neighbors - December 2002 magazine
21 x graphic nude female images from "Teen Sex" internet site
19 x graphic nude female images
10 x teenage sex imaging

 

27812DFD-4474-49C8-924B-70C69C889CD9.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, horn said:

:1251: 

http://www.sbscpublicaccess.org/docs/ctdocs/011805pltreqaseemd.pdf

Boys Will Be Boys - Containing photographs of boys under the age of 14, full frontal nudity. The book is personally inscribed by Michael Jackson
In Search of Young Beauty - Containing photographs of children, both boys and girls, some nude
The Boy, A Photographic Essay - Containing black & white photos of boys, some nude
A photograph of a boy, believed to be Jonathan Spence, fully nude
A photograph of a young boy holding an umbrella; wearing bikini bottoms, partially pulled down
Camp Cove, Photos of Sydney Men - Book of photographs of adult men, full frontal nudes
Scenes D'Interieur - Pictures of nude and semi-nude adult women, some sadomasochistic
Dress Up Playacts and Fantasies of Childhood - 1978 photo book. Contains 3 photos of teenage boys naked
The Art of Dave Nestler, Wicked Intentions - Nude illustrations, female model, some sadomasochicstic
The Gnoids, Genetically Manipulated - Nude illustrations, mostly female, some male, extreme sadomasochistic and body mutilation
Bidgood, James Bidgood - Nude young teenage men, Erotica
2 x Barely Legal magazines - Pornographic magazines
Naked as a Jaybird - 1979 Nude adult male and female erotica, very graphic
12 x pornographic magazines
23 x nudist magazines, vintage 1930's
The Chop Suey Club - Photo book, some nudes, all male, young adult models
The Christy Report - History of ponography, heterosexual photos from 1940's on to recent, some graphic, some sadomasochistic
Robert Maxwell Photographs - Old photos, some nude, some of young children (nude & dressed)
Bianchi Bob & Rod - Nude photos of male couple
Before The Hand of Man - Nude photos of young men
Taormina Wilhelm Von Gloeden - Nude photos of teenage boys from late 1800's
The Golden Age of Neglect - Photos of teenagers, some nudes
Room To Play - Photos of children that are altered, morphed head on older bodies, kids made to look sexualized. Some are nude photos of kids
Man A Sexual Study Of Man - Graphic primer for homosexuals, Gay photos, all nude, featuring a study of masturbation, oral & anal sex, each photo of 2 men. All homosexual erotica. About 2 dozens nudist magazines
4 x Barely legal DVD
1 x Pimps Up - Ho's Down DVD
The Best of Club - pornographic magazine
Couples - pornographic magazine
2 x pornographic magazines
2 x pornographic DVD
7 x pornographic magazines
Hustler Barely Legal - 2002 Anniversary Edition magazine
Naughty Neighbors - December 2002 magazine
21 x graphic nude female images from "Teen Sex" internet site
19 x graphic nude female images
10 x teenage sex imaging

Oh ffs. This has been gone through in this very thread. Those descriptions made by the District Attorney are inaccurate, which is why not a single one of these books made it into the trial as evidence for Jackson's supposed pedophilia.

There were no sexual deciptions of children, not to mention all of these books are commercially available.

Just as an example, the first one, Boys Will Be Boys that apparently contains "boys in full frontal nudity" is in fact inscribed in the US Library of Congress, can be bought on freaking Amazon and the supposed nudity is in fact pics of children swimming in a pool.

See here:

https://themichaeljacksonallegations.com/2016/12/27/has-child-pornography-ever-been-found-in-michael-jacksons-possession/

There was no child pornography found. What was found in reality however, including in Jackson's nightstand, was this type of pornography:

Spoiler

glory-of-the-de-dienes-women-4.jpg?w=194scenes-dinterieur-4.jpg?w=158&h=194&zoomwicked-intentions-3.jpg?w=211&h=269&zoom

So try again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, horn said:

:1251: 

http://www.sbscpublicaccess.org/docs/ctdocs/011805pltreqaseemd.pdf

Boys Will Be Boys - Containing photographs of boys under the age of 14, full frontal nudity. The book is personally inscribed by Michael Jackson
In Search of Young Beauty - Containing photographs of children, both boys and girls, some nude
The Boy, A Photographic Essay - Containing black & white photos of boys, some nude
A photograph of a boy, believed to be Jonathan Spence, fully nude
A photograph of a young boy holding an umbrella; wearing bikini bottoms, partially pulled down
Camp Cove, Photos of Sydney Men - Book of photographs of adult men, full frontal nudes
Scenes D'Interieur - Pictures of nude and semi-nude adult women, some sadomasochistic
Dress Up Playacts and Fantasies of Childhood - 1978 photo book. Contains 3 photos of teenage boys naked
The Art of Dave Nestler, Wicked Intentions - Nude illustrations, female model, some sadomasochicstic
The Gnoids, Genetically Manipulated - Nude illustrations, mostly female, some male, extreme sadomasochistic and body mutilation
Bidgood, James Bidgood - Nude young teenage men, Erotica
2 x Barely Legal magazines - Pornographic magazines
Naked as a Jaybird - 1979 Nude adult male and female erotica, very graphic
12 x pornographic magazines
23 x nudist magazines, vintage 1930's
The Chop Suey Club - Photo book, some nudes, all male, young adult models
The Christy Report - History of ponography, heterosexual photos from 1940's on to recent, some graphic, some sadomasochistic
Robert Maxwell Photographs - Old photos, some nude, some of young children (nude & dressed)
Bianchi Bob & Rod - Nude photos of male couple
Before The Hand of Man - Nude photos of young men
Taormina Wilhelm Von Gloeden - Nude photos of teenage boys from late 1800's
The Golden Age of Neglect - Photos of teenagers, some nudes
Room To Play - Photos of children that are altered, morphed head on older bodies, kids made to look sexualized. Some are nude photos of kids
Man A Sexual Study Of Man - Graphic primer for homosexuals, Gay photos, all nude, featuring a study of masturbation, oral & anal sex, each photo of 2 men. All homosexual erotica. About 2 dozens nudist magazines
4 x Barely legal DVD
1 x Pimps Up - Ho's Down DVD
The Best of Club - pornographic magazine
Couples - pornographic magazine
2 x pornographic magazines
2 x pornographic DVD
7 x pornographic magazines
Hustler Barely Legal - 2002 Anniversary Edition magazine
Naughty Neighbors - December 2002 magazine
21 x graphic nude female images from "Teen Sex" internet site
19 x graphic nude female images
10 x teenage sex imaging

We already went over this before. Do you really think he would've gotten off if any of this was legit?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh good grief. Are these paedo apologists now saying that the fact Jacko wasn't dumb enough to have a stash of actual child pornography at his place, and that the mountains of dubious barely legal photo books of young men and boys that yes, you can indeed buy in bookshops under the guise of "art" doesn't give hints to his predilections? 

And no, the laughable tactic of stashing a few copies of Hustler in his nightstand to prove he's a normal heterosexual male is even more hilarious. God, he was a freak. I just randomly put one of those titles into Amazon and the pics are weird as fuck. Young boys dressed as angels frolicking in a pool - with a bunch of dirty old men in the reviews saying how wonderfully "artistic" they are. Bleurgh!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Kim said:

Oh good grief. Are these paedo apologists now saying that the fact Jacko wasn't dumb enough to have a stash of actual child pornography at his place, and that the mountains of dubious barely legal photo books of young men and boys that yes, you can indeed buy in bookshops under the guise of "art" doesn't give hints to his predilections? 

And no, the laughable tactic of stashing a few copies of Hustler in his nightstand to prove he's a normal heterosexual male is even more hilarious. God, he was a freak. I just randomly put one of those titles into Amazon and the pics are weird as fuck. Young boys dressed as angels frolicking in a pool - with a bunch of dirty old men in the reviews saying how wonderfully "artistic" they are. Bleurgh!

Where are the "mountains" of those "dubious barely legal" photo books of young men? Where do you take these claims from?

And how are these his 'predilections' when his book collection contained over 10,000 titles?

(Source: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/no-child-porn-found-at-neverland-thenor-now-the_us_577fdfbce4b0f06648f4a3f8?guccounter=1)

And of course, there we go again. It just can't be he owned adult heterosexual porn because it would actually *shock* indicate he had healthy sexual interests, no it must have been a tactic again. Suggesting anything else is, of course, paedo apologism. (Isn't this getting tired at this point? Think of sth more creative)

Anyway, let me introduce the "few copies" of his apparent tactic:

Quote

 

  • Hustler centerfold, 10 August 1992
  • Playboy centerfold, Miss October
  • Playboy centerfold, Miss November
  • Playboy centerfold, 16 Miss March
  • Hustler centerfold, June 1993
  • Playboy centerfold, unknown date
  • Penthouse Page No. 153-154
  • Centerfold, Miss May
  • Penthouse, Page 8
  • Penthouse centerfold
  • Playboy centerfold
  • Penthouse centerfold
  • Penthouse, August 1991
  • Penthouse centerfold
  • Club International centerfold
  • Penthouse, double page 6/211
  • Penthouse centerfold
  • Penthouse, May 1992
  • Hustler, Centerfold Special Holiday Honey 1991
  • Penthouse centerfold
  • Penthouse centerfold
  • Penthouse, November 1991
  • Playboy Magazine, Centerfold Miss November
  • Playboy Magazine, Centerfold Miss February
  • Playboy Magazine, Centerfold Miss December
  • Al Golstein’s 100 Best Adult Videos Advertisement
  • Playboy Magazine, Centerfold
  • Hustler Magazine Cover, May 1992
  • Page from Unknown Magazine
  • Stiff Dick for Lynn Magazine (In Notebook)
  • Barely Legal Magazine
  • Just Legal Magazine, (Premier Issue) (In Notebook)
  • Finally Legal Magazine (In Notebook)
  • Playboy Magazine, February 1993 (In Notebook)
  • Hustler Magazine, Barely Legal (In Notebook)
  • Playboy Magazine, December 1994 (In Notebook)
  • Playboy Magazine, May 1994 (In Notebook)
  • Hustler Magazine, Barely Legal (In Notebook)
  • Penthouse Magazine (In Notebook)
  • Visions of Fantasy Magazine, A Hard Rock Affair (In Notebook)
  • Visions of Fantasy Magazine, Sam Jose’s Black Starlett (In Notebook)
  • Double Dicking Caroline Magazine (In Notebook)
  • Big Tits and a Hard Stud Magazine
  • Hustler Magazine
  • Celebrity Skin Magazine (In Notebook)
  • Oui, March 1998 in binder
  • Over 50, Volume 5, #9, 1996 in binder
  • XX rated, April 1995
  • Close Up, April 1995 in binder
  • Just 18, Volume 4, Issue No. 10
  • Plumpers centerfold
  • Hustler, August 1992
  • Hustler, April 1998
  • (No cover) in binder
  • Penthouse, March 1992 in binder
  • Juggs, June 1996 in binder
  • 44 Plus, June 1996 in binder
  • Plumpers, May 1996 in binder
  • Club International, March 1998 in binder
  • Live Young Girls, September in binder
  • Finally Legal, July 2003 in notebook
  • Finally Legal Freshman Class
  • Orgy, August 2002 in binder
  • Purely 18, October 2002 in binder
  • Purely 18, December 2002 in binder
  • Tight, November 2002 in binder
  • Hawk, November 2002 in binder
  • Hawk, January 2003 in binder
  • Live Young Girls, June 2003 in binder
  • Girlfriends in binder
  • Live Young Girls in binder
  • Parade
  • Finally Legal, February 2003 in binder
  • Girls of Barely Legal in binder
  • Hawk, February 2003 in binder
  • Girlfriends, Special Editions in binder
  • White binder containing The Girls of Penthouse, August 19 2003 in binder
  • White binder containing Barely Legal, July 200 21 in binder
  • Gallery 5/2002
  • Binder containing Playboy
  • Couples Volume 2, Issue 2
  • White binder containing Barely Legal, Anniversary 2002
  • White binder containing Naughty Neighbors, December
  • Hustler Barely Legal  [31]
  • Solaire Universalle Day Nudisme Volume 11 #5 May 1961; Eden Quarterly Issue 13, Copyright 1963
  • Nudist- March 1935
  • American Sunbather, May 1961
  • Nudist, February 1935
  • The Nudist, May 1935
  • The Nudist, June/July 1935
  • The Nudist August 1935
  • Sunshine and Health, The Nudist, May 1937
  • The Nudist, February 1936
  • The Nudist, June 1936
  • The Nudist, August 1936
  • The Nudist, October 1936
  • Sunshine and Health, The Nudist, April 1937
  • Sunshine and Health, The Nudist, December 1937
  • Sunshine and Health, The Nudist, October 1937
  • Sunshine and Health, The Nudist, February 1937
  • Sunshine and Health, The Nudist, January 1937
  • Sunshine and Health, The Nudist, December 1937
  • Sunshine and Health, The Nudist, September 1938
  • Sunshine and Health, The Nudist, July 1939
  • Eden Quarterly, Issue 7
  • Sunshine and Health, The Nudist, November 1937
  • Sunshine and Health, The Nudist, November 1937
  • Sunshine and Health, The Nudist, February 1938
  • Sunshine and Health, The Nudist, March 1938
  • Sunshine and Health, The Nudist, September 1937
  • Eden Quarterly, Issue 8
  • Sunshine and Health, The Nudist, June 1937 [6]

https://themichaeljacksonallegations.com/2016/12/27/has-child-pornography-ever-been-found-in-michael-jacksons-possession/

So all of this was only a tactic I see.

Makes sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Nonoka said:

And how are these his 'predilections' when his book collection contained over 10,000 titles?

(Source: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/no-child-porn-found-at-neverland-thenor-now-the_us_577fdfbce4b0f06648f4a3f8?guccounter=1)

And of course, there we go again. It just can't be he had this porn in his nightstand because it would actually *shock* indicate he had healthy sexual interests, no it must have been a tactic again. 

Well then, let me introduce all the objects of his apparent tactic:

So all of this was only a tactic I see. Makes sense.

I made the mistake of clicking on that link and seeing the pics of filthy rooms that look like some roach infested motel. I'm sure it says something about him that he and his 10,000 books were surrounded by squalor. So the sexual deviant liked making up binders full of clippings from porn magazines? This is meant to prove that he wasn't a paedophile is it? Because he had clipping from Big Jugs monthly? Or are those the binders and magazines and DVDs he used while grooming these young male kids? Yet another casebook example of grooming. Ugh, he was repellent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Kim said:

I made the mistake of clicking on that link and seeing the pics of filthy rooms that look like some roach infested motel. I'm sure it says something about him that he and his 10,000 books were surrounded by squalor. So the sexual deviant liked making up binders full of clippings from porn magazines? This is meant to prove that he wasn't a paedophile is it? Because he had clipping from Big Jugs monthly? Or are those the binders and magazines and DVDs he used while grooming these young male kids? Yet another casebook example of grooming. Ugh, he was repellent.

:rotfl:At this point I'm believing you must be kidding. 

Since you talked so confidently about his profile matching a pedophile, you surely are aware it is not so typical for a raging pedophile to own these masses of adult heterosexual porn and in turns, no child pornography at all. But that doesn't matter to the theory, does it?

Of course, all of this must have been for grooming purposes now. Don't agree? Well then you're a paedo apologist! (Seriously, this is getting boring)

Again, who is speculating without any basis and who is sticking to the facts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Nonoka said:

:rotfl:At this point I'm believing you must be kidding. 

Considering your initial post was that you were leaving the thread and not re-entering, yet here you are posting links to, wait for it.... the michael jackson allegations dot com (gee I wonder what slant that website takes?) I'd say that it must be you who's kidding at this point, no?

I'm sure you're aware that paedos often show pornography to young boys while grooming them. I'd be surprised if that wasn't covered in this documentary. And the fact that the upper floors of Neverland were mostly filthy squalid holes shouldn't be particularly funny either, or was that just another side effect of his mental health and drug addiction issues?

And seeing as I have it in the back of my head that all this was covered in previous threads, possibly on Dotmusic, it's not really achieving anything going over it all again, other than reminding people that behind the music was an abomination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Kim said:

Considering your initial post was that you were leaving the thread and not re-entering, yet here you are posting links to, wait for it.... the michael jackson allegations dot com (gee I wonder what slant that website takes?) I'd say that it must be you who's kidding at this point, no?

I'm sure you're aware that paedos often show pornography to young boys while grooming them. I'd be surprised if that wasn't covered in this documentary. And the fact that the upper floors of Neverland were mostly filthy squalid holes shouldn't be particularly funny either, or was that just another side effect of his mental health and drug addiction issues?

And seeing as I have it in the back of my head that all this was covered in previous threads, possibly on Dotmusic, it's not really achieving anything going over it all again, other than reminding people that behind the music was an abomination.

Oh, you mean a post I made three weeks ago and that would take quite some dedicated digging to find? Well dear, I changed my mind. And given that I have received private messages from 2 different forum members the last couple of days/weeks, thanking me for providing factual info in this thread, I have a good incentive to go on. :newspaper:

And slamming the website for its name is exactly what I was expecting and goes to show you did not take a look at this site at all. This site verifies every argument they put forward with multiple sources, examines every claim meticulously, but of course, let's throw it in the bin and defame it because of its *shock* website name.

I am very well aware grooming is a common method of paedophiles. It's just a slight bit counterintuitive when the alleged victims themselves stated that no grooming ever took place, which is exactly the reason why this grooming claim, which the prosecution tried to pursue as well, stood no chance in court. Whoops.

I will not respond to your other question as I fail to see how chaotic, unorderly rooms are an indication for anything else expect for a chaotic and unorderly person. Or was that a side effect of his pedophilia too?

Fine if you don't care to go through all this again and you have it all in the back of your head anyway. But then maybe deal with other people having different opinions and not throw personal insults at them? Because yes, alleging that I, or anyone else in this thread, are actually okay with any proven case of child abuse and any convicted predator, is highly defaming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×