DescentBB

... really was a child predator.

The King of Child Porn was hiding seven collections of pornography depicting teenage boys. There were also disturbing images of adult and child nudity, child torture, sadomasochism, and female bondage. Books featuring nude young boys and gay men were showcased in his master bedroom, in the arcade room, and in the master bathroom and were used to "groom" his victims to lower their inhibitions so they could be molested, investigators say.

https://pjmedia.com/parenting/2016/06/2 ... -revealed/

What no images….

Well, everyone pretty much knew he was a seriously screwed up pervert anyway.

actually, starting to look like a fabricated story, cobbling together an investigation report with made-up findings. Not really caring either way, the dude is dead, after all.........

tunnelcat wrote:Well, everyone pretty much knew he was a seriously screwed up pervert anyway.

a claim that hasn't been proven.

200 million in hush money says you are wrong.

the sheriff's office implies he is not.

callmeslick wrote:the sheriff's office implies he is not.

Slick once again spews the vapours and expects us to inhale them as fact.

If he was a Brit there'd already be victims coming forward claiming for "compensation"..

woodchip wrote:

callmeslick wrote:the sheriff's office implies he is not.

Slick once again spews the vapours and expects us to inhale them as fact.

Woody once again resorts to ignorant personal attacks when all I was relaying was this:" police spokesperson Kelly Hoover told USA TODAY, "Some of the documents appear to be copies of reports that were authored by Sheriff’s Office personnel as well as evidentiary photographs taken by Sheriff’s Office personnel interspersed with content that appears to be obtained off the internet or through unknown sources." She added, "The Sheriff’s Office did not release any of the documents and/or photographs to the media. The Sheriff’s Office released all of its reports and the photographs as part of the required discovery process to the prosecution and the defense" (referring to Jackson's 2005 sex-abuse trial, in which he was acquitted)."

Better, but we still need to see the evidence.

No need to worry, the Internet mob will make short work of this regardless of the 'facts' of the case - Yet another *man* condemned to be remembered as a sicko. 'Dun matter, no smoke without fire' and all that crowd. Can we live in the 90's again?

apparently, it is public record and could be requested legally. Once again, based on the words quoted.

What part of this suggest the material was released to the public?:

The Sheriff’s Office released all of its reports and the photographs as part of the required discovery process to the prosecution and the defense" ."

not released, but available under FOA, if you had some purpose beyond dragging a dead person's reputation through the dirt for no freaking reason.

Well I guess ignorance is bliss.

callmeslick wrote:not released, but available under FOA, if you had some purpose beyond dragging a dead person's reputation through the dirt for no freaking reason.

as long as it suits his purpose.

Nightshade wrote:... really was a child predator.

I've never seen compelling evidence that Mr Jackson was a predator. I also think the mythology surrounding his relationship with kids could have been eliminated early on if it were not for legal mishandling of allegations, much like the medical mishandling that killed him.

Mr Jackson was an enigma no doubt. Pedophile? Probably not. His life is so unique we don't have anything to compare it to: a child prodigy from an abusive family who became a world wide phenomena. It's been suggested that rather than pedophilia Mr Jackson was pedoamorous or had a stronger than average inclination toward neoteny which all humans have to varying degrees. Either way the word "predator" or "pervert" doesn't seem to fit.

Ferno wrote:

tunnelcat wrote:Well, everyone pretty much knew he was a seriously screwed up pervert anyway.

a claim that hasn't been proven.

Come on Ferno. He liked sleeping in bed with his child visitors, like some type of kid overnight pajama party. If that isn't weird behavior for an adult male, I don't know what is.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/ar ... ckson.html

once again, the Daily Mail is a tabloid, so lurid lies are stock in trade, along with unprovable innuendo. Nothing was ever proven, and as noted, his was a unique life, and a unique adult mindset. Sort of a permanent child, but I suspect that while creepy, the intent was harmless.

tunnelcat wrote:

Ferno wrote:

tunnelcat wrote:Well, everyone pretty much knew he was a seriously screwed up pervert anyway.

a claim that hasn't been proven.

Come on Ferno. He liked sleeping in bed with his child visitors, like some type of kid overnight pajama party. If that isn't weird behavior for an adult male, I don't know what is.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/ar ... ckson.html

no, YOU come on.

1) none of the claims alleged have been proven in court
2) daily mail is a known source of fabrications.

Do not trust that tabloid! It's pure purpose is to titillate with sex, sex crimes, 'Aha, gotcha!' moments and stupid stories like sea monsters, UFOs etc. They follow their own agenda and are absolutely *brutal* with disseminating misinformation - Many times worse than anything Fox news can put out.

Hunter wrote:Do not trust that tabloid! It's pure purpose is to titillate with sex, sex crimes, 'Aha, gotcha!' moments and stupid stories like sea monsters, UFOs etc. They follow their own agenda and are absolutely *brutal* with disseminating misinformation - Many times worse than anything Fox news can put out.

Which is why they're called the 'Daily FAIL'.

tunnelcat wrote:He liked sleeping in bed with his child visitors, like some type of kid overnight pajama party. If that isn't weird behavior for an adult male, I don't know what is.

That is weird behavior. It's not criminal behavior. It's not even abusive. It simply falls into the "socially unacceptable" category. Michael Jackson almost definitely suffered from a kind of infantilism, and one can imagine his abusive childhood played a role in his psychology.

vision wrote:

tunnelcat wrote:He liked sleeping in bed with his child visitors, like some type of kid overnight pajama party. If that isn't weird behavior for an adult male, I don't know what is.

That is weird behavior. It's not criminal behavior. It's not even abusive. It simply falls into the "socially unacceptable" category. Michael Jackson almost definitely suffered from a kind of infantilism, and one can imagine his abusive childhood played a role in his psychology.

Weird yes. Strange definitely. Pedophile, or in Jackson's case, a homosexual hebephile, who knows? However, Jackson's strange behavior allows for a lot of imagination to run rampant in the minds of most people. You'll also have to remember that Jackson also gave $20 million dollars as hush money to one of his accusers. No one gives out that kind of cash if they're not trying to hide something, even if Jackson claimed his insurance company forced him to pay out. Either way, children have no consent. So what normal protective parent in his or her right mind would allow their child, male or female, to "sleep in bed" with Jackson? I ask any parent here, would you let your young child sleep in the bed with an adult stranger? It's just not accepted behavior, celebrity or not.

http://www.science20.com/j_michael_bail ... _pedophile

tunnelcat wrote:You'll also have to remember that Jackson also gave $20 million dollars as hush money to one of his accusers. No one gives out that kind of cash if they're not trying to hide something, even if Jackson claimed his insurance company forced him to pay out.

BZZZZZZZZ! Wrong. You are still making assumptions. None of us know the details of the settlement and a settlement is not an admission of guilt or wrongdoing, not in the slightest. It simply means both parties came to an agreement without going to court. The financial side of it is determined by simply calculating which course of action would be least expensive.

tunnelcat wrote:Either way, children have no consent. So what normal protective parent in his or her right mind would allow their child, male or female, to "sleep in bed" with Jackson?

It's not criminal. None of us know the details or nature of the relationships. You're speculating, again.

Also stop posting idiotic links. The headline of that article makes me think you are a complete moron. I'm putting you in the same class of non-thinkers as woodchip from now on.

tunnelcat wrote:

vision wrote:

tunnelcat wrote:He liked sleeping in bed with his child visitors, like some type of kid overnight pajama party. If that isn't weird behavior for an adult male, I don't know what is.

That is weird behavior. It's not criminal behavior. It's not even abusive. It simply falls into the "socially unacceptable" category. Michael Jackson almost definitely suffered from a kind of infantilism, and one can imagine his abusive childhood played a role in his psychology.

Weird yes. Strange definitely. Pedophile, or in Jackson's case, a homosexual hebephile, who knows? However, Jackson's strange behavior allows for a lot of imagination to run rampant in the minds of most people. You'll also have to remember that Jackson also gave $20 million dollars as hush money to one of his accusers. No one gives out that kind of cash if they're not trying to hide something, even if Jackson claimed his insurance company forced him to pay out. Either way, children have no consent. So what normal protective parent in his or her right mind would allow their child, male or female, to "sleep in bed" with Jackson? I ask any parent here, would you let your young child sleep in the bed with an adult stranger? It's just not accepted behavior, celebrity or not.

http://www.science20.com/j_michael_bail ... _pedophile

I think it's time you stopped trying to convince us of a non-issue. your appeals to emotion are falling on deaf ears.

Well TC, now you have really screwed the pooch. Vision is now going to call you a racist/bigot/homophobe from here on in.

woodchip wrote:Well TC, now you have really screwed the pooch. Vision is now going to call you a racist/bigot/homophobe from here on in.

They can rant at me all they want. Jackson was just plain weird and possibly (I'll grant that) a hebephile. Homosexual adult men desire other adult men as willing, loving partners, and they don't desire to have sex with unwilling or non-consenting children. Being attracted to children sexually is a sick behavior, homosexual or heterosexual. It's weirdos like Jackson that make heterosexuals label all homosexuals as nothing but pedophiles and hebephiles, when that's the furthest thing from the truth.

tunnelcat wrote:It's weirdos like Jackson that make heterosexuals label all homosexuals as nothing but pedophiles and hebephiles, when that's the furthest thing from the truth.

Ignorance like yours is what makes heterosexuals label homosexuals as paedophiles, not "weirdos" like MJ. Use your brain.

No, it’s the Catholic Church and the fact that most public cases of pedophilia seem to be men who like little boys, that makes people think that most pedos are gay.

Are most pedos gay…probably not. (but they could be)
Are most gays pedos…most certainly not.

tunnelcat wrote:
They can rant at me all they want. Jackson was just plain weird and possibly (I'll grant that) a hebephile. Homosexual adult men desire other adult men as willing, loving partners, and they don't desire to have sex with unwilling or non-consenting children. Being attracted to children sexually is a sick behavior, homosexual or heterosexual. It's weirdos like Jackson that make heterosexuals label all homosexuals as nothing but pedophiles and hebephiles, when that's the furthest thing from the truth.

did you just seriously conflate homosexuality with statutory rape and paedophilia?

holy ★■◆●, TC.

Catholic priests in Montreal will be banned from being alone with children to provide a “safety net” against allegations of abuse.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/ ... ildren-ban

vision wrote:

tunnelcat wrote:It's weirdos like Jackson that make heterosexuals label all homosexuals as nothing but pedophiles and hebephiles, when that's the furthest thing from the truth.

Ignorance like yours is what makes heterosexuals label homosexuals as paedophiles, not "weirdos" like MJ. Use your brain.

No, ignorance like yours is what is truly appalling. You never were in contact with the MJ "playmates" nor were you party to the reasons hush money was payed.

woodchip wrote:...nor were you party to the reasons hush money was payed.

There's that word again, "hush money." Just like me you have no idea what the terms of the settlement were. Unlike you I'm a big fan of innocent until proven guilty. I know a little something about lawyering since half my friends are lawyers. Settlements are not an admission of guilt and are almost always a financial decision.

Plenty of time has passed for any of these mobs of kids to come forward. Only one did and his case was thrown out on the first pass because he was incredible. I'm inclined to think parents were preying on Michael Jackson than the other way around.

Yes vision, have been thru a NLRB suit, I know perfectly well what sealed cases are all about. I respect your opinion but do not rely on it as fact.

Ferno wrote:

tunnelcat wrote:
They can rant at me all they want. Jackson was just plain weird and possibly (I'll grant that) a hebephile. Homosexual adult men desire other adult men as willing, loving partners, and they don't desire to have sex with unwilling or non-consenting children. Being attracted to children sexually is a sick behavior, homosexual or heterosexual. It's weirdos like Jackson that make heterosexuals label all homosexuals as nothing but pedophiles and hebephiles, when that's the furthest thing from the truth.

did you just seriously conflate homosexuality with statutory rape and paedophilia?

holy ****, TC.

No, but I know that quite a few various religions that conflate homosexuality with pedophilia and bestiality, which is so far from the truth it's criminal. Come on Ferno, I've never bashed gays here at all. You're putting words into my mouth. I just happen to think that Michael Jackson was one weird dude who liked sleeping with kids, liked behaving like a kid even though he was an adult and wanted to appear like a real life Peter Pan, even though he was born a nice looking black person that should have left his birth features alone. The only speculation is that he may have had sexual proclivities towards children that no one can prove one way or another.

You may not have openly bashed gays, but here, in your very own words, you tried to connect two very different things as one and the same.

Can't believe I'm about to defend a dead guy, but so be it...

It's weirdos like Jackson that make heterosexuals label all homosexuals as nothing but pedophiles and hebephiles

This is the conflation I'm talking about. It's not him that does the connection, it's the other people's cognitive biases (yours included) that does the connection.

let me get this straight.....Michael Jackson is dead, right?

What does being dead have to do with whether he was or wasn't a pedophile.