Support NeoGAF

[Dr. Feel Good]

Doesn't it suck when you go buy tasteful nude children books to read in bed with nude boys who you give wine to and they're just stuffed with random child pornography? Not just once but over and over? I mean geeze people. Quit accidentally selling your unwanted hoards of child porn to unsuspecting collectors of innocent child nudity!

If you bought an estate comprised of 1,000 books are you expected to know what every page of every book contains?

I've purchased lots of <10 books on eBay and haven't even opened some of them. It's really not that crazy to think about.

 

[Davide]

Both cases where star power trumped reason duh

If you actually do some research into the 2005 trial you'll find MJ was definitely not guilty.

 

[Brutalitops]

How can a thread on gaming side with an error in listed platforms or some fanboy flame thread be closed or edited within seconds yet this still remains with this ridiculous title?

I don't give a fuck what some fucked up court says. This thread is going way too far for me. I need a serious break from GAF, this is not a place I want any connection with.

I don't know if you know what porn is.

See ya bro

 

[FartOfWar]

The lack of articles from the proper news sources, not counting tabloid,celebrity stalking sites, says a lot about all of this.

Do folks forget that the prosecution had all this information? Thomas Sneddon, the DA wanted MJ locked up and would not have hesitated in adding more charges. But there were zero images of abuse (child or animal). There was nothing illegal in those books. Actually....several of those can be found in the libraries.

This is literally a sad attempt to make old news, new news for money.

For all the people who actually want to bother (and i wish the OP can edit this in the first post)

http://michaeljacksonallegations.co...aterial-found-in-michael-jacksons-possession/

That is concerning this stuff.

That site has tons of information about both cases. Do yourself a favor and read up on it.


http://michaeljacksonallegations.com/


You will find out how much of this shit does not add up at all. Things really aren't as simple as you think they are. And again like i said...NONE of us can know for sure if he was innocent or guilty, only he and the accusers know that, but based on all this information i can only come to one conclusion.

READ!

People, please read michaeljacksonisinnocent.com and only michaeljacksonisinnocent.com for all things Michael Jackson. Only michaeljacksonisinnocent.com will allow us to use our Michael Jackson avatars without a debilitating sense of hypocrisy and shame.

 

[ZoddGutts]

Would you let your kid stay at his house for one night?

 

[sploatee]

Watch out, you're on a list now sploatee.

That's right! Me and everyone else who bought it off Amazon about six or seven years ago! We are all doomed.

I also have a copy of Off the Wall too which I bought this week along with a vinyl of the Lauryn Hill album. Coincidence? You decide.

 

[gogogow]

the Jury also let OJ walk free, stop trolling..

Lol, why do people keep bringing up OJ?
OJ is guilty, so is everyone else!

 

[Ash Sparrow]

MJ was such a mastermind he kidnapped people by letting them go alone to the spa for manicures and Toys R Us, apparently neither place had a phone or outside line to the police. And there were no clocks at NL even though several are built into the grounds. Cant make this stuff up

One thing MJ did have I recall is some over 50+ porn magazines, I guess he liked older women, so Liz Taylor relationship makes more sense.

 

[Brutalitops]

Would you let your kid stay at his house for one night?

I wouldn't let my kids stay with a stranger, no

 

[borghe]

Doesn't it suck when you go buy tasteful nude children books to read in bed with nude boys who you give wine to and they're just stuffed with random child pornography? Not just once but over and over? I mean geeze people. Quit accidentally selling your unwanted hoards of child porn to unsuspecting collectors of innocent child nudity!

everything in this quote is either falsehoods or hyperbole.

NICE!

 

[Syder]

Both cases where star power trumped reason duh

I see you haven't done much research into the case then. It's fine if you want to come into this thread and spout a narrative but if you get exposed for it don't be surprised if people mock you.

SMH

 

[CheDominik]

Fuck yes, naked children are not fucking art to be shared with other people. You want to snap a pic of your naked child as a memory that is your business. Selling those pictures as art is child porn.

Clearly pornography:

http://publicradio1.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/newscut/files/2014/10/AP72060801062.jpg

 

[DeathoftheEndless]

I love his music, but I also believe he was a pedophile. "Jesus Juice", hanging out with kids all the time (including sleepovers in his bed), a kid correctly identifying what his genitals looked like, etc. does not paint a good picture.

 

[Syder]

People, please read michaeljacksonisinnocent.com and only michaeljacksonisinnocent.com for all things Michael Jackson. Only michaeljacksonisinnocent.com will allow us to use our Michael Jackson avatars without a debilitating sense of hypocrisy and shame.

Wow, it's really shocking that people who like Michael Jackson might want to look further into the case against him. So disingenuous.

 

[Trash]

I see you haven't done much research into the case then. It's fine if you want to come into this thread and spout a narrative but if you get exposed for it don't be surprised if people mock you.

SMH

the guy was clearly a pedophile and ruined the lives of multiple kids. Disgusting how you feel obligated to defend him.

 

[LizardKing]

You guys know you can go and buy these books on Amazon right now right?

Even the sheriff in the .pdf says they are not illegal and not child porn.

 

[bootsthecat]

Would you let your kid stay at his house for one night?

Prior to the allegations, I'd maybe entertain it, I mean why not? Biggest pop star on earth. Amusement park in backyard. Of course I'd like to think I'd do some due diligence so far a multiple adults/nanny or whatever was around for proper supervision etc etc. It would prolly need to be some sort of contest that was won, where a bunch of other kids were involved as well. No 1 on 1, of course that would be creepy by default.

 

[Syder]

the guy was clearly a pedophile and ruined the lives of multiple kids. Disgusting how you feel obligated to defend him.

Nice. Countering actual evidence and research with this, dude? Tell me in what way he was 'clearly a pedophile', is it in the way that you bought into a media narrative and don't like it when people rock your narrow, rigid view of the world?

 

[Count Dookkake]

You guys know you can go and buy these books on Amazon right now right?

More like Jeff Pedos.

 

[Kibbles]

Had me until "Radar Online". Tabloids /=/ real?

 

[Peterthumpa]

the guy was clearly a pedophile and ruined the lives of multiple kids. Disgusting how you feel obligated to defend him.

Please prove what you're saying. Please. This is beyond stupid. If you don't like him, fine, but as with just another person, don't say stupid shit when you're not sure of it.

Humans also didn't land on the moon and Prince Charles is homossexual, right?

 

[Blader]

Prior to the allegations, I'd maybe entertain it, I mean why not? Biggest pop star on earth. Amusement park in backyard. Of course I'd like to think I'd do some due diligence so far a multiple adults/nanny or whatever was around for proper supervision etc etc. It would prolly need to be some sort of contest that was won, where a bunch of other kids were involved as well. No 1 on 1, of course that would be creepy by default.

lol

"I'd only let my kid stay at a stranger's house if they beat some other kids to get there!"

 

[Trash]

Please prove what you're saying. Please. This is beyond stupid. If you don't like him, fine, but as with just another person, don't say stupid shit when you're not sure of it.

Humans also didn't land on the moon and Prince Charles is homossexual, right?

Look up where those kids are now and tell me if you feel the same.

 

[Ash Sparrow]

I love his music, but I also believe he was a pedophile. "Jesus Juice", hanging out with kids all the time (including sleepovers in his bed), a kid correctly identifying what his genitals looked like, etc. does not paint a good picture.

The kid that drew a circumcised penis and MJ wasn't even circumcised according to autopsy.

 

[Wolfe]

People that look at the edited pictures posted in the OP's links and aren't disgusted or ill from it....

The people in this thread who are defending this are one and all massing in my ignore filter. Delusional.

Haha ok dude, goodbye.

Maybe it's just my European upbringing but most of the stuff in the pdf(most of it was hard to decipher because of the quality) is nothing out of the ordinary. I have never cared for Jackson or his music so I didn't pay much attention to the trials but if that is what the prosecution presented as evidence it's pretty much nothing.

It helps that the US is super prudish when it comes to nudity/sex. I mean you have men here, fathers of children, that are apprehensive about being seen out in public with their kid due to fear of being thought a pedo or creep or something. And the public plays into these fears, it's insane.

Violence though? Shit's dope yo.

 

[freenudemacusers]

the guy was clearly a pedophile and ruined the lives of multiple kids. Disgusting how you feel obligated to defend him.

What if he was a virtuous pedophile and just wanted to help kids in need, while fully controlling his desires through outlets such as videos and books? Are we going to judge otherwise innocent people just because of the media they consume?!

 

[Tatsumi Oga]

I love his music, but I also believe he was a pedophile. "Jesus Juice", hanging out with kids all the time (including sleepovers in his bed), a kid correctly identifying what his genitals looked like, etc. does not paint a good picture.

Except for that he did not describe them properly at all. The tabloids are manipulative as hell, its ridiculous.

 

[bootsthecat]

More like Jeff Pedos.

I saw this on Amazon. How is that scum not in prison?

 

[Ivan 3414]

Pretty clear several users who claim MJ did it are trolling now and won't get banned for it. People outright are not even acknowledging the humongous amount of evidence in favor of MJ, taking borderline-personal potshots at his defenders, and the mods still haven't even changed the misleading title.

 

[Wolfe]

The kid that drew a circumcised penis and MJ wasn't even circumcised according to autopsy.

It's so easy to just believe whatever you hear though man.

 

[MegaManTrigger]

Talk about a bombshell being dropped.

First off, is it legit? Also, I wonder if this was during the investigation, or if this was recently found. If this was legit and found during the investigation, why the hell was he not put in jail?

 

[bootsthecat]

lol

"I'd only let my kid stay at a stranger's house if they beat some other kids to get there!"

Hey, I can't help it if my kid was the regional moonwalking champ in 1989. kid had skillz

 

[Syder]

Talk about a bombshell being dropped.

First off, is it legit? Also, I wonder if this was during the investigation, or if this was recently found. If this was legit and found during the investigation, why the hell was he not put in jail?

Read the thread, dude.

Look up where those kids are now and tell me if you feel the same.

I don't understand your point. Gavin Arvizo recently got married.

Pretty clear several users who claim MJ did it are trolling now and won't get banned for it. People outright are not even acknowledging the humongous amount of evidence in favor of MJ, taking borderline-personal potshots at his defenders, and the mods still haven't even changed the misleading title.

Yup. I'm shocked, to be honest.

 

[Arthr2ShdsJcksn]

Talk about a bombshell being dropped.

First off, is it legit? Also, I wonder if this was during the investigation, or if this was recently found. If this was legit and found during the investigation, why the hell was he not put in jail?

It's not legit. That's why he was not put in jail.

 

[Neato_Jinkins]

Yup. I'm shocked, to be honest.

hopefully the mods swoop in to rescue you from facts you don't like faster than the authorities swooped in to stop michael jackson from abusing children.

 

[Bobby Roberts]

I don't believe the case was built on the idea that Michael Jackson was in possession of child pornography in and of itself, correct? The case was that Michael Jackson had, and used, this material (which is perfectly legal to own) as an alleged means to groom the children.

Focusing on whether or not the stuff itself is pornographic isn't really the point (although if it was pornographic, that'd help make the charges stick that much more cleanly, obviously), the stuff was introduced as a means to make the case that he was using all this material as a means to help groom the children so he could more easily manipulate them into doing what he wanted to do with them.

At which point going "but it's not porn!" doesn't really address why it was entered into evidence. Prosecution was trying to make the case that he was using these (and other easily obtained and legal for him to purchase items) in a fashion that would have facilitated his alleged pedophilic urges. That he was using this stuff to somehow normalize the level of transgression he was about to indulge.

The prosecution was not judged to have successfully made that case. This article now lets you look at the evidence provided by the Sheriff's office directly.

 

[Syder]

hopefully the mods swoop in to rescue you from facts you don't like faster than the authorities swooped in to stop michael jackson from abusing children.

This sort of blatant trolling is just disgusting.

 

[Tatsumi Oga]

As for this new 'news' by fantastic reliable sources......

1. You are being fooled by manipulative journalism.

2. This is nothing new. All these books are public record since 2005 so Radar Online acting like some it was some new damning evidence is dishonest.

3. It was never damning evidence. It's what the media twisting this into. None of it was illegal. None of it was child porn. If it had been then MJ had been charged with it plain and simple. It's really frustrating that people are so misinformed about basic law.

4. All the material was shown to the jury in 2005 and they didn't find them damning.

5. That is because they are not. They are legal art books that you can buy in any book store or library. Several of the books are in the Library of Congress.

Let me show you how the media manipulates the public with this. The Daily Beast for example wrote that "child pornography was found" (simply not true - if someone insists there was ask him to show you where MJ was charged with it, because he should have been if child porn had been found). Then the stuff they claim to be "gore" and "child torture" is a book called Room to Play.

"Sex book". No, it is not a sex book. It's an art book by a renowned photo artist. An art book that is also in the Library of Congress. http://lccn.loc.gov/2004297659

An art book that contains surreal, photoshopped pics of children, in surrealistic settings. Pics like these:

https://jacksonaktak.files.wordpress.com/2016/06/room-to-play-simen-johan-004.jpg?w=640

https://jacksonaktak.files.wordpress.com/2016/06/room-to-play-simen-johan-001.jpg?w=640

https://i0.wp.com/michaeljacksonallegations.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/roomtoplay13.jpg

https://i0.wp.com/michaeljacksonallegations.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/roomtoplay12.jpg

https://i0.wp.com/michaeljacksonallegations.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/roomtoplay07.jpg

"which included a photo of murdered child beauty queen Jon Benet Ramsay with a rope around her neck" - This is the photo they are talking about.

https://s31.postimg.org/h3yxkgu9n/Clipboard03.jpg

So that description too is very manipulative as it implies that there is a photo about the actual murdered body of Ramsey.

And this goes on with all the books and all the manipulation. The books all have been ALL introduced to trial in 2005 and the jury found him "not guilty". If child porn had been found MJ would have been charged with it. If anything illegal like child torture, animal sacrifice etc. had been found it would have been emphasized to death by the prosecution.

These are simply art books, some pics might be "edgy" or not everyone's cup of tea, but they are art books that you can find in any book store or library. Here is another one of that supposedly horror collection (by the way the media is trying to describe these books now) - The Golden Age of Neglect. You can skim through the full book here:

https://vimeo.com/54012676

MJ was a big fan of photography.


But i know...i know....i am in denial.

 

[Wolfe]

hopefully the mods swoop in to rescue you from facts you don't like faster than the authorities swooped in to stop michael jackson from abusing children.

You mean the facts he is presenting to counter argue the lack of facts being presented from the other side?

Sure.

 

[LizardKing]

I don't believe the case was built on the idea that Michael Jackson was in possession of child pornography in and of itself, correct? The case was that Michael Jackson had, and used, this material (which is perfectly legal to own) as an alleged means to groom the children.

Focusing on whether or not the stuff itself is pornographic isn't really the point (although if it was pornographic, that'd help make the charges stick that much more cleanly, obviously), the stuff was introduced as a means to make the case that he was using all this material as a means to help groom the children so he could more easily manipulate them into doing what he wanted to do with them.

At which point going "but it's not porn!" doesn't really address why it was entered into evidence. Prosecution was trying to make the case that he was using these (and other easily obtained and legal for him to purchase items) in a fashion that would have facilitated his alleged pedophilic urges.

The prosecution was not judged to have successfully made that case. This article now lets you look at the evidence provided by the Sheriff's office directly.

They literally took every book or magazine with nudity in it and said that it could be used to manipulate. This includes his copy of Club mag and any other normal 18+ porn magazines. With that logic, someone can check your browsing history and say that your porn history could have been used to manipulate children. There is nothing to create that link.

 

[paperboywriter]

Well he is dead, there is nothing to be done here, right?

 

[LookAtMeGo]

I don't believe the case was built on the idea that Michael Jackson was in possession of child pornography in and of itself, correct? The case was that Michael Jackson had, and used, this material (which is perfectly legal to own) as an alleged means to groom the children.

Focusing on whether or not the stuff itself is pornographic isn't really the point (although if it was pornographic, that'd help make the charges stick that much more cleanly, obviously), the stuff was introduced as a means to make the case that he was using all this material as a means to help groom the children so he could more easily manipulate them into doing what he wanted to do with them.

At which point going "but it's not porn!" doesn't really address why it was entered into evidence. Prosecution was trying to make the case that he was using these (and other easily obtained and legal for him to purchase items) in a fashion that would have facilitated his alleged pedophilic urges. That he was using this stuff to somehow normalize the level of transgression he was about to indulge.

The prosecution was not judged to have successfully made that case. This article now lets you look at the evidence provided by the Sheriff's office directly.

Sounds about right. Gets confusing for some when the thread titles says "had a child pornography collection" I suppose.

 

[Heckler456]

Look up where those kids are now and tell me if you feel the same.

Might expounding on that? I'm interested.

 

[Neato_Jinkins]

There is nothing to create that link.

except for, you know, all the children he had over all the time

 

[Syder]

They literally took every book or magazine with nudity in it and said that it could be used to manipulate. This includes his copy of Club mag and any other normal 18+ porn magazines. With that logic, someone can check your browsing history and say that your porn history could have been used to manipulate children. There is nothing to create that link.

I've previously mentioned it but they also included this picture from a music video shoot.

These are Tito's sons btw ^

Prosecution had it labelled: "Photograph of Michael Jackson posing with two shirtless males. Provocative attire" "labelled 'WHY SHOOT'"

Clutching at straws is putting it mildly.

 

[Cheerilee]

Talk about a bombshell being dropped.

First off, is it legit? Also, I wonder if this was during the investigation, or if this was recently found. If this was legit and found during the investigation, why the hell was he not put in jail?

He had creepy artbooks (some of which were factory-sealed and had never been read) that (among other things) contained non-porn pictures of nude children. The authorities declared it to be not porn, but potentially useful in grooming victims.

He had the July 2003 issue of Penthouse magazine. Authorities declared it not illegal, but potentially useful in grooming victims.

All of this stuff came out in the trial, but the exact list of books/magazines wasn't publicized until now.

 

[Mr Waluigi]

The documents exposed Jackson as a manipulative, drug-and-sex-crazed predator who used blood, gore, sexually explicit images of animal sacrifice and perverse adult sex acts to bend children to his will.

He also had disgusting and downright shocking images of child torture, adult and child nudity, female bondage and sadomasochism.

Too shocked to read the whole thread.

But from what I can gather from the current page, this is just stuff from an artbook? Sure, it's perfectly normal for an artist to have pictures of sadomasochistic porn and animal sacrifices. And child pornography.

 

[Wolfe]

I don't believe the case was built on the idea that Michael Jackson was in possession of child pornography in and of itself, correct? The case was that Michael Jackson had, and used, this material (which is perfectly legal to own) as an alleged means to groom the children.

Focusing on whether or not the stuff itself is pornographic isn't really the point (although if it was pornographic, that'd help make the charges stick that much more cleanly, obviously), the stuff was introduced as a means to make the case that he was using all this material as a means to help groom the children so he could more easily manipulate them into doing what he wanted to do with them.

At which point going "but it's not porn!" doesn't really address why it was entered into evidence. Prosecution was trying to make the case that he was using these (and other easily obtained and legal for him to purchase items) in a fashion that would have facilitated his alleged pedophilic urges. That he was using this stuff to somehow normalize the level of transgression he was about to indulge.

The prosecution was not judged to have successfully made that case. This article now lets you look at the evidence provided by the Sheriff's office directly.

I get that I really do, I just feel like any and all case they had falls apart pretty quicly just due to the misinformation and attempts to bend the truth that the prosecution used alone.

That picture of MJ with his fucking nephews in what looks like an album cover was used to try and show him spending him with "shirtless men" or something, it's his family for god sake. I mean if they went to those lengths with a picture of him and his nephews what other examples did they try to bend in their favor to paint Jackson in a bad light?

Too shocked to read the whole thread.

But from what I can gather from the current page, this is just stuff from an artbook? Sure, it's perfectly normal for an artist to have pictures of sadomasochistic porn and animal sacrifices. And child pornography.

Why even post then? Everything you're asking/talking about has been answered.

I apologize as I'm sure that sounds rather dickish but it doesn't take that long to read a few pages and it will help cut down on posts like that which you're hasn't been the first.

 

[Peterthumpa]

Look up where those kids are now and tell me if you feel the same.

http://www.inquisitr.com/1944509/michael-jackson-molestation-accusations-timeline/

Just one example, and yeah, I'm feeling exactly the same.

 

[Vilix]

Well he is dead, there is nothing to be done here, right?

If it's true people might stop listening to his music. I think radio stations would stop playing them at least.