Garden of Eden Escorts
Toronto Escorts

Michael Jackson Stockpiled Underage, Violent Pornography on Neverland Ranch

GameBoy27

Well-known member
Nov 23, 2004
12,629
2,516
113
I always wondered about MJ. I think he was a brilliant artist but figured he paid off his victims. This sure makes it look that way.

Michael Jackson Stockpiled Underage, Violent Pornography on Neverland Ranch, Report Shows.

New details from the 2003 investigation are horrifying.



Newly obtained reports from the 2003 child molestation investigation of Michael Jackson reveal that the late pop star had stockpiled gruesome underage pornography on his Neverland Ranch.

During a police raid in November of 2003, his California home was reportedly found with pornography that included both adults and children, animal torture, S&M, and gore, along with "drugs to treat sex addiction, with multiple prescriptions written by a variety of physicians," according to documents obtained by Radar Online.

Investigators told Radar Online that these materials were "used to desensitize children."

"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," the source told Radar.

Jackson was charged with child molestation and two counts of giving an intoxicant to a minor in 2003. He faced up to 20 years in prison, but was later acquitted in 2005. During that trial, the New York Times reported:

Prosecutors painted him as a serial pedophile who got young boys into his bed using Neverland as a lure. They portrayed the singer's estate near here as a no-rules fantasy kingdom that lowered children's inhibitions and made them ready for Mr. Jackson's sexual advances. The accuser in the case was just the latest in a long list of Mr. Jackson's "special friends," they said, at least two of whom were silenced with large payments.

A jury cleared Jackson of all the charges, with one juror saying after the trial, "we considered all the evidence, and since this was a criminal trial, it had to be beyond a reasonable doubt."

Since then, lawyers claim that Jackson paid up to $200 million to keep as many as 20 victims quiet. Jackson died in 2009 after taking a lethal dose of sleeping medications administered by his doctor.

http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/news/a46035/michael-jackson-underage-porn-report/
 

IM469

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2012
10,997
2,301
113
What next ... O.J. Simpson actually did murder Nichole Simpson ???? :crazy:
 

Smallcock

Active member
Jun 5, 2009
13,703
21
38
I always wondered about MJ. I think he was a brilliant artist but figured he paid off his victims. This sure makes it look that way.
Strange in light of the fact that all of his "victims" grew into adults and retracted the claims they made as children and have said their parents put them up to it for the $$$
 

JessyCeleste

Twitter: @JessyCeleste1
so why wasn't this evidence used in his child molestation trial 10 years ago?
I second this. I'm very wary of whats reported in press when it isn't backed up by anything solid. I mean, this was before my time but thanks to youtube I found out that Peter Chris of Kiss was a homeless alcoholic who had lost his fortune in a series of bad investments, hookers and drug addiction... until the real Peter Chris whos mother had just died had the fun of people offering him help while offering condolences at the funeral...and the real Peter Chris who was a happily married millionaire who had been off drugs and alcohol for years sued the living piss out of the paper that ran the story. He didn't blame the imposter as he had seen him as having been exploited and bribed by the paper for a good scoop. As we all know this isn't the only instance of the press totally fabricating a story they know to be untrue (before running it they spoke to Peter Chris's ex wife who said hes fine and offered his new phone number to confirm..they ran it anyway) let alone stretching the truth. So given that the press didn't speak of this at the time, given it wasn't entered into evidence (which theres no reason it wouldn't be since they had full warrents), I'll reserve condemnation. No, I'm not a fan. Talented guy but, not my thing. So this isn't bias. Just how I perceive it.
 

fuji

Banned
Jan 31, 2005
80,012
7
0
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
is.gd
Or more directly, why wasn't he charged with possession of child pornography? Even if an actual assault couldn't be proved that would have been enough to put him under court supervision and away from children.
 

james t kirk

Well-known member
Aug 17, 2001
24,004
3,830
113
What amazes me is the number of people who hold this freakshow in such high regard to this very day.

After he died, how many tributes were we subjected to?

I mean with everything known about Jackson, you'd think that no-one would be saying anything positive about him. But no, people are just lining up to raise a glass to him. And I've never understood that. On top of all that, I find his music to be OK at best. I don't own a single Michael Jackson album. Frankly, his music has never held any appeal to me. I like a lot of different music, different genres, I go to the see the symphony on a regular basis, I go to see Roger Waters, I go to see the Opera.

But Michael Jackson?

Nope.
 

Calgacus

Banned
Feb 14, 2013
840
5
0
I like some of his songs but I would agree that he's highly overrated musically. What people love about him (I think) is the fact that he's the "total package" as an entertainer. He can both sing and dance. I just care about the music. I couldn't care less whether someone can dance as a musician. Just write great songs
 

Aardvark154

New member
Jan 19, 2006
53,773
3
0
Or more directly, why wasn't he charged with possession of child pornography? Even if an actual assault couldn't be proved that would have been enough to put him under court supervision and away from children.
I can only speculate that there was some Constitutional problem with the search or seizure. Because otherwise it is inexplicable why he wasn't charged with possession of child pornography.
 

Conil

Well-known member
Apr 12, 2013
3,635
632
113
I can only speculate that there was some Constitutional problem with the search or seizure. Because otherwise it is inexplicable why he wasn't charged with possession of child pornography.
Maybe because it didn't happen.
 

Aardvark154

New member
Jan 19, 2006
53,773
3
0
Maybe because it didn't happen.
Perhaps you are correct.

According to the investigative report: "One of the juveniles appeared to be a young teenager; the other appeared to be adolescent (pre-teen). The name "Greg" was printed above the child who appeared to be off teenage years. This subject appeared to be wearing a white terry cloth robe. 'The name "Kendall" was printed over the adolescent aged individual. The adolescent individual was bare chested. The picture does not depict the lower half of the children so it cannot be ascertained as to what they were wearing with regard to lower clothing."

So in other words the photograph described above was not child pornography.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...al-photos-teenage-boys-provocative-poses.html
 

Scarey

Well-known member
Would be good for someone like Lisa Marie Presely to write
a book or tell us what she knows so that we can get the story once
and for all.
His family doesn't seem to be saying much.
He's dead. They are either getting his money, or not getting his money. There's no need to even mention him anymore.That whole family is greasy as fuck....
 

Smallcock

Active member
Jun 5, 2009
13,703
21
38

nottyboi

Well-known member
May 14, 2008
22,447
1,331
113
If he did, as if they would not charge him with possession. Neverland was almost a public facility, so who knows who put it there.
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts