Michael Jackson Stockpiled Child Porn and Animal Torture Photos

Many a parent turned a blind eye for a dollar bill. They should be in jail.

All of them will need to be watched carefully for the rest of their lives as a result of this.

Ick.

I always vacillated between hurting, gentle soul and sick pervert, but if all this is true, I'm not vacillating anymore.

If this had come out at his trial, he would be in big trouble.

Such a small child under pressure as a celebrity back before there were protections for child actors.. Stardom is perverse and evil thing to inflict on a developing small psyche.

And he is dead now.

before there were protections for child actors. From Jackie Cooper and Shirley Temple -a true child superstar. Judy Garland dealt by hurting herself, but AFAIK never hurt anyone else.

And of course, there are children who grow up under much, much worse circumstances than being "victimized by celebrity".

There's no excuse for hurting others...none.

I'm not excusing him.
But I don't excuse the shallow culture that failed to recognize the bizarre nature of its celebrity fixation and its impact on a small child.
Psychologically damaging. Some turn to suicide or drugs.
I'm not sure if what they are saying here is true, either. The man's not here to defend himself.

to jackie coogan. the bill has been updated a number of times.

Why do rich adult felons have excuses and "childhood issues" but poor people are just "criminals" ?

Jackson's behavior was enabled by the paid-off star struck parents of his victims and by his fans who refused to see the obvious (and refused to read the Vanity Fair article).

And now there are detailed accounts of what was found.

Really, really sickening. I just don't understand why "the public" didn't have access to this before.

You ever respond to replies by the way?

Yeah, well....

when TMZ interviewed his fentanyl dealer.

pop stars get the benefit of the doubt. until they don't. Jackson's damaged-manchild demeanor and talent generated huge amounts of sympathy for him. hell, I still feel like he'd still be here if his family and religion hadn't F'd him up and just let him accept he was a gay man who liked twinks.

no one stepped up to defend gary glitter, though...

Playing the victim, and making money off of that took true predatory instinct and intent.

I actually got the "How DARE you..." like I was calling a saint a sinner, or sommething.

was news 24/7 for several days. Apparently nothing else was happening in the world. It really pissed me off at the time. Even if there weren't a lot of questions about his relationships with young children, why on earth should a pop star get that kind of media attention. I just turned the crap off.

It was as if the President or Pope died.

We worship celebrity. It's sick - and while I always thought MIchael Jackson was sick yet innocent, I'm disgusted at his behavior. No excuse for harming innocent kids or animals. Bastard.

Reporting the death of a famous person with basic details is understandable, but replaying the same information and video clips all day long is lazy journalism. If people want to know more, they can buy a tell-all biography or pick up a tabloid newspaper.

no, he was just a fucking creep.

Really disgusting and I don't recommend reading for anyone who is squeamish.

Is there a reason why this new information (news?) isn't appropriate for this forum?

I don't understand why it is breaking now.

gossiping about celebrities, and particularly about celebrities who can not defend themselves. Cheap entertainment.

nt

during a police raid. He wasn't arrested for possession of it. He didn't have a trial and go to prison like anyone else in the country would. So he doesn't need to defend himself. His money and celebrity were defense enough.
I guess no one wanted to be the one to arrest Michael Jackson for possession of child pornography.

even without a shred of proof, and voila, let the fun begin!

I guess facts and truth don't matter to you. Which is typical of DU's membership today, but fine. I am not going to tangle with you, but I do now see that there are plenty of others here who see what goes on in threads on DU as mere Daily-Mail-school GOSSIP, not as serious discussion. So that's a win, in my view, for fairness.

then it's news. The police responsible for that may still be working, even if they haven't yet been sued.

He was charged with child molestation in 2005, presumably after this raid when the CP was found. Why was he not charged then? Th

That's above my pay grade.

Any regular person would be fucked beyond all hope.

thanks.

This was struck down in 2002 by the Supreme Court on 1st amendment grounds as being too broad.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_Pornography_Prevention_Act_of_1996

It was followed up by the PROTECT Act of 2003, passed into law in April 2003 and signed by Bush on April 30th. The raid on Neverland happened in November 2003 so this act should have been in force at that time. I'm sure there must have been material that could have been applicable to this act.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PROTECT_Act_of_2003

nt

We create gods out of fellow mortals because they and sing and dance, or throw a ball and jump high.

Never did understand why...

They were art books that weren't considered illegal. Some certainly were disturbing, but it wasn't against the law to own them. Also, I'd heard he had a tendency to buy massive amounts of books in estate sales, so I guess it would have been difficult to prove he sout these books out specifically beyond a reasonable doubt if they were illegal. Basically, the case against Jackson involved a lot of circumstantial (but not illegal) stuff that made it look like he was likely a paedophile, but there was no concrete proof of him comitting any crime.

If you actually bother clicking over to RadarOnline (which I don't really recommend because that was the point of this whole BS slander campaign), you'll see this in one of the top comments:

Update (June 21, 10:10 A.M.): A representative from the Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Department gave Vanity Fair the following statement regarding the documents:

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. 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.


So just "he said she said" !

so, yes, I do believe they could have been taken off the internet or copied from a book, since the books were named and the photographs were described in the report.

Is the copy of the report a fake, too? Your excerpt doesn't appear to suggest that.

for bored people.

I happen to have a very personal reason for caring about the victims of pedophiles and pederasts, so, yeah, this story interests me, although "sickens me" would be a better choice of words.

Don't click if you're not interested.

"Don't click if you're not interested..."

One would think that the most common of sense, leading me to believe the high-horse is in fact, giraffe-like in scale if not grace.

And I agree.

The news is that anyone would want to start a conversation with this.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3651294/Michael-Jackson-underage-sex-collection-photos-naked-teenage-boys-male-erotica-depicting-men-children-detailed-newly-released-police-report-2003-search-Neverland-Ranch.html

Michael Jackson underage sex collection: The photos of naked teenage boys and 'all-male erotica depicting men and children' detailed in newly released police report from 2003 search of Neverland Ranch
The police report from the 2003 search of Michael Jackson's Neverland Ranch has been released
The police report claims that in Jackson's bedroom and bathroom alone there were at least seven collections of work with nude teenage boys
'He also had disgusting and downright shocking images of child torture, adult and child nudity, and sadomasochism,' said one investigator
The report states that many of the materials featuring naked men and women could be used to groom and then molest young children
He was accused of sexually assaulting Gavin Arvizo, a 13-year-old cancer survivor at the time of the alleged incidents
Jackson was acquitted in 2005 on seven felony counts of child molestation and two felony counts of providing an intoxicant to a minor

By Chris Spargo For Dailymail.com

Published: 18:12 EST, 20 June 2016 | Updated: 20:57 EST, 20 June 2016











Michael Jackson was found to have a sizable collection of pornographic material at his Neverland Ranch in 2003 according to police reports cataloging the property following a search of the residence.

Many of these books and videos are also detailed in court papers from the time, submitted after a young boy came forward claiming that he had been sexually abused and assaulted by the singer on multiple occasions.

The police report claims that in Jackson's bedroom and bathroom alone there were at least seven collections of work found by investigators that show boys in their teenage years - and in some cases younger - fully nude or partially clothed.

One of the collections, Taormina Wilhelm Von Gloeden, is described in court papers as: 'Nude photos of teenage boys from late 1800s.'

The search of the home occurred in November of that year while Jackson was in Las Vegas, with 70 members of the Santa Barbara County District Attorney's Office and Sheriff's Department turning up to the residence.

An arrest warrant had been issued at that time as well, and Jackson later turned himself into police when he returned to California.





Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3651294/Michael-Jackson-underage-sex-collection-photos-naked-teenage-boys-male-erotica-depicting-men-children-detailed-newly-released-police-report-2003-search-Neverland-Ranch.html#ixzz4CFIHM68K
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

other than to hurt and humiliate his children? A bunch of bullshit to get clicks and ratings by continuing a decades long smear against a rich dead black man.

proven guilty.

Guy lived a weird life compared to most other people, but that isn't a crime.

Update (June 21, 10:10 A.M.): A representative from the Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Department gave Vanity Fair the following statement regarding the documents:

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. 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.

http://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2016/06/michael-jackson-police-reports-pornography-collection

"Some of the documents appear to be copies of reports that were authored by Sheriff’s Office personnel"

They are not denying that this isn't a copy of the actual report.

And in papers filed with the court, the books with the photos were clearly titled and the pictures were described. If these are copies of the actual documents from the Sheriff's office, it would be quite easy to find the books mentioned in the documents, and copy the pictures.

I saw the photo of Jon Benet Ramsey, and recognized it from the description in the report. The photo wasn't pornographic, but it was creepy.

Is if they had all this evidence from the raid, was it admitted into evidence at trial? If not why not? If so, how could the jury have found him not guilty? After the not guilty charge, why not charge him for the child porn? And why are we just hearing about this now? There are a lot of unanswered questions to this story.

That question make this case disturbingly fascinating.

pretty much get away with anything.
See Simpson, OJ.

That said, I'll wait for confirmation that is even true.

but he amused himself with photos of child porn and animal torture.

What an elaborate cover.

...nude photos and pornography. Neither are always problems, but this description of the material reveals a serious problem. Having photos of adult men and children younger than teenagers, gore photos and torture are truly sick. And, it's not normal for men to sleep with underage boys on a regular basis when you have a mansion full of sleeping options. There is no excuse. How horrible for those who adored him... Child abuse does not have to involve penetration. Any sexual act is abuse and can hurt for a lifetime. Showing these pictures is also abusive. I'm sorry Michael was so troubled, but even sorrier for his victims.

can lead to scars for a lifetime.

Someone I love was being groomed as a young teen, but he managed to figure out what was happening before a physical assault took place. It was very difficult to extricate himself because his mom would ask why he was no longer engaging in a particular activity with this man that he had previously enjoyed. He was ashamed to tell her.

It scarred him for years.

...

.... but a lot less serrious happened to me. I displayed reluctance and my parents picked up on it right away. They made a few phone calls and the situation was "resolved" pretty quickly.

picked up on it!

Try watching FAUX news for an update on this.

MJ was acquitted by a jury of his peers.

This is NOT LATE BREAKING NEWS, it is mindless gossip!

...with the alleged (because I don't believe the first word of this entire article) materials, right? No? Why not?

Sure thing, Medes. Nice date.

against Michael Jackson, and if there was a trove of child porn, he would have been charged with the crime. Or the DA was incompetent beyond belief. Why wouldn't charges have been brought?

at least legally. They were "art" books of which some involved partially clothed or nude children. He may well have been using the material in that way, but they couldn't prove it and just having the material was not illegal acording to the report. Most of this seems like old news with a tabloid spin on it.

have an "art" exception. Books of photos of nude teens and children are considered pornography. Only adults can give consent to be photographed nude or performing sex acts, which is why in movies about teens coming of age, the "teens" are always played by actors 18 or older.

Naked baby angels. Legit renaissance art. Whether he bought it for artistic value or for tittilation, well we can assume...

But it's not porn. That's the only reason I can think of for not charging him w child porn possession.

As are cartoons, drawings or paintings that did not make use of actual nude children. In fact, if I recall correctly the Supreme Court even found that altered nude photos of adults that have been computer enhanced to make them appear to be pubescent and pre-pubescent are perfectly acceptable and not illegal. Yuck. I think that is gross and just promotes actual kiddie porn, pervs have free speech rights too was the reasoning.

Posing actual nude children for photography is another matter.

a nude picture of me laying in a baby bathtub. I don't consider it porn. I was probably 5 or 6 months old at the time.

So does my mom. My comment was not about what people actually do, but about what the law is.

This type of law why some teens who have "sexted" each other nude photos of themselves (not performing sex acts -- just nudity) have been arrested for and in at least once case I know of, convicted of possessing and distributing child pornography due to the photos being found on their phones and for further circulating such photos.

Perhaps laws need to change with the times, but I am just stating some facts from some jurisdictions.

This was 10 years after the initial child abuse allegation, and Michael settled. Surely Sneddon would have used this during evidence during the trial, if it's really there.

Must have been a slow news day for this shit to be "all over the internet."

A shame he died before he got to suffer in jail.

worse than even I thought, apparently. (wonder what elizabeth taylor would have said. I know they were very close)

the seemingly unending adulation on his death was more than sickening.

Thriller is the best-selling album of all time.

His celebrity is probably the easiest to understand of just about any celebrity in modern history. He was massively popular and his music was beloved around the world. He had an iconic style and was an outstanding showman. The videos of his songs from Thriller transformed the industry and he completely captured the attention of the world at the time.

and, even if everything you say is true, that did not warrant 24/7 coverage on seemingly every station for weeks on end. there were other events happening, things that affected us.

Michael was a very talented singer/dancer (just because you may not like his kind of music is only your personal choice, it does not mean that he had no talent). I can't speak about the pedophile charges. I wasn't there, and neither were you. What I do know is that he was found innocent on all counts by a jury of his peers, and I tend to agree with them.
I also suspect that lots of people like Michael are easy targets for grifters. He liked to hang out with children, because he was working from the age of 5, and BOOM he's suspected of being a pedophile. People who are different are called "extremely strange" by a judgmental public who eschew everything and everyone out of the ordinary. People who are different are hounded by bullies all their lives. Michael was a famous, rich black man, so the bullies in this case are a bit different. They ended up hounding him to death.

I still like listening to his music, and probably always will. Others are more fanatical in their admiration. So what? The fact he is still loved and admired severely pisses off those who never liked him in the first place. To that I say, "Ha ha, assholes, you lose!"

Ha indeed.

First of all, the pron allegations are not new.

He had mainstream adult magazines, books, and videos. He also had books with naked people, including children, in non-pron settings. I got the impression that one of the books was slightly kinky, but not even to the level of 50 Shades.

We've known this. It's not news.

The police report says nothing about torture pron or animal abuse.

I think he was a total pedo and very creepy, but the allegations of torture pron don't seem to have a source.

You want weird shit, this was in the room he died in:

(Not that this isn't sickening OR, for that matter totally surprising, but it's only being published now because it will get people to go to the site).

With clickbait, they tease you without giving you the facts, so if you want to find out what the article is about, you have to click on the link.

Clickbait would be something like:

"Shocking New Revelations about Michael Jackson - You Won't Believe What's Been Found"

This, on the other hand, is an actual headline to an article that accurately tells you in the headline what information is contained within the body of the article.

And these things should have been admitted as evidence at the trial.

I was calling it clickbait because it seemed cynical to me that, years after Michael Jackson's death, there is a real question in my mind as to the actual newsworthiness of this story.

In the sense that it is the kind of thing a website would post just to get people to click on the story, I saw it as clickbait.

It was not about minimizing how sickening and disturbing this information is.

And parents, to follow their intuition, and to just say, no. Hell, no, and run!

Non-disclosure agreements?

"I heard this about Michael Jackson." This is a report from the Huffington Post based on police reports from authorities that were on that raid. Are the police lying? They just decided to gang up on this guy for no reason?
Or did they find crap the pervert was into and choose not to prosecute him for it like they would have with anyone else?

and 2) the police never lie about anything.

The parents who took payoffs ought to be publically shamed too.

I know plenty of people who had horrible childhoods and managed to live productive adult lives despite their abuse. MJ was a predator. End of sentence.

anywhere but Trump crime and the sit-in