Part 1 - youtube.com
Part 2 - youtube.com
Part 3 - youtube.com
Regardless if you think he is wrong, the sheer depth & detail he put into these videos is intense & respect worthy.
One part pointed out in the 1st video that shocks me, is the court allowing body guards to testify that they saw specific kids being molested despite the kids themselves being witnesses for for the defense saying they were never touched.
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
dailymail.co.uk
huffingtonpost.com
youtube.com
breitbart.com
youtu.be
foxnews.com
youtube.com
youtu.be
web.archive.org
thedailybeast.com
youtube.com
dailymail.co.uk
youtube.com
youtu.be
amazon.com
vanityfair.com
youtu.be
clickondetroit.com
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
amazon.com
washingtonpost.com
twitter.com
>failed metalhead
>Trump supporter
>pedophile enabler
Cool channel, I will subscribe.
Balding hair band fans are a sad thing to behold.
I just watched Part 3. Brilliant.
Thanks, I was about to give him a view.
Honestly, the one thing that puts Razorfist above many internet critics is the sheer amount of research done on complex topics. Everyone else seem to basic stuff, or useless nerd trivia, but Razorfist is the only one who has substance.
Wisecrack went to shit when they waisted philosophy to fellate Rick and Morty
I really liked this guy's Ultima Retrospective
Cherry popped by the king of pop.
>failed metalhead
lol how do you fail to be a metalhead?
>Trump supporter
He supported Trump the candidate
>pedophile enabler
kys faggot
He should review more Stat Trek episodes, those are comfy videos.
Fuck off e-celeb faggot
shat on the first thread on this made earlier on and razorfist but after watching part 1 and 2, watching 3 now, he's convincing me maybe he's not a nonce
Cringed and closed the video when he said "paralegal eagle"
I'm glad he doesn't put out videos often exactly for that reason.
There is at least enough doubt out there to give the fucking dead guy a break, and not smear his name.
It's fine to shit on ecelebs. But he did a splendid job presenting his Michael Jackson Rebuttal series. You don't even have to like MJ to understand that is just another episode of trial by court of forced public opinion.
Fuck off, zoomer.
Im sorry this board is for television and film related, ecelebs and dead niggers are none of our concern, please delete the thread.
why is spoony dressed like that?
>autistic alt-lite gamer
I'd rather get DSP's opinion on the documentary, this guy is pure cringe.
>another alt-right nazi e-celeb
cringe
>looks like leisure suit larry
>dresses like andrew dice clay
>outright stole jim carrey’s liar liar voice
>pedo lover
this is the most ghastly bag of shit you’ve ever dropped on my doorstep, Yea Forums
pedos never get a break, not even in death.
>pedophile enabler
wut?
I like him and his videos.
Have sex
>being a metalhead
already a failure at life
But on the other hand Razorfist take more time to rrelease a video
>TFW Spoony is a libshit fag that will never EVER release another video
>publishers not allowed to write Pro Jackson media
And people still don't think there was a Jew conspiracy against this man.
>>another alt-right nazi
cringe
shut up discord nazi
I don't even use discord you fucking zoomer
Why isn't Razorfist defending OJ if the only reason he's doing this is because Trump was friends with him almost 30 years ago.
Also who is Razorfist and why is an e-celbirty on Yea Forums?
Who?
MJ was friends with Trump? also he's critiquing Leaving Neverland
Ok sorry, fuck off stormfront nigger
Reminder Jackson had a large CP collection locked up in a hidden room in his house, with a number of the books produced by major pedophiles from Nambla and photographs done by a child rapist named Hajo Ortil who admits to having sex with 800 boys.
Quote by Ortil in the pro-child love magazine "Pan":
>"Well, they liked it. I can only tell you. Now I'm accustomed to it that boys accept this. Since then I've had sexuale encounters with maybe 800 boys -- only boys -- and only 5, 6 or 7 boys said no."
I don't use that either, it's full of American mutts who are cia niggers
youtube.com
cringe
Razorfist isn't doing the OJ trial because everything wrong with it stems from California doubling down on the progressive mantra.
Razorfist likes Trump because Democrats have no appeal to the general public, and Republicans are spineless pushovers.
>he owned legal books
What a madman.
fukin racist
Based
You hide all your legal books?
>critiquing
He was a hardcore apologist prior to Leaving Neverland and his videos often reposted on /pol/ in the last few years because zoomers are butt fucking retarded and too young to remember that old-fags on Yea Forums /pol/ and Yea Forums shit all over Jackson and his faggot defenders back in '09 when he died.
Interior pages of "Boys will be Boys," which was a "legal" form of CP created back in the 1960's by a child porn ring consisting of members of NAMBLA. You can still own the book today despite this.
>large
>two/three legal books
Nothing to see here, just more Jewish lies.
More CP books in Jackson's collection
He built charity houses for the poor in Mexico (he provided photos to prove it) That sound nazi-ish as fuck!
This guy looks like a massive faggot. Also,
>YouTube e-celebs
More books with naked boys
>this is CP according to the Americans
lol
Photoshopped child porn found in Jackson's house
>he did charity work, that totally disproves he's racist
t. trump voter
Reminds me when they censored butts in Hannbial in an old painting while showed mutilated bodies.
Jackson's signature in a copy of "The Boy," which he gave to one of his victims.
It says:
>"To Michael, my friend, 'Your rubba rubba friend, MJ.'"
t. Yea Forums user
t.child molester
Yes, I’ve put a book in a filing cabinet before,
I see you in every thread about Jackson. You're fucking crazy.
Older article from HuffingtonPost defending Jackson, calling Ortil's photos "art" and claiming there was nothing "obscene" or "pornographic" about them.
>These were all items that were entered in court back in 2005 ― items that were well known to both the prosecution and defense and were presented before both Judge Melville and the jury. None of the items seized from Neverland fit the legal definition of child pornography, and in fact many of the items that are currently creating the most media hysteria were not pornographic at all. They were legal art books; a few of them containing some examples of adult erotica, but again, these were not titles that could be in any way deemed as pornographic or even obscene.
huffingtonpost.com
>the sheer depth & detail he put into these videos is intense & respect worthy.
no it's not. fucking youtube beta orbit shill cocksucker
Jackson's CP collection found in a hidden room in his house.
Photos of boys who slept in his bed found in the hidden room with the CP. The photos also contained topless photos of the boys.
>often reposted on /pol/
never seen him on /pol/ and when I see him on Yea Forums you get a bunch of polfags calling him an r/thedonald queer.
I don't really care about him or MJ desu, everyone has got their own judgment in the court of public opinion
He might have put all the effort in the world in these videos, I'm not gonna listen to this faggot shout at me in his annoying voice for an hour and a half when I can't even stand it for five minutes.
Report stating that in 1994 Jimmy Safechuck, one of the accusers in Leaving Neverland said that Jackson kissed him on the lips. Safechuck was defending Jackson at the time despite the admission.
He has literally not a single time said anything or advocated anything maliciously racist.
He literally said "these are good people & Mexico deserves to be a great nation too".
Safechuck holding hands with Jackson
do loud voices make your balls shrivel up soiboi?
Just like people saying "black people are good people too, they deserve their own nation"
More of Jackson and Safechuck
Female juror during a reddit AMA saying she likes Jackson's music and let him off because she felt she had a deep connection to him.
One of the male jurors saying they thought he was guilty, but went along with saying innocent, because Jackson had a good defense team creating doubts:
youtube.com
>failed metalhead
what was meant by this
Regardless of whether he whether anything sexual went on or not, he definitely had patrician taste in boys.
the sheer depth
No, they make me want to punch faggots in the face. He doesn't even have a cool loud voice, it sounds like he has too much spit in his mouth.
>Now spread them butt cheeks
he didnt keep chuck safe
see
Razorfist is one of the few good jewtoobers
kek
that's got "HEY RABBI" written all over it
>60% like
guess he's good at it
Well, Jackson was jewish and hung-out with jews and was pro-Israel
>how do you fail to be a metalhead?
by having entry level tastes well into adulthood
who is DSP?
I hide mein kampf.
>I didn't watch his videos
If you have doubts, you don't vote guilty. That's how defense works.
REASONABLE doubts
>sheer amount of research done on complex topics
It was confirmed he never played or bought any of the games he reviewed.
>um, its just legal CP?
Just a reminder that these are the faggots that pushed pizzagate into the mainstream.
What he lacks in playing the game makes up in explaining the core mechanics, behind the scenes decisions, marketing and finances. It's not enough to just play the game to form an opinion.
Wait why did the media suddenly dig up MJ? Is his family going through another court issue and wants publicity or something?
metal is the music of the modern white man. if you listen to rap you are a race traitor and shall perish come DotR
>suddenly
It's been going for years. Wade Robson was suing back in 2013 digging it back up, with Safechuck then coming forward saying he too had lied for years, as evidenced in this document from 1994 where his dad states how his son told him Jackson kissed him on the lips, but then his dad launches into defending Jackson. Also conservatives and conservative websites have been after him for years after his death, with lib-shits calling his CP collection art:
breitbart.com
Leftists at Huffingtonpost calling the CP art Trump friend and supporter Rep. Peter King calling Michael Jackson a pedophile after his death.
foxnews.com
thats not child porn you stupid fuck its photography. The book is a bestseller you dumb nigger
I bet your mom owns nude photos of you, oof your mom is a pedo OH OH SPAGHETTIOOS
>The book is a bestseller
That was made by convicted child rapists and a major child pornographer named Hajo Ortil who advocated for sex between adult men and little boys, and admitted grooming and raping 800 boys over the course of his life time.
cool, i'll sub
>CLAIM
what did MJ mean when he called his children friends "Rubba"?
cringe
Well the book has nothing sexual in it. The boys arent in compromising positions or performing a sexual act. For a lot of human history, sport was done in the nude, look up the root of the word "gymnasium". Every art collector probably had these books.
>Let me rubba rubba that dick
Is this guy the republican Spoony?
have a sex
>has nothing sexual in it.
Full frontal child nudity with dicks out, along with sexually suggestive poses. The same can be argued about Youtube CP and the shit ton of pedos hanging out on "ASMR" and challenge video channels, and gymnasts and child model videos, posting time stamps and shit for when the kids are in suggestive poses. Hell Yea Forums is a haven for those types of videos, regularly getting posted in cunny threads.
>doesn't realize Razorfist is literally /ourguy/
no sexual poses at all.
okay, now prove hes a Nazi (you cant)
whats wrong with that, racist?
>no sexual poses
>has kids wrestling with their asses facing the camera
>has a boys ass sticking out of a tent
>has boys posing with their dicks out
That's hundreds of times worse than youtube CP, yet nobody is defending it.
kids are in the nude, they will have their dicks out, and wrestling was done in the nude for most of human history. Dumb faggot.
Leaving Neverland is a crock of shit. Over 90% of it is completely unverifiable and the two stars are money grubbers who have tried, and failed, to get millions out of Jackson's estate. However, MJ was a freak. It's impossible to ignore , , , , . So both sides are shady as fuck. On the one hand, MJ probably masturbated to nude pics of boys. On the other hand, his biggest accusers are flaming liars who obviously care more about money than anything else. So the whole situation is a fucking mess.
He came into the castle
He left bloodstains on his asshole
damn
>are flaming liars
Jimmy Safechuck is pretty credible. He admitted in 1994 that Jackson kissed him on the lips while he and his parents were defending him And there's a plethora of very bizarre photos of him and Jackson together, which Safechuck says that at the time he and Jackson were lovers and that he had introduced him to masturbation.
Safechuck had also toured the world with Jackson without his parents coming along.
In support of Wade's claims the police did find bloody clothing and sheets in Jackson's home indicating a boy had been sodomized.
Razorfist is an embarrassing moron who yells a lot and states a lot of opinions as facts. Not to mention his awful attempts at humor.
Go to bed razorfist.
This guy is the most pathetic of the pathetic e-sissies, I remember him making fun of all kinds of other e-sissies and then just lifting jokes from their videos.
>One of the male jurors saying they thought he was guilty, but went along with saying innocent, because Jackson had a good defense team creating doubts
not to say he was or wasn't guilty but there's literally nothing wrong with this, "beyond a reasonable doubt" means you're 99% sure, a good defence team will obviously introduce doubts and point out holes in the prosecution's case
Look at this submissive little bitch who likes to get yelled at by leather clad faggots.
Too much of a faggot to qualify?
You must be joking. You honestly don't see this as something a pedo would salivate over?
>Jimmy Safechuck is pretty credible.
Except he has revised key parts of his story numerous times. And the latest version of his story has some glaring timeline discrepancies. And he sued for millions instead of taking his case to criminal court. And his lawsuit was thrown out by the judge. He's only slightly better than Robson, senpai. This is why I refuse to pick a side when it comes to the MJ debate. Everyone involved has unignorable problems.
Fuck off with that brainlet argument of yours. I don't get off on animals but if I'm going to presume what gives people boners or nor then there would be no animals around. Normal human beings don't find kids sexually arousing but paedophiles aren't wired like normal folks. It's like the YouTube drama all over again, moms (and kids) were uploading fairly innocuous content until the sickos came in to jack it off. How do you stop that? With a witch hunt and a forced moral panic? MJ owned books that do not qualify as child porn and after reviewing them frankly there is absolutely nothing wrong with them, it's just candid pictures of kids. I don't know if he was a nonce or not but that doesn't matter, he did do anything illegal and this was even proven in court. What the fuck more do you people want? You're being manipulated into judging someone after he's dead.
mj was definitely a pedo, but these two guys in the doc are full of shit.
But based Ben and the news people told me he was guilty! Even Oprah! OPRAH!!!
I was surprised that the live interview I saw of him was almost like one of his scripted rants. Agree or disagree with the content of what he says, he's unambiguously good at speaking. Although, he probably had a bunch of pre-written sentences in his mind's back-pocket; like how "freestyle" rappers usually have pre-written rhymes that they sling together on the fly.
Safecuck claims Jackson gave him the thriller jacket. But it was sold for 1.8 million dollars.
>glaring timeline discrepancies
Like what?
>And he sued for millions instead of taking his case to criminal court.
He couldn't go to criminal court. There's a statute of limitations on rape, including child rape if you wait years later to tell.
>his lawsuit was thrown out by the judge
Because he waited too long. Being tossed out had nothing to do with it's merits, just that he waited too long to say anything. He only came forward because Wade Robson did.
The way the law works, is he would have had to have said something right away, and I believe for child victims you can come forward up until you're 18 still, granting some leniency with the waiting to tell.
>(you)
>Like what?
watch the video
Just tell me to support your claims, I' not giving views to some e-fag.
>the court allowing body guards to testify that they saw specific kids being molested despite the kids themselves being witnesses for for the defense saying they were never touched.
How is that shocking ? Victimes, especially kids, shut their mouth all the time.
You’re the same one that sperged out about BR2049 right? Tell me again why you think “mad” is a personality? Sage
>Like what?
He initially claimed that in 2005 he told his mother that MJ molested him, but then changed his story to he didn't realize he was molested until 2013. He claims that the abuse got worse after MJ did a Grammy performance that took place in 1989 in New York, but the 1989 Grammies took place in Los Angeles and MJ didn't perform at them. He claims that MJ took him on a "honeymoon" at Euro Disney in 1988, but Euro Disney didn't open until 1992. I could keep going. Safechuck's story has more holes than Swiss cheese. MJ was a creep but Safechuck is about as trustworthy as a $2 whore.
>/ss/
WTF i love whacko Jacko now?!
I'm about halfway through part 2 (the first part about Leaving Neverland) and it's absolutely fucking terrible. Literally the entire thing is "B-BUT THEY SAID HERE HE DIDN'T TOUCH EM" which is thoroughly addressed in the documentary.
>He claims that MJ took him on a "honeymoon" at Euro Disney in 1988, but Euro Disney didn't open until 1992.
Doesn't matter as it's from memory he wasn't writing a biography on Euro Disney. Did the trip happen? I'd imagine Safechuck may have proof on that as he has a collection of photos and videos of his time with Jackson and an audio recording interview Jackson let him make.
>He claims that the abuse got worse after MJ did a Grammy performance that took place in 1989 in New York, but the 1989 Grammies took place in Los Angeles and MJ didn't perform at them.
This point literally means nothing, because he's not saying he was at the Grammies with Jackson.
>He initially claimed that in 2005 he told his mother that MJ molested him
Is there a source for that with the exact quotes?
>he didn't realize he was molested until 2013
He does state that he didn't think of it as abuse until later in life. Regardless it doesn't exactly matter on when he decided that he was molested, with a specific date and time of when he specifically thought something that exists in his head. It's like a grasping at straws kind of argument.
>which is thoroughly addressed in the documentary.
Thoroughly addressed? Lol, in the documentary the accusers basically say "w-we were lying then but we're telling the truth now! Honest!" Their credibility is flimsy at best, and I say that as someone who isn't a fan of MJ's music.
I kinda wish he'd kill himself and join Jackson, just so people would stop spamming his videos on /pol/ and Yea Forums
>Their credibility is flimsy at best
>safechuck saying he was kissed on the lips by Jackson in 1994
>Tons of photos of him and Jackson over the years
>child porn in Jackson's home
It's the type of shit that failed him on cross examination, user. You can find them in interviews he gave and in court excerpts. Stop trying to play devil's advocate.
He and his friends are after settlement money, after getting hammered in the 2013 case. That's why they'll disgrace MJ's public image again, so they're closer to the millions they can win. It's pretty fuckin nefarious if you ask me
As opposed to people spamming false allegations about a pop singer long dead for cynical corporate reasons and keep perpetuating this toxic culture of "call X a pedophile to win"? Nah, fuck that. I'd much rather endure being spammed with faggot metalhead.
>I'd imagine Safechuck may have proof on that as he has a collection of photos and videos of his time with Jackson and an audio recording interview Jackson let him make.
If he has proof then why didn't he show it in the documentary?
>Is there a source for that with the exact quotes?
Razorfist showed a court document in one of the videos.
>He does state that he didn't think of it as abuse until later in life. Regardless it doesn't exactly matter on when he decided that he was molested
You're ignoring the fact that he changed one of the most critical parts of his story.
>It's like a grasping at straws kind of argument.
So it's grasping at straws to point out Jimmy's story has changed and is full of mistakes, but MJ having once kissed him on the lips shows that everything Jimmy has said is rock solid fact? user, you're no better than the MJ defenders.
>It's the type of shit that failed him on cross examination, user.
As far as I'm aware Safechuck didn't go to trial
>You can find them in interviews he gave and in court excerpts.
Then cite them.
>Stop trying to play devil's advocate.
>Stop arguing facts and agree with e-celebs talking out their ass without citations or any evidence to back it up
>He and his friends are after settlement money,
Like Ron Goldman's family was with OJ? Money aside, what other legal recourse did they have if you can't take a case to criminal court?
>hammered in the 2013 case.
Nothing happened with that case as it got tossed out because of the statue of limitations. You're trying to argue a negative as a positive, a logical fallacy.
>disgrace MJ's public image
Most of America hated him when he died, and he fled the country because he was a pedophile who got off, the same way OJ got off. Most of Yea Forums hated him when he died, but zoomers decided he was innocent a decade later.
>if you ask (((me)))
>If he has proof then why didn't he show it in the documentary?
Did anyone in the documentary bring up a literal who e-celebrity's counter argument after the fact via a time machine? No, I can't say that they did as far as I recall. There was things like concert videos of Safechuck, and photos of him on trips, and on planes with Jackson, and an audio recording Jackson did with him.
>Razorfist showed a court document in one of the videos.
Yet you can't post the document?
>You're ignoring the fact that he changed one of the most critical parts of his story.
What did he change exactly? On when he felt abused? And do you have quotes?
>So it's grasping at straws to point out Jimmy's story has changed
It wouldn't be if you posted some actual points that discredit him.
I'm kinda surprised people really forget how weird and batshit insane he was in the 10 years leading up to his death, but let's just focus on the pedophilia angle.
>As far as I'm aware Safechuck didn't go to trial
Right, because his 2013 didn't even lift off. Connect the dots
>Then cite them.
Sorry user, I may have burden of proof, but I don't have this pile of info on the go, nor do I wanna argue with you about it.
>Stop arguing facts and agree with e-celebs talking out their ass without citations or any evidence to back it up
You're not arguing facts, you're conflating the words of a guy who changed story and sides before. Why are you giving this guy the benefit of the doubt? some "logic''
>Money aside, what other legal recourse did they have if you can't take a case to criminal court?
Why did he try for a civil suit? Why go after the settlement specialist? Why not go for a criminal charge? Why all this secrecy?
>Nothing happened with that case as it got tossed out because of the statue of limitations. You're trying to argue a negative as a positive, a logical fallacy.
MJ was exonerated. ''Statue limitations'', what a joke, why would he go for secrecy then? What's the reason for a civil, not criminal suit? This guy is playing for settlements.
>Most of America hated him when he died, and he fled the country because he was a pedophile who got off, the same way OJ got off. Most of Yea Forums hated him when he died, but zoomers decided he was innocent a decade later.
Yea, you can thank the media and (((them))) for that. He fled a contry that hated him due to media vultures? oh the humanity. Most of Yea Forums in 2009 were comprised of socially clueless teens, so don't give me this bullshit.
>if you ask (((me)))
figure of speech is now a jewaway? ok.
>(((As far as I'm aware)))
>(((Didin't think as abuse)))
>(((Oy vey think of the children)))
I hope his estate goes after everyone in this fucking charade. I hope they spend their millions ruining their lives.
>let's just focus on the pedophilia angle
Being a boy crazy pedophile who sleeps in bed with boys for weeks straight isn't batshit insane?
>Being a boy crazy pedophile
"Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour."
It's all so tiresome.
>ORANGE MAN BAD
>Right, because his 2013 didn't even lift off. Connect the dots
Connect them fag and post some quotes or something.
>Sorry user, I may have burden of proof, but I don't have this pile of info on the go, nor do I wanna argue with you about it.
pic related
>You're not arguing facts
Says the fag who who cite some sources
>you're conflating the words
Weren't you and some e-celeb conflating Safechuck's statements?
>Why are you giving this guy the benefit
Why do you give Jackson infinite benefit of the doubt despite paying money to as many as 20 children going back to the mid 1980's according to LaToya Jackson
youtu.be
>Why not go for a criminal charge?
Do you lack reading comprehension? I said statue of limitions prevents a criminal case in sex crimes, particularly child sex crimes, because the system expects a child to tell the police with-in a certain time frame between the assault and when they come forward.
>MJ was exonerated
No he was acquitted, two different things. You can be acquitted and still be guilty, the same as OJ Simpson.
>What's the reason for a civil, not criminal suit?
Are you a Euro-cuck and don't understand what the statue of limitations are? Or are you a zoomer with no idea on what the law is?
> the media
No you can thank Jackson sleeping in bed with children, kissing them on their lips, and taking baths with them, and having child porn for that.
> Most of Yea Forums in 2009 were comprised of socially clueless teens
And you aren't a socially clueless teen in 2019? I mean I'm in my 30's now, so I see newfags discover the site every year.
>figure of speech is now a jewaway
Yeah, if you act like one.
>his (((estate))) goes
You mean Sony and Epic. His estate made $400 million just last year and has every incentive to try and cover up the abuse.
>ORANGE MAN BAD
You win, user.
My mistake for beginning a conversation I don't have the energy to finish. But citing LaToya as source is just weak, just so you know. Their fallout is widely known.
Best to you
Look at this beta cuck giving up
heavy metal lawyer sounds like a 2 season tv show that got cancelled in the mid 90s
his own words and the words of his family isn't proof? He said he slept in bed with all of these boys, for weeks on end. And his sister also said it happened and called him a pedophile who was paying off victims to be silent.
why is reddit bringing their racism here to defame an innocent black man after raging about white people hating black men?
>I'm in my 30's
And still using memetics and buzzwords to speak. Ok then, nigger. One way you'll understand. Here's my last (you), wojakman.png, crylaugh.png
the only correct opinion on this faggot
>citing LaToya as source is just weak
Oh I'm sorry, she's not his sister and therefore someone who would know if Michael was or wasn't a child molester? She didn't tell the media how he was cutting checks to victims? And then he cut a check to an accuser? And then years later it came out that he paid off as many as 20 accusers over the years, bankrupting himself?
People don't like LaToya's statements because she makes the whole house of cards collapse.
You're not even replying to the same user
>his own words and the words of his family isn't proof?
No, they aren't. MJ was prosecuted twice and twice was found innocent. It's funny how everyone is quick to point out the fact (and it is a fact) that despite him being or not being a pedophile MJ was at the very least sick in the head but they never extent the courtesy to his family that is noticeably just as fucked up as he was.
>No, they aren't
Explain
>MJ was prosecuted twice
(citation needed) He only went to trial once.
>found innocent
No, it was not guilty. You can be found not guilty but still have committed the crime, such was the case with OJ Simpson or Robert Blake.
>It's funny how everyone is quick to point out the fact (and it is a fact) that despite him being or not being a pedophile
Is this opposite day where having child porn doesn't make you a pedophile?
Latoya was abused by her then husband who forced her to come forward and say that shit because they were getting massive paydays from tabloids and media.
She later came out and apologized after she divorced him. This is all shit you could look up too rather than spouted nearly 30 year old tabloid articles that are now brought up despite the contradictory facts.
>Explain
LaToya is fucked in the head just as much as MJ. She can allege all she wants, she makes all these vile, disgusting accusations but all I hear is salt and mental illness. She never proved what she said.
>He only went to trial once.
I stand corrected on this but what I meant was that he settled once, he was prosecuted once and the second time the case didn't make it to court. So essentially there were two times where a case was made against Jackson where the accusation failed to pin him with any wrongdoing.
>No, it was not guilty.
My, aren't you a pedantic fuck. So when you're found guilty it's actually not innocent? Get the fuck out of here. He wasn't found guilty of any crime. If you want to make the case for it then the onus is on you to prove it.
>Is this opposite day where having child porn doesn't make you a pedophile?
Prove it. When was he found in possession of child pornography? And please don't cite the images already posted in this thread, they were already submitted do court and they were not classified as CP. They were lawfully obtained and you yourself can get a copy if you so desire. This does not prove that Michael Jackson was making children bleed from their gaping assholes.
>they were getting massive paydays from tabloids and media.
Wasn't Jackson's entire family getting massive paydays from siding with Michael? Even today, they made $400 million just last year off of his music.
>She later came out and apologized
Yeah, after she was down on her luck and needed money like the rest. I guess that magically erases her previous statements and means Michael didn't write those checks to 20 boys totaling to over $200 million and bankrupt himself at the end of his life, forcing him to do the "This is It" tour despite being in bad health and needing drugs to function and perform, ultimately killing himself. Silly me.
>This is all shit you could look up
Or you can cite sources when making a claim, like I did in providing the link in the first place.
Also it's funny how Jackson fags whine about tabloids when they always make up false information to justify a belief in Jackson's innocence such as the time they lied after his death, claiming Jordie Chandler had recanted, only for the guy who posted it originally on some random blog to delete him blog after Jackson's faggotty fans started using it as a source.
Wasnt ruled 'innocent' instead of 'not guilty'? I remember hearing that when I was younger and learning that that distinction meant they actually think beyond a reasonable doubt that he didnt do it and not just that there was reasonable doubt he did it which is the standard for not guilty. Is that true?
1/2
>LaToya is fucked in the head just as much as MJ.
Doesn't discount what either of them says, particularly with corroborating evidence such as witnesses and checks. And what Michael Jackson says is of the most importance because it's his guilt or innocence that's being judged.
>She never proved what she said.
Did other boys come forward? She said there were multiple boys? Did Jackson write checks to other victims? She said there were multiple boys over the years. Did Jackson stay married to Lisa Marie Presley? LaToya said he was gay and that he hated women and was only marrying her to make the accusations go away. Gay porn and erotica was found in his home. Debbie Rowe also testified that she and Jackson never had sex, and those who knew Jackson said that Michael asked them questions about sex when he got with Lisa Marie Presley, because he had never had sex before in his mid to late 30's. LaToya called him a pedophile as well, was there or was there not child porn in his home?
> he settled once
Which if you're Michael Jackson, one of the richest most powerful celebrities in the world you could have gone to trial if you were innocent and proven your innocence.
> prosecuted once and the second time the case didn't make it to court.
Other way around, the first time he paid off the accuser's family and the second time it went to court.
> failed to pin
Yet even some of jurors say he was a pedophile >So when you're found guilty it's actually not innocent?
Are you retarded or just pretending. I can cite other examples where people were found not guilty but did the crime, such as Tim Hennis, who was found guilty at his first trial, then not guilty at his second trial, only for years later for the police to DNA test the semen found in the vagina of his murder victim and prove it was him, so they used a legal loop-hole to prosecute him third time in a military court, where he was once again found guilty.
the jackson excuses keep piling up, and once you accept one you have to accept them all. that’s the problem with supporting pedos.
2/2
>then the onus is on you
I've provided numerous items of evidence in thread, such as the child porn evidence, a document from 1994 in which Safechuck said Jackson kissed him on the mouth, as well as statements by LaToya Jackson and by jurors.
>When was he found in possession of child pornography?
During a raid by police in the 90's. I want to say the raid occurred in '94 after the accusations were made.
>please don't cite the images already posted in this thread
I posted them, why can't I cite them?
>submitted do court and they were not classified as CP.
OH! Because it's inconvenient to your argument. My mistake. Except that those were CP and two of the books were produced by three hardcore child molesters involved in a child porn ring, such Hoja Ortil, the photographer on the books, who molested over 800 boys and advocated child love, or the two members of NAMBLA who also worked on the book, one of whome, George St Martin did prison time for raping boys and then got deported back to England.
>lawfully obtained
And? You can lawfully obtain Loli and watch pedo videos on Youtube. It doesn't make it not CP.
>This does not prove that Michael Jackson was making children bleed from their gaping assholes.
They did find bloody sheets and clothing in Jackson's home during the raid
>le everything is nazi
You people are legitimately mentally ill
MJ is guilty
The legal term is just guilty or not guilty. You can be found not guilty and still be responsible, it happens all the time in the legal system, particularly with celebrities and politicians, or cases where there may not be enough evidence for one reason or another. It's all about how the 12 jurors decide, and even then they may vote not guilty but still think you're guilty just for the sake of the defense providing some reasonable doubt, such as was the case with at least one of the jurors in the Jackson case, who said that he voted not guilty despite thinking he was guilty.
If he was exonerated by the legal system in 2005, why is this being brought up again now?
>When I asked Lee at Sundance why he chose to ignore the child-abuse allegations against Jackson in the documentary, he told me, “That was not my choice. That was determined by the record company, the Michael Jackson estate, and the fans. That’s how they arrived at that decision.”
>“They just have a viewpoint of how they want it to be, and that’s their right,” he added. “And going in, I knew I didn’t want to deal with that stuff. It’s just about the music.”
>After pressing Lee more on the abuse allegations against Jackson, Lee argued, “The legacy has been hijacked. The narrative has been hijacked. So things like Bad 25 and Off the Wall are going to take it back. I’m happy I’ve been given the opportunity by Sony, Epic, and the Jackson Estate to combat that. The manifesto from the get-go has been: focus on the music, his artistry, his genius. That’s the bottom line.”
thedailybeast.com
(((Sony))), (((Epic))) and the (((Jackson Estate))), and their useful anti-white puppet, Spike Lee would all love people to forget that Jackson rapes kids.
>he was exonerated
He wasn't exonerated, that's completely different term in the legal system leaving no room for doubt, such as when someone is wrongfully convicted only for the state to find the real killer years later, etc. He was found not guilty, which is different.
>why is this being brought up again now?
Here ya go:
Does this faggot exist just for the sole purpose of being a contrarian?
>Doesn't discount what either of them says
I don't disagree in the least. And this is why I say this: prove it. Don't just "allege" it, go through the proper channels and prove it without a shadow of a doubt. No such thing has happened.
>Which if you're Michael Jackson, one of the richest most powerful celebrities in the world (...)
... woudln't it be cheaper just to settle? Isn't your time much more valuable than a couple of millions and a stressful court procedure and a messy tabloid drama buzzing incessantly? Your logic here is faulty, user. Hindsight is 20/20, of course he shouldn't have settled but he wasn't looking at the long game at the time. It is wrong to presume guilt if the case is settled extrajudicially.
>Yet even some of jurors say he was a pedophile
It doesn't matter if the jury was split or not. He was found 'not guilty' on all 14 charges despite the public being bombarded with accusations and memes and easy jokes at the expense of Jackson for over a decade. A split jury is meaningless in light of these facts, quite the contrary, him overwhelmingly winning the case in spite of having already been tried by media speaks loudly of his innocence.
>I can cite other examples where people were found not guilty but did the crime
I couldn't give less than a fuck, user. Prove it. All that you have provided is hearsay, circumstantial evidence, testimony from unreliable witnesses (read "liars") and nothing more. Prove it.
I'll respond to your part 2 in a minute.
>that’s the problem with supporting pedos.
As opposed to the corporate pedos that are attacking the Jackson Estate for clearly motivated financial reasons? Are YOUR pedos so much better than MY pedo, user?
Isn't it funny how the MJ documentary came right around the time the mueller investigation was supposed to release, and now everyone is just talking about Michael
He is unlistenable. And he probably wonders why his views don't get above 100K (at least on the 2 vids I forced myself to listen all the way through)
Yeah I'm sure the zog machine cooked up a scheme to bring an old conspiracy back to life to distract people from a bombshell event that the media will ignore even though they know they can't just memory hole it.
>I've provided numerous items of evidence in thread
Motherfucker...
>such as the child porn evidence
Possession of child pornography is a criminal offense. Jackson was never found in possession of it.
>a document from 1994 in which Safechuck said Jackson kissed him on the mouth
So what? The document's authenticity has not been verified and even if it's true it is commonplace to kiss children on the lips in a lot of countries. This does not make him a pedophile.
>as well as statements by LaToya Jackson and by jurors
Which I already stated they're not the final nail in the coffin you think they are. They're both almost as unreliable for very extraordinary reasons pertaining to the Jackson's troubled upbringing, MJ's incredible fame and his over a decade long media persecution. You can't just ignore these facts.
>During a raid by police in the 90's. I want to say the raid occurred in '94 after the accusations were made.
>I posted them, why can't I cite them?
If those are the pictures you're reffering to, they are not child pornography unless you're only here basking in the hyperbole of it all. Possession of child pornography is a criminal offense. Jackson was never found guilty of this. Your insistence on this point despite already having been corrected makes you a liar. I understand it inconveniences you very much and your entire fraudulent case against MJ but try acting in good faith.
>And? You can lawfully obtain Loli and watch pedo videos on Youtube. It doesn't make it not CP.
No, you absolutely cannot, you disingenuous cunt.
>They did find bloody sheets and clothing in Jackson's home during the raid
Where any of these proven to be what you're insinuating they are? Let me make a wild guess here.
>woudln't it be cheaper just to settle?
Cheaper? How much did he pay Jordie Chandler around $20 million? Surely it can't cost $20 million to hire a defense team can it? I'd say it's more an unknown, unknown, that it's more like speculation on whether or not it'd be cheaper. It'd be faster sure, but I don't know if I buy it being a cheaper route, particularly with one's reputation on the line. He did lose a bunch of his sponsorship deals such as with Pepsi after the accusations, so going to court would certainly salvage your reputation unless there was something you didn't want the public to know.
>It is wrong to presume guilt if the case is settled extrajudicially.
For the most part I agree, but I consider a case by case situation. I actually found it a weak argument in the Cosby case and didn't find his initial accuser to be very credible, which was why they padded the accusations with those of other women who came forward after the fact at the re-trial.
>overwhelmingly winning the case in spite of having already been tried by media speaks loudly of his innocence.
It doesn't though, being found not guilty does not necessarily mean innocence as stated here: IF anything Robson's changing statements means his testimony in the trial then should be disregarded, and if this were a criminal appeal it would be grounds for a new trial, since some jurors said he was the whole reason they voted not guilty.
>Prove it.
I did.
>hearsay
Statements by Jackson, sister and his accusers are direct evidence.
>circumstantial evidence
Even DNA evidence is considered circumstantial under the legal system, but I'm willing to bet you didn't know that. The CP would be consider circumstantial, because he's an accused pedophile.
> testimony from unreliable witnesses
Who is Jordie Chandler who Jackson settled with after Jordie drew a picture of the spots on his dick, which he was shown to have at his autopsy, just like Chandler claimed.
Don't you mean Yikes, silly goy.
1/2
>Jackson was never found in possession of it.
Except that he was. Just that websites like (((huffingtonPost))) called it "art" because conservative websites like Breitbart were bringing it up. >So what? The document's authenticity has not been verified
Except that it has.
dailymail.co.uk
>both almost as unreliable
>the jurors are unreliable
Then you claiming being found not guilty is the same as innocent is non-argument then.
>decade long media persecution
Only after he was publicly accused in 1993, and admitted to sleeping in bed with children such as Chandler for weeks on end and wouldn't even admit to a prosecution lawyer that he knew Chandler despite his name on a legal document with Chandler's name, link to the video:
youtube.com
>You can't just ignore these facts.
I'm not, but for some reason you seem to be, such as the case of the CP or Safechuck saying Jackson kissed him on the lips in 1994. For some reason you give him infinite benefit of the doubt to an unreasonable extent like the Chappelle Show
youtu.be
> they are not child pornography
They were made by child pornographers, convicted child rapists, and child lovers. What makes them not child porn? Hajo Ortil's name pops up all over pedophile websites when you google the name, such as one about "greek" style love between men and boys, and pedophile wiki called "boywiki". In searches it says that his "art" photos were confiscated by Dutch police and destroyed upon his death. And by his own admission the photos featured his victims: OVER 800 of them.
>despite already having been corrected makes you a liar
>I can't argue against it so you're a liar
That's sound reasoning for a fucktard.
2/2
>No, you absolutely cannot, you disingenuous cunt.
You can buy loli mangas online right this very second. You can also even go into Barnes and Noble and buy Dance in the Vampire Bund and online on amazon
amazon.com
>Where any of these proven to be what you're insinuating they are?
Yeah, in the 90's when he paid off Jordie Chandler to make the pedo investigation stop
>Except that he was.
Dude, he was never found in possession of illegal pornography, stop pressing the point. You're being incredibly disingenuous.
>Except that it has.
You skipped the second part. EVEN if the document is found to be reliable, kissing a child on the lips is not proof of being a pedophile. I'm not sure where you're from but there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. You're imputing malice on the act because it fits your narrative and nothing more.
>Then you claiming being found not guilty is the same as innocent is non-argument then.
Not exactly. I will repeat myself: having been found not guilty despite the manufactured public bias is more of a testament to his innocent than being found guilty by a split jury.
>Only after he was publicly accused in 1993
What do you mean "only"? He settled in '93 and people took it as a sign of guilt.
>such as the case of the CP or Safechuck saying Jackson kissed him
Again with the hyperbole, he was never found in the posession of child pornography, stop being disingenuous. Formerly Safesneed has already perjured himself and had to wait for the statute of limitations to expire to try again for the other team. He's a liar and you should take all of his statements with extreme scrutiny instead of taking them at face value which is what you're doing. Even if you take it at face value, there is nothing wrong with kissing a child on the lips. It's perfectly normal except if it's a very creepy dude like MJ doing it. Unless he's filthy rich then it's okay again. Don't be a hypocrite.
>They were made by child pornographers, convicted child rapists, and child lovers.
Genuine question: so?
>What makes them not child porn?
Maybe the fact that they are not classified as such, can be purchased lawfully and being found in the possession of said items is not punishable by law? Come the fuck on. MJ has no CP, stop using modern euphemisms and calling everything child pornography when it clearly isn't. You're lying.
remember me, razorfist?
The dick this match though.
If the dick don't fit you must acquit.
>You can buy loli mangas online right this very second.
Again with the doublespeak. If you can acquire it lawfully, it is not CP. Can I get this point across your thick fucking skull? It is not ILLEGAL, it is not classified as child pornography.
>Yeah, in the 90's when he paid off Jordie Chandler to make the pedo investigation stop
I honestly don't know if you're trolling. He paid of Jordie Chandler because he wanted to avoid wasting time and going through a merry process and through all the media rigamarole. If you can not understand the clear rationale behind it other than presuming MJ's guilt, I really don't know what to tell you.
*didn't match
They freak out about it because they secretly get off on it and feel guilty. No normal person looks at those pictures and feels anything. I have plenty of embarrassing pictures being half naked when I was a kid that my mom kept. For most of human history it was normal for people to be naked a good amount of the time. Olympic sports were a celebration of the naked male body.
>all these people who don’t think Jackson did it
Have you guys watched the entire doco? It’s pretty convincing, even when viewed through a sceptical lens. There’s a mountain of evidence that forms a clear, singular narrative, and the only defence I’ve heard is that the accusers are looking for money, which is a weak defence when you think about it
>anecdotal evidence
>deceptive editing
>remember me, razorfist?
Yeah, the guy who couldn't argue for shit so he had to resort to spew more profanities than his guest and interrupt him at every given opportunity so that he can never follow a train of thought. Shit I don't even like razorfist but to think that was a decent debate or that it was even held in good faith is just stupid.
>2 self discredited people
>pretty convincing
Hello, fellow Yea Forums board poster! Hahah, yeah, what a hella doco, amirite? I was thoroughly convinced by the evidence presented! I mean, sure, I was already certain that he was a pedophile because of years of memes but now I'm an expert on the topic because I saw tears. Thanks Jews! You're the best chosen people ever. :-)
sociopath sarcastic prick
>he was never found in possession of illegal
That's why I referred to it as "legal" child porn. The same way loli and youtube ASMR and Gymnastic videos, and challenges, etc., are legal.
> stop pressing the point
>STOP PUTTING HOLES IN MY CLAIMS
No
>You skipped the second part. EVEN if
You can stop BTFO yourself any time now
> kissing a child on the lips is not proof of being a pedophile
Do you let 35-year-old strangers kiss your son on the lips?
>there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.
t. Card carrying member of NAMBLA
> I will repeat myself
You do an awful lot of that, yet say nothing.
>despite the manufactured
(citation needed) Personal opinion from a pedophile apologist isn't fact with nothing to back it up. Even his sister told the press in the 90's he did it.
>What do you mean "only"?
His sister said he was being accused since the mid-1980's.
>people took it as a sign of guilt.
Yeah, in light of the evidence it looked and does look like he was paying to make it all go away, because of things like his CP collection, and admissions of sleeping in bed with boys and inappropriate relationships with only boys, doing things like having 8 hour phone calls that lasted all day with little boys and setting up a pedo dreamland at his house with ferris wheels and shit, going beyond the pedophile who owns an ice cream truck.
>he was never found in the posession of child pornography
Well that's where you're wrong kid. Explain how it's not child porn, I'll wait.
>had to wait for the statute of limitations to expire to try again for the other team.
From what I recall only Wade Robson testified at the trial, not Safechuck. Safechuck said Jackson asked him, but he told him no.
>He's a liar
Because he hurts your claims, much like the CP and the kiss on the lips
>Genuine question: so?
Because you were so adamant it wasn't child porn when it was child porn.
>Maybe the fact that they are not classified as such
Like Russian child models? Or ASMR?
It did match though
vanityfair.com
> If you can acquire it lawfully, it is not CP.
So loli isn't CP then? Child model videos and photos aren't CP? ASMR videos and challenge videos aren't CP? Just because it's technically legal and you can view it, it's not CP?
> get this point across your thick fucking skull
You sound fat and autistic
youtu.be
> because he wanted to avoid wasting time
What is taking the word of a man who had child porn in his home.
>I really don't know
You don't know much
Since it has become more than clear that you're just arguing in bad faith, I'll present you this pity (You) for the two posts. You've done all the mental gymnastics you could possibly have, I would only be repeating myself.
Have a good one.
I believe you, don’t worry they do too. Michael had a problem you didn’t. I hope someway somehow by sharing this it will help you move on. Michael Jackson is no longer living I try really hard not to speak about them it’s not fair they can’t defend themselves, I just hope you know you can let it go, and everything will be alright no one will ever be hurt again in this way anyways. Maybe we will have a lesson we can learn and we can listen and we can judge even though money is always involved when it come to judgment God bless.
>arguing in bad faith
Says the tard who can't explain the child porn or if they'd let Michael Jackson kiss their son on the lips. You shift goal posts so many times there's nowhere else to go quite frankly.
>mental gymnastics
Says the tard who refuses to explain how the CP in Jackson's house is not CP.
>BUT IF IT'S TECHNICALLY LEGAL LIKE LOLI IT'S NOT CP
You were never able to explain away why a book of kids dicks isn't child porn
>Have a good one.
Thank you and good night
based. destroying pedo enablers is God’s work, user. never again can we allow a recurrence of the jackson estate war of mass delusion to occur.
>>child porn in Jackson's home
over and over again the Santa Barbara police report says that what they found in Jackson's house was NOT child pornography
>NOT child pornography
Not under the law, the same way loli, ASMR, and other youtube pedophilia isn't criminal to have, but it was indeed child porn despite that pedos wish to label it as "art". Explain how those books made by convicted child rapists and sex offenders were not child porn. I'll wait.
Based
>That's why I referred to it as "legal" child porn. The same way
Dude, its all real IN YOUR MIND.
I feel sorry for you, I really do.
>youtube pedophilia
you mean people wearing swimsuits in the swimming pool? playing on the beach? doing sommersaults in their bedroom? All porn.
And when you go into a gym locker room? That's a strip club, baby! A "technically" legal strip club, but you know, same thing.
>you mean people wearing swimsuits in the swimming pool? playing on the beach? doing sommersaults in their bedroom? All porn.
So the dozen or so cunny threads at 1am every night on/ tv/ are not about looking at little girls in suggestive poses in various states of undress? And videos of things like "popsicle" challenges, "lolipop" and "sucker" challenges have no nefarious undertone where the reason behind them isn't for pedophiles to beat off on youtube?
>yeah, technically it's not CP but you see under my own definition it's CP
>yeah now debunk that, atheist
lol
If it were CP Michael would've immediately been arrested and charged, however both the local police and FBI seem to have just let it slide. Can you explain how that happened?
I'm still waiting for someone to address how the CP doesn't count as CP, outside it being labeled as "art' in the 1960's, which was a popular con done by child porn rings during the 60's and 70's. They even busted one in Michigan that may have murdered 4 kids that were kidnapped from a wealthy area, which remains unsolved and the guy who ran the porn ring fled the country and died in Europe living a comfortable life and still produced child porn even after fleeing.
Wait wtf i thought NAMBLA was a made up thing from South Park what the abdolute fuck
Have you thought up an explanation for how pictures of kids dicks are not child porn?
>If it were CP Michael would've immediately been arrested and charged
No, the police let Pee Wee Herman plead it down when he got busted with similar child porn. Reubens even spins the arrest mentioning how he technically had nothing illegal.
>In March 2004, child pornography charges were dropped in exchange for Reubens' guilty plea to a lesser charge. For the next three years, he was required to register his address with the sheriff's office and he could not be in the company of minors without the permission of a parent or legal guardian.[27] Reubens later stated that he was a collector of erotica, including films, muscle magazines and a sizable collection of mostly homosexual vintage erotica,[2] such as photographic studies of teen nudes.[27] Reubens said that what the city attorney's office viewed as pornography, he considered to be innocent art and that what they described as people underage engaged in masturbation or oral copulation was, in fact, a judgmental point of view of the nudes that Reubens described as people "one hundred percent not" performing sexual acts.
en.wikipedia.org
Notice Pee Wee used the "It's art!" defense. With Jackson, he was so powerful and had so many lawyers that they didn't even try charging him for CP.
Wait no more:
>The Miller test for obscenity includes the following criteria: (1) whether ‘the average person, applying contemporary community standards’ would find that the work, ‘taken as a whole,’ appeals to ‘prurient interest’ (2) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law, and (3) whether the work, ‘taken as a whole,’ lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
Jeffrey Jones also got busted for taking nude photos of underage boys and claiming they were "art' after a teen said Jones tried to get him to pose nude at 14. He's now a registered sex-offender because he wasn't powerful enough to get away with the "art' defense.
en.wikipedia.org
>In 2002, Jones was arrested for possession of child pornography and accused by a 17-year-old boy of soliciting him to pose for nude photographs.[32] He pleaded no contest to a felony charge of soliciting a minor, as the boy was 14 when the offense first occurred.[33] At the same time, the misdemeanor charge of possession of child pornography was dropped. His attorney emphasized that there was no allegation of improper physical contact. His punishment was five years probation, counseling, and the requirement to register as a sex offender.[34]
Pee Wee Herman's house was raided in connection with Jones', but it's unclear what his connection was, yet not surprisingly Pee Wee also had child porn.
By those standards it's porn. The average person would certainly view "Boys will be Boys," as porn, and taken as whole as it says, would have to include who manufactured it as well, three major pedophiles. And what serious artistic value does it offer? In the 60's it skated as artistic because of the nudist movement and the general naivety of the era. The Dutch police even confiscated and destroyed the entire art collection of the photographer on the book, Hajo Ortil.
From your own link:
The district attorney looked at Reubens' collection and computer and found no grounds for bringing any felony charges against him, while the city attorney, Rocky Delgadillo brought misdemeanor charges against Reubens on the last day allowed by the statute.[75] Reubens was represented by Hollywood criminal defense lawyer Blair Berk.[76] In December he pleaded not guilty through Berk, who also complained that the city attorney failed to turn over evidence to the defense, which City Attorney Richard Katz countered that prosecutors were not required to do until after arraignment, after which they did; neither side disclosed the contents.[77]
In March 2004, child pornography charges were dropped in exchange for Reubens' guilty plea to a lesser charge.
Rubens was never convicted of child pornography, and no jury ever reviewed those charges, which were MISDEMEANOR charges
lmao at this dude's schtick
>Have you thought up an explanation for how pictures of kids dicks are not child porn?
sure if you're an artist having reference is nice. just because it floats your boat doesn't mean that normal people can't have a legitimate use to it. also protip if it has an isbn it's not cp lol
Notice how I said:
>No, the police let Pee Wee Herman plead it down when he got busted with similar child porn.
You'd realize this if you weren't rushing to defend kiddie diddlers. Reubens had vintage child porn passing as "art" from the 60's the same as Jackson and just like Jackson it was found during a raid in connection with a sexual abuse allegation(Jeffrey Jones).
Weird how that works that someone who is accused of being a pedophile happens to have books with naked kids in their house. Weird... really makes you think.
>eceleb shit
>linking directly to jewtube
kys
You don't think intent by the persons who manufactured a book pertinent under that legal definition? Do you believe these three child molesters who made the book intended for the photos of kids dicks to expand your mind or to expand your dong? A question you'd certainly have to answer. Many of the CP laws though were enacted after "Boys will be Boys" was printed however.
Unironically, if you have strong opinions on this topic, those videos are a good introduction.
>after which they did; neither side disclosed the contents.[77]
you don't know what Reubens had
When the books were made there were next to no child porn laws. The books came out in the 60's and the government only started cracking down on CP in the 70's, because people were making CP and calling it "art' books. That's why much of the vintage CP books and nudist books were from the 60's and before.
>isbn
Not an argument
You can literally hop on amazon an buy a copy. And there probably are other venues where you can acquire a digital copy. Your false moralism means nothing when it comes to the legality.
He says they were vintage "art" books and erotica in the link. In interviews he also tries to claim it was solely the Rob Lowe sex tape and vintage gay mags that the police were picking on him for for no reason.
Great rebuttal! You seem intelligent!
The fact that they lied about it as boys and as adults came clean about it makes so much more sense than them telling the truth as kids and then deciding as adults to lie. Kids lie about stuff when they’re scared and confused about the consequences, something as big as this lots of kids would lie about and hide, particularly thanks to their love for Michael. The excuse that they want money is definitely not impossible but it just seems illogical for grown men to do that given the fallout and backlash they’re bound to receive. Also the amount of archival footage and witness testimony that corroborated the narrative was pretty overwhelming. What is the counterargument aside from “they want money, only two stories are told, and documentaries are inherently biased”?
you state
>only started cracking down on CP in the 70's,
your image states
>the mid-80s saw the first wave
you literally cannot read common English.
And yes, making "little" mistakes like that matters when you are trying to justify your own presumptions
>you can buy and read it so it's not CP
>you can buy and read loli so it's not CP
>you can look at child models on youtube and instagram so it's not CP
>you can watch challenge videos so it's not CP
>you can watch 8-year-old Ukrainian gymnists doing stretches on youtube so it's not CP
>you can watch little girls in swim suits on youtube so it's not CP
>you can look at little girls posing in swim suits and underwear so it's not CP
You seem upset.
Now known as Safesneed
Yep. Congratulation, you got it. That is literally how it goes.
>you literally cannot read
My image says:
>Child pornography laws were practically nonexistent before 1970.
>making "little" mistakes like that matters when you are trying to justify your own presumptions
Yes making mistakes like this matters when you're defending pedophilia.
I know. That's what pedos believe.
>"It's not CP, though it really is that's why I'm time stamping when the little girls in the videos spread their legs or make moaning noses, or when you can see a little too much of their body, just for artistic purposes of course.lol
>He says they were vintage "art" books
Wink Wink Nudge Nudge Know what I Mean Know what I Mean
Right, you are the punch line to a classic satire sketch
it makes sense that there weren't any laws against it if you couldnt distribute video very easily so there was no incentive
You're quite dense, aren't you?
Well what do you think these vintage "art" books contained that made the police charge him in the first place? Whatever could it be? Paul Reubens even admits there were underage books in the books, claiming he bought them in bulk and didn't know they were there.
spoony black?
Nah it’s just an interesting discussion. Just keen to hear your defence of him, you haven’t really made any points
>Paul Reubens even admits there were underage
No he didn't, he said whatever they found to charge him with, he could not be held responsible for since he did not know thew were part of a bulk purchase.
>Being an avid collector, Reubens had often purchased bulk lots, and one of his vintage magazine dealers declared that "there's no way" he could have known the content of each page in the publications he bought and that he recalled Reubens asking for "physique magazines, vintage 1960s material, but not things featuring kids".[2]
You do this over and over again, in every one of these threads
According to old newspaper stories from the period you used to be able to buy magazines and books all over the place and they sold them often in porn shops. You even could watch movies of children actually having sex in the 70's and it was legal.
>These pre-pubescent girls, sometimes photgraphed with Teddy bears and other playthings of the young, appear in a magazine called Lollitots which can be purchased openly for $7.50 at "adult" book stores in the District and across the country.
>While Lollitots shocks the uninitiated, the magazine is, in fact, mild compared to the films projected in "adult" book store peep shows and to magazines which display children as young as 7 engaged in sex acts with other children and adults.
>A search for these children, their parents, the photographers, film makers and publishers is, more often than not, fruitless and frustrating. It leads into a subculture of child porn and prostitution - a lucrative twin industry which, according to law enforcement officials across the country, is proliferating.
>Civil libertarians argue among themselves whether the selling of child pornography material goes beyond the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment. Psychologists disagree on whether a sexually exploited child is psychologically damaged, or whether the sexually disturbed are so aroused by such material as to commit sex crimes against children.
his best content
>Reubens had often purchased bulk lots, and one of his vintage magazine dealers declared that "there's no way" he could have known the content
He also said:
>Reubens said that what the city attorney's office viewed as pornography, he considered to be innocent art and that what they described as people underage engaged in masturbation or oral copulation was, in fact, a judgmental point of view of the nudes that Reubens described as people "one hundred percent not" performing sexual acts.
Why would he say the following if there were no children:
>"one hundred percent not" performing sexual acts.
Why would he emphasize that it was innocent "art"?
ITT: defenders of a black weirdo that fuck children
yah well this might be the point of walking away from Yea Forums forever. god damn you retards
t. cunny poster Madthad is that you?
Nah, pham, I've taken the redpill. I only fap to women that *look* like children.
>>Why would he say "one hundred percent not" performing sexual acts.
Because, they were, 100%, not performing sexual acts.
Is this how he finally gets his exposure on Yea Forums? He's been shilling his channel on Yea Forums for years and nobody ever took him seriously. But now I guess he's found his way in and we'll see stupid RF threads everyday now. Yea Forums is going to end up being "my fav shitty youtube commentator mocks pop culture" the board.
Why would the police say it was children masturbating and performing oral sex then?
He's shilled a lot on /pol/ since he started defending Jackson. Invariably someone posts his videos in all Jackson threads as if it's the be all end all final truth and final answer to everything and anything on Jackson for some odd reason. Yea Forums gets a lot of /pol/ overflow for some reason as well.
>GUYS! It's not true! KnuckledraggerMcfucktard28 made a series of youtube videos and he says from his personal opinion with no sources, that Jackson is innocent!
>Also it was the jews!
it's ok user we have the power here on Yea Forums to turn them into incognito Spoony threads
The fuck is up with this newfaggotry? Yea Forums has been eceleb central since I remember it. Also, this isn't Yea Forums, it was never common to see people sperging out about youtube content since shills popularized the term eceleb. Razorfist was always a Yea Forums meme but when he does good content he does good content, what the fuck is there to cry about? Also, newfaggots who don't understand why this board has such a big crossover with /pol/ must have made it here months after the Weinstein scandal.
Because police lie, imply, exaggerate, "over-charge", as part of the "adversary" philosophy of law in the country.
>Also, newfaggots who don't understand why this board has such a big crossover with /pol/ must have made it here months after the Weinstein scandal.
I'm in my 30's and been here since the site was started. And the only crossover is occasional celebrity, but the same same could be argued with Yea Forums material and Yea Forums material, yet it isn't flooded non-stop with /pol/ shit all the time.
They just on a whim happen to pick on poor defenseless millionaires who happen to be affiliated with child predators like Jeffrey Jones, and just so happen to find 1960's child porn.
Keep in mind back in the '60's you could buy magazines like Lollitots which was sold only in porn shops but argued to be art back in the 70's:
>Presumably, since Lollitots is distributed solely by Parliament News in California and was available over the counter at a 14th and H Streets NW "adult" bookstore, some interstate transportation took place. But Wilens says, "You have to actually prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Parliament indeed shipped that particular edition of that magazine - packaged and delivered it to a carrier and in fact carried and delivered it to an address in a particular state." Records of such shipments are hard to find. "We can make a case from time to time," Wilens said, "but it takes a monumental effort, and resources are low."
>In the California case, Parliament News' lawyer, Stanley Fleischman, of the Beverly Hills firm of Fleischman, Brown, Weston & Rhode, plans to argue that Lollitots is not obscene and therefore is covered by the First Amendment. "It is simple nudity, nothing more. For something to be obscene [in California, unlike the District] there has to be sexual activity."