Elmo quits 'Sesame Street' second man makes underage sex claims

[CRASSUS]

Slew always says, "there's nothing like a soft puppet on your peepee."

Tuesday, a lawsuit was filed in federal court in New York charging Clash with sexual abuse of a second youth. The lawsuit alleges that Cecil Singleton, then 15 and now an adult, was persuaded by Clash to meet for sexual encounters.

The lawsuit seeks damages in excess of $5 million.

It was more than Sesame Street could stomach.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2012/11/...

[Bridgework]

CRASSUS wrote:

Slew always says, "there's nothing like a soft puppet on your peepee."
Tuesday, a lawsuit was filed in federal court in New York charging Clash with sexual abuse of a second youth. The lawsuit alleges that Cecil Singleton, then 15 and now an adult, was persuaded by Clash to meet for sexual encounters.
The lawsuit seeks damages in excess of $5 million.
It was more than Sesame Street could stomach.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2012/11/...

He is suing before a criminal investigation?

[Fred]

Great investment of tax dollars supporting the child molesters on Sesame Street.

[Bridgework]

Fred wrote:

Great investment of tax dollars supporting the child molesters on Sesame Street.

Just because someone says it happened, doesn't mean it happened. Like I said, why sue before a criminal investigation? The only answer is a quick pay day to go away.

[CRASSUS]

Bridgework wrote:

<quoted text>
Just because someone says it happened, doesn't mean it happened. Like I said, why sue before a criminal investigation? The only answer is a quick pay day to go away.

No one is accusing you. You're puppet show can continue. If the kids tell on you it doesn't mean it happened. Pervert!

[Bridgework]

CRASSUS wrote:

<quoted text>No one is accusing you. You're puppet show can continue. If the kids tell on you it doesn't mean it happened. Pervert!

So every time someone is accused of rape it is the truth? I bet the old Duke Lacross team would disagree. Bernie Fine would most likely also disagree.

[Fred]

CRASSUS wrote:

<quoted text>No one is accusing you. You're puppet show can continue. If the kids tell on you it doesn't mean it happened. Pervert!

Maybe "under the bridgework"?

[CRASSUS]

Bridgework wrote:

<quoted text>
So every time someone is accused of rape it is the truth? I bet the old Duke Lacross team would disagree. Bernie Fine would most likely also disagree.

If the perp is black it's usually the truth.

[CRASSUS]

Fred wrote:

Great investment of tax dollars supporting the child molesters on Sesame Street.

There's a reason they're known as "The Puppet Masters."

[Bridgework]

CRASSUS wrote:

<quoted text>There's a reason they're known as "The Puppet Masters."

Actually they use muppets.

[Bridgework]

CRASSUS wrote:

<quoted text>If the perp is black it's usually the truth.

What about when the accuser goes directly for a civil claim of $5,000,000 before a criminal investigation?

[CRASSUS]

Bridgework wrote:

<quoted text>
What about when the accuser goes directly for a civil claim of $5,000,000 before a criminal investigation?

That's why it's called a "civil claim." There sure seems to be a lot of freaks out there who take jobs just to have access to kids so they can molest them. Teachers, coaches , priest's, Michael Jackson's and now puppet masters. This perv should be in the slammer.

[Bridgework]

CRASSUS wrote:

<quoted text>That's why it's called a "civil claim." There sure seems to be a lot of freaks out there who take jobs just to have access to kids so they can molest them. Teachers, coaches , priest's, Michael Jackson's and now puppet masters. This perv should be in the slammer.

Someone comes out of the blue and sues for $5,000,000 and that is all you need to know to condemn someone?

[cantmakeitup]

Bridgework wrote:

<quoted text>
What about when the accuser goes directly for a civil claim of $5,000,000 before a criminal investigation?

They shouldn't be able to file a civil claim unless there is a criminal conviction or else the burden of proof should be the same.

[Miss Piggy]

Bridgework wrote:

<quoted text>
What about when the accuser goes directly for a civil claim of $5,000,000 before a criminal investigation?

The first accuser was paid a six figure settlement to retract his statement.
Once the claim goes public there is no reason for a fast, easy payday.

[CRASSUS]

Bridgework wrote:

<quoted text>
Someone comes out of the blue and sues for $5,000,000 and that is all you need to know to condemn someone?

That's up to the jury. This is a second underage accuser. If the claims are false the kid should be charged. Why are you defending a possible child molester?

[Bridgework]

Miss Piggy wrote:

<quoted text>The first accuser was paid a six figure settlement to retract his statement.
Once the claim goes public there is no reason for a fast, easy payday.

He also had been arrested for armed robbery and writing bad checks. His current occupation is "struggling male model". The only proof he apparently has was an email written to him well after he was 18. Maybe he recanted his recant because he is just after more money (after all the other guy wants $5,000,000)? This is not enough to pass judgment.

The second accuser came out after the first and his civil statement on why he waited was "did not become aware that he had suffered adverse psychological and emotional effects from Kevin Clash’s sexual acts and conduct until 2012.”

[Amused Slew]

Bridgework wrote:

<quoted text>
He also had been arrested for armed robbery and writing bad checks. His current occupation is "struggling male model". The only proof he apparently has was an email written to him well after he was 18. Maybe he recanted his recant because he is just after more money (after all the other guy wants $5,000,000)? This is not enough to pass judgment.
The second accuser came out after the first and his civil statement on why he waited was "did not become aware that he had suffered adverse psychological and emotional effects from Kevin Clash’s sexual acts and conduct until 2012.”

Sorry, the right goes straight to judgement on every liberal leaning program/cause... Miss the memo, moron ???

[Capt Obvious]

Fred wrote:

Great investment of tax dollars supporting the child molesters on Sesame Street.

Uh, even if the claims are true, Sesame Street is a money maker not a money taker. Big time money maker.

[Miss Piggy]

Capt Obvious wrote:

<quoted text>
Uh, even if the claims are true, Sesame Street is a money maker not a money taker. Big time money maker.

You're absolutely right, Sesame Street would do just fine with out government funding. And with the huge deficit of 1.3 trillion, entertainment is a good place to start the cutting!