Profile of a Pedophile: Does Michael ...

Profile of a Pedophile: Does Michael Jackson fit?

There are 64791 comments on the crime.about.com story from Dec 9, 2008, titled Profile of a Pedophile: Does Michael Jackson fit?. In it, crime.about.com reports that:

Pedophiles can be anyone -- old or young, rich or poor, educated or uneducated, non-professional or professional, and of any race. However, pedophiles often demonstrate similar characteristics, but these are merely indicators and it should not be assumed that individuals with these characteristics are pedophiles. But knowledge of these characteristics coupled with questionable behavior can be used as an alert that someone may be a pedophile.

[The part about Stockholm Syndrome is VERY interesting indeed... -ek.]

Join the discussion below, or Read more at crime.about.com.

“Depravity abounds...”

Since: Mar 13

Orlando, FL

#66911 Sep 24, 2013
FOREVER MICHAEL wrote:
I dont care what people say that man means so much to me
This just proved that you are biased and close minded. So you really REALLY like him, that means you won't even consider any negative evidence. You are the one acting brainwashed.

The thing is, not everyone has some weird fetish for the guy... so we aren't all as eager as you are to cut him some slack and give him the benefit of the doubt.
Zoop

Westerville, OH

#66914 Sep 24, 2013
persephone wrote:
<quoted text> Except that he wasn't a stranger to the boy, it was in the privacy of his own home in which the boy was a guest, it was a book which by no stretch of the imagination could be construed as 'erotic'; the book probably contained valuable information about the realities of the human sexual experience and the diseases which can result from it.
Leave to to a clueless hater to come up with a preposterous scenario in which viewing an anatomical illustration in a book is 'inappropriate' for a teenager.
Are you a pedo?
persephone

Sunnyvale, CA

#66915 Sep 24, 2013
Zoop wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you a pedo?
No, are you?
persephone

Sunnyvale, CA

#66916 Sep 24, 2013
Zoop wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you a pedo?
And do you think books with anatomical illustrations are pornographic?
persephone

Sunnyvale, CA

#66917 Sep 24, 2013
TwistedHubby wrote:
<quoted text>
This just proved that you are biased and close minded. So you really REALLY like him, that means you won't even consider any negative evidence. You are the one acting brainwashed.
The thing is, not everyone has some weird fetish for the guy... so we aren't all as eager as you are to cut him some slack and give him the benefit of the doubt.
Being biased and closed-minded works both ways--the same could be said about you, for instance.

Are you capable of being able to accept that much of the so-called 'evidence' was flimsy at best, and did not hold up well under closer scrutiny and cross-examination?

Are you able to concede that it's possible to think MJ was innocent without always attributing it to celebrity worship?
persephone

Sunnyvale, CA

#66918 Sep 24, 2013
Len is Disgusted wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you honestly not see something wrong with a grown man who has a child alone in his condo and shows him a book filled with nude men and women and discusses STD's with the child? Does anyone in your family, including you, do this? I hope not.
Then again, you also don't think there is anything wrong with a naked man keeping a gawky teenager in his bedroom when he steps out of the shower and walks into his bedroom where the child is.
Absolutely ridiculous to imply that an adult being honest and forthright about the reality of STDs is 'inappropriate' behavior.
ERIC CARTMAN

Everett, WA

#66919 Sep 24, 2013
And who's job is it to teach children about sex. Michael jacksons? No. How would anyone of You think think if your brother or neighbor handed your child the book the joy of sex. The karma sultra. Everything you always wanted to know about sex but were afraid to ask. or a playboy mag ? My guess would be. not to happy. Then why is it okay for a self apointed educator pop singer who claimed to be a virgin up to his middle 20s to talk to children who he wasn't related to whatsoever about sex?
persephone

Sunnyvale, CA

#66920 Sep 24, 2013
ERIC CARTMAN wrote:
And who's job is it to teach children about sex. Michael jacksons? No. How would anyone of You think think if your brother or neighbor handed your child the book the joy of sex. The karma sultra. Everything you always wanted to know about sex but were afraid to ask. or a playboy mag ? My guess would be. not to happy. Then why is it okay for a self apointed educator pop singer who claimed to be a virgin up to his middle 20s to talk to children who he wasn't related to whatsoever about sex?
Books like that are available at the public library and bookstores; there are no rules preventing teenagers from looking at such books in either location.
ERIC CARTMAN

Tacoma, WA

#66921 Sep 24, 2013
Once again avoiding my question. Lol.---- What I expected

“at yet more f'loonspin”

Since: Aug 11

I live far away from f'loons

#66922 Sep 24, 2013
ERIC CARTMAN wrote:
Once again avoiding my question. Lol.---- What I expected
Pedophone also won't answer why a gawky teenager would be in the bedroom when a naked man walks from his shower into it.

“at yet more f'loonspin”

Since: Aug 11

I live far away from f'loons

#66923 Sep 24, 2013
persephone wrote:
<quoted text> Absolutely ridiculous to imply that an adult being honest and forthright about the reality of STDs is 'inappropriate' behavior.
*sniff, sniff*

I smell NAMBLA.

A grown man is not the person who should be showing and child a book filled with graphic images of men and women to an unrelated child, and then telling the child about STD's.

When I was in school, my parents had to sign a release form in order for me to attend sex education, which was done under carefully supervised circumstances.

“Depravity abounds...”

Since: Mar 13

Orlando, FL

#66926 Sep 25, 2013
persephone wrote:
<quoted text>Are you able to concede that it's possible to think MJ was innocent without always attributing it to celebrity worship?
Oh well sure. But see I was talking with FOREVER MICHAEL and those comments were directly for them.

Are you saying there isn't any celebrity worship going on in FOREVER's head and that they are using logical and rational thought (untainted by emotion) to arrive at the conclusion that MJ was innocent?

See it really hurts the credibility of non-worshiping MJ defenders when you have a loon like FOREVER making it seems like all his defenders are just nuts.
ERIC CARTMAN

Enumclaw, WA

#66927 Sep 25, 2013
I also hope the verdict goes in favor of AEG and not the jacksons. I am not on either side with this case but the family doesn't deserve a billion dollars niether
persephone

Sunnyvale, CA

#66928 Sep 25, 2013
Len is Disgusted wrote:
<quoted text>
Pedophone also won't answer why a gawky teenager would be in the bedroom when a naked man walks from his shower into it.
What is this obsession about naked men and showers and teenagers?

Normal healthy adults shouldn't be this obsessed with the subject of nudity.
persephone

Sunnyvale, CA

#66929 Sep 25, 2013
Len is Disgusted wrote:
<quoted text>
*sniff, sniff*
I smell NAMBLA.
A grown man is not the person who should be showing and child a book filled with graphic images of men and women to an unrelated child, and then telling the child about STD's.
When I was in school, my parents had to sign a release form in order for me to attend sex education, which was done under carefully supervised circumstances.
Do you really think that teenagers can't and don't find sex education in all sorts of venues, from public libraries, to books in other people's homes, not to mention what's on TV?
persephone

Sunnyvale, CA

#66930 Sep 25, 2013
TwistedHubby wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh well sure. But see I was talking with FOREVER MICHAEL and those comments were directly for them.
Are you saying there isn't any celebrity worship going on in FOREVER's head and that they are using logical and rational thought (untainted by emotion) to arrive at the conclusion that MJ was innocent?
See it really hurts the credibility of non-worshiping MJ defenders when you have a loon like FOREVER making it seems like all his defenders are just nuts.
I've been accused of being a pedophile and a member of NAMBLA by haters when they apparently run out of any solid arguments.

An NFL Fan

“Brevity is the soule of wit”

Since: May 09

USA

#66931 Sep 25, 2013
persephony wrote:
<quoted text> I've been accused of being a pedophile and a member of NAMBLA by haters when
You've been called that because of your vehement support of acts of pedophilia, Jugsy.
persephone

Sunnyvale, CA

#66932 Sep 25, 2013
ERIC CARTMAN wrote:
Once again avoiding my question. Lol.---- What I expected
I did answer your question, but apparently you're just too dense to grasp it.

I don't see what's so terrible about a situation in which a teenager probably asked about sex and STDs, and MJ had a book which told the truth about possible consequences.

“Evolution is fab!”

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#66933 Sep 25, 2013
persephone wrote:
<quoted text> Except that he wasn't a stranger to the boy, it was in the privacy of his own home in which the boy was a guest, it was a book which by no stretch of the imagination could be construed as 'erotic'; the book probably contained valuable information about the realities of the human sexual experience and the diseases which can result from it.
Leave to to a clueless hater to come up with a preposterous scenario in which viewing an anatomical illustration in a book is 'inappropriate' for a teenager.
Dear child hater,

Is your celebrity worshipping obsession with that hideous looking freak (Wacko) so bad that you can't even bring yourself to accept that he was wrong to show an unrelated young boy images of men and women's genitals?

Just what is the big deal? Do you have this image of pristine perfection in your head when it comes to that dead freak? Does it really affect your life so much that you can't even accept he did wrong when he did do wrong?

“Evolution is fab!”

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#66934 Sep 25, 2013
Pishpash1234 wrote:
<quoted text>
The book depicted several nude men and women according to Corey. Why can you not fit the puzzle?
This is the same man who was supposedly regressed - you use this to excuse why he slept with boys night after night. You then excuse him for collecting child erotica and photographs of boys he bedded. AND now you excuse him for showing a boy graphic and inappropriate content in a sex-related book. Which man relives his child-hood teaching little boys sex education? You contradict yourself constantly.
Adding up his past suspicious behaviour, how can you not see the blatant red flags with him showing a young pre-teen boy a graphic book? Only MJ fans can be this dense
Great point, Pishpash. Were meant to believe that Wacko Jacko was this recessed man who was stuck in some kind of childlike state and slept with young boys because he felt a young boy himself. But showing a book featuring men and women's genitalia to young boy doesn't sound at all like childlike behaviour to me.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Michael Jackson Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
I am a pedophile (Jul '07) 16 hr Jar Jar Binks is ... 2
How many children did he abuse? (Jul '06) 17 hr Michalite97 113
A fb page against Wade Robson won't make him lo... 18 hr The Power Of Mast... 4
Paid jewish trolls Mon Space ace 1
Pics Proving Wacko Was Incontinent. (Sep '14) Apr 23 Spotted Wee 93
Wade Robson Supporters (Jul '13) Apr 21 Spotted Wee 84
Another Thread Suddenly Deleted From Upset Floons (May '15) Apr 20 The Power Of Mast... 36
More from around the web