TMZ

Our TV Shows

Got a Tip?

Call TMZ at (888) 847-9869 or Click Here

Conrad Murray in Documentary

Everyone TRASHES MJ

11/10/2011 6:50 PM PST BY TMZ STAFF

1109-conrad-murray-mj-tmz-bn
The controversial Conrad Murray documentary debuted in the United Kingdom tonight -- and in it the doctor emphatically states that AEG Live CEO Randy Phillips told him Michael Jackson does not have a "f**king cent!"

Murray claims Phillips pulled him aside after a meeting about the "This Is It" concerts and angrily said ... "What's this bullshit all about? Listen this guy is next to skid row. He's going to be homeless. Nine security guards? Why does he need that? I'm paying for that s**t. I'm paying for the toilet paper he wipes his f**king ass with."

Phillips took the stand during the manslaughter trial and -- under oath -- denied that conversation with Murray ever took place.

"Michael Jackson and the Doctor: A Fatal Friendship" also shows strategy meetings between Murray's lawyers -- Ed Chernoff and Michael Flanagan ... as well as Flanagan's wife, Susan.

During one pow wow Susan says, "Explain a 50-year-old man who sleeps with a baby doll and has pictures of basically infants to 2-year-old children looking at him every night."

Chernoff then says, "I think the media made him appear weirder than he is." Michael responds, "You gotta be kidding me, he can't be any weirder than he is."

In the docu, Murray claims Michael "always had a chamber that was exclusively his. The bedroom that he slept in ... I had to persuade him, eventually to have it cleaned. Because ... one, he peed the bed. It did not smell good. It was mildew, and I had to get it clean."

"Who would ever believe that a man his age would still be wetting his bed?" Murray added it wasn't medication that made MJ wet the bed ... he claims it was psychological.

The documentary airs in the states, Friday night on MSNBC.

334 COMMENTS

No Avatar
181.

Brandon    

@StopAbuse + ByTheWay:

THIS IS THE EVIDENCE FROM 2005 TRIAL THAT MICHAEL JACKSON - DID NOT - PAID THE 1993 BOY, BUT THE INSUARANCE COMPANY!

You can clearly read that everything was paid off by the insuarance company. Anybody saying anything other than this is ignorant, small minded and a fool.

FROM THE MEMO age 3-4:
- http://i56.tinypic.com/2dj6jvb.jpg
- http://i32.tinypic.com/289wwh1.jpg


**********
Transcript:
**********

C. The 1993 Civil Settlement was Made by Mr. Jackson's Insurance Company and was Not Within Mr. Jackson's Control.

The plaintiff seeks to introduce evidence of the civil settlement of the 1993 lawsuit through the testimony of Larry Feldman, attorney for the current complaining family and attorney for the plaintiff in the 1993 matter. The settlement agreement was for global claims of negligence and the lawsuit was defended by Mr. Jackson's insurance carrier. The insurance carrier negotiated and paid the settlement, over the protests of Mr. Jackson and his personal legal counsel.

It is general practice for an insurer to be entitled to control settlement negotiations and the insured is precluded from any interference. Shapero v. Allstate Ins. Co., 114 Cal. App.3d 433, 438 (1971); Ivy v. Pacific Automobile Ins. Co., 156 Cal. App.2d 652, 660... (1958)(the insured is precluded from interfering with settlement procedures). Under the majority of contracts for liability insurance, the absolute control of the defense of the matter is turned over to the insurance company and the insured is excluded from any interference in any negotiation for settlement or other legal proceedings (emphasis added). Merritt v. Reserve Ins. Co., 34 Cal. App.3d 858, 870 (1973). An insurance carrier has the right to settle claims covered by insurance when it decides settlement is expedient and the insured may not interfere with nor prevent such settlements. 44 Am. Jur. 2d, Insurance, sec. 1392, at 326-27 (rev. ed 2002)

In Brown v. Guarantee Ins. Co., 155 Cal. App. 2d 679, 685 (1957), the court stated:

"It is generally understood that these are rights and privileges which it is necessary for the insurer to have in order to justify or enable it to assume obligations which it does in the contract of insurance. So long as recovery does not exceed the limits of the insurance, the question of whether the claim be compromised or settled, or the matter in which it shall be defended, is a matter of no concern to the insured."

The insurer's right to control the defense of any action against the insured includes the right to negotiate settlement, and to otherwise conduct defense of the action. The consent of the insured is usually superfluous. "Liability policies usually specifically prohibit the insured from settling or negotiating for a settlement or interfering in any manner with the defense except upon request of the insurer unless the insurer is in breach of contract. By accepting a liability insurance policy, the insured is bound by these terms." (Croskey, et. al, Cal. Practice Guide: Insurance Litigation 3, supra, section 12:207, p. 12B-2.) "For this reason, it is common practice for insurance counsel and an adjuster to handle the negotiation of insurance funded settlements with out the superfluous involvement of a fully protected insured." Fiege v. Cooke, __ Cal. App. 4th __ (2004).

It is unfair for an insurance company's settlement to be now held against Mr. Jackson or for the Settlement Agreement to be admitted as evidence of Mr. Jackson's prior conduct or guilt. Mr. Jackson could not control nor interfere with his insurance carrier's demand to settle the dispute. No admission against interest nor acknowledgment of criminality can be inferred regarding Mr. Jackson from the act of the insurance carrier in the settling the litigation.

889 days ago
182.

susanne    

@cherwood. You may have a point.
.
The story is ugly. Michael Jackson is not around to defend himself. It doesn't matter if he was a good guy, a weird guy or whatever. It is ugly to spread stories about someone who can not defend himself.There was a court and it came with a conclusion. If someone feels it was not right, they have to appeal in the legal way. There was a trial and Murray had the chance to speak in court. He passed on it. End of story.
.
The child molestation story will never sound right to many people. Michael Jackson was successful and rich at one point. Many people would envy. Some may be people with little talent and huge ego and would do anything to trash him and get the money. Since a child molestation is something that would disgust many people in the US it seems a strategy for people that envied his fame and wanted some money. Court found MJ "not guilty", there was no appeal.
.
My sympathy is with Jackson family. They lost a relative and he is being trashed even now when he can not defend himself.

889 days ago
183.

Brandon    

Authorities: There's Never Been Evidence Michael Jackson Was A Pedophile!
---------------------
Posted on May 05, 2011 @ 03:43PM
Splash News By Jen Heger/radaronline


With Katherine Jackson ratcheting up the debate about her son Michael Jackson's relationship with children by saying he was no child molester, a well-placed government source tells RadarOnline she's right.

"The Los Angeles Department of Children and Family Services absolutely agrees with Katherine that her son never molested any child in cases the department investigated," a source told RadarOnline.

Michael Jackson was investigated by DCFS on and off for at least 10 years. The department undertook a first extensive investigation of allegations made by an underage accuser in 1993.

"Michael was fully cooperative during all of his interactions with DCFS," the source said. "Michael was interviewed for hours without his lawyer. He held nothing back. He couldn't understand why these allegations were being made against him. DCFS cleared him on any wrongdoing in ALL investigations.

"Did Michael put himself in precarious situations that most normal people wouldn't? Absolutely . . . The questioning was very, very hard on Michael, he just couldn't fathom that anyone could accuse him of being a child molester."

Another accuser, in 2005, "had absolutely no credibility," the source said. "There were differing accounts of what happened from the accuser and his family members."

Los Angeles' DCFS also investigated claims of abuse last year involving Michael Jackson's three children. Michael's nephew, Jaafar, allegedly used a stun gun on Michael's son, Blanket. After an extensive investigation, DCFS again took no action in the 2010 stun gun incident.

"Katherine was questioned by officials from the department, and as always, she was cooperative but saddened," the source said. "Katherine feels that her family has been targeted by opportunists over the years, and she just hopes that was the last time she ever has to go through that."

889 days ago
184.

Brandon    

I know you dont like the facts and you are desperate to prove your "truth", but its pointless, you have lost!

Anything you can find via google, every memo or any 2005 trial file is available on the net.

You simply CAN NOT question validity of any piece of evidence of the 2005 trial and challenge the outcome, and thats why you have lost.

Just read this and any file of the trial...

http://vindicatemj.wordpress.com/2009/11/21/the-questions-asked-about-the1993-settlement/

or FROM THE MEMO about the insurance company age 3-4:
(pics of the docs)
- http://i56.tinypic.com/2dj6jvb.jpg
- http://i32.tinypic.com/289wwh1.jpg

These are the FACTS..., if you like or not.

889 days ago
185.

Here's a good summary    

Here a pretty good summary of Michael's relationship with his first known victim...


Jordie Chandler

889 days ago
186.

More f'loon garbage    

You're citing references to a mysterious insurance company that supposedly came to the rescue and paid off MJ's victim, when Michael Jackson's actual insurance company publicly came out in 1994 and acknowledged that they REFUSED to pay. It's time to stop drinking the f'loon kool aid.

889 days ago
187.

Anna V for Vendetta    

Things are not always clear cut. There is a bit of true in everything. We may never know with absolute certitude what’s true and what’s false. The bottom line is, whether you are rich or poor, free or in jail, we all try to live another day and the “situation” we are in becomes our world; we adapt. Michael failed at that, surely he was like a great dinosaur, and like the dinosaurs he became extinct because he couldn’t adapt. Dr. Murray is not the only greedy person in the never-ending MJ saga. Greed… this is the crooked timber of humanity. In the crux of this drama I would like to jump from that into another shameful exploitati­on of MJ. A line of perfumes dedicated to Michael is about to be launched by Joe Jackson and a profession­al scam-artis­t who is much spookier than Dr. Murray, Julian Franck Rouas. This story will make your eyes curl up in the back of your head when you’ll read about the psychologi­cally malevolent Julian Rouas and the Jackson Tribute Fragrances rogue operation. With no functionin­g conscience­, they have even used Michael’s kids to promote the stinking perfumes…
http://jac­ksontribut­efragrance­s.blogspot­.com

889 days ago
188.

Brandon    

the Extortion scheme of the 1993 boy´s father how to destroy Michael Jackson:
VIDEO - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gr00HKpd7Vk&feature=player_embedded


There is a taped phone conversation between Evan Chandler (the alleged victim's father) and Dave Schwartz (the allged victim's stepfather) where Chandler says:,
Transcript:
"Everything's going according to a certain plan that isn't just mine... and if I go through with this, I win big time. There's no way I lose. I've checked that inside out. I will get everything I want, and they will be destroyed forever. June will lose [custody of the son]... and Michael's career will be over."

This tape was played all over news networks in 1994.

You cant win guys, MJ haters...

889 days ago
189.

go to: mjfacts.info    

Rather than relying on brief excerpts from it, educate yourself and read the full transcript of Evan's conversation with David Schwartz. It was clearly not an extortion attempt.

889 days ago
190.

Brandon    

@StopAbuse or whoever you are:

.. a mysterious insurance company?

From:
Mr. Jackson’s Memorandum in Support of Objection to Subpoena to Larry Feldman for Settlement Do***ents - April 20, 2005:

An excerpt-
“Plaintiff cannot establish the source of the funds utilized to settle the claims involved, and because insurance policies permitting the insurer to settle over the wishes of the insured were involved, introduction of settlement agreements will deprive Mr. Jackson of due process of law.”

Bye bye..., dont waste your time here, you can not win, I dont have time to argue with you, you simply can not win.

889 days ago
191.

Brandon lack reading comprehension    

Where is an insurance company named? There is ZERO evidence ANYWHERE to support their suggestion anyone other than Michael Jackson paid off his victim. His actual insurance company publicly came out in 1994 and stated that it would not do so. This isn't that complicated. Do you have special needs or something? I guess being a f'loon is a form of retardation.

889 days ago
192.

Truth    

Michael Jackson's abuse victims are harassed and sent death threats by hateful fans. Murray saved other children


-Michael Jackson was thrice accused of child molestation (Chandler, Francia, Arvizo)


-Michael Jackson settled his 1st case for $25 million after a 13-yr-old boy accurately drew a detailed description of his genitals...including marks that can only be seen during an erection.


-Michael Jackson had an alarm system for his bedroom that would go off when someone was approaching.


-Michael Jackson had a 2nd hidden bedroom within his main bedroom.


-Three different types of semen were found on Michael Jackson's mattress--one belonged to him, and the two others belonged to different males. A fourth sample of semen was found in Michael's bedsheets, and a fifth on a size small pair of underwear stored in a bag with Michael's own soiled underwear. No female DNA was detected.


-During the raid, police discovered that Michael Jackson had multiple books of nude children including "Boys Will be Boys", which is an extremely explicit book of young boys in erotic poses (this was locked in a filing cabinet in his room)


-Michael Jackson owned a nude photo of his pubescent friend Jonathan Spence...a boy he shared his bed with for years.


Anyone who still doesn't realize that he was a child predator is an idiot.


further reading, includes police and court docs
MJ's payoff not covered by insurance
Video about MJ's 1st victim, Jordie Chandler


889 days ago
193.

HumanNature    

HOW COME THE "DUMB AS A ROCK" HATERS REFUSES TO ACKNOWLEDGE AND ACCEPT THE "TRUTH/FACTS" THAT MJ WAS/IS "INNOCENT"?????


PEOPLE ARE SLOWLY REALIZING THE "TRUTH/FACTS" ABOUT THE CHILD MOLESTATION CHARGES AGAINST MJ!!!


MODERN DAY RACIST LYNCHING OF MJ!!!!


ALL BEHIND JEALOUSY, RACISM, ENVY, GREED, HATRED AND "BS LIE"!!!!


Out-of-court settlement of the civil suit


A civil lawsuit was filed by Jordan Chandler and his parents on September 14, 1993.[72] In late 1993, district attorneys in Santa Barbara and Los Angeles counties both convened grand juries to assess whether criminal charges should be filed against Jackson.[73] By January 1, 1994, $2 million had been spent by prosecution departments in California and the grand juries had questioned 200 witnesses, but Jordan's allegations could not be corroborated.[61] On January 4, 1994, Chandler's attorney, Larry Feldman, filed a motion for the photos from Jackson's December 1993 body search from investigators, saying Jackson's attorneys and the L.A. district attorney had refused to give him copies.[74] A few weeks later, Feldman petitioned the court that he should be allowed access to Jackson's finances over concerns that the singer's wealth would give him an unfair advantage in court. One adviser to Jackson stated, "You can take pictures of Michael's **** and he's not gonna like it, but once you start trying to figure out how much money he has, that's where he stops playing around."[61] Initially Jackson and his lawyers filed a motion for Superior Court Judge David M. Rothman to postpone the civil case until the criminal investigation was concluded. Feldman filed a counter-motion, saying the delay would hurt Jordan's chances for recovery and make it more difficult to gather evidence.[75] It is legal to postpone a civil lawsuit past the criminal statute of limitations as a lawsuit can still be filed past that date, such as the case of Pacers, Inc. v. Superior Court.[76] Also, the constitutional right to a "speedy trial" only applies to criminal cases according to the Sixth Amendment, not civil cases.[77]

On November 23, Judge Rothman accepted Feldman's motion and set March 21, 1994 as the start date for the civil trial.[78] Rothman ordered Jackson's deposition scheduled before the end of January 1994, but noted he might reconsider if Jackson was indicted on criminal charges.[79] Jackson agreed to be deposed on January 18.[79] His attorneys said he was eager to testify, but also said they might oppose the deposition if criminal charges were filed or were still under consideration on his deposition date.[79] They said if charges were filed, they would want the criminal trial to go first.[79] However, when authorities notified Jackson's lawyers that they expected their investigation to continue at least through February, Jackson's team still failed to win a delay of the civil case.[80] Jackson's lawyers also lost a motion to prevent Feldman from turning over information (e.g. from the civil deposition) to prosecutors pursuing possible criminal charges.[80]

The concerns about a civil trial during an ongoing criminal investigation, and about the prosecutor's access to the plaintiff's information in the civil trial, stemmed from Jackson's Fifth Amendment rights.[77] As two grand juries had deemed there was insufficient evidence for charges as of January 1,[61] the prosecution might have been able to form the elements of a criminal case around the defense strategy in the civil trial; creating a situation akin to double jeopardy.[81][82] For instance, prosecutor Tom Sneddon altered fundamental elements of his case in 2004 after evidence undermining the Arvizo family's 2003 allegations appeared after Jackson's initial arraignment.[83] Upon discovery of two taped interviews in which the Arvizo family praised Jackson and denied any abuse, Sneddon introduced a conspiracy charge and claimed they were forced to lie against their will.[83] And when Jackson was re-arraigned in April 2004 for the conspiracy charge, the dates of the alleged molestation on the charge sheet had been shifted by almost two weeks.[83] Jackson's lawyer, Mark Geragos, had announced on NBC in January 2004 that his client had a "concrete, iron-clad alibi" for the dates on the charge sheet.[83]

On January 24, 1994, prosecutors announced that they would be not bringing charges against Evan Chandler for attempted extortion as Jackson's camp has been slow to report the extortion claim to the police and had tried to negotiate a settlement with Chandler for several weeks.[84] Evan had first made his demand for a financial settlement on August 4, 1993 and the Jackson camp filed extortion charges against Evan and his attorney Barry K. Rothman in late August 1993.[85] After tape recordings supporting the extortion claim were released to the media on August 30,[86] a lawyer for Jackson explained they had not gone to the police earlier because, "It was our hope that this would all go away. We tried to keep it as much in-house as we could."[10] Jackson had already experienced years of bizarre rumors and speculation.[10] In the extortion investigation, a search warrant was never sought to search the homes and offices of Evan Chandler and Barry Rothman and no grand jury was convened when both men declined to interviewed by police.[73] In contrast, the police searched Jackson's residences solely based on Jordan's allegations reported by a psychiatrist with no particular expertise in child sexual abuse[9][87] and increased their efforts to investigate Jackson after no supporting evidence was found in their raids and after questioning almost 30 children (Jackson's phonebooks were seized) and their families, all of whom said Jackson had done nothing wrong.[9][85] Officers flew to the Philippines to interview two ex-housekeepers who had sold a molestation story to the tabloids but decided it lacked credibility.[85] Several parents also complained to one of Jackson's attorneys o****gressive investigative techniques by the police; allegedly frightening their children with lies, e.g. ‘We have nude photos of you', to pressure them into accusing Jackson[85][75] and unequivocally telling parents their children had been molested even though their children had denied being victimized.[85]

On January 25, 1994,[88] the Chandlers' lawsuit was settled out of court with $15,331,250 to be held in a trust fund for Jordan,[18] $1.5 million for each of his parents and the family's lawyer slated to receive $5 million for a total of approximately $23 million[19] (although another source showed Feldman was to receive $3 million based on a September 1993 retainer, for a total of $21 million).[20] Jackson's insurance company "negotiated and paid the settlement, over the protests of Mr. Jackson and his personal legal counsel" and was "the source of the settlement amounts"; as noted in a 2005 memorandum in People v. Jackson.[89] It also noted "an insurance carrier has the right to settle claims covered by insurance where it decides settlement is expedient and the insured may not interfere with nor prevent such settlements", as established by a number of precedents in California.[89] Defeating the right would involve convincing a court with the power to overrule the precedent that the earlier decision was either wrongly decided or more often, 'clearly' wrong (depending on the criteria of the court)[90] or the court must be convinced to distinguish the case.[91] That is, to make the ruling narrower than that in the precedent due to some difference in facts between the current and precedent case, while still supporting the result reached in the earlier case.[91] In 2004, Jackson's attorney Thomas Mesereau in People v. Jackson said "People who intended to earn millions of dollars from his record and music promotions did not want negative publicity from these lawsuits interfering with their profits. Michael Jackson now regrets making these payments. These settlements were entered into with one primary condition – that condition was that Mr. Jackson never admitted any wrongdoing. Mr. Jackson always denied doing anything wrong...Mr. Jackson now realizes the advice he received was wrong."[92] Jackson explained why had he tried to settle: "I wanted to go on with my life. Too many people had already been hurt. I want to make records. I want to sing. I want to perform again...It's my talent. My hard work. My life. My decision."[61] He also wanted to avoid a "media circus".[93]

Although some[who?] perceive the settlement as an admission of guilt, the settlement agreement specifically stated that Jackson admitted no wrongdoing and no liability[19][94] and legally, a settlement cannot be used as evidence of guilt in future civil and criminal cases.[95] The settlement payment was "for alleged personal injuries arising out of claims of negligence and not for claims of intentional or wrong acts of sexual molestation."[20][96] In the settlement, both parties agreed they would not speak about the case details in public but it did not prevent the Chandlers from testifying in a criminal trial or sharing information with authorities in a criminal investigation.[21] The Chandlers' lawyer Mr. Feldman explicitly stated "nobody bought anybody's silence".[97] Bribery to not testify in a trial is a felony according to California Penal Code 138.[98] Receiving such a bribe is also a felony according to this law.[98] District Attorney Gil Garcetti stated the settlement didn't affect criminal prosecution of the molestation allegations, "The criminal investigation of singer Michael Jackson is ongoing and will not be affected by the announcement of the civil case settlement."[99]

Jordan Chandler was interviewed after the settlement by detectives seeking evidence of child molestation, but "no criminal charges were filed as a result of that interview."[100] A Santa Barbara County grand jury disbanded on May 2, 1994 without indicting Jackson, while a Los Angeles County grand jury continued to investigate the sexual abuse allegations.[101][102] After which time the Chandlers stopped co-operating with the criminal investigation around July 6, 1994.[103] The police never pressed criminal charges.[93] Citing a lack of evidence without Jordan's testimony, the state closed its investigation on September 22, 1994.[61][23] According to the grand juries, the evidence presented by the Santa Barbara police and the LAPD was not convincing enough to indict Jackson or subpoena him,[61][101] even though grand juries can indict the accused purely on hearsay evidence.[104][105]
[edit] Aftermath

Three years later, Jordan Chandler's alleged account of the relationship was detailed in a book by journalist Victor M Gutierrez. The book was said to be based on a diary the boy had kept at the time and included details of alleged sexual encounters between Jackson and him.[24] In 1995, Jackson filed a civil suit against Gutierrez for slander; the jury found in Jackson's favor, awarding him $2.7 million in damages.[106] In 1996, Evan Chandler sued Jackson for around $60... million, claiming Jackson had breached an agreement never to discuss the case. In 1999, a court ruled in Jackson's favor and threw out the lawsuit.[24] As of 2011,[when?] Jordan Chandler is 31 and lives in a $2.35 million home on Long Island under an assumed name. He and his family also own a high-rise apartment in Manhattan and a condominium in Santa Barbara. June Chandler's second marriage ended sometime afterward. Jordan Chandler and Jackson never spoke to each other again; he received his last installment from Jackson in June 1999.[61]

But the 1993 case would be revisited again with the 2003 allegations. There was more than a year between Jackson's 2003 arrest and the beginning of his trial and he was prevented by a gag order from responding to any stories in the media.[83] As in 1993, prosecution sympathizers leaked do***ents e.g. Jordan Chandler's 1993 police statement.[83] The media was again eager to report on the allegations, with a tendency for sensationalism. And allegations sold to tabloid TV shows by disgruntled ex-employees in the 1990s were constantly in the news again.[83] Also similar to 1993, details of the Arvizo family's 2003 allegations were leaked.[83] These stories were mostly reported as allegations rather than facts, but the volume and frequency of stories, combined with Jackson's inability to refute them, had a devastating impact on public opinion of him.[83]

In a 2005 lecture at Harvard after Jackson's trial, Jackson's attorney Thomas Mesereau said the following about Jordan Chandler: "The prosecutors tried to get him to show up and he wouldn't. If he had, I had witnesses who were going to come in and say he told them it never happened and that he would never talk to his parents again for what they made him say. It turned out he'd gone into court and got legal emancipation from his parents."[83] In 2006, Jordan accused Evan of attacking him with a barbell, choking him and spraying his face with Mace. The charges were later dropped.[107] On November 5, 2009, Evan Chandler was found dead following an apparent suicide.[108] On November 25, 2009, Jermaine Jackson reportedly stated the 29-year-old Jordan Chandler came forward after Jackson's death, admitting the late superstar never molested him.[109][110]

Music journalist Charles Thomson noted a continued media bias against Jackson after the Chandler suicide. Thomson said he was contacted by a British tabloid to supply information about the 1993 allegations, only to have them replace his carefully researched information with the common myths he advised them to avoid[12] and that the same misinformation was in every article he read about the suicide.[12] He noted when Jackson's FBI file was released the following month, the contents were portrayed by the media as giving an impression of guilt even though the file strongly supported his innocence.[12] He noted how Gene Simmons' allegations in 2010 about Jackson molesting children received over a hundred times more coverage than his interview with Jackson's long-time guitarist, Jennifer Batten, who rebutted Simmon's claims.[12]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_child_sexual_abuse_accusations_against_Michael_Jackson

889 days ago
194.

LOL    

LOL @ f'loons citing wikipedia as their source. Look at the actual police do***ents. Pedo apologists sicken me.

889 days ago
195.

HumanNature    

OH, I FORGOT THAT THE "DUMB AS A ROCK" HATERS DO NOT KNOW HOW TO RESEARCH FOR THE TRUTH/FACTS!!!

889 days ago
Previous 15 Comments | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | Most Recent | Next 15 Comments

Around The Web