Inside Neverland--2003 Raid Photos

[SteveForever]

No way MJ could have done those concerts...he obviously was totally mental!

[JasonD]

I'd like to know who's all in that "Last Supper" looking picture.

From left to right: Abraham Lincoln, JFK, unknown ( at least to me ), Einstein, MJ ( not Michael Jordan ) Walt Disney, Charlie Chaplin, Elvis, and I'm not sure, but possibly Little Richard.

Third from left: Thomas Edison.

Side Note To Teacher Ginger: See, I lurned sumthing in skool.

[annie89509]

No way MJ could have done those concerts...he obviously was totally mental!

I don't think he could have done those concerts, either. All the outpouring of love and anguish over his pre-mature death is getting to be over-the-top. The fact is he hasn't been musically revelant since around 2001. Remember how BritneySpears was lambasted and ridiculed when she came back out at the MTV awards show a couple of years ago? I could see that happening with MJ, had he gone through with the concert plan. He may have did himself a favor by dying, as harsh as that may sound.

As media pundits have mentioned, Michael is now forever put on that diety pedestal (which he may or may not deserve). Not a bad way to go, actually.

[JeremyP]

During the 2003 court case, one of the facts in the case was that Jackson was feeding non-family child guests of Neverland alcohol...(presumably to make them more sexually pliable, but that's interpretation...the alcohol itself is a fact that wasn't disputed in the case, afaik)...

regardless, Tripple-J (Michael Jackson) called the drinks he was feeding these kids "Jesus Juice"....using their religious beliefs to shamefully justify it to the children if they declined his offer of alcohol. i.e. "It's OK. Jesus drank wine too...it's really ok that you drink this...think of it as jesus juice"

This wasn't a "fact". He was actually found not guilty of it.

[annie89509]

During the 2003 court case, one of the facts in the case was that Jackson was feeding non-family child guests of Neverland alcohol...(presumably to make them more sexually pliable, but that's interpretation...the alcohol itself is a fact that wasn't disputed in the case, afaik)...

regardless, Tripple-J (Michael Jackson) called the drinks he was feeding these kids "Jesus Juice"....using their religious beliefs to shamefully justify it to the children if they declined his offer of alcohol. i.e. "It's OK. Jesus drank wine too...it's really ok that you drink this...think of it as jesus juice"

This wasn't a "fact". He was actually found not guilty of it.

He was found not guilty of molestation. But the fact about giving alcohol to children is true, I think ... the whole premise of what Strangegrey put in quotes (above) is what I remember reading about the case, too.

[treetopovskaya]

i wish mj could have gotten the help he needed. he should be here... for his kids. it's sad that the people he surrounded himself with didn't care enough to get him the help he needed. now they seem to care... but where were they before he died? where was jamie "he belongs to us" fox??? can you believe that a-hole? pfft.

is steve perry now irrelevant since it's been YEARS since he toured with journey.

[treetopovskaya]

dif between mj & brit is mj has REAL talent. }:C)

[stevew2]

Don't forget about the case of Jesus Juice that they confiscated:

Alright, I "give." I love MJ, but somebody has got to explain to me this "Jesus Juice" I keep reading about. What IS that & why does it keep coming back into the conversations?

During the 2003 court case, one of the facts in the case was that Jackson was feeding non-family child guests of Neverland alcohol...(presumably to make them more sexually pliable, but that's interpretation...the alcohol itself is a fact that wasn't disputed in the case, afaik)...

regardless, Tripple-J (Michael Jackson) called the drinks he was feeding these kids "Jesus Juice"....using their religious beliefs to shamefully justify it to the children if they declined his offer of alcohol. i.e. "It's OK. Jesus drank wine too...it's really ok that you drink this...think of it as jesus juice"

Yuck!!! Well, I had to ask, didn't I? Hope there isn't any truth to the rumor. I would hate to think MJ actually said that to those kids.

Iknow what kinda juice you ll be drinking tonight

[JeremyP]

He was found not guilty of molestation. But the fact about giving alcohol to children is true, I think ... the whole premise of what Strangegrey put in quotes (above) is what I remember reading about the case, too.

Pop singer Michael Jackson, 46, faces charges of conspiracy to commit child abduction, false imprisonment and extortion, three counts of committing lewd acts upon a child, attempted lewd acts upon a child, and four counts of administering intoxicating agents to assist in the commission of a felony.

Jackson entered a plea of not guilty to the ten felony counts on April 30, 2004 at Santa Maria, California courthouse. See also: Michael Jackson - The King of Pop or Wacko Jacko?.

Latest Developments
Michael Jackson Not Guilty on All Charges
June 13, 2005
Michael Jackson was found not guilty of all charges today by a jury in San Maria, California. The jury deliberated almost 33 hours from Friday, June 3 until shortly after noon June 13.

http://crime.about.com/od/current/a/jackson.htm


C'mon, guys.

[Lula]

dif between mj & brit is mj has REAL talent. }:C)

exactly. there is no comparison to be made between the two. i don't believe for a moment that michael jackson would have delivered anything less than a stellar performance. just looking at that rehearsal footage it is clear he still had the moves.

[artist4perry]

I'd like to know who's all in that "Last Supper" looking picture.

From left to right: Abraham Lincoln, JFK, unknown ( at least to me ), Einstein, MJ ( not Michael Jordan ) Walt Disney, Charlie Chaplin, Elvis, and I'm not sure, but possibly Little Richard.

Third from left: Thomas Edison.

Side Note To Teacher Ginger: See, I lurned sumthing in skool.

Jason, you have been hanging out with SteveW too much,you have picked up his Frigabonics.............LOL! Thanks for telling us who the one guy was, Dan was trying to figure it out.

[strangegrey]

During the 2003 court case, one of the facts in the case was that Jackson was feeding non-family child guests of Neverland alcohol...(presumably to make them more sexually pliable, but that's interpretation...the alcohol itself is a fact that wasn't disputed in the case, afaik)...

regardless, Tripple-J (Michael Jackson) called the drinks he was feeding these kids "Jesus Juice"....using their religious beliefs to shamefully justify it to the children if they declined his offer of alcohol. i.e. "It's OK. Jesus drank wine too...it's really ok that you drink this...think of it as jesus juice"

This wasn't a "fact". He was actually found not guilty of it.

He was found *not* guilty of child molestation. which means the burden of proof was not met by the prosecution to the satisfaction of a jury. What it does NOT mean, is that a fact pattern or evidence item presented during the case is also not true. Afaik, the Jesus Juice issue was not a contested part of the case (i.e. not dismissed as evidence)....so the FACT that this freak fed children alcohol was in play thoughout the case....whether it had enough bearing to contribute to conviction is up to interpretation. The jury's, yours mine.

The charge that Whacko Jacko was arraigned with was child molestion...not feeding alcohol to minors....so you claim that he was found not guilty of child molestation does NOT at ALL mean he didn't feed them jesus juice. All it means is that the FACT that MJ fed the kids Jesus Juice, wasn't enough in combination with the other EVIDENCE presented, to convict MJ of fucking little boys in context of the burden of proof the jury was required to exam.


But, make no mistake. he did feed those boys alcohol. If he didn't, the defense would have gone ape ship trying to dismiss the evidence...

[strangegrey]

http://crime.about.com/od/current/a/jackson.htm


C'mon, guys.

You're clearly not a lawyer (or anything remotely close)....or else you'd understand that if he were going to get off on the big daddy charge of molestation, they weren't going to throw the alcohol charge at him.

The fact of the jesus juice evidence was not successfully countered as evidence. It was allowed throughout the case....

You must be in the .0000000001% of people that feel OJ was innocent..

[JeremyP]

You're clearly not a lawyer (or anything remotely close)....

Oooh, you got me there. Nice.

I have nothing against you, Frank. Let's not get too personal with this and get the thread closed, ok? We can take it to PM if you wanna get all, "My dad could beat up your dad".

or else you'd understand that if he were going to get off on the big daddy charge of molestation, they weren't going to throw the alcohol charge at him.

The fact of the jesus juice evidence was not successfully countered as evidence. It was allowed throughout the case....

It was among the charges brought against him of which he was found not guilty by a jury of his peers.

You must be in the .0000000001% of people that feel OJ was innocent..

I don't know how I feel about that. OJ admittedly had a horrible and quick temper. I could envision that he found Mr. Goldman with Nicole and in the heat of rage killed them, especially given the history of violence in their marriage.

However, she was nearly decapitated and unless he was swinging an axe or sword from a few feet away, he would have gotten very, very, bloody and I can't reconcile the fact that all that blood just disappeared from on and about his person.

That, among other things, is one reason why I can't categorically state that I believe he did it. His actions since the murder have been deplorable in my opinion, however, and do surprise me at just how cold hearted he is. "If I Did It"...? Horrible.

[strangegrey]

Well, Jeremy, I'm not looking to argue the issue on MJ any longer. The last thing I want to do is take it to the personal level either.

I do think that it's kinda hard to say that he was found not guilty by a jury of his peers. That's kinda odd to even contemplate, dont ya think? Those jurors that claimed after the fact that they felt he was guilty, clearly weren't peers of his. They weren't even born in the same side of a century with him....


Regardless, there's enough justification for folks to either stamp guilt on Jackson or absolve him of it. Obviously, it's clear where we all stand.

Personally, irrespective of the outcome of the case, there's enough information that unfolded during the case, for me to come to my own conclusion. I don't apply a great deal of confidence to the southern california court system. They failed to convict OJ, out of fear of racial unrest...and I firmly believe the same motivational factors come to play with Jackson. Maybe not racial (because he was no longer black and far more interested in being white)....but there were enough people that would have thrown a temper tantrum in socal, if he was thrown in jail, that the courts walked very carefully...


What I do find rather frustrating to see unfold, is all of the MJ love thrown in his direction, post-OD. I still maintain, if he were anyone else, his death (and all of the bullshit surrounding it) would carry a somber/subdued tone, because of the child molestation charges (whether or not he was found guilty). The mere fact that charges were brought against him, he paid his way out of another case and made the statements he did on tv, would be MORE than enough to make people rethink all of the tributes currently going on.

But the fact that they are simply being tossed to the side of the road (when before his death, people were MORE than happy and content with his living as a hermit out of the scrutiny of society) in favor of all this stupid tribute shit....is deplorable. It really is. This is child molestation. It wasn't like he got a few DWIs and all was well....

I'll leave it at that...

[SteveForever]

The little kid could have seen Jackson naked by peeking in on him asleep on in the bathroom...doesn't mean he was a molester.
Even kids can be devious and perverted at an early age. Jackson was weird but I will never believe he was a molester.

[bluejeangirl76]

The little kid could have seen Jackson naked by peeking in on him asleep on in the bathroom...doesn't mean he was a molester. Even kids can be devious and perverted at an early age. Jackson was weird but I will never believe he was a molester.

The kid could have been told to say that, just as he was told all the other things to say... the fact that Jackson had vitiligo was not a secret and having a basic knowledge of what the condition does to a person gives the father a 50/50 that if they made that claim, they'd be right, or at least right enough. Then, if the description the kid gave did not match at all, or not exactly, there's an easy way to backpedal over it and say it was dark and he could be mistaken, or something to that effect. That whole situation just reeked of opportunism.

The second accusation, again, is incredibly suspect. There were all kinds of claims as to what Jackson allegedly did, but no evidence. And that kid's mother, whoo boy, she was a shady one. The simple fact that he was not the first star she tried to swindle is a big factor in my line of thinking.

They found none of this pornography that was said to have been shown to the children... they found nothing except all the percoset and xanax, etc. And do my knowledge, possessing enough prescription narcotics to take down a small village doesn't mean one is a pee-pee-toucher. If it does, then arrest 70% of Hollywood.

Now, this is not to say that I condone the things that we know for a fact went on, things that MJ admitted, such as having these kids hanging around all the time, having them stay over, and staying in the same room. But if you watch certain videos that are out there, things that Michael permitted the release of, like his own home movies, you can see that this was a guy who really just didn't perceive it the way the outside world did. While we were all like "Hey, Mike, whoa, wtf r u doin'?" he was just doing what he thought was normal, having fun... no sick jokes, that's not what I mean. I mean he was an adult who had a part of him that did not grow up, and that was the part the included how he interacted with people.

In his reality, it was totally ok to run around Neverland and have a Super Soaker fight with Janet and Macauley Culkin. Even his interaction with other adults was childlike. One of his home movies was one time when he spent Christmas Day at Neverland with Liz Taylor... because of his religious upbringing he had never celebrated Christmas, so she came in and created his first Christmas... there was not a child in the room, but he still behaved like one, even interacting with her...

Now, I could go to my sister's home tomorrow and run around having a Super Soaker fight with her kids and all their little friends and no one would say anything other than "awww, look how much she loves her nieces, playing with them like that..." mostly because I don't do that on a regular basis, but because he was Michael Jackson, people said "what the hell is with this guy, there has to be something nefarious going on". Well, maybe there was and maybe there wasn't, but honestly, if I had to put money on it, I would say there probably was not.

[The Sushi Hunter]

People take the side of the adult when they are talking about issues that involve someone elses kids, concluding that they are convinced the kid is lying. Yet if the issue was about their own kid, they would conclude that they are convinced their kids are telling the truth and the adult is lying. Interesting filter.

[strangegrey]

They found none of this pornography that was said to have been shown to the children... they found nothing except all the percoset and xanax, etc. And do my knowledge, possessing enough prescription narcotics to take down a small village doesn't mean one is a pee-pee-toucher. If it does, then arrest 70% of Hollywood.

I'm sorry. I refuse to believe the story that Tripple-J is just a man who is supposedly just an overgrown child....when he's got jizz-mags like the above mentioned....


The knee-jerk defense that 'he was just a cute little boy that sheltered himself because of all of the horrors his daddy inflicted on him' doesn't add up. It simply doesn't. The guy was a fucking pervert...and little boys were the Pièce de résistance.

[KenTheDude]

About the only thing we know for certain is that Joe Jackson was a complete douche. I mean when your own unmarried, multi-millionaire (possibly billionaire) son leaves you completely out of the will, you're pretty much scum.

[steveo777]

They found none of this pornography that was said to have been shown to the children... they found nothing except all the percoset and xanax, etc. And do my knowledge, possessing enough prescription narcotics to take down a small village doesn't mean one is a pee-pee-toucher. If it does, then arrest 70% of Hollywood.

So he had a Hustler and Naughty Neighbors magazine in his home. So does a large part of America. That automatically proves his guilt as a pedophile for surez.

[strangegrey]

So he had a Hustler and Naughty Neighbors magazine in his home. So does a large part of America. That automatically proves his guilt as a pedophile for surez.

You're missing the point. People here and elsewhere are claiming as one of the reasons that he never did what he was accused of, despite the mountain of evidence to the contrary, is that he was "just a gentile little boy reliving a childhood he never had. He could never hurt a soul, because he was such a sweet dear person who was just trying to be a kid again"

That type of explanation goes out the window when you see the above pictures.


There are plenty of people out there that enjoy porn. I wouldn't say I'm one that purchases it or keeps it in my house....but if Tripple-J was truly this kid trapped in a tortured mans body, that everyone has been trying to say about him....

...this blows that right out of the water.

[YoungJRNY]

What? The dude had a couple Hustler's and Porn magazines? Big fucking deal. IF that's all they found, then that makes me look like Peter North. Holy shit! I can raid the entire population of my city, and can guarantee that every single house has a naughty magazine. People need to bitch about everything. Atleast it wasn't kid porn or anything. The magazines had tits! Good for you, Mike.. good for you. I actually applaud this notion.

[YoungJRNY]

So he had a Hustler and Naughty Neighbors magazine in his home. So does a large part of America. That automatically proves his guilt as a pedophile for surez.

You're missing the point. People here and elsewhere are claiming as one of the reasons that he never did what he was accused of, despite the mountain of evidence to the contrary, is that he was "just a gentile little boy reliving a childhood he never had. He could never hurt a soul, because he was such a sweet dear person who was just trying to be a kid again"

That type of explanation goes out the window when you see the above pictures.


There are plenty of people out there that enjoy porn. I wouldn't say I'm one that purchases it or keeps it in my house....but if Tripple-J was truly this kid trapped in a tortured mans body, that everyone has been trying to say about him....

...this blows that right out of the water.

Come on strange.. give the guy some credit. He was a grown man. Just because he was a "kid trapped in a tortured mans body" doesn't mean the man can't look at poon once in awhile. I'm a nice person, have good morals, and try to do the right thing.. and will probably always be a kid at heart. More than once in awhile, I'll see a tit. Does this make me a bad person? NO. This makes me a man. Welcome to the nature of homosapians.

[strangegrey]

again, missing the point...whatever. It's clearly going over the head of the little brains....


The guy clearly wasn't an innocent little child trapped in a mans body.

That brings all of the other shit back into serious question. The hustlers and the jizz mags don't, in and of themselves, make him out to be anything other than a grown man who has a strong sex drive....

....but the picture that has been presented by people trying to explain away his sexual deviance, in that he's not normal. That he doesn't really have a sex drive, that he's just a big overgrown child.....is clearly not the case, anymore....

[The Sushi Hunter]

So he had a Hustler and Naughty Neighbors magazine in his home. So does a large part of America. That automatically proves his guilt as a pedophile for surez.

You forgot to mention the "Barely Legal" magazine.

So the big question, what would a person having young underaged boys hanging over at his house be doing with these types of mags?

When I was 14 years old, I met this dude that was in his late 30's at the local bowling alley. He befriended me and then after some time he brought me to his car. He eventuallly showed me this type of materials and asked me if I knew what Jacking off was. I didn't so he explained it to me and then was asking me if I wanted to get some pussy cause he knew some chicks in the area who would do it with me. This dude was using straight pornography to try and get me interested in sexual behavior. Once he could establish that, he'd take it the next step in his direction. Thank God I was street smart and got the fuck away from that guy before he could do anything to me. 20 some odd years later the dude was busted for child molestation, that was when the local McDonald's built one of those play grounds attached to the building. The cops got some tips and caught the guy meeting underaged boys at McDonalds and then getting them in his car and wacking them off for them. My regret is that I didn't report that fucker when I should have. But I was just a kid and didn't really "think outside the box" at that time in my life. Plus who would have believed me anyways, seems like a lot of people don't believe these kids. And the dude I'm talking about in my situation was a professional bowler with his own pro-bowl shop in the bowling alley. So that would be another excuse for adults not to believe me, that some how some way my parent's put me up to the story so they could get money from him.

[YoungJRNY]

again, missing the point...whatever. It's clearly going over the head of the little brains....


The guy clearly wasn't an innocent little child trapped in a mans body.

That brings all of the other shit back into serious question. The hustlers and the jizz mags don't, in and of themselves, make him out to be anything other than a grown man who has a strong sex drive....

....but the picture that has been presented by people trying to explain away his sexual deviance, in that he's not normal. That he doesn't really have a sex drive, that he's just a big overgrown child.....is clearly not the case, anymore....

Well no shit. I got what you were saying. I don't care who the hell you are.. if you're a man, your PP will get hard. 100% proven fact. BTW: take a look around. Children aren't these sweet little innocent beings anymore. You should hear the language that comes out of 7-9 year olds' mouths. Pretty vulgar.. ones that shock me. I got your point. My point was that your right, and that even though MJ was genuine and labeled as a well nature and non-sexual guy.. he had a right to his privacy also. He wasn't fooling anybody, because when it comes down to it he's a man. Nothing wrong with that.

[The Sushi Hunter]

BTW: take a look around. Children aren't these sweet little innocent beings anymore. You should hear the language that comes out of 7-9 year olds' mouths. Pretty vulgar.. ones that shock me.

Yeah....they learn that from adults most the time.

[YoungJRNY]

So he had a Hustler and Naughty Neighbors magazine in his home. So does a large part of America. That automatically proves his guilt as a pedophile for surez.

You forgot to mention the "Barely Legal" magazine.

So the big question, what would a person having young underaged boys hanging over at his house be doing with these types of mags?

When I was 14 years old, I met this dude that was in his late 30's at the local bowling alley. He befriended me and then after some time he brought me to his car. He eventuallly showed me this type of materials and asked me if I knew what Jacking off was. I didn't so he explained it to me and then was asking me if I wanted to get some pussy cause he knew some chicks in the area who would do it with me. This dude was using straight pornography to try and get me interested in sexual behavior. Once he could establish that, he'd take it the next step in his direction. Thank God I was street smart and got the fuck away from that guy before he could do anything to me. 20 some odd years later the dude was busted for child molestation. My regret is that I didn't report that fucker when I should have. But I was just a kid and didn't really "think outside the box" at that time in my life. Plus who would have believed me anyways, seems like a lot of people don't believe these kids. And the dude I'm talking about in my situation was a professional bowler with his own pro-bowl shop in the bowling alley. So that would be another excuse for adults not to believe me, that some how some way my parent's put me up to the story so they could get money from him.

So the big question, what would a person having young underaged boys hanging over at his house be doing with these types of mags?

Forget everything that Michael was accused of for once second, and think of this horrific parenting going on here for a second. Funny how these kids had nothing but praise for Michael and loved him for being a good guy and couldn't say a nicer thing about the man, then turn around and all of a sudden, there's their mom wanting a settlement of millions of dollars to pay off the crime for touching her child. Give me a break. It's he-said, she-said. No one will ever know if these stories are true, but the man was acquitted of all these charges.

Another thing I don't understand. With all of the top authorities of Michael Jackson's home, and security guards, and security camera's and the CIA and the Swat team looking over Michael's house.. you mean to tell me if these people knew Michael Jackson was sucking these kids off.. in his bedroom.. and they didn't say anything or do anything about it? I'm a firm believer that Michael didn't perform these acts. But I do believe he put himself out there to the point where it's a possible valid argument.

[Deb]

Well no shit. I got what you were saying. I don't care who the hell you are.. if you're a man, your PP will get hard. 100% proven fact. BTW: take a look around. Children aren't these sweet little innocent beings anymore. You should hear the language that comes out of 7-9 year olds' mouths. Pretty vulgar.. ones that shock me. I got your point. My point was that your right, and that even though MJ was genuine and labeled as a well nature and non-sexual guy.. he had a right to his privacy also. He wasn't fooling anybody, because when it comes down to it he's a man. Nothing wrong with that.

LOL Travis, always cracks me up when I hear a grown man call it his PP.