Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would guess a lot of the PP who call grooming, etc., never saw Mr. Knick Knack in concert. Yes, he's with a bunch of kids in that picture--and the parents are probably one foot out of the frame. There were always tons and tons of parents at the shows, and the shows were always in outdoor or very public arenas. There is literally no way he could have touched a child inappropriately in those settings.

I actually talked to the guy a couple times with my kids nearby. I agree he's eccentric but I didn't get the creepy vibe. In one incident, he had problems with the promoter (I don't remember the details), and we said we'd vouch for him. The classic child molester would have happily taken our contact information, but he didn't--he said thanks but he'd figure it out. He also never remembered our kids' names or anything, even though we spoke to him a few different times.

I'm not disputing the charges. I'm just saying that it was NOT obvious that the guy was a sex offender.

Exacty what I’ve been trying to say. He did a horrible thing possessing child porn, but people thinking more is going to come out, because he inappropriately touched kids at shows, are going to be waiting for something that won’t happen. This poster is right, it’s impossible at one of these shows. It’s so crowded with moms, and sometimes dads, as well.

This is not what grooming is. You don't know what grooming is if you think it means touching kids inappropriately in public settings. I never said he did that, I'm only saying that he had the opportunity to groom kids--and their parents--because I know what actual grooming is.

You really are like talking to a wall. We all know what grooming is, as we watch the news, also. Look at your after school teachers, coaches, family members or people that can groom with the purpose of isolating that child. I’m not sure you know what grooming is after all. It’s to gain the trust of a child over a period of time, to eventually isolate that child and harm them.
Mr Knick knack or any other performer isn’t babysitting your kids to you get back. The point of someone in that situation grooming would be pointless, as he’s never alone with your kid. Uncle joe has a chance to groom and isolate your kid. What Knick knack did is horrible, but grooming your kids at show, no, it would be impossible for him to do anything there

No, but he could have done dozens, hundreds, perhaps thousands of one-off gropes. A 1 or 2 year old doesn't have the language or knowledge to know/tell they have been violated. Let that sink in for a moment. Think about times when you've had your personal space encroached on or when some random perv touched you inappropriately and no one around you noticed.

Thousands of gropes, with 60 to 80 parents looking on, taking photos, and recording it all on video.

I give up! No matter how many times his show is described, the alarmists claim that they know best.

I have no idea what he did in his off-hours, but no one will ever convince me that those shows were the site of mass molestations.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The point, however, still stands: People who care about the safety of children but be vigilant regarding any man who wants to spend lots of time with little children.

This is critical.

That is the take home message.

Coaches, teachers, entertainers, are all professions, where people are around kids, making a living. Always be vigilant, no matter what, when it comes to kids. Absolutely

But ESPECIALLY men!

This.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The point, however, still stands: People who care about the safety of children but be vigilant regarding any man who wants to spend lots of time with little children.

This is critical.

That is the take home message.

Coaches, teachers, entertainers, are all professions, where people are around kids, making a living. Always be vigilant, no matter what, when it comes to kids. Absolutely

But ESPECIALLY men!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would guess a lot of the PP who call grooming, etc., never saw Mr. Knick Knack in concert. Yes, he's with a bunch of kids in that picture--and the parents are probably one foot out of the frame. There were always tons and tons of parents at the shows, and the shows were always in outdoor or very public arenas. There is literally no way he could have touched a child inappropriately in those settings.

I actually talked to the guy a couple times with my kids nearby. I agree he's eccentric but I didn't get the creepy vibe. In one incident, he had problems with the promoter (I don't remember the details), and we said we'd vouch for him. The classic child molester would have happily taken our contact information, but he didn't--he said thanks but he'd figure it out. He also never remembered our kids' names or anything, even though we spoke to him a few different times.

I'm not disputing the charges. I'm just saying that it was NOT obvious that the guy was a sex offender.

Exacty what I’ve been trying to say. He did a horrible thing possessing child porn, but people thinking more is going to come out, because he inappropriately touched kids at shows, are going to be waiting for something that won’t happen. This poster is right, it’s impossible at one of these shows. It’s so crowded with moms, and sometimes dads, as well.

This is not what grooming is. You don't know what grooming is if you think it means touching kids inappropriately in public settings. I never said he did that, I'm only saying that he had the opportunity to groom kids--and their parents--because I know what actual grooming is.

You really are like talking to a wall. We all know what grooming is, as we watch the news, also. Look at your after school teachers, coaches, family members or people that can groom with the purpose of isolating that child. I’m not sure you know what grooming is after all. It’s to gain the trust of a child over a period of time, to eventually isolate that child and harm them.
Mr Knick knack or any other performer isn’t babysitting your kids to you get back. The point of someone in that situation grooming would be pointless, as he’s never alone with your kid. Uncle joe has a chance to groom and isolate your kid. What Knick knack did is horrible, but grooming your kids at show, no, it would be impossible for him to do anything there

No, but he could have done dozens, hundreds, perhaps thousands of one-off gropes. A 1 or 2 year old doesn't have the language or knowledge to know/tell they have been violated. Let that sink in for a moment. Think about times when you've had your personal space encroached on or when some random perv touched you inappropriately and no one around you noticed.

Thousands of gropes, with 60 to 80 parents looking on, taking photos, and recording it all on video.

I give up! No matter how many times his show is described, the alarmists claim that they know best.

I have no idea what he did in his off-hours, but no one will ever convince me that those shows were the site of mass molestations.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The point, however, still stands: People who care about the safety of children but be vigilant regarding any man who wants to spend lots of time with little children.

This is critical.

That is the take home message.

Coaches, teachers, entertainers, are all professions, where people are around kids, making a living. Always be vigilant, no matter what, when it comes to kids. Absolutely

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would guess a lot of the PP who call grooming, etc., never saw Mr. Knick Knack in concert. Yes, he's with a bunch of kids in that picture--and the parents are probably one foot out of the frame. There were always tons and tons of parents at the shows, and the shows were always in outdoor or very public arenas. There is literally no way he could have touched a child inappropriately in those settings.

I actually talked to the guy a couple times with my kids nearby. I agree he's eccentric but I didn't get the creepy vibe. In one incident, he had problems with the promoter (I don't remember the details), and we said we'd vouch for him. The classic child molester would have happily taken our contact information, but he didn't--he said thanks but he'd figure it out. He also never remembered our kids' names or anything, even though we spoke to him a few different times.

I'm not disputing the charges. I'm just saying that it was NOT obvious that the guy was a sex offender.

Exacty what I’ve been trying to say. He did a horrible thing possessing child porn, but people thinking more is going to come out, because he inappropriately touched kids at shows, are going to be waiting for something that won’t happen. This poster is right, it’s impossible at one of these shows. It’s so crowded with moms, and sometimes dads, as well.

This is not what grooming is. You don't know what grooming is if you think it means touching kids inappropriately in public settings. I never said he did that, I'm only saying that he had the opportunity to groom kids--and their parents--because I know what actual grooming is.

You really are like talking to a wall. We all know what grooming is, as we watch the news, also. Look at your after school teachers, coaches, family members or people that can groom with the purpose of isolating that child. I’m not sure you know what grooming is after all. It’s to gain the trust of a child over a period of time, to eventually isolate that child and harm them.
Mr Knick knack or any other performer isn’t babysitting your kids to you get back. The point of someone in that situation grooming would be pointless, as he’s never alone with your kid. Uncle joe has a chance to groom and isolate your kid. What Knick knack did is horrible, but grooming your kids at show, no, it would be impossible for him to do anything there

No, but he could have done dozens, hundreds, perhaps thousands of one-off gropes. A 1 or 2 year old doesn't have the language or knowledge to know/tell they have been violated. Let that sink in for a moment. Think about times when you've had your personal space encroached on or when some random perv touched you inappropriately and no one around you noticed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The point, however, still stands: People who care about the safety of children but be vigilant regarding any man who wants to spend lots of time with little children.

This is critical.

That is the take home message.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m so confused why some of you are arguing about additional abuse. The fact that this guy was into child porn (while being in a career where he got to be around tons of kids, to boot) is already terrible and disgusting. Full stop.

What some of us are arguing against (with aforementioned brick walls) is that we should have known this guy was a sex offender. No. Nothing in his public appearances would have led you to believe he was a sex offender, unless you believe every man who enjoys singing to young children is a sex offender. I guess Mister Rogers is next on their list?

exactly

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would guess a lot of the PP who call grooming, etc., never saw Mr. Knick Knack in concert. Yes, he's with a bunch of kids in that picture--and the parents are probably one foot out of the frame. There were always tons and tons of parents at the shows, and the shows were always in outdoor or very public arenas. There is literally no way he could have touched a child inappropriately in those settings.

I actually talked to the guy a couple times with my kids nearby. I agree he's eccentric but I didn't get the creepy vibe. In one incident, he had problems with the promoter (I don't remember the details), and we said we'd vouch for him. The classic child molester would have happily taken our contact information, but he didn't--he said thanks but he'd figure it out. He also never remembered our kids' names or anything, even though we spoke to him a few different times.

I'm not disputing the charges. I'm just saying that it was NOT obvious that the guy was a sex offender.

Exacty what I’ve been trying to say. He did a horrible thing possessing child porn, but people thinking more is going to come out, because he inappropriately touched kids at shows, are going to be waiting for something that won’t happen. This poster is right, it’s impossible at one of these shows. It’s so crowded with moms, and sometimes dads, as well.

This is not what grooming is. You don't know what grooming is if you think it means touching kids inappropriately in public settings. I never said he did that, I'm only saying that he had the opportunity to groom kids--and their parents--because I know what actual grooming is.

You really are like talking to a wall. We all know what grooming is, as we watch the news, also. Look at your after school teachers, coaches, family members or people that can groom with the purpose of isolating that child. I’m not sure you know what grooming is after all. It’s to gain the trust of a child over a period of time, to eventually isolate that child and harm them.
Mr Knick knack or any other performer isn’t babysitting your kids to you get back. The point of someone in that situation grooming would be pointless, as he’s never alone with your kid. Uncle joe has a chance to groom and isolate your kid. What Knick knack did is horrible, but grooming your kids at show, no, it would be impossible for him to do anything there

Anonymous wrote:The point, however, still stands: People who care about the safety of children but be vigilant regarding any man who wants to spend lots of time with little children.

This is critical.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard he was giving the moms a paddy whack, AND THEY LOVED IT.

Not funny.

Inappropriate... but it was pretty funny.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m so confused why some of you are arguing about additional abuse. The fact that this guy was into child porn (while being in a career where he got to be around tons of kids, to boot) is already terrible and disgusting. Full stop.

What some of us are arguing against (with aforementioned brick walls) is that we should have known this guy was a sex offender. No. Nothing in his public appearances would have led you to believe he was a sex offender, unless you believe every man who enjoys singing to young children is a sex offender. I guess Mister Rogers is next on their list?

Anonymous wrote:I’m so confused why some of you are arguing about additional abuse. The fact that this guy was into child porn (while being in a career where he got to be around tons of kids, to boot) is already terrible and disgusting. Full stop.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would guess a lot of the PP who call grooming, etc., never saw Mr. Knick Knack in concert. Yes, he's with a bunch of kids in that picture--and the parents are probably one foot out of the frame. There were always tons and tons of parents at the shows, and the shows were always in outdoor or very public arenas. There is literally no way he could have touched a child inappropriately in those settings.

I actually talked to the guy a couple times with my kids nearby. I agree he's eccentric but I didn't get the creepy vibe. In one incident, he had problems with the promoter (I don't remember the details), and we said we'd vouch for him. The classic child molester would have happily taken our contact information, but he didn't--he said thanks but he'd figure it out. He also never remembered our kids' names or anything, even though we spoke to him a few different times.

I'm not disputing the charges. I'm just saying that it was NOT obvious that the guy was a sex offender.

Exacty what I’ve been trying to say. He did a horrible thing possessing child porn, but people thinking more is going to come out, because he inappropriately touched kids at shows, are going to be waiting for something that won’t happen. This poster is right, it’s impossible at one of these shows. It’s so crowded with moms, and sometimes dads, as well.

This is not what grooming is. You don't know what grooming is if you think it means touching kids inappropriately in public settings. I never said he did that, I'm only saying that he had the opportunity to groom kids--and their parents--because I know what actual grooming is.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would guess a lot of the PP who call grooming, etc., never saw Mr. Knick Knack in concert. Yes, he's with a bunch of kids in that picture--and the parents are probably one foot out of the frame. There were always tons and tons of parents at the shows, and the shows were always in outdoor or very public arenas. There is literally no way he could have touched a child inappropriately in those settings.

I actually talked to the guy a couple times with my kids nearby. I agree he's eccentric but I didn't get the creepy vibe. In one incident, he had problems with the promoter (I don't remember the details), and we said we'd vouch for him. The classic child molester would have happily taken our contact information, but he didn't--he said thanks but he'd figure it out. He also never remembered our kids' names or anything, even though we spoke to him a few different times.

I'm not disputing the charges. I'm just saying that it was NOT obvious that the guy was a sex offender.

Exacty what I’ve been trying to say. He did a horrible thing possessing child porn, but people thinking more is going to come out, because he inappropriately touched kids at shows, are going to be waiting for something that won’t happen. This poster is right, it’s impossible at one of these shows. It’s so crowded with moms, and sometimes dads, as well.

This is not what grooming is. You don't know what grooming is if you think it means touching kids inappropriately in public settings. I never said he did that, I'm only saying that he had the opportunity to groom kids--and their parents--because I know what actual grooming is.