[sweetliberty]

Chilling, Calpernia. Thanks for posting that profile. People DO need to read it and it fits to a T. I'm not going to say that I believe he is guilty of sex with children, although I suspect it may be likely, but it is clearly evident that Michael J. has some serious "problems" which are disturbing at the very least. The main thing that leads me to think that perhaps he may not have actually had sex with children is that it seems that his pathology cold actually be severe enough to make him impotent. I suspect that before it's over we will learn far more than we ever wanted to know. The only thing that would surprise me in this case would be to discover that he was having a secret affair with a grown woman.

I have only ever of his "attraction" to little boys. Does he like little girls too, or is he strictly a one way kind of "guy?"

By the way, we have to stop meeting like this.

[Calpernia]

>>>The main thing that leads me to think that perhaps he may not have actually had sex with children is that it seems that his pathology cold actually be severe enough to make him impotent.

Actually SweetLiberty, I do suspect you may be right about the actual physical act of sex. I too, believe he may be impotant do to his pathology.

But that does not rule out Child Molestation. That still falls under the umbrella of a pedophile.