AcuteMania

For Truth, Honor, and Freedom
Try Acutemania's Conservative News Search

“Elmo” Pays Accuser to Keep Gay Pedophilia Charges Quiet »« Hey Liberals, Moderates, and Libertarians! Join the Conservatives . . . or Perish!

Gay Elmo Puppeteer Accused of Pedophilia, Confirmed as Internet Pervert

It gives a whole new meaning to the saying, “Tickle me, Elmo.” In a bizarre tale that has several unsavory turns, the man behind (no pun intended) the muppet Elmo was accused of carrying on a homosexual liaison with an underaged boy.

Specifically, the homosexual former lover of the Elmo muppeteer, Kevin Clash 52, asserted that Clash had sex with him when the accuser was only 16. According to Clash their relationship did not start until the accuser was at least 18; he is now 23.

Eventually, the accuser dropped his charges and the question remains: why? The initial charges were brought against Kevin Clash in June. The account of the June accusation, as recorded in the Toronto Star, runs as follows:

“We took the allegation very seriously and took immediate action,” Sesame Workshop said in a statement issued Monday. “We met with the accuser twice and had repeated communications with him. We met with Kevin, who denied the accusation.”

The organization described the relationship as “unrelated to the workplace.” Its investigation found the allegation of underage conduct to be unsubstantiated. But it said Clash exercised “poor judgment” and was disciplined for violating company policy regarding Internet usage. It offered no details.

In other words, the incident was swept under the rug, despite the fact that Kevin Clash was found to be doing something inappropriate on the internet. It is not surprising that PBS was quick to ditch this issue; a perverted muppet is a terrible marketing tool for children.

The question is why did the accuser bring this issue up in November after it was dismissed in June only to dismiss it again? Was he paid to go away and never be heard from again? It would not be surprising since PBS would hate the publicity, and PBS and Kevin Clash are not talking now.

That begs the question: Is there still a pedophile on Sesame Street? Whether or not the accuser was over 18 at the time is only legally relevant. The fact is that it takes a sick 50 year old man to take sexual advantage of an 18 year old boy. That is not the sort of person that I would want anywhere near a children’s television program.

, , , , , , , , , ,
November 16, 2012 at 10:36 pm
3 comments »
  • September 24, 2015 at 2:39 pmBablu

    Thank you so much! I actually just goeglod Sesame Street Sign Template. Imported the image and did some creative work. I think I was able to do it in Publisher. Wiping out the existing text and adding my own personalized text. I also some pictures on pinterest where people cut out the sign and letters from construction paper and glued it all together. I hope that helps!

  • July 1, 2013 at 1:29 amJean Valjean

    I think it is very unfortunate when the media continues to expand and re-write the definition of words like “pedophilia.”

    A pedophile is a person who is sexually attracted to pre-pubescent boys. They simply aren’t attracted to boys after they’ve reached puberty.

    In this case, the alleged pedophilia is between Clash and a young man of 16. That’s only two years before the age of majority and had Clash been 18 there would have been no impropriety.

    To call Clash a pedophile is misleading to the reader and downright slander to Clash and a disservice to everyone.

    Particularly children who are truly abused but then get lumped in with cases in which the abuse is less serious.

  • March 20, 2013 at 9:16 amJerry

    Although there may be some shady dealings here, as a gay man I can simply say this. At 16, I would have LOVED to have had an older lover and knew what I was doing. At 18 I was on my own, and making my own choises…no one was taking advantage of me…no one of ANY age. To think 18 year olds do not understand what is going on around them, or happening to them is ludicrous!

Leave a Reply to Bablu

*