GRAND HAVEN, Mich. — A man who is suing his parents over their alleged destruction of his pricey pornography collection is now facing allegations in court that some of his items may be illegal.
A man FOX 17 has referred to as “Charlie” in previous reports filed the lawsuit against his parents in April. In it, he says he was temporarily living at his parents’ house following a divorce.
After an incident where police were called to the family home, Charlie moved out of the house.
Charlie claims in the lawsuit that after he moved out, his parents failed to return his vast collection of pornography and adult toys. According to the lawsuit, Charlie had left about 12 moving boxes full of explicit movies with his parents.
He would file a police report with the Ottawa County Sheriff’s Office, estimating the value of his collection to be $28,940.72. The prosecutor’s office declined to file charges against his parents.
Charlie’s parents filed a motion with the courts in May to have the case dismissed, a judge declined to do so at the time.
In a motion filed Monday, his parents make new accusations about some of the material their son left at their home. In their motion for protective order and judicial guidance, they tell the court that they have “newly discovered material” that is currently being held in a safety deposit box.
The motion says that attorneys for both Charlie and his parents had discussed the situation regarding the new materials and had agreed to consult the courts on how to proceed.
According to the filing, his parents had kept some of the “worst of the worst” materials belonging to their son, as “evidence of the sort of material that was destroyed just in case.”
The motion claims that neither the parents nor their attorney had actually viewed any of the movies in question, just looked at their “cover art,” saying that on first appearance, the movies appear to “depict highly obscene and likely criminal material.” They go on to speculate that some may include depictions of bestiality and child pornography, calling the visible cover art, “beyond shockingly graphic.”
In the request for judgement, his parent’s counsel writes, “Essentially, child pornography is radioactive.” For that reason, according to the documents, they felt it necessary to request judicial guidance on how to proceed with the materials.
