PDA

View Full Version : To Catch A Predator



NJCardFan
12-26-2010, 11:27 PM
Anyone else watch this? The wife and I do all the time, mostly when they show it on BSNBC(this and Lockup are the only shows I watch on BSNBC). I have mixed feelings on what they do because they're trying to catch sexual predators. However, here's my issue with it:

OK, what they do(in case you don't know) this organization(Perverted Justice) has people who go to chat rooms posing as underage girls or boys(13, 14, 15 years old), but the ones posing as these children are adults. If these guys decide to meet these kids, they set up a meeting at a house and use a girl or guy who's an adult, usually 19 or early 20's, and these people go to this house and get interviewed by Chris Hansen before leaving and getting arrested. Now, here's the deal. They are supposed to be chatting with a child, however, the person they are actually chatting with isn't a child but is an adult. Same with the person who is at the set up house. So, how can you be guilty of committing a crime you technically didn't commit? And some of these guys get hit with some pretty stiff penalties, some do prison time. Is this entrapment or not? I mean apparently not but it sure looks like it.

PoliCon
12-26-2010, 11:40 PM
intent is also a crime.

NJCardFan
12-27-2010, 12:04 AM
intent is also a crime.

I guess you're right.

m00
12-27-2010, 12:05 AM
intent is also a crime.

Ah, but if there's entrapment to what degree is there really intent?

megimoo
12-27-2010, 12:07 AM
Anyone else watch this? The wife and I do all the time, mostly when they show it on BSNBC(this and Lockup are the only shows I watch on BSNBC). I have mixed feelings on what they do because they're trying to catch sexual predators. However, here's my issue with it:

OK, what they do(in case you don't know) this organization(Perverted Justice) has people who go to chat rooms posing as underage girls or boys(13, 14, 15 years old), but the ones posing as these children are adults. If these guys decide to meet these kids, they set up a meeting at a house and use a girl or guy who's an adult, usually 19 or early 20's, and these people go to this house and get interviewed by Chris Hansen before leaving and getting arrested. Now, here's the deal. They are supposed to be chatting with a child, however, the person they are actually chatting with isn't a child but is an adult. Same with the person who is at the set up house. So, how can you be guilty of committing a crime you technically didn't commit? And some of these guys get hit with some pretty stiff penalties, some do prison time. Is this entrapment or not? I mean apparently not but it sure looks like it.

The FBI has a task force dedicated to this stuff.They're all over face book and other social sites where young kids hang out.These kids are dumb and post pictures of themselves in compromising positions to their young male friends and reveal quite a bit of themselves and lots of personnel information for all to read .

They usually have agents communicate with Particularly Aggressive men stalking naive young kids and play the part of wantons .When they are ready to take one down they will set up a meet and grab him or her.The first thing they do is to grab their hard drives qnd look for any evidence of paedophilic pronography .They have set some people up for arrest just for clicking on a known Paedophile website .

NJCardFan
12-27-2010, 01:19 AM
Ah, but if there's entrapment to what degree is there really intent?

That's where I was leaning.

djones520
12-27-2010, 05:43 AM
Ah, but if there's entrapment to what degree is there really intent?

How is it entrapment though? And how can you not figure intent when these people drive however long to do this? It's not like they just show up at their door and arrest them. The people actually drive to a location intending on engaging in sexual intercourse with minors.

Personally, I think it's a good show. Watch it when I work mids back home.

PoliCon
12-27-2010, 07:39 AM
Ah, but if there's entrapment to what degree is there really intent?

Please. We're talking about people who go to chatrooms to talk dirty with kids. Entrapment? Can you be trapped into doing something that was never in your heart in the first place?

NJCardFan
12-27-2010, 10:11 AM
How is it entrapment though? And how can you not figure intent when these people drive however long to do this? It's not like they just show up at their door and arrest them. The people actually drive to a location intending on engaging in sexual intercourse with minors.

Personally, I think it's a good show. Watch it when I work mids back home.

My wife and I laugh at these guys because when Hansen comes out, they all say the exact same things: "I've never done this before", "I don't know his/her age", "I wasn't planning on having sex". It's good for a laugh. Another thing we noticed last night that the penalties vary from state to state. Guys in Georgia were getting hit with at least 4 years in prison then probation for anywhere between 10 and 25 years. In Ohio, they were getting 60 days in jail and fines. Except one guy who got 25 to life.

linda22003
12-27-2010, 10:13 AM
If they could somehow blend this show with "Hoarders" they'd have a total winner. Guy gets lured by a teen on the internet, and when he shows up the house is so full of crap he has to clean it out to find her. Then when it's clean, the show leaps out and nabs him.

djones520
12-27-2010, 10:15 AM
My wife and I laugh at these guys because when Hansen comes out, they all say the exact same things: "I've never done this before", "I don't know his/her age", "I wasn't planning on having sex". It's good for a laugh. Another thing we noticed last night that the penalties vary from state to state. Guys in Georgia were getting hit with at least 4 years in prison then probation for anywhere between 10 and 25 years. In Ohio, they were getting 60 days in jail and fines. Except one guy who got 25 to life.

Yeah, get some pretty pathetic ones on there. I actually almost have to applaud that guys who just accept their fate like a man. Well... you know what I mean.

Probably the best episode I saw was when they nailed the same guy twice on the same sting. You could just tell this guy was messed up in the head though. Not just being a child molester messed up, but truly a few bricks short of a full load.

NJCardFan
12-27-2010, 10:41 AM
Yeah, get some pretty pathetic ones on there. I actually almost have to applaud that guys who just accept their fate like a man. Well... you know what I mean.

Probably the best episode I saw was when they nailed the same guy twice on the same sting. You could just tell this guy was messed up in the head though. Not just being a child molester messed up, but truly a few bricks short of a full load.

Wasn't that the guy who took his clothes off before going into the house?

djones520
12-27-2010, 10:43 AM
Wasn't that the guy who took his clothes off before going into the house?

I think I've seen a couple like that. But yeah, probably was him. Then they set it up to meet him at a McDonalds.

NJCardFan
12-27-2010, 10:53 AM
I think I've seen a couple like that. But yeah, probably was him. Then they set it up to meet him at a McDonalds.
That's the guy. This was before they started working with local law enforcement.

Novaheart
12-27-2010, 12:10 PM
Please. We're talking about people who go to chatrooms to talk dirty with kids. Entrapment? Can you be trapped into doing something that was never in your heart in the first place?

That's precisely why it isn't entrapment. Entrapment isn't when police entice you to do something on their schedule so they can arrest you, it's when they entice you to do something you wouldn't otherwise do, or force you into a situation where you make a criminal choice under stress.

I still have a problem with what these cops and pseudo cops do, as have some courts in the past. The problem is that these people are being prosecuted for the thoughts and actions leading up to a crime which was not committed. Some legislatures have made "solicitation of a minor or use of an internet device for blah blah blah... " a crime and it doesn't sit well with me.

As a society, our prime directive in crime and punishment is "Innocent until proven guilty". To me, that means that you are innocent up until the moment in which you actually commit a crime. This kind of set-up takes away the choice to turn back. Yes, Dominic drove four hours to meet up with Jennifer, and he stupidly walked into a strange house, and sat at the breakfast bar eating cookies. So far, he hasn't defiled a child. He still has the chance to turn back and leave. He still might, upon meeting her think, "Hey, I can't do this." and take off running. But in this scenario, the choice to not commit the actual crime has been taken away by criminalizing the consideration and pursuit of the crime.

By comparison, this would be like busting a guy for buying a hooded sweatshirt and sunglasses, buying a gun or knife, walking through the park, and sitting down next to Mrs. Morrton Throgbotham and her Gucci purse. He may be a scumbag. He may have robbed someone before. But today he has yet to rob Mrs. Throgbotham.

This is quite different from busting a hit man before he can complete the hit. He has conspired against the victim. These Predator men are conspiring with the victim.

The bottom line is that we (as a nation) have an unfounded belief that the police can make us safe. We like things like this which give us a false sense of security. And we often don't care if we trample constitutional principles in the pursuit of safety, especially where young people are involved (either as victim or perp).

Novaheart
12-27-2010, 12:18 PM
I was watching one of the endless re-cuts of this show the other night and the host explained that the reason that the police were throwing even the meekest and most compliant arrestees on the ground was because.... "This is Florida where easily available guns and permits make it necessary for the officers to quickly control the suspect."

So , Chris Hansen thinks that Second Amendment rights are an excuse for cops to clobber suspects, throw them to the ground, and jump on top of them on camera no less.

And while I'm bitching, was there no one who would host this show who doesn't have an annoying speech impediment? I know that's not kind, but Chris Hansen could have gone to therapy years ago and trained this out.

NJCardFan
12-27-2010, 12:59 PM
The deal with entrapment in this case is that it isn't the police who are doing it. It's a private organization called Perverted Justice. They go into these chat rooms, have conversations with these men, and if the men agree to meet them, they contact the local law enforcement. When TCAP forst came to be, the cops weren't involved. It wasn't until the 2nd season, I believe, that on site arrests were being made. Now, that said, if things stopped at the vulgar chat, that would be the end of it. It's inappropriate, yes but if they were arrested for doing that, that would never hold up in court. The sending of lewd pictures crosses another line, however, since it's online and the person receiving it is legally an adult, there's no case. Where intent plays in is when these guys show up at the house. Armed with the chat logs, they can now put everything together because quite frankly, the admittance that all they wanted to do was "hang out" won't fly. Especially if they have condoms, booze, etc which proves that their intent was to get this kid drunk and screw them.

m00
12-27-2010, 04:46 PM
Please. We're talking about people who go to chatrooms to talk dirty with kids. Entrapment? Can you be trapped into doing something that was never in your heart in the first place?

Actually, we are talking about 19-20 year-olds who go into a chat room and get enticed to come over and meet what is presumably a 15-16 year old, but is instead a member of a vigilante organization. They then get humiliated on national TV before there is a trial, and then the cops haul them off. I think the show creates as many criminals as it finds.

Just my 2c.

PoliCon
12-27-2010, 06:07 PM
As a society, our prime directive in crime and punishment is "Innocent until proven guilty". To me, that means that you are innocent up until the moment in which you actually commit a crime. So what you're saying is they need to wait until after the kid is scared for life before they can bust em. I for one - as someone who has been the victim of sexual assault - am quite satisfied with what is currently being done. Reality is these perves talk with what they believe to be under aged kids on the internet - they ALWAYS confirm to the perp that they are under aged so that the perp cannot claim "I didn't know" - the perp then agrees to meet a kid for sex - and once again it's always expressed as being a meeting for sex. THEN as if that's not enough - the bastards actually show up! Sorry. There's more than enough there for them to be found guilty.

PoliCon
12-27-2010, 06:13 PM
Actually, we are talking about 19-20 year-olds who go into a chat room and get enticed to come over and meet what is presumably a 15-16 year old, but is instead a member of a vigilante organization. They then get humiliated on national TV before there is a trial, and then the cops haul them off. I think the show creates as many criminals as it finds.

Just my 2c. Once again why it pays to know the age of consent in your state. And get enticed? Please have you seen the chat logs from these cases?? The vast majority of the time the perp is the one who initiates contact and who initiates the topic of sex and who initiates the get together.

Madisonian
12-27-2010, 06:26 PM
Actually, we are talking about 19-20 year-olds who go into a chat room and get enticed to come over and meet what is presumably a 15-16 year old, but is instead a member of a vigilante organization. They then get humiliated on national TV before there is a trial, and then the cops haul them off. I think the show creates as many criminals as it finds.

Just my 2c.

I have only seen the show a couple times but the ones I did see, the men were much older that 19-20 year olds. Married professional men, a doctor and your assorted 30 something losers were the ones showing up and if they are that sex starved and perverted to go after young teen-agers, then I have no sympathy for them and hope they find all the "loving" they need in the correctional system.

I have 17 and 14 year year old granddaughters and if I found out some older guy went after either of them, the authorities would be their only safe haven and the perverts would be much safer with them in jail than with me outside.

m00
12-27-2010, 08:50 PM
I have 17 and 14 year year old granddaughters and if I found out some older guy went after either of them, the authorities would be their only safe haven and the perverts would be much safer with them in jail than with me outside.

Well, 17 is age of consent in a lot of places. Just sayin...

PoliCon
12-27-2010, 10:13 PM
Well, 17 is age of consent in a lot of places. Just sayin...

In places like Ohio - it's 16.

Space Gravy
12-27-2010, 10:14 PM
If they could somehow blend this show with "Hoarders" they'd have a total winner. Guy gets lured by a teen on the internet, and when he shows up the house is so full of crap he has to clean it out to find her. Then when it's clean, the show leaps out and nabs him.

How many shows about cake and little people do we really need?

Rockntractor
12-27-2010, 10:17 PM
In places like Ohio - it's 16.

I think in Arkansas you have to be tall enough to reach the line they use for carnival rides!

Novaheart
12-27-2010, 10:35 PM
If they could somehow blend this show with "Hoarders" they'd have a total winner. Guy gets lured by a teen on the internet, and when he shows up the house is so full of crap he has to clean it out to find her. Then when it's clean, the show leaps out and nabs him.

That's fabulous.

NJCardFan
12-27-2010, 11:03 PM
If they could somehow blend this show with "Hoarders" they'd have a total winner. Guy gets lured by a teen on the internet, and when he shows up the house is so full of crap he has to clean it out to find her. Then when it's clean, the show leaps out and nabs him.

Throw in the guys from American Pickers and it's smorgasbord.

Novaheart
12-27-2010, 11:43 PM
So what you're saying is they need to wait until after the kid is scared for life before they can bust em. I for one - as someone who has been the victim of sexual assault - am quite satisfied with what is currently being done. Reality is these perves talk with what they believe to be under aged kids on the internet - they ALWAYS confirm to the perp that they are under aged so that the perp cannot claim "I didn't know" - the perp then agrees to meet a kid for sex - and once again it's always expressed as being a meeting for sex. THEN as if that's not enough - the bastards actually show up! Sorry. There's more than enough there for them to be found guilty.

As has been pointed out before, in these cases there is no actual minor.

m00
12-28-2010, 12:58 AM
So how would you guys feel if there was another show, where people on the show pretended to be adults and meet kids online, and when they showed up at the kid's house they brought social workers and put the parents on TV. :p

Novaheart
12-28-2010, 01:31 AM
So how would you guys feel if there was another show, where people on the show pretended to be adults and meet kids online, and when they showed up at the kid's house they brought social workers and put the parents on TV. :p

My parents kept a pretty good eye on me, and yet my mother would have to retreat into an advanced state of denial were I to tell her some of the stuff she doesn't know about.

I should write a book called the Secret Lives Of The Good Kids.

CaughtintheMiddle1990
12-28-2010, 08:15 AM
I have a theory with this.
I think Chris Hansen is probably a huge closet pedophile and he has to Catch a Predator to remove his potential competition.:D

NJCardFan
12-28-2010, 09:48 AM
One thing that struck me as funny. The decoy they were using on one show, whoever is actually dating her must get some funny looks because she was 20 and looked 12. Cute as hell but damn she looks like a little girl.

Novaheart
12-28-2010, 10:12 AM
One thing that struck me as funny. The decoy they were using on one show, whoever is actually dating her must get some funny looks because she was 20 and looked 12. Cute as hell but damn she looks like a little girl.

AN old friend's mother was a warbride from the Philipines. Pictures of her when she is allegedly 18 years old (shortly before they were married) show her to be about as physically adult as a female Chinese gymnast. Technically you are physically adult when you are capable of reproduction, but this woman looked like a child. Despite the fact that she turned into Bloody Mary, she has always called him "Daddy" and I have always found the relationship to be a bit creepy.

Novaheart
12-28-2010, 10:22 AM
I have a theory with this.
I think Chris Hansen is probably a huge closet pedophile and he has to Catch a Predator to remove his potential competition.:D

It's a show that makes everyone feel better about himself. Even pedophiles can watch it and think, "What a dumbass. I can't believe you fell for this."

I wish they would but the guy who drives the ice cream truck around here. It's not that I think he's a pedophile, it's that I really hate listening to that continuous loop of synthetic music box on his PA system.

Gingersnap
12-28-2010, 10:36 AM
If they could somehow blend this show with "Hoarders" they'd have a total winner. Guy gets lured by a teen on the internet, and when he shows up the house is so full of crap he has to clean it out to find her. Then when it's clean, the show leaps out and nabs him.

OMG! I'd totally watch that!

I was a huge fan of this show before it was canceled. Hanson has hinted that the show might return in the future.

Novaheart
12-28-2010, 10:43 AM
OMG! I'd totally watch that!

I was a huge fan of this show before it was canceled. Hanson has hinted that the show might return in the future.

I thought that was a fabulous idea. My mom thought it was hilarious.

Another variation, and I think we can all agree that this one is appropriate, would be to get those two bitches from What Not To Wear to take the place of Chris Hanson.

Gingersnap
12-28-2010, 10:46 AM
I thought that was a fabulous idea. My mom thought it was hilarious.

Another variation, and I think we can all agree that this one is appropriate, would be to get those two bitches from What Not To Wear to take the place of Chris Hanson.

It's completely appropriate because the reveal would be even more horrifying.

PoliCon
12-28-2010, 06:00 PM
As has been pointed out before, in these cases there is no actual minor.

IMO - doesn't matter. Their intent is to have sex with a minor.

m00
12-28-2010, 06:02 PM
IMO - doesn't matter. Their intent is to have sex with a minor.

But would it have been their intent if there wasn't entrapment (by an adult)? That's kinda the point I'm making.

PoliCon
12-28-2010, 06:14 PM
One thing that struck me as funny. The decoy they were using on one show, whoever is actually dating her must get some funny looks because she was 20 and looked 12. Cute as hell but damn she looks like a little girl.

A friend of mine - his youngest brother is almost 30 and looks 14 at the oldest. His petuitary shut down when he was a kid and he just stopped growing.

Gingersnap
12-28-2010, 06:17 PM
But would it have been their intent if there wasn't entrapment (by an adult)? That's kinda the point I'm making.

Sure. These guys were all looking for underage tail. The "persona" in the chat rooms always repeatedly makes it plain that the persona is very underage. The persona isn't trying to pretend to be kid pretending to be an adult. Only someone actively sorting contacts to meet kids would follow up in those chats.

If the persona says, "I'm 14 and I go to such-and-such middle school" that's a big red flag to anyone who wants to hookup with legal adults.

PoliCon
12-28-2010, 06:17 PM
But would it have been their intent if there wasn't entrapment (by an adult)? That's kinda the point I'm making.

Entrapment? They go LOOKING for this dude. This isn't a cold call where out of the blue some supposedly teenaged girl calls and says hey wanna have sex with me? This is them going and LOOKING for it and an adult offering to give it to them. The perp always initiates the discussion of sex and is the one who chooses to meet. How the hell is that entrapment? :confused:

m00
12-28-2010, 06:22 PM
Entrapment? They go LOOKING for this dude. This isn't a cold call where out of the blue some supposedly teenaged girl calls and says hey wanna have sex with me? This is them going and LOOKING for it and an adult offering to give it to them. The perp always initiates the discussion of sex and is the one who chooses to meet. How the hell is that entrapment? :confused:

On what evidence do you make this claim?

PoliCon
12-28-2010, 06:24 PM
On what evidence do you make this claim?

They wouldn't have a case otherwise dude. If it were any other way - then the perp might be able to make the case for entrapment and these people don't want anything less than an air tight case.

Madisonian
12-28-2010, 06:28 PM
But would it have been their intent if there wasn't entrapment (by an adult)? That's kinda the point I'm making.

I can see your point a have a good alternative.
Instead of legal age adults, they use actual minors in all phases of the show. That gets rid of the entrapment issues and to make sure, there would be no law enforcement involved.

My change would be that the minor lets the pervert touch her and then excuses herself to "get more comfortable".

After she disappears, a volunteer parent or two that have had children molested, kidnapped or killed by these pedophiles come out and beat the holy fuck out of the guy with whatever blunt instruments they choose. He is then free to leave for the hospital of his choice.

Since this would be a "private transaction" as law enforcement would not be involved, it gets around the Constitutional issues and if really necessary, Judge Judy could monitor.

Gingersnap
12-28-2010, 06:32 PM
On what evidence do you make this claim?

That's how the show was set up. The show worked with members of police units who specialized in sexual predators. The police decided all the ground rules for the show and that was a big one - the "kid" always states his or her age and the "kid" never brings up any sexual topics.

m00
12-28-2010, 06:33 PM
They wouldn't have a case otherwise dude. If it were any other way - then the perp might be able to make the case for entrapment and these people don't want anything less than an air tight case.

That seems like a circular argument. We need to assume they are guilty as you are convinced it's not entrapment, because if it weren't entrapment you wouldn't assume they were guilty.

I'm generally very skeptical of this sort of thing because our FBI defines "intent" as "your browser sent an HTTP request to a forbidden site." I mean, literally I could pretend to link to DU and instead link to an FBI honeypot and you could go to jail if you click on it. I couldn't even make this shit up if I tried.

This is such an emotional issue, that all common sense and justice goes out the window. So no, I don't "trust" a vigilante justice organization to follow proper procedures to make sure it's not entrapment (even if they agree with police to do things a certain way), and no I don't "trust" a federal prosecutor not to cherry pick and rearrange chat logs, and no I don't generally don't trust a politician or a judge to go out on a limb and step in if rights are being violated.

m00
12-28-2010, 06:36 PM
That's how the show was set up. The show worked with members of police units who specialized in sexual predators. The police decided all the ground rules for the show and that was a big one - the "kid" always states his or her age and the "kid" never brings up any sexual topics.

Yeah, but if it's getting towards the end of the week and they need to cut an episode you don't think they'd bend the rules just a little?

PoliCon
12-28-2010, 06:36 PM
That seems like a circular argument. We need to assume they are guilty as you are convinced it's not entrapment, because if it weren't entrapment you wouldn't assume they were guilty.

I'm generally very skeptical of this sort of thing because our FBI defines "intent" as "your browser sent an HTTP request to a forbidden site." I mean, literally I could pretend to link to DU and instead link to an FBI honeypot and you could go to jail if you click on it. I couldn't even make this shit up if I tried.

This is such an emotional issue, that all common sense and justice goes out the window. So no, I don't "trust" a vigilante justice organization to follow proper procedures to make sure it's not entrapment (even if they agree with police to do things a certain way), and no I don't "trust" a federal prosecutor not to cherry pick and rearrange chat logs, and no I don't generally don't trust a politician or a judge to go out on a limb and step in if rights are being violated.

It's not just clicking on a site - it's getting in a car and driving to meet someone who has confessed to you that they are a minor with the intent of having sex with them.

Rockntractor
12-28-2010, 06:38 PM
It's ot just clicking on a site - it's getting in a car and driving to meet someone who has confessed to you that they are a minor with the intent of having sex with them.

It'ts ot? Did you mean otay?:confused:

m00
12-28-2010, 06:42 PM
It's ot just clicking on a site - it's getting in a car and driving to meet someone who has confessed to you that they are a minor with the intent of having sex with them.

But they aren't a minor, and "intent" is a tricky thing when you falsify aspects of the situation. And don't they jump on the dudes as soon as they enter?

I have no sympathy for guys who pick up minors in chat-rooms, but I think this is a really screwed up show. And I think blending justice and entertainment is such a dangerous path it's not even funny.

Rockntractor
12-28-2010, 06:45 PM
But they aren't a minor, and "intent" is a tricky thing when you falsify aspects of the situation. And don't they jump on the dudes as soon as they enter?

I have no sympathy for guys who pick up minors in chat-rooms, but I think this is a really screwed up show. And I think blending justice and entertainment is such a dangerous path it's not even funny.

I heard hangings used to be fun!:confused:

Gingersnap
12-28-2010, 06:46 PM
Yeah, but if it's getting towards the end of the week and they need to cut an episode you don't think they'd bend the rules just a little?

No. The show followed a number of chat contacts. There are so many grown men out there who want to bang 14 year old girls (or boys) that they never lacked for material.

These men frequently not only directly solicited sex from the personas, they even went so far as to take pics of their junk and send it to their prey. When they were caught, they had everything from condoms and roofies to duct tape in their goodie bags.

This wasn't a case of hysteria and mistaken information (which I do believe happens a lot in sexual cases involving kids), it was all very explicit and the predators had numerous opportunities to end the contact before anything illegal happened.

m00
12-28-2010, 06:47 PM
I heard hangings used to be fun!:confused:

People didn't buy tickets to go to privatize hangings, that sold advertisement based on tickets sold. :p "This Hanging has been brought to you buy... Pa Palmer's Linseed Oil"

Rockntractor
12-28-2010, 06:49 PM
People didn't buy tickets to go to privatize hangings, that sold advertisement based on tickets sold. :p "This Hanging has been brought to you buy... Pa Palmer's Linseed Oil"

...or this electrocution brought to you by Shake and Bake!

Madisonian
12-28-2010, 06:52 PM
No. The show followed a number of chat contacts. There are so many grown men out there who want to bang 14 year old girls (or boys) that they never lacked for material.



Does the show use boy personas and induce either male or female predators following the same format?
Have they ever had a man show up for an underage boy on the show?

I don't watch the show on any regular basis, have just caught it here and there but was wondering if only males to supposedly underage girls were targeted.

Novaheart
12-28-2010, 08:39 PM
A friend of mine - his youngest brother is almost 30 and looks 14 at the oldest. His petuitary shut down when he was a kid and he just stopped growing.

That makes the point, doesn't it? We're not punishing the desire, because we can't and don't punish people who are attracted to very young looking 18 year olds. We might look at them funny, like I do my friend's dad, but what they are doing is not illegal.

As someone else pointed out, the age of consent in some states is at or below the age at which these bait-persons are being described as "children". They are not biologically children, they are biologically adults, and the people who are attracted to them aren't technically pedophiles, and in some states it would be legal for the perp to be marrying the bait.

We have arbitrary rules and it's well known in our society that you are expected to know the rules. But, this is not truly a moral crusade, we're talking about statutory rape- sex with the consent of a person not legally permitted to consent by a person outside an arbitrary age range we have decided upon. So now that we've nailed down what this actually is, the next question is if we're going to be consistent.

The 18 year and one day old boyfriend of a fifteen year and 364 day old person comes over to the house and they have planned to have sex. Can he be arrested in the driveway? Or do you have to wait until he actually does something sexual?

Novaheart
12-28-2010, 08:42 PM
Does the show use boy personas and induce either male or female predators following the same format?
Have they ever had a man show up for an underage boy on the show?

I don't watch the show on any regular basis, have just caught it here and there but was wondering if only males to supposedly underage girls were targeted.

Yes, they have used boy bait before. To my knowledge, they have never snagged a female perp. Women usually do their students. And if you were around for the Debra LsFavre case, many heterosexual men were complaining that there weren't any teachers like that when they were in middle school.

Gingersnap
12-28-2010, 08:43 PM
Does the show use boy personas and induce either male or female predators following the same format?
Have they ever had a man show up for an underage boy on the show?

I don't watch the show on any regular basis, have just caught it here and there but was wondering if only males to supposedly underage girls were targeted.

They've had men looking for both girls and boys. I believe they even caught one woman looking to recruit a girl for some kind of unholy threesome. :eek:

Rockntractor
12-28-2010, 08:48 PM
A friend of mine - his youngest brother is almost 30 and looks 14 at the oldest. His petuitary shut down when he was a kid and he just stopped growing.

A friend, yes of course it's always "a friend".:rolleyes:

m00
12-28-2010, 08:50 PM
Can he be arrested in the driveway? Or do you have to wait until he actually does something sexual?

Apparently, whatever has the highest entertainment value.

Gingersnap
12-28-2010, 08:59 PM
Apparently, whatever has the highest entertainment value.

They had to make contact with the actor and enter the house after being invited in.

Kind of like vampires.

PoliCon
12-28-2010, 09:28 PM
But they aren't a minor, and "intent" is a tricky thing when you falsify aspects of the situation. And don't they jump on the dudes as soon as they enter?

I have no sympathy for guys who pick up minors in chat-rooms, but I think this is a really screwed up show. And I think blending justice and entertainment is such a dangerous path it's not even funny.

OH I would never and could never watch the show - but I feel not one ounce of sympathy for the perps.

PoliCon
12-28-2010, 09:33 PM
A friend, yes of course it's always "a friend".:rolleyes:

OH SHUT UP. :p

Novaheart
12-28-2010, 09:54 PM
Speaking of shows, TBS is pissing me off with these five minute promos for their lousy original content. I don't watch family guy to put up with five minutes of Juvenile Mental Defectives Go To College, and Screaming Atlanta Suburbanites Make Ehtnic Jokes.

Rockntractor
12-28-2010, 09:57 PM
OH SHUT UP. :p

Oh your friend wants me to shut up now, hmmmm.....:rolleyes:

Novaheart
12-28-2010, 10:04 PM
Oh your friend wants me to shut up now, hmmmm.....:rolleyes:

What do you expect? He's Peter Pan.

PoliCon
12-28-2010, 10:05 PM
Oh your friend wants me to shut up now, hmmmm.....:rolleyes:

Yes actually he does. And so do I. :p

Rockntractor
12-28-2010, 10:10 PM
Yes actually he does. And so do I. :p

Do you have a lot of friends with you all the time?:confused:

PoliCon
12-28-2010, 10:12 PM
Do you have a lot of friends with you all the time?:confused:

Yup. Gots me a whole Posse. :cool:

NJCardFan
12-28-2010, 11:16 PM
Y And if you were around for the Debra LsFavre case, many heterosexual men were complaining that there weren't any teachers like that when they were in middle school.

Me being one of them. :D I mean, look at her...
http://www.05news.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/Debra-Lafave2.jpg
http://www.05news.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/Debra-Lafave3.jpg

PoliCon
12-28-2010, 11:21 PM
Me being one of them. :D I mean, look at her...
http://www.05news.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/Debra-Lafave2.jpg
http://www.05news.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/Debra-Lafave3.jpg

http://www.zimbio.com/The+50+Most+Infamous+Female+Teacher+Sex+Scandals - don't say I didn't get you a christmas present! :D Number 3 is a Pittsburgh girl.

NJCardFan
12-29-2010, 12:51 AM
http://www.zimbio.com/The+50+Most+Infamous+Female+Teacher+Sex+Scandals - don't say I didn't get you a christmas present! :D Number 3 is a Pittsburgh girl.
Holy shnikey:
http://www3.pictures.zimbio.com/mp/Vn5IZ57NHNml.jpg

This one is not too far from me:
http://www1.pictures.zimbio.com/mp/OY-7pvy3Fupl.jpg

CueSi
12-29-2010, 01:22 AM
Yes, they have used boy bait before. To my knowledge, they have never snagged a female perp. Women usually do their students. And if you were around for the Debra LsFavre case, many heterosexual men were complaining that there weren't any teachers like that when they were in middle school.

PJ has snagged ONE female perp, and that was long before Dateline even heard of them.

Yeah... If that were my son assaulted by that woman, she wouldn't be pretty when I was done.

~QC

m00
12-29-2010, 01:40 AM
PJ has snagged ONE female perp, and that was long before Dateline even heard of them.

Yeah... If that were my son assaulted by that woman, she wouldn't be pretty when I was done.

~QC

You have a kid?

CueSi
12-29-2010, 02:05 AM
You have a kid?

No... but if I did have one... I'd kick her ass.

Sorry for the miscommunication. Right now, I'd be a shitty parent. :D

~QC

Novaheart
12-29-2010, 02:26 AM
No... but if I did have one... I'd kick her ass.

Sorry for the miscommunication. Right now, I'd be a shitty parent. :D

~QC

You'd have to try really hard to fall below the average.

CueSi
12-29-2010, 02:32 AM
You'd have to try really hard to fall below the average.

So I'm drinking, broke, I slacked off on the laundry, and sugary cereals as lunch don't cut it anymore? DAMN.

~QC

m00
12-29-2010, 04:31 AM
So I'm drinking, broke, I slacked off on the laundry, and sugary cereals as lunch don't cut it anymore? DAMN.

~QC

So you'll just raise him liberal, big deal.

PoliCon
12-29-2010, 08:01 AM
Holy shnikey:
http://www3.pictures.zimbio.com/mp/Vn5IZ57NHNml.jpg

This one is not too far from me:
http://www1.pictures.zimbio.com/mp/OY-7pvy3Fupl.jpg

Notice too the jail time these 'ladies' serve for their crimes. :rolleyes:

Novaheart
12-29-2010, 11:38 AM
Notice too the jail time these 'ladies' serve for their crimes. :rolleyes:

I don't know who the second one is.

Sending Debra Lafave to jail might have been the consistent and fair thing to have done, but despite making the point (that minors can and do consent to sex and it isn't necessarily this Lifetime movie of woe and ruination) that everyone will be treated equally, it wouldn't change the public reaction to a male in the same situation or a homosexual in any situation so could we really claim that it served the ends of justice?

Gingersnap
12-29-2010, 12:36 PM
I don't know who the second one is.

Sending Debra Lafave to jail might have been the consistent and fair thing to have done, but despite making the point (that minors can and do consent to sex and it isn't necessarily this Lifetime movie of woe and ruination) that everyone will be treated equally, it wouldn't change the public reaction to a male in the same situation or a homosexual in any situation so could we really claim that it served the ends of justice?

It would if women were consistently (and harshly) punished for this kind of thing. Regardless of teen boy fantasies, teachers are in a position of trust and authority. Parents don't send their kids to school so those kids can get a sexual awakening from the chemistry teacher.

This is not a new problem. People were outraged by teacher/pupil sexual relationships 100 years ago. For every kid who wants (or thinks he or she wants) a sexual relationship with a teacher, there are 5 kids who get in over their heads and don't know how to get out without being punished by the teacher or the system.

Novaheart
12-29-2010, 12:56 PM
It would if women were consistently (and harshly) punished for this kind of thing. Regardless of teen boy fantasies, teachers are in a position of trust and authority. Parents don't send their kids to school so those kids can get a sexual awakening from the chemistry teacher.

Sorry, I see that as modern day psychobabble. Statutory rape laws are "statutory" for a reason: they were created to control female bodies and male futures. They are clearly arbitrary, because historically (and still in some places) those "children" could have all the sex they want as long as they had their parents' permission via consent to marry. That's why we have so much trouble enforcing them in ways they were not designed to be applied.

I think the trick here would be to make the penalties for statutory rape reflect the consensual nature of the crime, lessen the penalty and make enforcement more consistent. The difference between "boys will be boys" and "throw his ass in jail" should not be the father's opinion.




This is not a new problem. People were outraged by teacher/pupil sexual relationships 100 years ago.

People have also been writing "coming of age" books, both historical and fiction, about it for centuries.

A big problem here is the commonly found refusal to define terms and separate pedophilia from statutory rape. There is a HUGE difference, but when people get on their high horse, especially if they are trying to make you out to be a bad guy, they use dissimilar terminology interchangeable, because they want to imply that you support something you don't support, that you are merely trying to be objective about.

My niece is 15 and looks 12. I am not going to be happy if I find out that she's having a relationship, much less sex, with any of the boys she goes to school with, especially not some 19 year old who should have graduated 2 years ago. But the decision whether to prosecute him for rape should rest on whether it was rape, not on whether I approve of his culture or prospects.

NJCardFan
12-29-2010, 01:00 PM
Debra Lafave originally received probation. Switch genders and a male teacher, consensual or not, would have received 10 years. Also, on this program, I've seen men get prison time for 'intent'. Why is it that a female actually performs the act of intercourse and receives probation yet a male receives jail time for showing up at a house with the intent of something sexual. To say that there is a gross imbalance in the law is an understatement.

Novaheart
12-29-2010, 01:02 PM
It would if women were consistently (and harshly) punished for this kind of thing. Regardless of teen boy fantasies, teachers are in a position of trust and authority. Parents don't send their kids to school so those kids can get a sexual awakening from the chemistry teacher.


Another game we play in this trust and authority thing is "imbalance of power". There are people who would tell you that it's inappropriate for a doctor to have a relationship with his nurse. This is modern day victorianism wrapped up in liberal arts academic bullshit. This is what happens when you have too many people studying worthless topics. Doctors have been marrying nurses for ages. Many women still get their RN hoping to get their Mrs.MD. So in Stupidworld, Nurse Nancy is supposed to quit her job working for Doctor Dreamy, so she can date Doctor Dreamy? That doesn't make sense. By the same token, if it doesn't work out, they should act like adults (or gay people) and go back to being friends and coworkers.

linda22003
12-29-2010, 01:05 PM
It would if women were consistently (and harshly) punished for this kind of thing.

Great. Now you've got the guys picturing harsh punishment for that blonde chick. :rolleyes:

NJCardFan
12-29-2010, 01:09 PM
Another game we play in this trust and authority thing is "imbalance of power". There are people who would tell you that it's inappropriate for a doctor to have a relationship with his nurse. This is modern day victorianism wrapped up in liberal arts academic bullshit. This is what happens when you have too many people studying worthless topics. Doctors have been marrying nurses for ages. Many women still get their RN hoping to get their Mrs.MD. So in Stupidworld, Nurse Nancy is supposed to quit her job working for Doctor Dreamy, so she can date Doctor Dreamy? That doesn't make sense. By the same token, if it doesn't work out, they should act like adults (or gay people) and go back to being friends and coworkers.

Wow, how you've managed to build a strawman in this argument is astounding. The reason why doctors aren't supposed to date nurses has more to do with professional cohesiveness than anything 'Victorian'. There are many companies and organizations who dissuade inter-office relationships and it has nothing to do with any type of puritanism. For example: Boss dates his secretary. They break up. Work suffers because of the strained relationship. It's really that simple. And try this one on: in the NFL, the players and cheerleaders are not allowed to date. Is that puritanism or is that the owners nipping any potential problem in the bud? I vote the latter.

Novaheart
12-29-2010, 01:28 PM
Wow, how you've managed to build a strawman in this argument is astounding. The reason why doctors aren't supposed to date nurses has more to do with professional cohesiveness than anything 'Victorian'. There are many companies and organizations who dissuade inter-office relationships and it has nothing to do with any type of puritanism. For example: Boss dates his secretary. They break up. Work suffers because of the strained relationship. It's really that simple. And try this one on: in the NFL, the players and cheerleaders are not allowed to date. Is that puritanism or is that the owners nipping any potential problem in the bud? I vote the latter.

I think it is the owners trying to protect the image of the team, lest they be accused of maintaining a stable of whores for the savage lust of hired muscle.

FBIGuy
12-29-2010, 01:35 PM
I think it is the owners trying to protect the image of the team, lest they be accused of maintaining a stable of whores for the savage lust of hired muscle.

and you would be wrong.

NJCardFan
12-29-2010, 03:54 PM
I think it is the owners trying to protect the image of the team, lest they be accused of maintaining a stable of whores for the savage lust of hired muscle.

Are you going out of your way to be a dickhead? If so, mission accomplished.

CueSi
12-29-2010, 04:13 PM
and you would be wrong.

Nope, they're both right. Imagine if it was known that Brian Hartline, Dolphins wide reciever was dating Jen Suarez, cheerleader. It's all cool till Brian gets traded, as players do, to ...say, the Patriots. They try to keep the relationship going, but if say, Jake Long (Dolphins DE, I think) deciedes to fuck with Brian by either pushing a player in the direction of the cheerleaders in stopping a run, talking shit about what Jen's really been doing, that relationship has now become a weapon for the opposing team. And if Brian doesn't get traded, but he and Jen break up and she dates Brandon Marshall? That's lockerroom drama no one needs.

Now multiply it by 32. Roger Godell doesn't want that ish making it more difficult.

~QC

CueSi
12-29-2010, 04:25 PM
And that's not to say it never happens, either. I think cheerleaders in the NFL do date players, it's just DADT is practiced to a degree to make the military envious.

~QC

Gingersnap
12-29-2010, 05:20 PM
Sorry, I see that as modern day psychobabble. Statutory rape laws are "statutory" for a reason: they were created to control female bodies and male futures. They are clearly arbitrary, because historically (and still in some places) those "children" could have all the sex they want as long as they had their parents' permission via consent to marry. That's why we have so much trouble enforcing them in ways they were not designed to be applied.

I think the trick here would be to make the penalties for statutory rape reflect the consensual nature of the crime, lessen the penalty and make enforcement more consistent. The difference between "boys will be boys" and "throw his ass in jail" should not be the father's opinion.

People have also been writing "coming of age" books, both historical and fiction, about it for centuries.

A big problem here is the commonly found refusal to define terms and separate pedophilia from statutory rape. There is a HUGE difference, but when people get on their high horse, especially if they are trying to make you out to be a bad guy, they use dissimilar terminology interchangeable, because they want to imply that you support something you don't support, that you are merely trying to be objective about.

My niece is 15 and looks 12. I am not going to be happy if I find out that she's having a relationship, much less sex, with any of the boys she goes to school with, especially not some 19 year old who should have graduated 2 years ago. But the decision whether to prosecute him for rape should rest on whether it was rape, not on whether I approve of his culture or prospects.

My remarks were about teachers having sexual relationships with students. I don't care about teen-on-teen sex in this contest. It doesn't matter how romanticized the child/teen sex object has been down through the ages, it's still an unequal power relationship. Abuse of women has also been romanticized in literature, poetry, and art - is it "okay" for a guy to beat and restrain a woman just because it's happened in our culture and is currently celebrated in others?

There's no psycho-babble about the trust and authority relationship our culture invests in schools and teachers. That's why all teacher/student sexual relationships have to be punished. Not only is the teacher in a position to coerce the student, the student is a position to unfairly leverage a sexual exchange into favors and better grades. There is nothing good in this relationship.

PoliCon
12-29-2010, 05:58 PM
And that's not to say it never happens, either. I think cheerleaders in the NFL do date players, it's just DADT is practiced to a degree to make the military envious.

~QC

apparently straight guys are better able to keep their mouths shut about their sex lives.

FBIGuy
12-29-2010, 07:20 PM
apparently straight guys are better able to keep their mouths shut about their sex lives.

Some people are so proud of their abnormal activities that they have to share them with others so that we understand just how aberrant they really are.

FBIGuy
12-29-2010, 07:23 PM
Nope, they're both right. Imagine if it was known that Brian Hartline, Dolphins wide reciever was dating Jen Suarez, cheerleader. It's all cool till Brian gets traded, as players do, to ...say, the Patriots. They try to keep the relationship going, but if say, Jake Long (Dolphins DE, I think) deciedes to fuck with Brian by either pushing a player in the direction of the cheerleaders in stopping a run, talking shit about what Jen's really been doing, that relationship has now become a weapon for the opposing team. And if Brian doesn't get traded, but he and Jen break up and she dates Brandon Marshall? That's lockerroom drama no one needs.

Now multiply it by 32. Roger Godell doesn't want that ish making it more difficult.

~QC

I was thinking of things in the corporate world. Many places discourage work place dating because of the potential down side when a breakup occurs. Also it avoids charges of favoritism that generally arise when someone dates a business subordinate.

CueSi
12-29-2010, 07:31 PM
apparently straight guys are better able to keep their mouths shut about their sex lives.

Nah, I think in that case, no one wants to be The A**hole Who Ruined The Fun. Every workplace has one. Maybe you used to have a nice little flexibility in some law- -personal time, coffee machine privileges, lunchbreaks, requisitioning certain items, or some other creature comfort that made work bearable. Then the A**hole comes along, abuses it, or whines about it ... you come in Monday and there's an e-mail or memo saying it's gone.

No names are mentioned. But everyone knows it was them. That's my theory, anyhow.

And it's easier to keep a secret if your behavior falls in the majority.

~QC

CueSi
12-29-2010, 07:36 PM
I was thinking of things in the corporate world. Many places discourage work place dating because of the potential down side when a breakup occurs. Also it avoids charges of favoritism that generally arise when someone dates a business subordinate.

It's a little different in the NFL, though. Cheerleaders can become celebs in their own right - whether as a squad (Dallas Cowboys/Oakland Raiders) - or individually; Pam Grier started out as a Denver Broncos Cheerleader, IICR. And if they were to be honest, they ARE looking to marry up.

~QC

PoliCon
12-29-2010, 10:02 PM
And it's easier to keep a secret if your behavior falls in the majority.

~QC True. And it does help when the people who can and should blow the whistle are straight up fans as well. I'm sure if Tim Tebow comes up with any scandals the press will jump at the chance to report them . . . .

CueSi
12-29-2010, 10:06 PM
True. And it does help when the people who can and should blow the whistle are straight up fans as well. I'm sure if Tim Tebow comes up with any scandals the press will jump at the chance to report them . . . .

As I'm sure they will. :mad: I am not the most virtuous person, but he seems like such a sweet, genuine, kid that I hope he stays as pure as the driven snow till God sees fit. :) I just wanna hug him and give him a sammitch and a milkshake.

~QC