30 Pedophiles Arrested in Virginia

[Checkmite]

I'm sure I'll regret posting this, but here it goes.

I won't rush to judge the accused. There have been stories about similar sting operations where the "young girl" said she was of age. As the accused is on the way to see her, she informs him that she is underage. He either does not believe her or thinks she is now role playing, so continues to go be with her. It's things like this that has caused many of those cases to to dropped.

I would like to hear some of these stories. I haven't heard of any actual law enforcement agency stings employing this kind of bait-and-switch entrapment.

 

[Planigale]

Also depends on how old the agents claimed to be. If 10, those are true pedos. But with every extra year amount of men attracted will rise. At 15 most girls have adult bodies and it's normal to be sexually attracted to them. Still would be illegal in many countries. And of course there are predatory behaviors which are illegal even toward adult women.

Until 2016 it was legal to marry (and therefore have sex) a thirteen year old in Virginia. It remains legal to do so in several US states. Perhaps this should be addressed also.

 

[rockinkt]

I'm sure I'll regret posting this, but here it goes.

I won't rush to judge the accused. There have been stories about similar sting operations where the "young girl" said she was of age. As the accused is on the way to see her, she informs him that she is underage. He either does not believe her or thinks she is now role playing, so continues to go be with her. It's things like this that has caused many of those cases to to dropped.
Now, I'm not saying that is what happened here. Just something to keep in mind.

Please point the way to the reputable media reports of this situation actually happening.

edit: Beat to the punch by Checkmite

 

[mike81]

Please point the way to the reputable media reports of this situation actually happening.

edit: Beat to the punch by Checkmite

This was many years ago I heard a report on TV about it. If I'm not mistaken I have also read some articles online about it. No I can't point to those sources right now. If you think that means I'm wrong then fine. I got other things to do besides argue with strangers on the internet about who's right and wrong. It's not like this is just something so impossible to be true.

 

[Segnosaur]

I figure anyone they capture would probably need at least a few days of interactions in order to convince them/arrange a meeting. Then there would all the wasted time interacting with people who don't try to meet. So they could waste days/weeks of manpower, all in order to arrest a person who probably wouldn't actually have the chance to meet someone anyways.

I'm not sure how that follows. If they made arrangements to meet and carried them through to the point where they actually traveled to the house of someone they thought was a child, to me that seems to establish an intention that outweighs the somewhat arbitrary hope that they "probably" wouldn't have gotten to meet a real child in that manner.

I have no doubt that these people certainly had the intent to meet an underage person. And had it actually been an underage person they would have still wanted to meet, etc. I am not defending them or their actions, and (assuming they probably guilty) they deserve whatever legal ramifications will ensure.

What I am saying is that there are probably thousands of men like them, and probably very few (if any) children who would actually want to meet an adult. I suspect that 9 of the 10 'kids' they talk to are either 1) law enforcement, 2) vigilantes, or 3) other men engaging in 'fantasies', and the very few that are actually children probably wouldn't go through with anything.

My claim isn't that they wouldn't do anything with children because the didn't want to... my claim is that they wouldn't do anything with children because they are unlikely to find any.

As an analogy, they are like bigfoot hunters... in search of something that rare (at best) and possibly/likely non-existent. And the police sting operation is like they set out a trap to arrest the bigfoot hunters. Yeah, the hunters wanted to shoot a bigfoot but they were unlikely to ever actually do so due to the absence of their target.

ETA: I can understand the desire to prevent harm to children. I am just saying that there are probably better uses of government resources to address that.... instead of spending manpower to arrange a sting to arrest people attempting to meet children, spend it on educational programs, or on investigating child trafficking.

 

[smartcooky]

This was many years ago I heard a report on TV about it. If I'm not mistaken I have also read some articles online about it. No I can't point to those sources right now. If you think that means I'm wrong then fine. I got other things to do besides argue with strangers on the internet about who's right and wrong. It's not like this is just something so impossible to be true.

Err no.

While it is true that girls do lie about their ages (they do this a lot - having been a barman in a pub, I can personally attest to this) I would be very surprised if Police sting operations used this tactic. Their whole point is to catch men with a predilection under-aged girls. Using a girl over the age of consent totally defeats the point of the sting, and the moment it comes out in court that the bait was of consenting age, the victim of the sting has no case to answer - case dismissed.

 

[mike81]

Err no.

While it is true that girls do lie about their ages (they do this a lot - having been a barman in a pub, I can personally attest to this) I would be very surprised if Police sting operations used this tactic. Their whole point is to catch men with a predilection under-aged girls. Using a girl over the age of consent totally defeats the point of the sting, and the moment it comes out in court that the bait was of consenting age, the victim of the sting has no case to answer - case dismissed.

Yeah because police are never dishonest and DA's never just care about getting a conviction or looking like they are being tough on crime. So be surprised all you want. That does not mean that is is not true.

Also, in reading your response again I see you may be wrong about something else. These stings do not use under-age girls usually. They are adults pretending to be under-age. I thought this was "common knowledge." I've never heard of a case where they actually used someone under-age.

In the reports I'm talking about, the adult female would say she is 18 or whatever. She would then say she was 13 or whatever as the man is on the way to meet. He would not believe her or think it was some role play. Then when he shows up, they say, but she told you she was 13.

 

[smartcooky]

My claim isn't that they wouldn't do anything with children because the didn't want to... my claim is that they wouldn't do anything with children because they are unlikely to find any..

Firstly, and to rockinkt's point earlier, they don't actually have to meet the victim to do the child a lot of damage. Amanda Todd was driven to suicide by an obsessed online predator who stalked her for 4 years since 7th grade.

Secondly, its not as rare as you think

► One in five U.S. teenagers who regularly log on to the Internet says they have received an unwanted sexual solicitation via the Web. Solicitations were defined as requests to engage in sexual activities or sexual talk, or to give out personal sexual information. (only 25% of those told a parent)

► Teens are willing to meet with strangers: 16 percent of teens considered meeting someone they've only talked to online and 8 percent have actually met someone they only knew online

https://www.puresight.com/Pedophiles/Online-Predators/online-predators-statistics.html


► More than 500,000 predators are online everyday

► FBI stats show that more than 50 percent of victims of online sexual exploitation are 12-15 years old

► In (27 percent) of exploitation incidents, predators asked kids for sexual photographs of themselves.

► 4 percent of kids get "aggressive" sexual solicitations that included attempts to contact the kids offline

https://patch.com/massachusetts/sud...line-predators-and-precautions-parec47b01a336

 

[smartcooky]

Yeah because police are never dishonest and DA's never just care about getting a conviction or looking like they are being tough on crime.

Just think about it. How are they going to get around the fact that the age they used was an age above the age of consent?

Think before you post

Also, in reading your response again I see you may be wrong about something else. These stings do not use under-age girls usually. They are adults pretending to be under-age. I thought this was "common knowledge." I've never heard of a case where they actually used someone under-age.

In the reports I'm talking about, the adult female would say she is 18 or whatever. She would then say she was 13 or whatever as the man is on the way to meet. He would not believe her or think it was some role play. Then when he shows up, they say, but she told you she was 13.

Well done, Captain Obvious.

OF COURSE THEY DON'T ACTUALLY USE REAL UNDER AGED GIRLS AS BAIT.

Doh!!

 

[mike81]

Just think about it. How are they going to get around the fact that the age they used was an age above the age of consent?

Think before you post



Well done, Captain Obvious.

OF COURSE THEY DON'T ACTUALLY USE REAL UNDER AGED GIRLS AS BAIT.

Doh!!

To your first point. That is why the cases got dropped. They argued that the girl originally said she was of age.

To your second point. I must have misunderstood your comment. If so, I apologize. You may also be misunderstanding me. If so, I apologize.

 

[Craig4]

I'm sure I'll regret posting this, but here it goes.

I won't rush to judge the accused. There have been stories about similar sting operations where the "young girl" said she was of age. As the accused is on the way to see her, she informs him that she is underage. He either does not believe her or thinks she is now role playing, so continues to go be with her. It's things like this that has caused many of those cases to to dropped.

Now, I'm not saying that is what happened here. Just something to keep in mind.

Years ago and this was still a new thing I was tangentially involved in a few of these when I worked for INS (what is now CBP). The standard is pretty high for prosecution and the audit trail of the conversations would be difficult to alter. Because this is a crime of intent (obviously no children are ever put in danger) it has to be crystal clear that the defendant knew the child was underage. The person needs to demonstrate knowledge of the child's age and the language of what the person intends to do must be clear.

 

[smartcooky]

So be surprised all you want. That does not mean that is is not true.

To your first point. That is why the cases got dropped. They argued that the girl originally said she was of age.

OK. You claim there have been cases where a police online sting has used the age of an above age of consent child to attract the predator, then switched to the age of an under aged child to arrange the meeting, correct?

Well, find one and post the details here.

To your second point. I must have misunderstood your comment. If so, I apologize. You may also be misunderstanding me. If so, I apologize.

Aceepted.

 

[mike81]

OK. You claim there have been cases where a police online sting has used the age of an above age of consent child to attract the predator, then switched to the age of an under aged child to arrange the meeting, correct?

Well, find one and post the details here.



Aceepted.

Yes, that is my claim. I probably saw the report 10 years ago or so. Not saying it is a common thing, just saying what the report on TV said. I also vaguely remember some articles online about it a while back. To be honest, I really don't want to do a search on that subject and get put on some list myself.

 

[smartcooky]

Years ago and this was still a new thing I was tangentially involved in a few of these when I worked for INS (what is now CBP). The standard is pretty high for prosecution and the audit trail of the conversations would be difficult to alter. Because this is a crime of intent (obviously no children are ever put in danger) it has to be crystal clear that the defendant knew the child was underage. The person needs to demonstrate knowledge of the child's age and the language of what the person intends to do must be clear.

Absolutely it would.

What mike81 does not seem to relaise is that this is an internet conversation of hundreds of back an forth messages over a long period of time (weeks, or even months) between the sting operator masquerading as an under aged child, and the target of the sting. Both the sting operator and the target have copies of the conversations on their respective computers. Copies would also be available from the servers of all the ISPs involved. For the police to do what mike81 is claiming ALL of those copies would have to be tampered with. They probably would be able to tamper their own, and they might conceivably be able to tamper the target's record, but the records the ISP server's, not a chance in hell.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Years ago and this was still a new thing I was tangentially involved in a few of these when I worked for INS (what is now CBP). The standard is pretty high for prosecution and the audit trail of the conversations would be difficult to alter. Because this is a crime of intent (obviously no children are ever put in danger) it has to be crystal clear that the defendant knew the child was underage. The person needs to demonstrate knowledge of the child's age and the language of what the person intends to do must be clear.

From what I've read, this is a major problem with people not in law enforcement setting up vigilante "stings". They imagine they're doing good work but the results are useless legally.

 

[mike81]

Absolutely it would.

What mike81 does not seem to relaise is that this is an internet conversation of hundreds of back an forth messages over a long period of time (weeks, or even months) between the sting operator masquerading as an under aged child, and the target of the sting. Both the sting operator and the target have copies of the conversations on their respective computers. Copies would also be available from the servers of all the ISPs involved. For the police to do what mike81 is claiming ALL of those copies would have to be tampered with. They probably would be able to tamper their own, and they might conceivably be able to tamper the target's record, but the records the ISP server's, not a chance in hell.

You are misunderstanding me. No records were altered. They admitted to saying they were at least 18 at first and then told the man they were 13 or whatever and that is why the cases got dropped. I am not saying the records were altered.

 

[smartcooky]

Yes, that is my claim. I probably saw the report 10 years ago or so. Not saying it is a common thing, just saying what the report on TV said. I also vaguely remember some articles online about it a while back. To be honest, I really don't want to do a search on that subject and get put on some list myself.

Yeah. What you may or may not have seen on TV is not evidence.

For now, I will accord you claim the attention it deseves... none

PS: You don't get put on a "list" because of an internet search - that's just Hollywood fantasy. But if it worries you that much, you can always refer the Men in Black to this thread.

 

[mike81]

Yeah. What you may or may not have seen on TV is not evidence.

For now, I will accord you claim the attention it deseves... none

PS: You don't get put on a "list" because of an internet search - that's just Hollywood fantasy. But if it worries you that much, you can always refer the Men in Black to this thread.

I wasn't being very serious about "a list" I just don't feel like searching right now ok?

I guess I'll start giving this board the attention it deserves....none.

Some of you really need to get over yourselves. I've been treated like **** or had people overreact many times here. So whatever.

 

[smartcooky]

You are misunderstanding me. No records were altered. They admitted to saying they were at least 18 at first and then told the man they were 13 or whatever and that is why the cases got dropped. I am not saying the records were altered.

Wait, are you talking about a police sting (i.e. a Police officer masquerading as a 13 year old) or an actual case of a 13 yo child doing this that was later reported to police.

If the former, I want to see the evidence.

If the latter (the 13 yo girl admitting saying she was 18) then don't bother, I remember the case -it was in Australia, and girl lied and admitted she lied and the case was dropped. IIRC is was on one of this news shows like 60 Minutes or A Current Affair.

The latter scenario has nothing to do with what we are talking about here.

 

[Segnosaur]

My claim isn't that they wouldn't do anything with children because the didn't want to... my claim is that they wouldn't do anything with children because they are unlikely to find any..

...
Secondly, its not as rare as you think

► Teens are willing to meet with strangers: 16 percent of teens considered meeting someone they've only talked to online and 8 percent have actually met someone they only knew online

https://www.puresight.com/Pedophiles/Online-Predators/online-predators-statistics.html

Admittedly that does seem to change things a little bit... I would have assumed that that percentage was substantially lower. (I just can't picture a younger girl actually having an interest in someone substantially older.)

A couple of issues that I have:
- I do not know how reputable the site you referenced is. (It for a company that sells child protection services, so they might have a vested interest in skewing the figures. And the link they provided for the '8%' figure is broken.)
- They mention 8% actually meeting strangers, but they don't specify whether they were meeting someone older or a teenager near their own age.

I am not totally dismissive of your reference, but I do think it provides some evidence in support.

► 4 percent of kids get "aggressive" sexual solicitations that included attempts to contact the kids offline

https://patch.com/massachusetts/sudb...parec47b01a336

There does seem to be a bit of inconsistency here... 8% actually met strangers, but 4% 'included attempts to contact offline'. (And sadly the 4% statistic they referred to doesn't have an active source either.)

I know... different sources are probably using different definitions, different age ranges, etc.

The statistic I would like to see (and the one that sadly I have never seen), is: How many on-line pedophiles actually have success in actually meeting a victim through the internet.