BurntCricket
Gotta Do What Ya Gotta Do
Premium
join:2000-09-02
Here
clubs:
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to fatness
Re: Our local ICE team doesn't care if you are a cop
said by fatness  :Is there a more complete description of that statute? Everyone on this website is guilty of using a computer to communicate with a person they believe is under 18. We have thousands of young members. That's why I stated they are going to need a lot more prisons.
--
It is better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it. |
|
amysheehan
Premium,VIP,MVM
join:1999-12-21
Huntington Beach, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to Link Logger
Just for reference: In the US - ICE is Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency-
»74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:c8···nk&gl=us
--
Proud Member of ASAP
DSLR Phishtracker |
|
Link Logger
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
Calgary, AB
·Shaw
| reply to pog
At some point one has to consider the victim, for example it is far better for the victim if someone is convicted for conspiracy to commit murder, rather then murder (ie the intended victim can attend the trial as something other then cold evidence  ). We certainly don't want children becoming active victims in the child pornography business, as the recovery process for them can be difficult, if not impossible, so hunting down and taking out a recruiter (on a lesser charge, solicitation or conspiracy etc) is actually a better deal overall then nailing the perv after the fact. Now to make these charges stick you really have to prove that execution of the crime is the genuine intent/motive, and only a matter of time or opportunity before the actual crime is committed. Now Judges of course take into consideration the fact the crime hasn't actually occurred, but legally they are bound to the laws of the land which often state that motive, intent, etc are enough to prosecute in some crimes (usually with a lessor charge).
So sitting in a chat room calling some girl a hottie (if it is in fact actually a girl  ) and asking for a photo (like its her photo anyways), doesn't prove intent to engage her in kiddie porn as say compared to repeated chat sessions offering/planning to meet/take/get photo's of her in described positions, levels of nudity, sexual acts, etc, after asking numerous questions about her age and supporting questions meant to further disclose her age, perhaps offering payment or other forms of remuneration/gifts etc, huge huge difference. As Chris Rock said, if your doing this, then you deserve to get your ass kicked by the police, or in a legal society, incarcerated. Now everyone gets their chance in court and is innocent til proven guilty so the onus is on the prosecution team to do their work. Now this system might not be prefect, but its the best I know of, so I'm going with it until someone convinces me that they have a better system.
Blake
--
Vendor: Author of Link Logger which is a traffic analysis and firewall logging tool |
|
pog
Premium
join:2004-06-03
Kihei, HI
 ·Hawaiian Telcom
| Maybe part of my problem with this is really based on the dumbed-down-yet-lurid way it's portrayed in the media. The more clued-in members of the viewing audience, I guess, just want reassurance that due process and all that still exist.
Your explanation helps!
--
My Site |
|
Tzale
Proud Libertarian Conservative
Premium
join:2004-01-06
Sweden
 ·Verizon FIOS
·Optimum Online
| reply to Steve
said by Steve :Ok, something doesn't look right. From the article, it says "with the intention of having the victim supply photographs this fall". How many child predators would hold off asking for the goodies for months? Is it conceivable that during the fake-chat, the day of her birthday became known and "this fall" would have been after she turned 18? Is it a crime to have sexy-talk with a minor and overtly plan for behavior that waits for the age of majority (putting aside the fact that it's just creepy)? No, it is not illegal IMHO.
You can't commit a crime until you have actually done it.
-Tzale
--
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
-:-
"I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism."~Ronald Reagan |
|
Blue2
Premium
join:2004-04-14
France
| reply to pog
said by pog : The more clued-in members of the viewing audience, I guess, just want reassurance that due process and all that still exist. What exactly do the more "clued-in members" want? To know that his rights weren't violated? (Forget "her" rights.) You don't get that from a news brief, written to show the irony of a police officer got caught in his department's trap, but from the complaint sworn out for his arrest. So if you don't believe that there were legal grounds for charging him, then stop reading these sensationalist stories and start reading the public records.
What's next, "She was wearing a tight skirt so she probably wanted it"? A harmless chat with some teenage girl will NOT get you charged. But IF you know her to be underage, and IF your suggestions to her violate local statutes, it might. Law enforcement often looks for sexual predators in chat rooms.
FYI, due process is NOT violated by your being charged with a crime. If the charge is unsubstantiated, any good lawyer will get this thrown out in a heartbeat BEFORE it even gets to trail. Due process is your right to being informed of your rights, to being told what you have been charged with, to having legal counsel, and to having a trial. So what have you read thus far that suggests to you that any of these elements of "due process" have not been met? |
|
pog
Premium
join:2004-06-03
Kihei, HI
·Hawaiian Telcom
| said by Blue2 :said by pog : The more clued-in members of the viewing audience, I guess, just want reassurance that due process and all that still exist. What exactly do the more "clued-in members" want? To know that his rights weren't violated? Well, yes. Wouldn't you want to believe that people get a fair shake and are not being unfairly targeted?
Anyway, it wasn't solely about "him" or the OP's article. I was talking about the whole concept of these stings, intent being the crime, no specific victim, and how careful/cavalier the police are with making sure they are finding the real bad guys... and not entrapping, exaggerating, etc.
So if you don't believe that there were legal grounds for charging him, then stop reading these sensationalist stories and start reading the public records. I don't think I said anything specific about this particular case at all. There is a bigger picture, right?
What's next, "She was wearing a tight skirt so she probably wanted it"? What does this have to do with anything?
So what have you read thus far that suggests to you that any of these elements of "due process" have not been met?
There's the "due process" part and then there's the rest of it that I referred to as "and all that". Do these stings produce the right evidence in the right way to put away the right people? I think it's a fair question given the glossed-over media coverage of cases like these... not just this particular case that you won't go beyond.
--
My Site |
|
as43090
@rr.com
| reply to dave
So now thought can be a crime?
said by dave :But it's worse - it's communicating with someone you think is under 18. Presumably, as long as you didn't believe the person was under 18, the same conversation with the same person would be legal. Thus, it apparently depends on what was in the mind of the suspect at the time. This is scary. (And before we go in that direction, can we discuss this without assuming I am somehow 'for' the rights of child predators?) |
|
Link Logger
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
Calgary, AB
·Shaw
| reply to pog
said by pog :Maybe part of my problem with this is really based on the dumbed-down-yet-lurid way it's portrayed in the media. I agree Pog as I hate TV etc as they really corrupt the truth for their own means and needs (you have 22 minutes to tell the story and sell it in a half hour slot, reality and truth are often the first casualties and sensationalism the winner).
It has been my experience that the system does work at least more often then any other system I have heard of or can think of, so I'm generally a believe in the system.
Blake
--
Vendor: Author of Link Logger which is a traffic analysis and firewall logging tool |
|
Blue2
Premium
join:2004-04-14
France
| reply to pog
No, people shouldn't be unfairly targeted and there is a "bigger picture", but NOTHING presented here suggests he was targeted or entrapped. Discussions of this guy's guilt or innocence go nowhere since we have no facts. Law enforcement is infiltrating chat rooms these days because child crimes, sex trafficking, etc. are on the rise and they'd rather charge and let a jury decide guilt/innocence than wait for a few more dead children. Protecting children often takes precedence.
The ONLY reason that this is a sensationalist story is because he's a police officer ironically caught in his own department's sting operation. If it were you or me, no one would write about it, read about it or care.
It's also highly unlikely that the police department would unfairly "target" and arrest one of their own just to embarrass their own department. In fact, it's much more likely to be the reverse, the infamous law enforcement "code of silence".
The "tight skirt" comment was a reference to the often used defense in rape trials that the victim was wearing a tight skirt, suggesting that she "wanted it". This male-oriented mentality reached new lows in Italy a few years ago when what the VICTIM wore became the basis for a Supreme Court acquittal in a rape charge. The court declared that a woman who wore pants could NOT be raped. That male dominated court verdict caused worldwide outrage. »news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/277263.stm
I take stories for what they are. This isn't the New York Times or "60 Minutes" offering in-depth investigative analysis. So why expect anything more than just the the most basic details? This has already gotten far more attention that it merits. |
|
fatness
subtle
Janitor
join:2000-11-17
fishing
·EarthLink
Host:
Earthlink DSL
TekSavvy
Forum Feature Requ..
Need Site Help?
Rants, Raves, and ..
| reply to Link Logger
said by Link Logger :At some point one has to consider the victim, for example it is far better for the victim if someone is convicted for conspiracy to commit murder, rather then murder (ie the intended victim can attend the trial as something other then cold evidence ). I don't think that applies in this case, does it? Who was the victim? |
|
dave
Premium,MVM
join:2000-05-04
not in ohio
·Verizon Online DSL
·Verizon FIOS
| reply to Blue2
said by Blue2 :What exactly do the more "clued-in members" want? To know that his rights weren't violated? Well, yes. They way you say that makes it sound like a bad thing.
It isn't "sympathy for the criminal" that makes me ask these sort of questions, it's concern for the continued functioning of society - you know, proper laws and all that.
My interest in this thread has been that I don't understand how the law operates in this area, that on the surface (and due to the superficial media reports) it looks pretty sketchy. So I ask questions. You're right, I could go read the records, but on the other hand, there are at least a couple of people in this forum who can and have explained it pretty well, so why not ask here? It educates us all.
What's next, "She was wearing a tight skirt so she probably wanted it"? This is unworthy in a serious discussion.
FYI, due process is NOT violated by your being charged with a crime. Maybe not. Only the other hand, it is undeniable that your life will probably suffer if you are falsely accused of such a crime. |
|
Cabal
Premium
join:2007-01-21
Boston, MA | reply to dave
Thoughtcrime. |
|
GyroCaptain
join:2008-08-01 | reply to Link Logger
Now I still maintain and believe that 99.9999% of cops are good guys Now THATS funny!! |
|
N3OGH
Bear patrol must be working like a charm
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
·Verizon FIOS
·Verizon Online DSL
|  reply to as43090
It's not the THOUGHT that's illegal, it's the INTENT.
You can think whatever you want. What goes on between your ears is your own business.
I would love to see the chat logs on this one. I seriously doubt he was asking her for pictures from last year's class visit to the local science museum. I'm sure the chat logs reveal something a bit more lurid in nature.
From a prosecutorial standpoint, I think it's a bit flimsy. Especially since he wanted the pictures "in October". If he had reasonable grounds to believe she would be 18 in October, he MIGHT have a defense.
From the arresting officer's standpoint, I see the reasons for acting now instead of later. Here you have a police officer, with tremendous authority over other people and their children and he may be a sexual predator. IMHO, once you get enough to get yourself in the door from a legal standpoint, you get your ass in there and see what this guy's up to before someone gets hurt for real.
If there's nothing more here, this guy probably walks. I'm guessing those computers are chock full of kiddy porn, and this guy has no business wearing a badge.
Besides, WTF? You're 26 for Christ sake. Why the hell are you talking to 18 year olds on the internet?
I mean, really. Who hasn't seen Chris Hanson on "To Catch a Predator" at this point?
--
Petty people are disproportionably corrupted by petty power… |
|
pog
Premium
join:2004-06-03
Kihei, HI
·Hawaiian Telcom
| reply to Blue2
said by Blue2 :No, people shouldn't be unfairly targeted and there is a "bigger picture", but NOTHING presented here suggests he was targeted or entrapped. Discussions of this guy's guilt or innocence go nowhere since we have no facts. Irrelevant. I'm not being specific about this case.
Law enforcement is infiltrating chat rooms these days because child crimes, sex trafficking, etc. are on the rise and they'd rather charge and let a jury decide guilt/innocence than wait for a few more dead children. Protecting children often takes precedence. You are not going to like this one bit...
a) how do we know these crimes are "on the rise"? or do we only know that the internet plays more and more of a role in such crimes? If these crimes actually are on the rise, is the increase proportional to general population increases (by region, etc)?
b) invoking "dead children" should not give automatic license to piss on the lives of other people.
The "tight skirt" comment was a reference to the often used defense in rape trials that the victim was wearing a tight skirt, suggesting that she "wanted it". This male-oriented mentality reached new lows in Italy a few years ago ... The only possible way this can make sense in this thread is if you are suggesting that I believe kids participating in chat rooms want to be abused.
I take stories for what they are. ...
Okey dokey.
Can you comprehend that, to me, the original story is simply a catalyst for general discussion?
I enjoyed Link Logger 's earlier response to me... it makes sense and addresses what I was concerned about. Not sure what you could possibly add to it anyway.
--
My Site |
|
sailor
Merry Whatever ..R.I.P. dadkins
Premium
join:2003-10-21
Long Island
1 edit | reply to N3OGH
said by N3OGH : Who hasn't seen Chris Hanson on "To Catch a Predator" at this point? True but what about those busted on the show in the sting operation who either had all charges dropped or were found not guilty? Due to the way they conducted the sting those who were truly innocent still were portrayed as guilty and basically had their lives ruined, being humilatated, jobs lost, photos in the papers and even on television etc. This all before even being arraigned. And then down the road when charges are dropped or individuals arrested are found not guilty does the sting operation participants go back on the air and publicly announce the names of those who were found not guilty or had charges dropped? NO!....are they looking to save some kids or are they looking for high ratings and advertising fees?....I say ratings.....Finally, like I mentioned earlier, there is a fine line between good law enforcement and entrapment and these kinds of shows obviously have crossed that line. Go after the pervs and not after the ratings is where I stand on this.
__
Validity of Murphy predator stings under scrutiny
The town of Murphy in Collin County became big news last fall after it was the location for a highly publicized sting designed to catch sexual predators, which became the subject of two NBC To Catch a Predator shows. The sting was also behind the suicide of a former Kaufman County district attorney.
However, information has arisen that indicates that after the television crews left, little happened to the alleged sexual predators.
While there were 24 arrests, little has become of the cases. Reports also reveal that the legality of the sting was questioned before it went down, and that a key search warrant was invalid.
The news has led critics, inside and outside the legal system, to ask whether the sting was about law enforcement or making a TV show.
»www.wfaa.com/sharedcontent/dws/w···c39.html
_____
Charges dropped
In June 2007, Perverted-Justice was criticized following a sting operation in Collin County, Texas, that resulted in the charges against 23 suspected online sex predators being dropped. Collin County Assistant District Attorney Greg Davis said the cases were dropped after Perverted-Justice failed to provide enough usable evidence.
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_Catch_a_Predator |
|
Blue2
Premium
join:2004-04-14
France
1 edit | reply to pog
Many comments here were based on pure unsubstantiated speculation: he might be innocent, he might have been targeted, he might have been entrapped. All you know is what little they chose to report: he was arrested, by whom and about what. Why woud you assume that a police officer was arrested without probable cause? That's just unlikely.
What I do know is what ICE does. So I assume it is a crime in their jurisdiction and it could relate to any of the following including "child luring": "The British Columbia Integrated Child Exploitation Team (ICE) is responsible for coordinating and investigating internet based exploitation of children. The investigator’s role encompasses investigations pertaining to accessing, possession, importation, exportation, production and distribution of child pornography, as well as child luring and sex tourism investigations." »bc.rcmp.ca/ViewPage.action?siteN···tId=8862
As for statistics, by chance the link amysheehan provided for ICE was for a different organization (US Immigration and Customs Enforcement). But 28% of THAT organization's latest news items (7 out of 25) related to convictions or arrests for child pornography, and 2 of them hold official jobs, a U.N. employee (arrested) and former NYC cop. (convicted). »www.ice.gov/pi/news/newsreleases···ubmit=Go So that either means they're focusing more on these crimes or there are more of them being reported.
Sensational headlines sell newspapers, but they also deliver the message that child-related crimes are perpetrated by anyone, including cops and priests. (The later took a long time to come out as priests don't get arrested. The Oscar-nominated documentary Deliver Us From Evil shows the extraordinary lengths to which the Catholic Church went to prevent that. »farm.imdb.com/title/tt0814075/). So not being arrrested, doesn't imply innocence either.
So, at no time did I state any opinion on this arrest, since I've been given no facts, just mention of his arrest. That's what courts decide. But assuming that it was just a "thoughtcrime' is insulting until you know what he did or did not do.
I don't think I ever mentioned "dead childen" (Edit: I stand corrected. I did mention it, not to be sensational, but to explain why charges are brought quickly.) and I'm no "pedophile" crusader. But given the sensitive nature of an investigation of one of their own, I'd be surprised if they charged him without enough to convict. |
|
pog
Premium
join:2004-06-03
Kihei, HI
·Hawaiian Telcom
| said by Blue2 :Why woud you assume that a police officer was arrested without probable cause? That's just unlikely. I've made no such assumptions... and, for the last time, I am not talking only about this case.
But assuming that it was just a "thoughtcrime' is insulting until you know what he did or did not do. I've made no such assumptions.
I don't think I ever mentioned "dead childen" and I'm no "pedophile" crusader.
... but I provided the quote to what you said. I guess I expected too much. You don't even know what you are writing... so how can I expect you to understand what I write?
--
My Site |
|
Blue2
Premium
join:2004-04-14
France
| reply to Link Logger
I promptly corrected my error. Mea culpa. Mea culpa. Mea maxima culpa. Perhaps it was too much to expect absolution. In any case, "You don't even know what you are writing." does seem like a slight exaggeration.
Many assumptions were strewn hroughout this thread and I pointed them out, though I in no way suggested that they all came from you.
As far as I know, this thread was not started as a theoretical exercise, but for reporting a particular news item. That item provides no information, so there can be no answers only speculation. If this is just a general discussion about the trampling of civil liberties, due process, intent versus actions, etc. this threadbare news story would hardly seem to be much of a catalyst. |
|
