Straight Dope Message Board

Straight Dope Message Board (https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/index.php)
-   Mundane Pointless Stuff I Must Share (MPSIMS) (https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/forumdisplay.php?f=4)
-   -   Catch a Predator (https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=868806)

manson1972 01-12-2019 02:15 AM

Catch a Predator
 
Bored tonight since I'm not working, and watching old Chris Hanson "To Catch A Predator" videos.

I just don't get it. Is there something so different in having sex with a 14 year old, instead of a legal 18 year old? So different that moronic men risk jail time for it?

I just don't get it.

Beckdawrek 01-12-2019 03:36 AM

Maybe it's the only yes they've ever got. I assume a regular guy wouldn't be looking for hook-ups like that. They have to be stupid if they are. The ones that get me are middle aged men, pastors, teachers and once there was a dentist. Just ridiculous. And scary.

manson1972 01-12-2019 04:05 AM

That's just it. Are they that stupid? It pains me that people are that stupid.

Beckdawrek 01-12-2019 04:18 AM

They must be. It pains me too. It makes sick knowing there are men who would do things to these young girls and boys. But we all know it's happening. The priests and coaches, gymnastics team doctors. It allover the news. Theres some rap star in the news today who apparently has a whole group of young women he's messed with from age 13 or so. It's a pervasive problem that we've yet to see the end of. I don't know the answer. I hope people smarter than me are working on it. I hope.

zoid 01-12-2019 05:03 AM

I think it's just the way these guys are wired that they are extremely sexually attracted to juveniles. If it were unacceptable for me to have sex with women I couldn’t shut those feelings off. Even if I knew I was going to jail if I tried to have sex with a woman I’d probably end up in jail at some point.
I don’t think it’s stupid as much as it’s a very strong impulse and it’s difficult to control.
Just to be clear I’m not defending the actions of these people but I don’t think it’s pure stupidity.

manson1972 01-12-2019 05:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zoid (Post 21426423)
I think it's just the way these guys are wired that they are extremely sexually attracted to juveniles. If it were unacceptable for me to have sex with women I couldnít shut those feelings off. Even if I knew I was going to jail if I tried to have sex with a woman Iíd probably end up in jail at some point.
I donít think itís stupid as much as itís a very strong impulse and itís difficult to control.
Just to be clear Iím not defending the actions of these people but I donít think itís pure stupidity.

Maybe, but the episodes I watched tonight, they physically saw the women (undercover agent) and they will still interested. The undercover woman was at least 18. If they are attracted to an 18 year old, why risk prison for someone younger than that? It just seems ridiculous to me.

Joey P 01-12-2019 08:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by manson1972 (Post 21426434)
Maybe, but the episodes I watched tonight, they physically saw the women (undercover agent) and they will still interested. The undercover woman was at least 18. If they are attracted to an 18 year old, why risk prison for someone younger than that? It just seems ridiculous to me.

Like zoid said, they're attracted to underaged girls. Or rather, they're attracted to something about the physical attributes of a 16 year old girl (+/- a few years).
It's been a while since I've watched it, but when the guy shows up at the house, he only catches a quick glimpse of her before she takes off for another room, right? Possibly not enough time to decide that's not who he'd been talking to or saw pictures of, especially when he's almost guaranteed to get laid in the next 45 minutes.

Imagine if you were only attracted to red heads and after some back and forth emails set up a time and date to meet one, specifically for sex. When you arrived she was more of a dark strawberry blonde...would you take a pass on the sex? If she pulled off her wig and revealed herself to be a brunette, would you now be attracted to brunettes as well?


The part that's always really bugged me about the show is that the predator has, the entire time, been exchanging emails with an FBI agent or police officer posing as an underaged kid. He then gets arrested for attempting to have sex with this underaged kid that doesn't exist. I understand that the emails and chat transcripts make it very clear that he understands her age and that he's coming over for sex (and often bringing alcohol as well).
I also understand that this is probably someone you want off the streets. My issue has always been that since it's not an underaged kid he's talking to, no underaged kid has ever been involved in any part of this, can't he argue that he knew the person he was talking to wasn't an underaged kid, even if "she" said she was?

hajario 01-12-2019 09:19 AM

Itís an undercover sting. Itís just like if you make a deal to trade drugs for automatic weapons that donít exist.

Covfefe 01-12-2019 09:57 AM

There are youtube channels of guys who take it upon themselves to do this kind of work, going into chat rooms posing as someone under the age of consent and agreeing to a meeting in a public place. The aim seems to be to confront and scare the shit, psychologically speaking, out of the guy who gets caught in order to deter this. It's definitely more gritty and less of a template deal watching that versus the To Catch A Predator formula. It's beyond me what legal implications this dangerous work could bring about and whether law enforcement agencies ever monitor people involved. One such vigilante is named Justin Payne. I watched him a bit a couple years ago. He actually does the whole 9 yards of sounding like children around the age of puberty and has conversations on the phone with some of these would be perps beforehand.

I've heard controversial things about Perverted Justice, the organization that To Catch A Predator teamed up with to produce that show. At the very least, the guys who founded it do not have clean records.

Telemark 01-12-2019 10:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joey P (Post 21426487)
can't he argue that he knew the person he was talking to wasn't an underaged kid, even if "she" said she was?

He can try, but that's a pretty big mountain of evidence to climb over.

Covfefe 01-12-2019 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by manson1972 (Post 21426434)
Maybe, but the episodes I watched tonight, they physically saw the women (undercover agent) and they will still interested. The undercover woman was at least 18. If they are attracted to an 18 year old, why risk prison for someone younger than that? It just seems ridiculous to me.

The men were going after an actress who was doing her best to pretend to be the age the men thought she was. I sense the man's reaction is often mild confusion.

hajario 01-12-2019 10:26 AM

Apparently the perps go into chat rooms that are supposed to be for younger teens. They really shouldnít be there in the first place.

Around 13 years ago when I was recently divorced, Yahoo! had adult oriented singles chat rooms. I had a hell of a lot of fun in them. If you hit it off with someone, you could open up a private chat window. More than a few times Iíd do that and the person on the other side would admit that they were actually 16 or 17. Theyíd get instantly blocked on my side. I always wondered what the game of those trolls was considering that they started in an adult over 18 place.

Chefguy 01-12-2019 12:59 PM

They do it partly because it's taboo and has an element of danger to it. Also, pedophilic disorder is a recognized mental aberration.

Wesley Clark 01-12-2019 01:11 PM

Who knows. Part of it is probably the power imbalance that draws them in.

I've heard if you experienced a trauma or stopped developing at a certain age, you end up stuck there. This can make you see similar aged people as your peers. So if something bad happened at 13 you may find yourself thinking those are your peers.

No idea. At the risk of sounding like a pervert, if you're into 14 year olds you can date an 18 year old who looks 14 instead. Thats still very skeevy but at least it isn't illegal.

Iggy 01-12-2019 05:35 PM

Around the time To Catch a Predator was aired my niece was a very young teen and arguing for unmonitored internet access. My sister had been requiring a parent sit alongside my niece while she was on the internet to monitor her.

I proposed a test. I created a bare bones online account purporting to be a 13 year old teen girl. No photos. No social media. Nothing but the one account. And I logged into a Homework Help chat room and waited. Didn't say a thing. Let's see what would happen.

It took six minutes for a stranger to initiate a conversation. Within the course of that chat he said he was a school teacher and provided a G-rated photo of himself. And he admitted to previously engaging in sexual contact with a student in the school building where he taught.

I notified authorities in the state where he lived and they took over the account. The man was identified and prosecuted for sexual assault and for attempt to entice. He served several years in prison.

Six minutes.

The authorities asked me one other question. Who were these other people my account chatted with? One had sent them a dick pic. Those two other accounts were of adult men who initiated a conversation with a stranger who they thought was a 13 year old girl. All had initiated contact within that first six minutes.

SigMan 01-12-2019 08:49 PM

Paedophilia is no different than Homophilia or Beastiality. It's all abnormal shit. :rolleyes:

IvoryTowerDenizen 01-12-2019 10:32 PM

Warning Issued for being a jerk

Comparing homosexuality to both beastiality and peodphilia is as jerkish as they come. Stay of this thread.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SigMan (Post 21427348)
Paedophilia is no different than Homophilia or Beastiality. It's all abnormal shit. :rolleyes:


SigMan 01-13-2019 09:25 AM

Oh gee, someone here is butthurt. Maybe you should tell your boyfriend not to pound you so hard.

engineer_comp_geek 01-13-2019 10:38 AM

Moderator Action

Quote:

Originally Posted by SigMan (Post 21427869)
Oh gee, someone here is butthurt. Maybe you should tell your boyfriend not to pound you so hard.

For jerkish behavior and failure to follow moderator instructions, you are hereby suspended for 24 hours, during which time we will be discussing your posting privileges here.

ETA: After discussion with the other moderators, we have extended the suspension to one week.

Musicat 01-13-2019 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joey P (Post 21426487)
My issue has always been that since it's not an underaged kid he's talking to, no underaged kid has ever been involved in any part of this, can't he argue that he knew the person he was talking to wasn't an underaged kid, even if "she" said she was?

This may be analogous to the free speech question: if no human being is involved, such as in a cartoon, should depiction of illegal activities be permitted?

4th US Circuit Court once said an image is illegal if it appears to be Child Porn, even if computer-generated and no human being was ever photographed.

This decision was overturned by the Supreme Court (Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition).

(Sorry, no links. All of my links to these cases no longer work and I don't want to spend the time to update them. It's also possible that more recent cases have altered those decisions.)

Pantastic 01-13-2019 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joey P (Post 21426487)
I also understand that this is probably someone you want off the streets. My issue has always been that since it's not an underaged kid he's talking to, no underaged kid has ever been involved in any part of this, can't he argue that he knew the person he was talking to wasn't an underaged kid, even if "she" said she was?

Generally the laws are phrased so that the crime is engaging in sexual talk or arranging to meet to engage in sexual activity with a minor or someone the defendant believes is a minor. So in order to establish that a crime happened, the prosecutor needs to show only that the person had enough information in the chat that it's clear they thought they were making arrangements with an underage person, like the 'underaged' person stating their pretend age and the defendant acknowledging it. The exact details vary state to state, and various specific wordings have fared differently in appeals courts, but in general this works fine legally speaking.

dorvann 01-13-2019 01:12 PM

I am surprised that these men believe it's actually a 14 year old girl they are talking with. As a middle aged man myself I'd be instantly suspicious if a 14 year old girl agreed to meet with me. Don't they look in the mirror and realize they are really not that attractive to someone that young? It's like ithey are delusional about how they are some sort of Casanova who is just going to sweep some young teen off her feet and run away together.

Also a lot of men are attracted to younger women because they think they will be easier to manipulate and control than an actual adult woman who has attained a level of maturity. It's so they could mold them into what they think a "perfect mate" should be.

Bill Door 01-13-2019 02:09 PM

There's nobody pretending to be an 18 year old offering to have sex with these guys; there's only people pretending to be 14 years old offering to have sex wiith these guys. I'm pretty sure most of them would jump at the chance for sex with an 18 year old, they just don't get the opportunity.

The 14 year old chat rooms are full of police sting operations, middle aged women age-playing, trolls looking for reactions, and people like Iggy up there proving a point. I'll bet there's less than a 50:50 chance that any random person in there is actually 14. With all that chum in the water; it's no wonder there's so many sharks hanging around.

Ambivalid 01-13-2019 02:16 PM

I suspect an issue at play (for some of the men at least) is the appeal of a female who lacks the mental/emotional maturity of women more appropriate to their age ranges. These men utterly lack the social skills to relate to/date/flirt with women their age, so they take advantage of those with little-to-no experience to know better.

Tatterdemalion 01-13-2019 02:25 PM

Ah, the internet. Where the men are men, the women are men, and the girls are FBI agents.

manson1972 01-13-2019 11:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wesley Clark (Post 21426781)
No idea. At the risk of sounding like a pervert, if you're into 14 year olds you can date an 18 year old who looks 14 instead. Thats still very skeevy but at least it isn't illegal.

This. At least do something legal.

In the episode I watched, the woman met him and talked for a while. He could clearly see how she looked, and she was over 18. Yet he was still interested.

It's just the idea that she's young? Power imbalance? There are many legal woman that someone could find with a power imbalance.

Something taboo, I can understand, even if I don't agree. Something illegal? No, I just don't see it.

JB99 01-14-2019 01:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ambivalid (Post 21428149)
I suspect an issue at play (for some of the men at least) is the appeal of a female who lacks the mental/emotional maturity of women more appropriate to their age ranges. These men utterly lack the social skills to relate to/date/flirt with women their age, so they take advantage of those with little-to-no experience to know better.

This has always been my best guess. The prefrontal cortex is basically the last part of the teenage brain to develop. Available evidence indicates that teens are able to evaluate risk, but their brains over-emphasize the perceived rewards of risky behavior. At the same time, they have less capacity to self-regulate their behavior because the prefontal cortex is still underdeveloped. And to top it all off, they lack the experience necessary to evaluate what is and is not 'okay' in their model of a healthy and rewarding relationship.

These girls are at an age where they are physically becoming mature, but the sexual predator's interest is in finding someone who will not say 'no,' or defend their boundaries, or demand the reciprocity that comes with having a mature relationship.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dorvann (Post 21428064)
I am surprised that these men believe it's actually a 14 year old girl they are talking with. As a middle aged man myself I'd be instantly suspicious if a 14 year old girl agreed to meet with me.

I have no explanation for this. I suppose we should be thankful that these people are so often incompetent.

nearwildheaven 01-14-2019 02:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beckdawrek (Post 21426397)
Maybe it's the only yes they've ever got. I assume a regular guy wouldn't be looking for hook-ups like that. They have to be stupid if they are. The ones that get me are middle aged men, pastors, teachers and once there was a dentist. Just ridiculous. And scary.

I remember when they arrested a POLICE OFFICER who had driven across several states to do this, and when they searched his car, they found all kinds of illegal weapons.

That was nothing compared to the guy who brought his preschool-aged son with him. :eek: I heard that the wife took her "for better or worse" vows seriously enough to choose him over the boy.

nearwildheaven 01-14-2019 02:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ambivalid (Post 21428149)
I suspect an issue at play (for some of the men at least) is the appeal of a female who lacks the mental/emotional maturity of women more appropriate to their age ranges. These men utterly lack the social skills to relate to/date/flirt with women their age, so they take advantage of those with little-to-no experience to know better.

Some of these stings also involved boys.

They remind me a lot of men who pursue mail-order brides; they have some flaws (or multiple flaws) that keep them from having any kind of relationship, even FWB, with "real" women (or men), so they go this route instead.

iamthewalrus(:3= 01-14-2019 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Musicat (Post 21427974)
This may be analogous to the free speech question: if no human being is involved, such as in a cartoon, should depiction of illegal activities be permitted?

4th US Circuit Court once said an image is illegal if it appears to be Child Porn, even if computer-generated and no human being was ever photographed.

This decision was overturned by the Supreme Court (Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition).

It'll be interesting to see how and if this is revisited as deep learning allows for the creation of sexually explicit material that appears to be of specific minors using porn of adults and fully wholesome normal video of minors as training material.

It is not at all clear to me where the line should be drawn here.

Enola Straight 01-14-2019 08:26 PM

I remember a TCAP ep. where Chris Hansen asked a sullen perp "WHY" and he said something like,"Cause it's the cleanest, purest pleasure."

:dubious:

Ulfreida 01-14-2019 10:04 PM

Read Lolita.

manson1972 01-14-2019 11:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Enola Straight (Post 21430621)
I remember a TCAP ep. where Chris Hansen asked a sullen perp "WHY" and he said something like,"Cause it's the cleanest, purest pleasure."

:dubious:

That quote made me a little physically ill. I guess I should be thankful that I don't understand what these guys are thinking.

Gross.

hajario 01-14-2019 11:37 PM

I wonder how many of the people that Hansen caught were at their first attempted meet or had actually been successful in the past.

dropzone 01-15-2019 12:12 AM

"She said she was 18 but by God she looked 13!"

Trying to remember where I stole that.

TokyoBayer 01-15-2019 12:26 AM

My uncle was caught with kiddie porn on his computer. He had been fired from one job for taking an underage girl to a hotel, as some sort of counselor and she was under his charge.

This was back in the 70s so he wasn’t prosecuted.

I don’t think that these people are just a normal people with one problem. I think they have serious problems.

Royal Nonesutch 01-15-2019 05:08 AM

RE "...the cleanest, purest pleasure."
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Enola Straight (Post 21430621)
I remember a TCAP ep. where Chris Hansen asked a sullen perp "WHY" and he said something like,"Cause it's the cleanest, purest pleasure."

:dubious:

That is exactly how Charlie Sheen described recieving a perfectly proportioned, expertly executed and lovingly administered Tanqueray, Tabasco Sauce & turpentine enema from the late, great Nipsey Russell.

Arcite 01-15-2019 08:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dorvann (Post 21428064)
I am surprised that these men believe it's actually a 14 year old girl they are talking with. As a middle aged man myself I'd be instantly suspicious if a 14 year old girl agreed to meet with me. Don't they look in the mirror and realize they are really not that attractive to someone that young? It's like ithey are delusional about how they are some sort of Casanova who is just going to sweep some young teen off her feet and run away together.

Quote:

Originally Posted by hajario (Post 21430940)
I wonder how many of the people that Hansen caught were at their first attempted meet or had actually been successful in the past.

I think dorvann's post addresses that well. One of Chris Hansen's gimmicks, early in the interview when he's still in "let them think I'm a law enforcement officer" mode, is to ask these guys if they've ever done this before, or let them volunteer that they've never done it before, then act all sardonically skeptical and say something like "you understand why I find that hard to believe." Yeah, right. What cute 13 year old girl is interested in a fat, bald, geeky looking 40 year old man? And before you say that these guys are conning the girls into thinking that they look like Justin Bieber or whoever the latest teen pop star is, the guys are sending accurate photos of themselves clearly revealing them to be fat, bald, geeky looking 40 year old men. It's not like we're talking about a guy who's the girls sports coach or whatever and has had the chance to "groom" her. I find it very hard to believe that there is an epidemic of 13 year old girls inviting fat, bald, forty-year-old, geeky looking strangers over to their houses when they're home alone.

The very first time they made this show they could legitimately call it an "investigation;" every episode since then is nothing more than soccer mom outrage porn.

xizor 01-15-2019 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TokyoBayer (Post 21431015)
My uncle was caught with kiddie porn on his computer. He had been fired from one job for taking an underage girl to a hotel, as some sort of counselor and she was under his charge.

This was back in the 70s so he wasnít prosecuted.

He had a computer back in the 70s?

nearwildheaven 01-15-2019 05:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hajario (Post 21430940)
I wonder how many of the people that Hansen caught were at their first attempted meet or had actually been successful in the past.

Which reminds me: There was a guy who was caught in a second televised sting! :smack:

Urbanredneck 01-15-2019 07:37 PM

My problem is Chris Hansen and his people are just making money off this. Have they ever found real predators who have really done this?

And the thing is, who ultimately pays? Society pays to put them in jail. Then what happens when they get out? With perv laws the way they are their are few places they can live and those often get flooded. Society (taxpayers) ends up finding them a place to live.

I feel better with the vigilantes listed above who just scare the crap out of pervs.

So what we really have is Dateline NBC making money and taxpayers end up paying for incarceration and finding them a place to live later and the thing is - no real crime was committed.

hajario 01-15-2019 08:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urbanredneck (Post 21432886)
My problem is Chris Hansen and his people are just making money off this. Have they ever found real predators who have really done this?

And the thing is, who ultimately pays? Society pays to put them in jail. Then what happens when they get out? With perv laws the way they are their are few places they can live and those often get flooded. Society (taxpayers) ends up finding them a place to live.

I feel better with the vigilantes listed above who just scare the crap out of pervs.

So what we really have is Dateline NBC making money and taxpayers end up paying for incarceration and finding them a place to live later and the thing is - no real crime was committed.

But maybe the show will scare off a lot of men who would otherwise be trying that shit.

Enola Straight 01-15-2019 08:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Enola Straight (Post 21430621)
I remember a TCAP ep. where Chris Hansen asked a sullen perp "WHY" and he said something like,"Cause it's the cleanest, purest pleasure."

:dubious:

"The cleanest, best pleasure."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KenQ4dJapZ0
Cody Green... start at 2:07

Urbanredneck 01-16-2019 07:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arcite (Post 21431323)

The very first time they made this show they could legitimately call it an "investigation;" every episode since then is nothing more than soccer mom outrage porn.

They have also had to make this show more and more realistic to catch pervs who suspect a sting. for example in the earlier years when the perv came to the house all they heard was a voice of a girl. Then they had the girl wave them down from the front door. Later they have gotten them to give their phone numbers and the actor call them back to keep the conversation going.


Wasnt there a case where the perv figured out what was up, he never actually went up to the house but went home. The cops came to his house and he committed suicide?

DesertDog 01-16-2019 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xizor (Post 21431798)
He had a computer back in the 70s?

Sure. It took a long time to load a web page from a cassette tape. Even longer for the site to mail it to you. :)
Quote:

Originally Posted by Urbanredneck (Post 21432886)
And the thing is, who ultimately pays? Society pays to put them in jail. Then what happens when they get out? With perv laws the way they are their are few places they can live and those often get flooded. Society (taxpayers) ends up finding them a place to live.

Part of the problem is (and I stress part) that guys who have these feelings but not yet acted on them have no place to turn to for help. Some time back one of Dan Savage's columns had a letter from a guy with strong but unacted upon ephebophilia. Feeling his control weakening, he went to a therapist who, as required by law, promptly notified the police. He was arrested, prosecuted for thought crime, and damn near convicted. Had he been, he would have been put on a sexual offender list with all of the notification and residence restrictions.

Savage was sympathetic and offered suggestions, but a large chunk of his readers -- pretty much an anything goes crowd so long as it's with an adult -- excoriated him. It made me imagine a gay man seventy-five years ago bowing to social pressure and seeking help for teh gay. 'Gay conversion therapy' is generally ineffective and I'm not sure convincing someone to not diddle a teen would be any more so, but these guys don't even have the option to try.

Icarus 01-16-2019 09:31 AM

Just to put a broader context on this issue -

Here in the US, and likely in much of the Liberal Western world, the idea of an older man with an under 18 girl is seen as deeply repugnant. However, in other cultures this is not seen in quite the same way. There are active movements to condemn these practices in those cultures.
But how much of that is seen as Western meddling by the targets?

Even in the US, it seems that certain segments of the population, (dare I say it) usually with a strong fundamentalist religious component, support/promote relationships between adult men and teen girls. (Roy Moore, Warren Jeffs)

I am in no way suggesting we loosen our standards on this issue in our culture. However, I'm more inclined to see this as a bigger issue than a few "bent" individuals who show up on a TV show.

Royal Nonesutch 01-16-2019 04:40 PM

Chris Hansen, former host of "To Catch A Predator" was arrested today in CT for felony charges of writing 2 separate bad checks for $13,000 each.

He bounced the first $13,000 check in the summer of 2017 and the guy he wrote it to finally tracked him down, got the cops involved and had them make Hansen write a new one last April, but it bounced too, so I guess it's time to face the music.

ivylass 01-16-2019 05:00 PM

Is he not working anymore? I thought he was still at NBC.

Skywatcher 01-16-2019 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ivylass (Post 21434910)
Is he not working anymore?

Apparently his career has been reduced to YouTube as of the end of September.

Mean Mr. Mustard 01-16-2019 07:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Royal Nonesutch (Post 21434862)
Chris Hansen, former host of "To Catch A Predator" was arrested today in CT for felony charges of writing 2 separate bad checks for $13,000 each.

He bounced the first $13,000 check in the summer of 2017 and the guy he wrote it to finally tracked him down, got the cops involved and had them make Hansen write a new one last April, but it bounced too, so I guess it's time to face the music.

Tonight, on "To Catch a Creditor"...*


mmm



Not original, stolen from TMZ


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:20 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.