I have several times heard people make the claim that the only (or at least the majority of the) child pornography available in the US is published or imported by the FBI in order to catch pedophiles. To what extent is this true?
-Ben
Earlier in the year, an FBI agent working out of Tampa came to speak to my History class on career day or somesuch event. His area of expertise was catching perveyors of child pornography on the internet. He said he basically enters chat rooms, waits to be solicited for the reciept of child pornography, agrees to receive the pictures, then busts the unwitting pervert at his/her home, where they often have an impressive collection of kiddie porn (everybody needs a hobby…) He said nothing about the FBI making any or all of the child pornography. From his procedural description, he doesn’t need to.
You wouldn’t expect him to admit it, would you?
Why would they need to make or import any when after a single bust they would have some, if they wanted to use it as bait?
True enough, Rev, they don’t have to produce any. But if they transmit any of what they’ve got to ensnare a culprit, have they not participated in the trade?
The OP reminds me of similar questions that arise in possible entrapment deals involving government agents being the purported suppliers of the drugs in a dope bust.
Everything I’ve read about the FBI and kiddie porn (which is not one of the bigger topics in the Wall Street Journal) agrees with argyle. Here’s a WAG: They like to hang out in chat rooms because that’s where the preditors are.
Let me clarify: the FBI does not use “bait” to catch those who posess and trade child porn. They don’t have to, all they do is enter a chat room, and it is given away freely to them. There is no need for the FBI to posess kiddie porn in any way, shape or form, unless it has been seized and is being used as evidence.
There was a famous case from Iowa I believe. The situation was that The local FBI mailed our advertisements for kiddie porn, mailed the kiddie porn, and then were and arrested the people.
There is also an old joke that goes like this.
Who is the biggest distributor of kiddie porn in the US. …The FBI.
This does not mean that they make kiddie porn, just that they use porn that have in their possesion.
I don’t believe your claim for a minute unless you can back it up with evidence.
This sounds like an over-zealous sting operation. IIRC, entrapment is when a law enforcement agent suggests that the suspect commit the crime in the first place. That sounds exactly like what happened here.
Lighten up, dude. The FBI’s only human. You’ve got to expect that they’ll blow a few operations (no pun intended).
Okay. The reference is to a bit that appeared on “60 Minutes” at least 15 years ago and before the internet as we know it.
One old guy kept getting mailings and finally sent off for some of the stuff. His next visit was from the Feds.
The porn had been confiscated from overseas mail order (Denmark comes to mind–this was a long time ago and this is from memory).
The old man had never been arrested before and several attorneys argued that if the government hadn’t bombarded him with mailings he would never have been curious in the first place.
I believe FBI tactics have changed a bit since then.
I didn’t mean to be an asshole, I just wanted to know if what was said was true, or perhaps just an urban legend. Perhaps I should check over at Snopes.
FWIW, I also remember reading some time ago about the case of the older gentleman finally ordering the porno after being solicited repeatedly by the FBI. There was a lengthy newspaper write-up. My recollection was that the fella was from Nebraska, but I can’t be for sure.
I wish I could narrow down the time frame or newspaper, but I’ve moved around a lot and can’t pin anything down that will help with specifics.
No problem, argyle. Even today, entrapment does happen in undercover and sting operations.
I posted a question a while back asking about this. I can’t find it now. Someone I know is now in jail over this. (I think that when I posted before you all thought it was me in trouble and I didn’t want to admit it.) This guy was in a chat room and accepted some porn that was described to him as “teen porn.” Upon recieving the images of obviously VERY young girls he told the sender he was not interested in that stuff and deleted the images. Shortly after this, for unrelated reasons, he moved to another state. They raided his home and confiscated his computer – the images were found in his recycle bin. They charged him with transporting the stuff over state lines making it a federal offense. He’s now serving 15 months. This happened this year. My previous post was before his conviction.
Now, I still think he could have fought and won this one but he was afraid of the federal charges and went with a plea bargain. I don’t know why they singled him out. I think that he must have done something to draw attention. He can be an a$$hole.
I don’t worry about this happening to me, and I have respect for the FBI and other law enforcement agencies. I just think that the rules for the internet have not been fully developed and we should all be respectful of one another while we work it out.
I think we should all be worried. I suspect that all one would have to do to frame somebody is to send them a bunch of email with kiddie porn attached, put something like “here’s the kiddie porn you asked me for” in the subject line, then call the FBI about the guy.
Is the FBI smart enough to understand how easy this would be? I certainly hope so.
It is scary. A couple of weeks ago I received an e-mail purportedly from a 16 year-old girl taking a “survey.” The e-mail asked 70-80 sex related questions (when was my first time, what are my fantasies, etc…). Extremely graphic.
Then “she” proceeded to answer all the questions herself. It was obvious they were designed to titilate. Now, I’ve never been to a chat room in my life (not even SD-related), so I don’t know why I was a target of this e-mail. The list of recipiants was mammoth, so I figure someone was using the shotgun approach.
Of course I deleted the e-mail without saving or responding. Even clicked “block sender.” But it is unnerving to think someone might construe this as me soliciting sexual information from a teenager.
divemaster, the age of consent in some states is 16 or less.