duffer, in his typically ham-handed way, took this as an opportunity to launch into a discussion of how violent he’s like to be to pedophiles, but don’t perpetrate his confusion of the issue. There’s a major difference between a child and a fourteen year old, and even if he had messaged an actual fourteen year old, she wouldn’t exactly have been traumatized for life. Hell, even if he’d managed to talk one into bed with him, it’s a bad thing to do, but it’s not remotely the equivalent of molesting a young child.
I think our societal discussion of this issue is really badly clouded and it’s not helpful to equate any sex with anyone underage with child-molestation. I’m glad there are cops out there trying to get these guys - if nothing else, because the internet shouldn’t be a free space to find young people to have cybersex with. But I’m deeply troubled by the confusion between this kind of thing and child-molestation, which is a different, and much worse, crime.
I’m an outspoken critic of this administration, but I really don’t think that blame can be laid at the door of Homeland Security. Pervs are everywhere. I’m glad that someone is catching them, and I’m glad that employment with Homeland Security doesn’t shelter this asshole from investigation.
I don’t know. Haven’t there been several cases involving REAL teenagers, who have corresponded with older men online, then run away to meet them because they were “in love”?
in my jurisdictino (MI), depending on what you did w/said 15 year old, Criminal Sexual conduct in the first or second degree is possible. her age would be the deciding factor.
Why? All he did was fantasize about commiting a crime. I’ve fantasized about robbing Fort Knox, myself- Prsion time for me? I had fantasies about Tracy Lords before she was 18- even though I had no idea she was that young. A painful execution for me too? :dubious: And, the roughly 5 million men who jack-offed to her Porno? Death? :rolleyes:
where I asked "
So, if the pedophile just talked about it and planned it, but never actually drove to a meeting place, then there were be no conviction? It’s that final act that turns it from a fantasy to an attempted crime? If so, then I can buy that. But I know that dudes fantasize with others on-line, and neither is what they say they are, and both know that. So, just the act of IMing back & forth doesn’t make a crime, IMHO." and Bricker answered
So, this sounds like a bogus arrest. However, since he did mention his real job title, he needs to lose his job, of course.
But how do we know he really thought that person was a minor, and not just an adult pretending to be a minor for a fantasy? And, show me a juristiction where sending porn to someone you think is a minor but really is an adult is a crime? And then- prove that’s what he thought.
So why would a local police chief want to spend the time and resources to troll for pedophiles who may very well be in Outter Mongolia? It does not make his town any safer.
I would assume that the chat transcripts include the target stating they are underage. and it is quite illegal to give a minor pornography. No need to delve into his mind, if there was a statement that the person was a minor. Now, if you saw me in person, and I claimed to be a minor, you’d have some justification for stating “I didn’t believe her” (I"m over 50, havent’ looked underage since I was about 23 or so). But as it is, he’d have a difficult time attempting to prove that he had reason to believe that the person he was sending the porn to wasn’t a minor. that’s all that’s necessary for the ‘attempt’ charge to carry, I believe.
IF I mail booze to a minor, knowing/believing they’re a minor and the mom intercepts the delivery, I’m still guilty of the attempt.
I told you her age: 22. It’s not a crime in Tennessee to pick up a 22-year-old, and I don’t see how her having lied about her age would make it a crime.
I’m always up for a game of oneupsmanship where each person tries to express just how morally apalled THEY are by pedophiles/terrorists/drunk drivers/smokers/homosexuals/liberals/etc. and the violent lengths THEY would go through to punish the P/t/dd/s/h/l/es… so I’ll see see your death by beating and raise you a skinned alive, rolled in salt, and buried alive in poop.
No. While that’s certainly true, it supports DaddyTimesTwo’s point, not mine. That’s a case of a real older guy fooled into believeing a younger person was interested in them, sexually.
Undoubtedly, but that, too, isn’t my point.
Have there been cases of real teens falling for real older guys? I’m sure there have.
sorry, got it backward. I still believe that you’d be charged- “the intent was to have relations w/a 15 eyar old” (unless, like I mentioned before you’d have some way of substantiating a claim of “I knew she was really 22”, like you knew her younger sister who was 21 etc.).
again - if you write a note saying you’re robbing the bank, but the teller doesn’t read English, your intent is still there and chargable.
So? It is extremely common for dudes & dudettes to lie about their ages (and sex, and appearance, and income, and…) for purposes of fantasies on the Internet. So, anyone coming along with a claim that “well, the other person made such and such a claim, thus they must have assumed this claim was accurate” is bullshit. Anyone who assumes accuracy on a blind internet post is a fool. And, in actual fact- the person wasn’t what they claimed to be.
The point is- If I said I was 21, and you sold it to me, and it turned out I was 16, you could get into trouble. BUT If I said I was 16, but I really was 21, then there’d only be a crime if you could show that the other other person really thought I was 16, and even that’d be doubtful.
Sure, if you mail booze to a minor. BUt if you mail booze to someone who *said * they were a minor, but really was 21- where would the crime be? (OK, it might be illegal to MAIL booze to anyone, but that’s not the point here).
Hey, if somebody really does rape a child, I’m 100% behind dire draconian penalties. But “thinking about it” just can’t be a crime.
If I would be charged, then the law must be changed. It’s a pretty fucked up world we live in when the complete absence of a victim makes no difference to the nature of a crime.
For the bank example to hold up, it would have to turn out there was no teller, and no bank.