That accurately states the law. The only thing I’d add is that outrageous government conduct, so bad it “shocks the conscience” can invalidate arrests even if the accused was predisposed to commit the crimes. To give one example, the sheriff’s department in Broward County, Florida, conducted a reverse sting to sell crack cocaine, using real crack cocaine that they had manufactured themselves. The court ruled that even though the defendants were predisposed to break the law, the police conduct in making small rocks of cocaine and letting some actually get into the community was so outrageous that it shocked the conscience.
Wow. So the state of being attractive/sexually appealing causes men to break the law and attempt to have sex with inappropriate partners. You hear that, girls? Only burkas can prevent rape.
No one ever said the adult on the other end of the chat was forbidden from getting an erection or having fantasies all day long. It is the actions of the adult that are getting them in trouble, not the biological response to sexual stimulus. The web has a smorgasbord of age appropriate wank fodder to choose from; if they steer towards underage girls they are out of line, ethically and legally.
Then hey, here’s a novel suggestion. Troll age appropriate chatrooms with adult members!!! A truer statement is that *humans *get very strong urges sometimes. My suggestion is that males steer those urges towards appropriate outlets/partners. Do you really expect us to sympathize with sexual predators because they’re horny?
(Also, I don’t believe for one minute that sexually mature males are the out of control, hair-trigger statutory rapists/pedos/ephes/hebes that you defend here. Weakest defense you’ve trotted out yet.)
No, I didn’t. I responded to ModernPrimate that temptation is *not *a reasonable excuse for sexual predation. The media is rich with temptation by pubescent teens; that’s no excuse for breaking ethical or legal rules.
The adult in the referenced chat should have exited at “bye”. He clearly knew what laws he was breaking as he referenced trouble numerous times, almost as many times as he propositioned the “girl”. I have zero sympathy for his inability to resist temptation, and agree that he was trolling for underage girls; underage girls were *not *trolling for him.
Yes, it’s totally contemptuous to notice that criminals are attempting to commit crimes.
The fact that they generally do not should be all the proof you need that sting operations are NOT motivated by a perverse desire by cops to punish innocents. If you’re in rehab, you’re attempting to stop committing that crime, so the cops aren’t going to get on your nuts about it.
I have an anger management problem, mostly controlled. Shall I be let off with mere counseling/therapy when I fly off the handle and murder someone?
It’s quite simple. You’re allowed to hurt yourself all you want. Hurting others is on an entirely different moral plane.
In other words, your cake is a lie.
I take severe exception to your misandrist statement in the absence of a cite showing a pervasive lack of control among men.
I know you said temptation is not a reason - I agreed with that in the post you’re quoting. My point was that there was no temptation. That means I have even less sympathy for them than if they were tempted and failed to say no.
Gotcha.
Since this discussion ran off the rails pages ago anyway, does anyone else think the idea that there is a sea of eager 13 year old girls just waiting for a balding, paunchy, socially awkward and creepy 30+ year old man to come over and sex them up is hilarious? I mean, sure some young teens are physically developing and well on their way to sexual maturity but their target audience is teenaged boys, not creepy old men. Some of the older, profoundly unappealing men who appeared at a cute teens door on TCAP must be the most misguided, deluded creeps on the net.
Speaking for myself, I was a precocious kid who was thoroughly disgusted by leering teachers and entertained zero fantasies about having someone’s dad heave his nervous, hairy, sweaty body on top of me. My friends and I laughed at older men who came onto us. Most predators who entertain fantasies about educating a virgin are seriously barking up the wrong tree. And if there are legitimate young teens talking dirty to random strangers on the internet, compare it to prank phone calls of previous generations. It’s far more likely to be a joke than an actual proposition.
Avoid claiming or suggesting that another poster is lying.
[/Moderating ]
I have no idea in what langage, dialect, or patois “durrrr” indicates “it is obvious,” but since it does have the meaning that I noted and you admit that it is impolite, stop using it.
Wait a minute, how were these girls on display? These are CHAT LOGS. Of a TEEN CHAT ROOM. They are words on a screen in a forum specifically for teens. These aren’t girls going up to guys on the street and waving their tits and asses. They aren’t even in an adult oriented chat room.
How can a girl not be on display? Erase all social media, wrap up in a burka, and only go out in the company of chaperon?
It’s weird. It’s one of the strangest things about the show. These guys have no clue about how teenage girls’ minds work. These pathetic clowns actually send pics of their genitals to middle school girls.
Now I’m quite sure that lots of middle school aged girls would like to have sex with middle aged men - Brad Pitt, Will Smith, Ashton Kutcher, Johnny Depp, Leo DiCaprio, et al. Guys who look like Jack Black? Not hardly.
The thing is, if you go read the transcripts, these “girls” aren’t really waiting around all that eagerly. For the most part, they seem to tentatively agree to most stuff. To answer questions during the chat, the decoys frequently create a profile of a little girl who has been abused and is starved for attention, and these pieces of shit grab onto that and don’t let go. It’s completely disgusting, and seeing it portrayed here as some sexxxy “barely legal” Lolitas tempting innocent men on the internet with their steamy chatting is disturbing, to say the least.
*Even if *that was what was happening, I would have no sympathy. But, when you see the reality of what goes on, it just makes you ill.
errrr… every country? Sure there are corrupt and abusive police systems out there, but not many would stoop so low as to allow that. Otherwise police could do that all day long to appear to be doing work. Some countries such as Netherlands and Sweden have outlawed all stings in every sense.
Depending on the circumstances, the cops in this situation could be described as drug pushers, or at least enablers. The fact that they could even get close to being a drug pusher in any sense should be enough that they would not even touch it. Dangling drugs in front of known addicts who are trying to avoid them, how low can you go?
I saw on Cops also girl pretending to be prostitutes in order to “sting” clients. It just seemed so bizarre and wrong. I would say 95%+ of males would use a prostitute if they could not get sex any other way or any other method.
Yes, but the persuasion means entrapment.
No, no, no. The decoys DO keep asking them over on the phone. Anyone that has watched the show regularly can attest to that. What we established was that the decoys don’t bring up sex first. They do openly beg them to come over on the phone and actively phone their phones multiple times. If they didn’t do that, I mightn’t be here arguing this at all.
No, I said it’s a mitigating factor.
**False. **
You see this is what I mean by people making things up to suit themselves.
The decoys had yahoo profiles and pictures on them, (with really sexy pictures if the guys’ descriptions are any way accurate). A decoy was also shown on webcam on the tv show on multiple occasions, who knows how many of these girls were on webcam and what they said (considering they wouldn’t be restricted by the rules and having to show the chat later). On a related point, a lot of them had names not too far from “candyass4u”.
See what I mean by talking about things you don’t know about?
And btw, who is checking the perverted-justice machines and what system do they have to make sure they aren’t edited afterwards? Let me guess, all they do is send on the chats to each other. At the very least that is ridiculously unprofessional for supposed police evidence. If I were caught, I would deny everything and say they edited the chats, and it would have to be thrown out for lack of evidence.
How do you know that they don’t edit the chats, because they say so? Even if 99% of the time they’re honest, many people find it acceptable to be dishonest “just this once”, especially if it’s “for a good cause, so this bastard creep doesn’t get away, I don’t care if I’m breaking protocol”, similar to the feelings many people here have espoused.
You were asked for a citation to support your claim and you have responded with more claims and no supporting evidence.
You might want to actually provide evidence for your claim, particularly in regards to the two countries you actually named.
Not sure how reliable the Wiki page is, but it appears that UK laws regarding sexwith children is fairly similar to US laws. Of enforcement and punishment I have no idea, but here is a selection from the list of sexual offences in the UK:
" Arranging or facilitating the commission of a child sex offence (s.14)
Meeting a child following sexual grooming etc (s.15)
Abuse of position of trust: sexual activity with a child (s.16)
Abuse of position of trust: causing or inciting a child to engage in sexual activity (s.17)"
It appears that the legal definition of child is under 13, but the coercive actions leading up to actual physical sexual contact are just as illegal in the UK as in the US.
ModernPrimate, do your assertions arise from your own personal belief system or from experience and/or knowledge of UK laws?
You need hard, real, tangible evidence. I mean some of these guys are being put away for 7 years, you need something damn concrete and not wikipedia-esque. The more I think about it, the more ridiculous it sounds.
Low hanging fruit. Because Chris Hanson reads verbatim the juiciest sections of chat allowed to broadcast, and the predators confirm the words and nude photos belong to them.
Ha. How about the transcripts of the chats, and the admission of the accused caught on video and witnessed by thousands? Is that enough concrete evidence for ya? You know both prosecution and defense can subpeona the predator’s computer for the exact chat log. Any defendent who claimed entrapment would happily provide his chat log for perusal by the court, and if anything was falsified it would be grounds for dismissal of the case.
I didn’t make assertions about whether or not TCAP could be carried out in the UK. I made assertions about how so many stings allowed in the US wouldn’t be allowed in UK or most of the world.
You’d need a lot more evidence to put somone away in the UK for anything like that. In the UK the government doesn’t cave to the populist opinion like they do in the US… typically they say that what goes on in the UK would never be tolerate in the US.
Well I tried looking and all I could find was this: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2048689/Labour-councillor-campaigned-Harriet-Harman-admits-grooming-15-year-old-girl-blackmailer.html Unfortunately he’s not sentenced yet, I doubt it’ll be for 6+ years.
Note however that he would come across as a particularly nasty case in TCAP.
Modern Primate, I subtitled this show for a TV station. That meant I had to watch it closely. What you’re describing did not happen. I don’t think you’re lying, but I do think you’re imagining it.