For those of you who may not have seen this program, it's about the ultimate sting !
Police posing as a 13 year old girl on the internet, lure these unsuspecting child predators to a location in Petaluma CA. When they arrive, they are greeted by an 18 year old actress, posing as the 13 year old, and told to get comfortable while she goes into another room to change into a bathing suit. Then out comes the host of Dateline with all his cameramen, with transcripts of the conversations they had on the internet chat room with the ficticous 13 year old. The host reads those transcrpits on the air, and the men are told that this will be on national TV. They then start to apologize, and most say they weren't going to do anthing.
When they get up to leave, as soon as they step outside they are confronted by four policemen, pinned to the ground and cuffed. Then they are taken to the station, booked and interviewed by LE, and that is recorded for national TV also. Then they are told they can post bond, which is $30,000.
Do you folks think this is a public service, or just plain overkill in order for NBC to secure higher ratings and increase their income from advertisers.
My feelings are really split on this. On the one hand you have these predators that get caught at this, but so far none of them had a previous record of sexual abuse with anyone. It would seem they acted on a fantasy they had, and although it was wrong, and incredibly stupid, the ramifications of them acting on this are immense. These seem to be mostly ordinary people. Professionals, doctors, computer engineers, plant formen, Iraqi veterans, etc.
They will now be disgraced on national TV, lose their jobs, their careers, have to hire lawyers at great expense to have a chance stay out of prison, but most of all, and I don't feel really too sorry for these guys, but the collateral damage is of more concern than those things I have just mentioned. These guys have wives, children, girlfriends, parents, people they are close to. Some of their lives may be destroyed also by all this, and it seems the punishment for trying to act out this fantasy they have, doesn't fit the crime, especially since it's victimless.
On the other hand, it does send out a message across the nation. Don't try to mess with the under aged. And if it helps to lessen these types of crime, then it may be worth it.
But do you think it really will. I'm not sure. I guess my biggest problem with this is the fact it's put on national TV. These stings happen all the time and they are just small time on the local news.
What if we were entrapped for our hobbying, and instead of finding our provider, we enter an incall to find a TV show host and a bunch of cameramen telling us were going to be on National TV. After all this hobby is a victimless crime also.
What do YOU think? Just or unjust.
Dateline NBC will have more of this on Friday 8 PM central.
One would think that most LE agencies would have a policy regarding doing a sting operation that involves non-LE teamwork
I guess I would feel better about this if LE was doing this alone. Obviously, Dateline is just in it for the sensationalism & ratings.
And no, I don't feel sorry for the pervs that show up. They do need to be rounded up and identified for who they are and what they may do for real if they get the chance.
A subliminal message is being sent to all those who abhor pedophilia that these predators do this with the aid of the "Internet" and maybe the internet should be regulated.
A good salesman ALWAYS builds need & worth into his presentation.
How often did they "net" these guys before the internet? Without the internet, these guys probably could have gone after children at their whim for their whole lives.
The internet has certainly changed sexual behavior.
BUT THEY DON'T!!
The government really doesn't care if little girls are diddled or if babies are raped. The Government wants CONTROL over the flow of information (the internet). The govn't will continue their propaganda efforts via the state controlled mass media and continuously bombard the masses with the most universally detestable of crimes that use the internet as a tool so as to gain public support that 'strict' regulations must be enacted.
A recent "restriction" placed on internet content has already hade a demonstrable impact on the escort malls and the kinds of photos the advertisers are allowed to run.
With the myopic minded 'anti-groups' and another catch phrase "War on....." being waged; the dominos are already falling.
I would be far more fearful of the end to net neutrality that the telecom companies want and Congress might be ready to give them. There, the government is clearly encouraging them to manage the internet. Once net neutrality is gone, the government can then regulate content through the telecoms, such as with the television networks. The democracy on the internet and the wonderful things it has done for all of us would be finished and we will never be able to recover it.
This is a blatant attack, and I'm surprised at how little attention people have paid to it.
By a cursory check of the blue/red representatives in Congress/Senate given by the "save the internet" site It looks like the ditto-head neocons would be the favored party of Adolf Hitler, Genghus Khan, Saddam Hussein and the nearly forgotten Osama Bin Ladin.
Save your breath LFA. Most people are so well- indoctrinated and incapable of actually thinking that I'm afraid you're just wasting yout time.
Everybody knows the bad mean men use the interent to hurt good little girls and the nice policeman save them.
In this case there is no entrapment. Perverted Justice puts a profile of a 12 or 13 year old on the net and is in a teen chat room. The pic is obviously underage and isn't of a sexual nature. The guy messages who they think is a teen and initiates all sexual chat.
Its not like the teen says "I want to see you naked." or "I want you to take my virginity". The guy is initiating this.
Now the OP asks if dateline is performing a service or just trying to bump up their ratings. The answer is both.
We owe a debt to NBC. The sooner we get the predators off the street, the better. Same goes for rapists and child and women abusers.
First, don't tell me it's a victimless crime. Consensual sex is an absurdity if one of the parties is beneath the age of consent. You might say there's no balance of power there. The adult man has it all-- which is the main reason that it's thought of as sexual predation.
The girls or boys these guys are trolling for have lives and families too. Some girls will end up pregnant at 13 (I can't believe sex under such unequal circumstances would be protected), or will get AIDS, others may get raped and murdered. In case you haven't noticed, our legislatures are making abortions much harder for girls at that age. Congress is making it a federal crime to take a minor across state lines to have an abortion.
Those guys may plea that they weren't going to really do anything, but what else could they say? I'm certain a guy can get his jollies just having that power and then making himself feel good by letting her go unmolested. That could very well be a fantasy somebody could jack off to. I wouldn't count on this contingency, at least not for every such encounter.
Still, I think it's an attack on freedom for police to work hand in hand with reporters, using them as a judicial instrument of punishment. It puts the punishment before conviction, or the indictment and arraignment for that matter. There are constitutional issues to this.
I don't think it's likely to be used against the hobby. Oh, networks may try it, but it won't go anywhere. I think that consensual sex between adults is too morally ambiguous for TV stations to get into. What makes trapping a sexual predator both safe and effective for ratings is clear moral tale about it: people want to see a scoundrel get outed and punished, and they have no doubt in their minds that the hebephile is a scoundrel.
When you get into consensual sex though, the moral clarity disappears. If people see that punished, too many of them might just change the channel.
I think this will probably go on till a newstation goes too far and gets sued, which will happen the first time a conviction falls through. I don't expect sympathy from judges for networks when a suit for this is brought to them.
and I'd add one - the issue of age of consent can be changed any time a legislature agrees. While I think the line is necessary, I'm not convinced that an 18th birthday turns an innocent into a mensch.
Just about anyone would agree that 13 is clearly under the line. This gives the police a solid case and the networks a clear cut moral cause.
Legislatures can change age of consent. Though however they write the laws, when it's close, judges and juries are likely to be more lenient giving the guys probation rather than time. In some places, (the Ozarks or Appalachians) the laws aren't enforced so readily, especially if the older guy marries her.
I did know a few women who were married in their early teens, two of them were completely enthralled with the guys. All those marriages were disasterous for the women.
Apparently crimes go unsolved because there are no dental records and all the DNA matches. WTF
It seems that any people living in mountain ranges are isolated and so more inbred, even in our century.
Nice write up. And, you were going along just fine until you asserted this:
"What if we were entrapped for our hobbying, and instead of finding our provider, we enter an incall to find a TV show host and a bunch of cameramen telling us were going to be on National TV. After all this hobby is a victimless crime also."
You called it a victimless crime in preceeding paragraphs. Sir, you comparing apples and oranges. Now of course, none of use want to be on Dateline when visiting a provider. That is not going to happen, under the current laws I can assure you.
This is one of many of these episodes as we all know, and YES some of the previous episodes there were perverts that even had previous convictions for this stuff. Victimless? I dare not try to explain that to my 13 year old daughter after the fact. Don't be so upset honey, this stuff DOES happen and it is a victimless crime.
OMG, I don't feel sorry for these guys at all.They need to find some other way to spend their time than flirting with children online, then going to meet them. I am so sick of it.
Besides cops have been doing these types of setups forever, it's always in the news every few weeks. If these guys are too stupid to keep doing this, then oh well.
It is not a victimless crime IMO.
Sara
Although a crime was commited when the predators showed up, there were no victims of that crime. However your point is well taken, and yes, if it wasn't a sting there would have been victims.
My point is, should NBC be doing this. I have absolutely no sympathy for the predators, but I do feel for their families. However if this sort of sting really helps to prevent these acts from really occuring, then I guess it's a good thing.
However, is NBC doing this as a public service, or for ratings, or perhaps it doesn't matter if it has positive results.
While I'm no expert on preditors, I have read a few books on the subject. One of the things I found mentioned in some of these books is how often preditors do not get charges pressed. One: because they tend to be "good" people, with active ties to the community and people don't want to think bad of them, ie: teachers, doctors, choir group leaders, etc. Two: because a lot of times they pic subjects that are not as credible. Children, in general, do not hold as much weight in our society as adults, but also a lot of times the vicitims that are chosen fit particular profiles, and ususally have emotional/behavioral problems that also can create doubt *if* they come forward. (Who do you believe, Johnny that's been acting out at school and home, or the coach everyone loves that has no record??) Three: because they are skilled at manipulating, and therefore engratiating themselves in the family or community, and making themselves empathetic when needed.
Just because they have not been caught before does not mean they haven't tried it, and succeeded multiple times. And the more they "almost" get caught but are able to get away with it, the bolder it makes them. There was a least one person interviewed in one of the books I read that was a "first time offender" that copped to many, many more offenses when interviewed for the book.
And I do wonder what is next with this type of TV programming...
One in three females and one in ten males will be sexually molested before the age of 18. Four million child molesters reside in this country
He studied 240 child molesters (pedophiles). They averaged 30 (homosexual or same-sex) to 60 (heterosexual) victims before being caught. The typical child molester will sexually abuse 380 children in a lifetime
And what does our society (as represented by the legal sytem) do to these predators? More likely than not they get what amounts to a slap on the wrist, unless there is a corpse. That is why I favor that child molesters, upon first conviction, have the "active ingredient" removed - in a clean, surgical environment although a skilfully wielded axe in the public square... Or there could be a public service program by all TV stations broadcasting the surgery.
that a goodly number of the trapped will be their bosses and fellow newsmen.
They're a horny lot, I've told. 
Trust me when I say there are many, many members of TER. Only a very small fraction (who knows maybe 1/10th of a percent) actually come on the boards, or write reviews.
Many are so UTR that it is not funny. I would venture that it will be many of their bosses and up and up. You can bet their are clergyman, police officers (off duty) lawmakers, elected officials and movie peeps as well that know about TER or use it. For all I know Mr. Fisher, you could be Brad Pitt. Not likely lmao, but who knows.
I wonder if Mark Foley is here?
If it ever starts, LE will begin chasing its own tail. Its membership clearly wants to avoid this, especially on national televison.
Lets get the story straight, Some of the guys do have a record and some don't, the ones that do have one are longer than the long arm of the law!! So what your saying is that its ok to go on line and pick-up some 13yr old bring her some beer or what ever else she may want and in hopes of sex for free?? But its not ok for dateline to show this on the air ? that thier doing it for the ratings? These are men with families and homes and kids of there own,,They even showed one guy showing up with his own kid !!! These men and I use that loosely because i don't think these people are men,, anyone who goes after a 12 or 13 yr. old should be put on national tv.In one of the interviews one of them said he had watched dateline the weeks before and saw what they were doing,, HE SAW THE SHOW AND STILL WENT TO THE HOUSE !!!! Know how dumb is that?? You hit a tender subject !! Sex should be for adults not for kids under 13, then it is a crime and always should be,,under 18 should be, not 16! As far as the hoppy goes we all know that it is against the law in this state always was and always will be! Is it victimless, I think in the back of every mans mind he is a victim of one thing or another
Read my post again. I just saw the one show last week, and only one guy had a record and it was for armed robbery. All I am doing is asking for opinions on this subject.
Where did I say anything is OK? These stings happen all the time without the media in on it. The predators are arrested, tried and either convicted or not. I said I had NO sympathy for them, but by putting it on national TV, and I don't give a shit how it destroys their lives, but I feel for the relatives.
How would you feel if your son or your father ended up on TV like that. Would you be glad that everyone in the country ended up knowing about it, or would you prefer it was just known in your family only. You would end up having to suffer for their sins also.
That being said, if it really stops just one child from being sexually molested, then it IS right to broadcast it.
You are right about it being a tender subject though, and that's why I posted it. It made for some interesting discussion.
They have done this in several cities with the same results everywhere. I think its good to expose these guys. 13 is below the age of consent for a reason. These guys are praying of girls (and boys) who way to young.
I would like to see them follow up, and see what happens in court. A few times they arrested someone who tryed to drive away before going to the house. (He saw something that spooked him). I know he was arrested, but I wonder if LE would be able to back it up a get a conviction, when he never went to the house.