Online paedo catchers

Discussion in 'The Intelligence Cell' started by Bigdumps, Aug 3, 2008.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. I was recently channel hopping and I end up on the FX channel and there was this programme on called 'To Catch a Predator' and it was about how people from a volunteer organisation called perverted-Justice would pose as children and wait in adult themed chatrooms for a paedo to approach them.

    The decoy would explicitly state her age (which of course would be under the legal age of consent) and essentially let the paedo do the 'grooming' and incriminate himself by declaring acts of intent etc etc

    They would then arrage to meet at the decoys house where a media crew and cops from the local sheriffs office would be waiting to nick him.

    Any thoughts on this? I mean, I don't know the American entrapment laws etc but what is the situation in the UK?
  2. The thing I really like about these operations is that they always say, "...but "Emma" was actually a burly police officer...." :D

    I mean, is there some rule that says any cop with a BMI of less than 30 isn't allowed to impersonate the kid - "Sorry, DS Smith, you're amply qualified, but your recent diet means that by no stretch of the imagination could you be described as burly. I'm so sorry, you're off the team".
  3. probably illegal in this country and pretty dodgy even state side.
    couldn't arrse do a version just give the nonce a good shoeing steal there car and pin number not like they could got to the police is it :twisted:
  4. As far as I remember a crime needs to be prevalent, a senior officer needs to ok it (I think Superintendant), and the conduct of the sting has to be such that what you are providing is an ordinary opportunity to commit an offence; you can't act so as to make more likely that an otherwise non-offending person would be tempted. Leaving a motorbike with the steering lock on in a hotspot is fine. Leaving one with the keys in it isn't. Same would apply in all cases, I think.

    I think Americans have got some funny rules generally on "entrapment" and the like - e.g. you can lie to a suspect under questioning so long as the lie would only appeal to a guilty conscience. So, "Your pal is talking, you'd better tell us all about it", "We've found a gun with your prints on it" are (I kind of remember) ok so long as an innocent person in the circumstances wouldn't be disadvantaged and a guilty one would.
  5. i have no problems with that whatsoever, they publicly state that they are underage so fair play to the Yanks on that one, i just wish the screaming hand wringing liberals over here would allow such a thing as that to work under our laws. if you do a little research about the 2600 hacker groups around the world some of them activley hunt the peado's and then proceed to destroy their lives using identity theft and other criminal activity's.
  6. msr

    msr LE

    Mob justice - just what we need :roll:

  7. It would be quite legal to do as long as the Police bit was left out... As for what may happen to said nonce upon the day of the big "meet". That would probably be illegal too!
  8. As opposed to the kind of "justice" where the peado either serves a ridiculously short sentance in relatively luxurious surroundings or, more likely, never goes to jail at all? :roll:
  9. the hacker never actually meets his victim just ruins his or her life :)
  10. As I understand it, the organisation that does this, started off by posting the chatlogs and getting information about the paedo and handing it to police. Its seems to have taken off, watching the programme the voice-over said that the organisation is paid as a consultant buy the police.

    It strikes me that over here it would be ok to post up the chat logs (with username of course and maybe real name?) but send the info also to the coppers.
  11. The Court has employed the so-called "subjective approach" in evaluating the defense of entrapment. This subjective approach follows a two-pronged analysis. First, the question is asked whether the offense was induced by a government agent. Second, if the government has induced the defendant to break the law, "the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant was disposed to commit the criminal act prior to first being approached by Government agents." If the defendant can be shown to have been ready and willing to commit the crime whenever the opportunity presented itself, the defense of entrapment is unavailing, no matter the degree of inducement. On the other hand, "[w]hen the Government's quest for conviction leads to the apprehension of an otherwise law-abiding citizen who, if left to his own devices, likely would never run afoul of the law, the courts should intervene."

    The people that set up the sting are not government/law enforcement agents. They do however call law enforcement once a meet is set up between the suspected weirdo and the "underage girl". Before the cops bust in the door the suspect has usually already shown intent to break the law by turning up with beer and condoms. Some of the nutters shown on the programme actually strip naked before the "girl" actually shows her face. (The girl is usually in another room explaining she is getting ready)

    In effect the suspect is left explaining to the journo and his cameras why he is naked in a young girls house, why he has beer, and why he has brought a box of condoms. There is a small amount of entertainment in watching a fat, sweaty paedo try and bluff his way out of these types of situations.

    Once the journo has had his fun, the police are usually waiting to ask all the same questions. Bear in mind that not all the paedos are prosecuted; but they are certainly embarressed on a national scale.

    Hope this sheds a small amount of light.
  12. In the UK the CEOP (Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre) conducts very much the same sort of operation, with investigators posing online not only as children but also as other offenders.

    The CEOP employs not only traditional law enforcement staff but also includes secondees from organisations such as the NSPCC and Childline who bring knowledge of offender and indeed victim behaviour to the effort as well as commercial firms such as Visa who can assist in the financial element of investigations (it's not just hackers who can ruin someone's credit rating) and facilitating activity on the web becomes a lot harder when no company will give you a credit card.

    All of which helps to create a high risk environment for these individuals since they can never be quite sure whether they themselves are being 'groomed' for eventual arrest and prosecution.

    All to the good as far as I can see.

    Entrapment is not illegal in the UK and the 'fairness' of each instance can be decided upon by a jury of the accused's peers who can use their common sense and varied experiences of the real world in making their decision.
  13. I remeber seeing a video online where some lads had posed as a young teenage girl they eventually got the paedo to turn his cam on. The look of suprise on his face when he saw who he was chatting to was hilarious of course you didnt see him for long
  14. I couldn't agree more. Well said that man!
  15. Just throwing this in for debate...

    As the majority of squaddies on this site would throw one up a female aged 16 and one day... would these also beat someone who does the same to a female of 15yrs 364 days old?

    What a difference 48 hours make.....