Vigilante Justice...

wndsr

wndsr

wndsr

Soldato
Joined
10 Jun 2013
Posts
3,638
Location
Manchester, UK
I was surprised to see there wasn't a thread about a show that recently aired on Channel 4 about Stinson Hunter. For those who have never heard of him, he's a bloke who poses as young children online for the purposes of finding people looking to 'meet' with what they believe to be children.

I was aware of who he was and his actions even before the show went out as I've been following him online, but I thought the show hammered home just how (scarily) easy it was for him to get grown men to come and meet what they thought were kids. His usual tactic is to get them to meet and confront them by reading the disgusting things they've said whilst recording the whole encounter. There is no violence involved and he makes it very clear that there won't be.

It got me thinking - is this approach to catching online predators a good thing and should the police be doing it more routinely? I actually quite liked the way he went about it, he was fairly smart and he wouldn't threaten violence when they met up, but he did record the whole encounter and publish it online.

What are your thoughts on this kind of technique and could the public taking the law into their own hands in this way ever be successful?

4OD Link: http://www.channel4.com/programmes/the-paedophile-hunter/4od
 
Last edited:
I watched this and the problem I had was the way he puts stuff online.

These guys could have innocent families that get targeted or kids bullied at school.

Once something like this is on the Internet its on forever.
 
My concern is that without over-sight targets could be manipulated, there could be inadvertent consequences/fall out with what is a quite serious subject, etc. but raising the profile of the potential issue and so on is a good thing.
 
I don't have a problem outing people like this as a matter of fact I believe some group on Facebook has been doing it for a while and a bloke, who a woman I used to work with was married to, was caught like this a little while ago. In the US there has been a tv program doing this for years, To catch a predator!

At the end of the day, if it brings to light people like this that may not have been on the police radar previously it saves children's lives and stops these deviants from committing these acts.
 
I haven't seen the programme in question, but I have no problems at all with gathering evidence against men who try to meet up with kids they meet online. Let's just think about that for a second - they think they are talking to children online then arrange to meet them irl. These guys are a massive danger to society, it sounds like this guy should be knighted.
 
wndsr said:
could the public taking the law into their own hands in this way ever be successful?
Click to expand...

News of the World readers vandalising paediatrician's homes comes to mind. Mob law seems to be controlled by the lowest common denominator.
 
"I give them the rope...They choose to hang themselves" Stinson hunter

That's pretty much it for me. If I was talking to someone online and they told me they were 13 for example I'd immediately stop the conversation. I most certainly wouldn't keep talking to them and then send pictures of myself naked and arrange to meet them. But then again judging by the decoys photos I would never have even begun conversation with them in the first place...

I don't have any sympathy for these men. The only circumstances where I would feel sympathy would be as already mentioned say the children at school who then get taunted "your dads a paedo" and bullied etc.

Here's a video of one for those that haven't seen any. To think this guy got away with it in court, as he said that it was an over 18 website, and he never really believed it was an 11 year old.

 
Last edited:
I'd not considered the collateral damage of this before, but this is a very good point. I think the difference between the people on this show and people who have just 'been accused' is that he has made it clear to the person on the other end that the kid is only 13/12/underage yet they chose to go ahead anyway. As CJ84 quoted, he gave them the rope but they hung themselves.

E: Despite the risk of collateral damage from videos being published online, I have to ask why didn't these people consider their families before going ahead and meeting what they thought was a child on the internet? Plus, if 'the normal way' of catching these people did prove successful, surely there would be collateral damage anyway.
 
Even with "collateral damage" I'm still not against posting videos online. These guys are banged to rights. They openly admit on camera to having the conversations.

But we live in a society where people like the Jamie Buldger killers are protected and given new identites, homes and jobs....

I understand the reasons behind it, I.e to avoid members of the public taking law into their own hands, but I personally believe if you choose to commit a crime like that then deal with the consequences.

I certainly wouldn't want to have people like that living next door to me.
 
There was on bloke in particular who marched out of the house, down the road (where locals shouted abuse at him) then through the park. He even said on his walk down the round something about 'giving it to her'...
 
CJ84 said:
"I give them the rope...They choose to hang themselves" Stinson hunter

That's pretty much it for me. If I was talking to someone online and they told me they were 13 for example I'd immediately stop the conversation. I most certainly wouldn't keep talking to them and then send pictures of myself naked and arrange to meet them. But then again judging by the decoys photos I would never have even begun conversation with them in the first place...

I don't have any sympathy for these men. The only circumstances where I would feel sympathy would be as already mentioned say the children at school who then get taunted "your dads a paedo" and bullied etc.

Here's a video of one for those that haven't seen any. To think this guy got away with it in court, as he said that it was an over 18 website, and he never really believed it was an 11 year old.

Click to expand...

This is all well and good if there is a clear demarcation where the target realises the age concerned but without proper over-sight it would be easy to reel someone in before they fully understood what they were getting into and by the time they realised and weren't interested in taking it any further there would already be enough "evidence" to smear them forever.

Confirmation bias can have very serious consequences with this subject.
 
wndsr said:
There was on bloke in particular who marched out of the house, down the road (where locals shouted abuse at him) then through the park. He even said on his walk down the round something about 'giving it to her'...
Click to expand...

Yeah that was the guy "lee", when asked if there had been a 13 year old girl would he have done anything and he said yes...:eek:
 
I'm glad some of them lost their jobs after getting caught. They should be named and shamed.
 
CJ84 said:
Yeah that was the guy "lee", when asked if there had been a 13 year old girl would he have done anything and he said yes...:eek:
Click to expand...

That was the one.

My biggest fear about this show is that people start getting ideas and instead of simply recording the meeting, uploading it and giving it to the police, they will decide to 'teach them a lesson'.
 
Rroff said:
This is all well and good if there is a clear demarcation where the target realises the age concerned but without proper over-sight it would be easy to reel someone in before they fully understood what they were getting into and by the time they realised and weren't interested in taking it any further there would already be enough "evidence" to smear them forever.

Confirmation bias can have very serious consequences with this subject.
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to be argumentative with you but I don't understand the "would be easy to reel someone in before they fully understood what they were getting into"

If someone tells me they are 11 years old, it wouldn't even cross my mind to send pictures of myself, let alone arrange a sexual meeting with them.

And the age is mentioned immediately in all the cases. Unlike another guy before Stinson (can't think of his name) but it was reported that he would arrange meetings with men online without disclosing the age, but would then 5mins before meeting tell the person they were underage and then film them in public shouting they were attempting to meet a girl/boy of x years of age. That was something I don't agree with.
 
Vigilante justice is not justice at all.

The actions of such people pretending to be younger online are simply despicable. The only reason that people allow it is that the actions of the people they are catching are worse.
 
CJ84 said:
I'm not trying to be argumentative with you but I don't understand the "would be easy to reel someone in before they fully understood what they were getting into"

If someone tells me they are 11 years old, it wouldn't even cross my mind to send pictures of myself, let alone arrange a sexual meeting with them.

And the age is mentioned immediately in all the cases. Unlike another guy before Stinson who would arrange meetings but would then 5mins before meeting tell the person their age and then film them. That was something I don't agree with.
Click to expand...

My concern is there is a clear demarcation - it would be relatively easy for someone without scruples, an agenda or blinded by confirmation bias to manipulate someone where it wasn't clear initially what the age was and reel them in over time to the point that they have what appears to be compelling evidence of someone's perversion before they themselves actually realise what they've got themselves into.

I'm all for a properly regulated body doing this, but vigilante style has a lot of possible issues and it leaves it very open for someone with an agenda to smear someone forever.
 
CJ84 said:
But the police employ similar methods of catching people online, I.e pretending to be underage.
Click to expand...

Aye they do, and its morally dangerous for them as well. At least the offers that do so for the police are highly trained and abide by legally enforced moral codes though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom