How to catch a predator..

steve-h said:
When did it say they were in children's chatrooms?



Well it's taught them all to be a lot more cautious. I can think of a million ways to get out of that situation... the fact they admit to everything only shows further how smart they are.

Alright Chris, ye she said she was 15, I brought condoms, booze and I left a load of evidence on my pc lol and now I'll gladly admit to everything because I didn't think of a cover story before hand
Click to expand...

That still doesn't make any sense. They have proof that these people have been talking filth in a chat room and arranged to meet for that reason. They turn up at the house and get caught.

What is this magical cover story that will make the police go "sorry mate, misunderstanding, when you said plough, you were talking about farming her yard"

You still havn't explained what this show has taught any idiots that do this sort of thing. So it says, don't be a paedophile or you may get set up and caught, thats not really ground breaking stuff.
 
e36Adz said:
Pure comedy when you first come across this show lol, it was on sky regularly. Definately good entertainment but makes you wonder, I mean some of these guys were sent a pic over the net of a girl who is actually 18+ but claimed to be say 14 or 15, so were they attracted to a minor if they liked what they saw in the pic? In certain countries the age of consent is 14-15 and so what they did wouldn't even be considered wrong, yet on this show they are getting labelled 'paedos'. Physically many girls are mature by 14-15, and many years back they would be married possibly even with kids at that age. I guess the question is where do you draw the line.
Click to expand...

But the fact is that the photos are usually pictures of the programs staff when they were 10+ and it's obvious they are minors. We can debate maturity till we are blue in the face but the thought of wanting sex with a 13 year old is repulsive no matter how 'attractive' or 'grown up' they seem.
 
Castor said:
But the fact is that the photos are usually pictures of the programs staff when they were 10+ and it's obvious they are minors. We can debate maturity till we are blue in the face but the thought of wanting sex with a 13 year old is repulsive no matter how 'attractive' or 'grown up' they seem.
Click to expand...

I misunderstood the program then as I thought they sent pictures of program staff aged 18+ in the pics, but who actually looked younger then 18 so can normally pass themselves off as a 14-15 yr old.
 
e36Adz said:
I misunderstood the program then as I thought they sent pictures of program staff aged 18+ in the pics, but who actually looked younger then 18 so can normally pass themselves off as a 14-15 yr old.
Click to expand...

The pictures sent are completely beside the point though. It doesnt matter if you send a picture of someone in their mid thirties. If you say that you are underage and the other person continues their advances then they are doing something wrong.
 
fez said:
That still doesn't make any sense. They have proof that these people have been talking filth in a chat room and arranged to meet for that reason. They turn up at the house and get caught.

What is this magical cover story that will make the police go "sorry mate, misunderstanding, when you said plough, you were talking about farming her yard"

You still havn't explained what this show has taught any idiots that do this sort of thing. So it says, don't be a paedophile or you may get set up and caught, thats not really ground breaking stuff.
Click to expand...

They have chat logs... plain-text from an IP address (maybe).

Unless the target sends them nudes of himself with face included for **** sake. They're not catching the smartest people are they?

Qdos said:
Bit hard to come up with a decent cover story when they've got chat logs showing that your intention was to meet for sexual purposes....
Click to expand...

Yeah, there end...

Castor said:
But the fact is that the photos are usually pictures of the programs staff when they were 10+ and it's obvious they are minors. We can debate maturity till we are blue in the face but the thought of wanting sex with a 13 year old is repulsive no matter how 'attractive' or 'grown up' they seem.
Click to expand...

Are they?

dmpoole said:
So you in the room and Chris Hansen walks in :

Tell us how you get out of it?
Click to expand...

Well I'd start a long time before I even see Chris...

Have a legit reason for being there
No ties to the bait
Fake evidence your side if needs be
???
Profit
 
steve-h said:
They have chat logs... plain-text from an IP address (maybe).
Click to expand...

That's what you see in the video - what you don't see is the capture of the chat log, which is obviously done to an evidential level. Your IP address/email address is captured, submitted under RIPA (or US equivalent) and your subscriber details retrieved. That's how they know the real name and criminal background of people coming to the house.
 
Qdos said:
That's what you see in the video - what you don't see is the capture of the chat log, which is obviously done to an evidential level. Your IP address/email address is captured, submitted under RIPA (or US equivalent) and your subscriber details retrieved. That's how they know the real name and criminal background of people coming to the house.
Click to expand...

That's still not proper evidence though... there's a million and one ways of faking an email, or using one of a completely different person along with their IP.

Plus... get the person at the other end to verify themselves via something that these entrapment organisations wouldn't be able to send you?


(strong no child predator btw)
 
Last edited:
R420LA6X2/4MNA said:
Did anybody else, given whats recently gone on in Clifton, Bristol, find that in poor taste to put it mildly?
Click to expand...

Meh, it's just a bad joke, we can't get touchy about things like that or we'll all become like muslims soon.

123troll.jpg


Controversial?
 
steve-h said:
That's still not proper evidence though... there's a million and one ways of faking an email, or using one of a completely different person along with their IP.

Plus... get the person at the other end to verify themselves via something that these entrapment organisations wouldn't be able to send you?


(strong no child predator btw)
Click to expand...

Well, in this case, the person they were talking to has turned up - that's your corroboration right there.

And it's not entrapment - all these organisations do is create a non-sexual profile of a normal teenager - the sexualised chat always comes from them.
 
steve-h said:
Have a legit reason for being there
No ties to the bait
Fake evidence your side if needs be
???
Profit
Click to expand...

Have a legit reason for visiting a 13 year old girl who's home alone?

"Hey babe, A/S/L"
"Oh hi, 13/F"
"You home alone tomorrow?"
"Yup"
"Cool. Have you ever thought about saving on your energy bills?"
"Not really"
"Ok cool so how about surprising your mom when she comes home to a new set of energy saving double glazed windows?!?!?!"
"Umm..."
"Tell you what, buy the downstairs, get the upstairs free?!?!?!"
"Umm..."
"See you tomorrow babe"

And then rather than being lured in by an apparently willing girl, you end up raping her. On balance I would say this is a worse plan.

My point being, I doubt there could be a legitimate reason why you're round at some random girl's house. With condoms. It would have to be very elaborate. And if you can afford to be that pre-meditated, that's a bit more scary tbh
 
Last edited:
I doubt there could be a legitimate reason why you're round at some random girl's house. With condoms. It would have to be very elaborate.

"I saw her drop them from her purse when she paid the bus driver so figured I'd drop them back round to her house and on my way I bought a pizza, which you can have, if you let me go".
 
Who cares what they have to say....... They had no problem grooming (what they thought were) youngsters.

Someone of them have been caught more than once...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom