Bathing Suit
| |
Anonymous comments allowed.
133 comments displayed.
#191 to #171
-
repostforlife ONLINE (09/22/2015) [-] oh god, rvb, it ripped my heart out at the end.
#227 to #225
-
repostforlife ONLINE (09/23/2015) [-] watch it, watch it and cry. there is NO way to watch that last episode and NOT do so. everything just, ended well. hell even doyle proved he is a brave, and a bad ass.
#139 to #89
-
jumperzero (09/22/2015) [-]
google "hidden camera"
they are stationary cameras, mounted in corners or hidden behind objects and unobtrusive spots
people are surprisingly unobservant
there are no people standing there holding the cameras
they are stationary cameras, mounted in corners or hidden behind objects and unobtrusive spots
people are surprisingly unobservant
there are no people standing there holding the cameras
#156 to #139
-
professordolan ONLINE (09/22/2015) [-] 0:24
no zoom
too close to be hidden = camera man
no zoom
too close to be hidden = camera man
#174 to #28
-
mechgeek (09/22/2015) [-] In the original to catch a predator show the team of people who find and lure these people are all regular citizens (if memory serves me right, I could be wrong). And then they tell the police 'Yo, a peado is gonna try and come to do the nasty. Wanna wait for him outside after he gives it a try?'
#86 to #77
-
retwistfate (09/22/2015) [-]
unfortunately the anon is more right then you are, entrapment is an extremely strict law that the police are in fact allowed to lie to you to get you to commit a crime but not allowed to force you into a corner and make you commit that crime. for example
jane is an undercover cop at a home with her target, she asks her target to sell her some drugs because her mother is in pain and needs them, she reassured her friend she inst a cop and gets her target to sell to her. she immediately arrests her target and takes her to jail. <---- this is not entrapment, this is completely legal
now taking the same story
jane asks her target for drugs because her mother is in pain. her target says no, the next day jane asks again, then again then again day after day. finally after being warn down and not having much choice janes target gives in. jane immediately arrests her and takes her to jail. <----- THIS is entrapment. she is essentially forcing her target to do something she wouldnt normally do for the sake of an arrest.
now entrapment takes many forms, but legally if the cop isnt forcing you to do something then they arnt entrapping you . this includes lying to you, among many other tricky things
jane is an undercover cop at a home with her target, she asks her target to sell her some drugs because her mother is in pain and needs them, she reassured her friend she inst a cop and gets her target to sell to her. she immediately arrests her target and takes her to jail. <---- this is not entrapment, this is completely legal
now taking the same story
jane asks her target for drugs because her mother is in pain. her target says no, the next day jane asks again, then again then again day after day. finally after being warn down and not having much choice janes target gives in. jane immediately arrests her and takes her to jail. <----- THIS is entrapment. she is essentially forcing her target to do something she wouldnt normally do for the sake of an arrest.
now entrapment takes many forms, but legally if the cop isnt forcing you to do something then they arnt entrapping you . this includes lying to you, among many other tricky things
#114 to #88
-
retwistfate (09/22/2015) [-]
this is taken straight out of a book of law
Case Example 1. Mary-Anne Berry is charged with selling illegal drugs to an undercover police officer. Berry testifies that the drugs were for her personal use and that the reason she sold some to the officer is that at a party, the officer falsely said that she wanted some drugs for her mom, who was in a lot of pain. According to Berry, the officer even assured Berry that she wasn't a cop and wasn't setting Berry up. The police officer's actions do not amount to entrapment. Police officers are allowed to tell lies. The officer gave Berry an opportunity to break the law, but the officer did not engage in extreme or overbearing behavior.
Case Example 2. Mary-Anne Berry is charged with selling illegal drugs to an undercover police officer. Berry testifies that, "The drugs were for my personal use. For nearly two weeks, the undercover officer stopped by my apartment and pleaded with me to sell her some of my stash because her mom was extremely sick and needed the drugs for pain relief. I kept refusing. When the officer told me that the drugs would allow her mom to be comfortable for the few days she had left to live, I broke down and sold her some drugs. She immediately arrested me." The undercover agent's repeated entreaties and lies are sufficiently extreme to constitute entrapment and result in a not guilty verdict.
this is taken straight out of a book of law
Case Example 1. Mary-Anne Berry is charged with selling illegal drugs to an undercover police officer. Berry testifies that the drugs were for her personal use and that the reason she sold some to the officer is that at a party, the officer falsely said that she wanted some drugs for her mom, who was in a lot of pain. According to Berry, the officer even assured Berry that she wasn't a cop and wasn't setting Berry up. The police officer's actions do not amount to entrapment. Police officers are allowed to tell lies. The officer gave Berry an opportunity to break the law, but the officer did not engage in extreme or overbearing behavior.
Case Example 2. Mary-Anne Berry is charged with selling illegal drugs to an undercover police officer. Berry testifies that, "The drugs were for my personal use. For nearly two weeks, the undercover officer stopped by my apartment and pleaded with me to sell her some of my stash because her mom was extremely sick and needed the drugs for pain relief. I kept refusing. When the officer told me that the drugs would allow her mom to be comfortable for the few days she had left to live, I broke down and sold her some drugs. She immediately arrested me." The undercover agent's repeated entreaties and lies are sufficiently extreme to constitute entrapment and result in a not guilty verdict.
#137 to #28
-
makethingsworse (09/22/2015) [-] That's actually a very pertinent question. It is, I'm a way, entrapment due to them basically fishing for pedophiles. However the entrapment ends the moment they enter the house. When they cross the threshold it becomes assault due to- among other reasons- that child not actually having the authority to invite them into the house. It's a very strange grey area.
#36 to #28
-
thevoodoofrog (09/22/2015) [-] Of course its entrapment. They lead these guys on in online chat rooms, provoke them into meeting up with the prospect of indulging their (admittedly unhealthy) sexual tastes, and then shame them on television, and arrest them.
I don't like paedophiles, but making a TV show to profit off them is ******* sickening.
I don't like paedophiles, but making a TV show to profit off them is ******* sickening.
#48 to #36
-
tableflipper (09/22/2015) [-] entrapment is a practice whereby a law enforcement agent induces a person to commit a criminal offense that the person would have otherwise been unlikely to commit.!!!!
In other words the guy came over with the intent on sleeping with a minor therefore it is NOT entrapment. not that this is real or anything.
In other words the guy came over with the intent on sleeping with a minor therefore it is NOT entrapment. not that this is real or anything.
#52 to #48
-
letting 
(09/22/2015) [-] You're telling me posing as a under-age girl willing to have sex with an ugly pedophile doesn't increase the likelihood at all? They go into chat rooms literally fishing for guys, asking them to come over, sometimes taking weeks to grind them down and convince them.
Look at it from whatever angle you want, it's entrapment. It's good to get pedophiles off the street, but the way it's done for TV views should be illegal.
Look at it from whatever angle you want, it's entrapment. It's good to get pedophiles off the street, but the way it's done for TV views should be illegal.
#55 to #52
-
tableflipper (09/22/2015) [-] i agree on that they shouldn't be doing it for entertainment as it should be done no matter what but if a little girls asked you (weather it's the cops or an actual little girl) to have sex is that really enough incentive to get you to say yes?
Keep in mind I'm not calling you a pedophile just saying if you do say yes you are infact a pedophile and it is not entrapment no matter how many times they ask, if you say no then your good. It's not entrapment if you bring alcohol and condoms to "party" with a little girl.
Keep in mind I'm not calling you a pedophile just saying if you do say yes you are infact a pedophile and it is not entrapment no matter how many times they ask, if you say no then your good. It's not entrapment if you bring alcohol and condoms to "party" with a little girl.
#67 to #55
-
letting (09/22/2015) [-] No, I would never agree to meet a minor to have sex, if that's what you're saying.
However, people that are on-the-fence, or are sick in the head and have those kinds of urges, could be "pushed" to do so if an opportunity presented itself, such as the opportunities presented by the makers of this show.
Pedophiles are, quite literally, mentally ill. They should receive help just like other people that are mentally ill. Incriminating somebody for having a mental defect doesn't help the problem.
However, people that are on-the-fence, or are sick in the head and have those kinds of urges, could be "pushed" to do so if an opportunity presented itself, such as the opportunities presented by the makers of this show.
Pedophiles are, quite literally, mentally ill. They should receive help just like other people that are mentally ill. Incriminating somebody for having a mental defect doesn't help the problem.
#69 to #67
-
tableflipper (09/22/2015) [-] suppose they are mentally ill I'm not saying they aren't, but they still chose to go online and prey on little girls. I would much rather have them off the street where they can't harm child in any way
#106 to #67
-
defeats (09/22/2015) [-] Entrapment isn't the same as giving somebody the opportunity to break the law. Police are allowed to lie in order for it to happen. Such as buying drugs from a drug dealer and then arresting them isn't entrapment. Entrapment involves pressuring and convincing somebody to commit a crime, whereas a "sting" involves presenting somebody the opportunity to commit a crime, which is legal and not at all entrapment.
To catch a predator is a sting operation, which involves a private agency corroborating with the police. They pose as an underage child in online chat rooms looking for somebody to talk to. Pedophiles approach the "child" and it goes from there. It's worth noting too that the person pretending to be the child does not instigate any sexual conversation and I don't even think participates beyond asking what X, Y and Z would entail. In this way, when the pedophile asks to come over for sex, they believe they are soliciting a child for sex, this allows them to be charged with soliciting a minor for sex.
If for example, the person pretending to be the child was going to online chat rooms and saying "I'm a 14 year old girl desperately looking for an older man to **** me", then you know, this may defended as entrapment, but even then, nobody is convincing these pedophiles to come and try to **** a child, that is their choice and it is completely under their control.
To catch a predator is a sting operation, which involves a private agency corroborating with the police. They pose as an underage child in online chat rooms looking for somebody to talk to. Pedophiles approach the "child" and it goes from there. It's worth noting too that the person pretending to be the child does not instigate any sexual conversation and I don't even think participates beyond asking what X, Y and Z would entail. In this way, when the pedophile asks to come over for sex, they believe they are soliciting a child for sex, this allows them to be charged with soliciting a minor for sex.
If for example, the person pretending to be the child was going to online chat rooms and saying "I'm a 14 year old girl desperately looking for an older man to **** me", then you know, this may defended as entrapment, but even then, nobody is convincing these pedophiles to come and try to **** a child, that is their choice and it is completely under their control.
#59 to #55
-
anon (09/22/2015) [-]
Totally. Nobody is forcing them to talk to these little girls. If you're a grown man and you talk to kids online it's pretty obvious that you need psychological help. There's really no reason to talk to a kid because they're pretty stupid and not interesting at all. Unless they're asking for help/you're giving them advice or you're stuck babysitting them there's nothing to talk about. Whenever I'm with my nieces and nephews I just want to blow my ******* brains out. These dudes are obviously trying to **** some kids.
#122 to #52
-
alalalalal (09/22/2015) [-] Its not entrapment.
Entrapment would be an officer telling someone to go shoot someone or rob a place. Its making them do something that if otherwise not provoked they wouldnt do.
With the sting operations, like with the cars or online, they just wait for the criminal to come to them then once they get evidence that they are doing it, they bust them.
The reason they put it on TV shows is to discourage others from commiting the crime, while getting more funding from the show to continue to fight the crime.
Entrapment would be an officer telling someone to go shoot someone or rob a place. Its making them do something that if otherwise not provoked they wouldnt do.
With the sting operations, like with the cars or online, they just wait for the criminal to come to them then once they get evidence that they are doing it, they bust them.
The reason they put it on TV shows is to discourage others from commiting the crime, while getting more funding from the show to continue to fight the crime.
#54 to #48
-
thismustbeseen (09/22/2015) [-] > otherwise been unlikely to commit
Which I disagree with. So does Google, which defines it like this:
"the action of luring an individual into committing a crime in order to prosecute the person for it" ... which makes much more sense because "otherwise been unlikely" is unnecessarily vague.
So yeah, it's entrapment.
Which I disagree with. So does Google, which defines it like this:
"the action of luring an individual into committing a crime in order to prosecute the person for it" ... which makes much more sense because "otherwise been unlikely" is unnecessarily vague.
So yeah, it's entrapment.
#57 to #54
-
tableflipper (09/22/2015) [-] > otherwise been unlikely to commit
it's that you said so does google cause that is where i got it from (at least it's where i started) and yest it does make sense. It is a matter of giving the person enough incentive to commit the crime. like if a cop gave you keys and said "hey go take that car" then arrested you for it then that would be entrapment, but if you see the keys in the ignition that the cop put there and you take it thinking free ride, that is not entrapment. see the the difference? I suppose there is a thin line but cops know how to not cross it. If they do cross it thenit doesn't take a good lawyer to fight it.
it's that you said so does google cause that is where i got it from (at least it's where i started) and yest it does make sense. It is a matter of giving the person enough incentive to commit the crime. like if a cop gave you keys and said "hey go take that car" then arrested you for it then that would be entrapment, but if you see the keys in the ignition that the cop put there and you take it thinking free ride, that is not entrapment. see the the difference? I suppose there is a thin line but cops know how to not cross it. If they do cross it thenit doesn't take a good lawyer to fight it.
#62 to #57
-
thismustbeseen (09/22/2015) [-] This situation is more like the "hey go take that car", because it's the cop that's impersonating the girl. That's the key here. The cop impersonates the girl online. If the girl said what she did of her own free will, and the guy decided to go to her house and **** her, and the cops just happened to be watching, then it wouldn't be entrapment, but this is.
#64 to #62
-
hoponthefeelstrain (09/22/2015) [-] I disagree. The cops never initiate anything, the predator starts everything. That's why it's not entrapment. It's like buying drugs from an undercover cop. You wanted to commit a crime it just so happens the person you chose to trust was the wrong person.
#66 to #64
-
thismustbeseen (09/22/2015) [-] Alright, well... if that's the case then maybe there's some legitimacy to this... but it still disgusts me that it's been made into a show to entertain people.
Also, it's a slippery slope. This could turn into a trend where any kind of moderate crime is turned into show where the perpetrator was lured, recorded, and captured for entertainment. For all I know there's a show that's about luring people to break into bait cars.
Also, we don't know that it wasn't entrapment. It wouldn't be if, as you say, the guy initiated it, etc., but we don't know that. The show could be made to look like not-entrapment.
Also, I disagree with the laws regarding this in the US. You're basically a pedophile if you sleep with someone a day under 18, even if they consented. That's ******** .
Am I defending pedophiles? Yeah. They're sick people who have unhealthy sexual tastes. That doesn't mean they deserve to be humiliated on TV unless they actually committed a crime, and even then it would probably be wrong.
Also, it's a slippery slope. This could turn into a trend where any kind of moderate crime is turned into show where the perpetrator was lured, recorded, and captured for entertainment. For all I know there's a show that's about luring people to break into bait cars.
Also, we don't know that it wasn't entrapment. It wouldn't be if, as you say, the guy initiated it, etc., but we don't know that. The show could be made to look like not-entrapment.
Also, I disagree with the laws regarding this in the US. You're basically a pedophile if you sleep with someone a day under 18, even if they consented. That's ******** .
Am I defending pedophiles? Yeah. They're sick people who have unhealthy sexual tastes. That doesn't mean they deserve to be humiliated on TV unless they actually committed a crime, and even then it would probably be wrong.
#109 to #66
-
defeats (09/22/2015) [-] Why is it better to wait for a pedophile to commit a crime before charging them? Rather than baiting them into committing it?
I don't know how many times I've seen some ******* retard on this site defending pedophiles, every single time it makes me sick.
There is no creature lower to me, than an offending pedophile, and the moment these subhumans in the show instigate any sexual solicitation on the 'minor', that is them committing a crime, which is punishable by the law. And they deserve everything they get.
Pedophiles know that having sex with somebody legally considered a minor is illegal, just like everybody else knows. That means, that by doing it they are breaking the law.
I don't know how many times I've seen some ******* retard on this site defending pedophiles, every single time it makes me sick.
There is no creature lower to me, than an offending pedophile, and the moment these subhumans in the show instigate any sexual solicitation on the 'minor', that is them committing a crime, which is punishable by the law. And they deserve everything they get.
Pedophiles know that having sex with somebody legally considered a minor is illegal, just like everybody else knows. That means, that by doing it they are breaking the law.
#166 to #109
-
thismustbeseen (09/22/2015) [-] Oh yeah? Well... you're the ******* retard and your narrow-minded one-dimensional ass-backwards lock-em-up thinking makes me sick.
#72 to #66
-
tableflipper (09/22/2015) [-] Maybe the car was a bit of a bad example as there is still some grey area. I agree on that it shouldn't be a TV show for entertainment as it almost in some sense encourages (for lack of a better word) the crime, maybe more in shows like bait car. Also, yes most of these guys are sick, mentally ill, etc. Arresting these may be the best chance at getting help for such illness or get punished for a crime keep in mind that kids go missing and found killed because of people like this. Maybe there not all like that but i wouldn't take my chances. I guess it is up to the justice system.
#168 to #72
-
thismustbeseen (09/22/2015) [-] I'm pretty sure that the "help" that they'll get is getting thrown in a supermax and get raped and harassed by inmates. 90% of society treats them like vermin.
Yeah just as I thought. There's a show about bait cars. ******* disgusting.
Hey. America. You listening? I thought you hated your own government. Now you're being entertained, en masse, by your government using its own power over you.
Yeah just as I thought. There's a show about bait cars. ******* disgusting.
Hey. America. You listening? I thought you hated your own government. Now you're being entertained, en masse, by your government using its own power over you.
#179 to #168
-
tableflipper (09/22/2015) [-] Ya that's what i was saying best chance at getting help, not that they're getting help at all. I think that it is safe to assume that if they are getting arrested for being a pedophile, then had no interest of getting help.
#218 to #66
-
hoponthefeelstrain (09/22/2015) [-] the thing is they went as far to actually commit the crime. The show wasn't made for entertainment or to be funny, it started when chatrooms first got popular and it was made to warn parents about the trouble their teenagers could get into online. And it says a lot that despite the fact that most of the pedos who are on the show now mention the show by name, still go to meet up with 12-14 yr olds says a lot. They have zero self control and should be jailed for trying to **** underage kids. You can say "maybe they would have backed out" but lots of them bring alcohol and condoms.
#71 to #66
-
anon (09/22/2015) [-]
Like 37 states(there's 50, so that's more than half) have their age of consent lower than 18 years old. And no, they won't arrest you for sleeping with a 17 year old the day before her birthday. The judge would dismiss the case. They'd probably give you the whole week before the birthday if they're competent.
#169 to #71
-
thismustbeseen (09/22/2015) [-] *slow clap*
Oh wow... such leniency.
If it came to below-16-yr-olds, I'd say it's a better idea to keep guys after them off the streets, but I'd still be disgusted with and against a show that's about that.
Oh wow... such leniency.
If it came to below-16-yr-olds, I'd say it's a better idea to keep guys after them off the streets, but I'd still be disgusted with and against a show that's about that.
#80 to #36
-
soyfriedbryce ONLINE (09/22/2015) [-]
I had a friend arrested by something like this once. I knew him for 5 years, since my freshman year. He was a genuinely good person, and he wasn't sick in any way. I personally knew 4 of his girlfriends, all over 18, except when he was also underage in our freshman ad junior years. Years later, he tells me about a girl he met online, that shes really nice, and they share a ton of interests. Not once did he mention dating her, he said he was enjoying finally having a terraria buddy. They spoke for 4 months before they started dating, she had originally said she was over 18, until 3 months into the relationship, where she revealed she was 16. He had just gone through a suicidal period where he'd lost his job, his nephew, and was in danger of being kicked out because he couldn't pay his rent to his landlord, and talking to her was one of the few things he looked forward to everyday. He even told me that he was so uncomfortable with the age gap he thought about just breaking it off, he hated that she was 16, but he said he was willing to deal with it in light of how long they'd been together and how much she cared about him. He was only 23, yeah, its a huge difference for that period in life, but its still only 7 years. I know people who've been married for 20 that have a difference way over that. But this man was not a pedophile. Eventually, after long distance dating for almost a year, after getting past the lies about her age, after his mental breakdown and he got back on his feet, he said he wanted to meet her in person. She agreed and he went over. I helped him pick out the outfit he would wear when he went, I helped him buy flowers, I helped him make a necklace from an illustration in a book called "The Little Prince", because he told me that when they'd started dating she'd said it meant a lot to her when she was younger. Then he went over. He was arrested immediately. He didn't get too much prison time, but he was fired from his job, he can't get an apartment in most places, and no where will hire him when they see his record. He was not a pedophile, they made him one. They took someone who was in a bad place in life, and forced an escape on him, something that made him happy, and lied to him to make it alright until he couldn't get away anymore. He thought she was 18 when they started dating, and by the time that she told him she wasn't, he was so attached to her that he couldn't bring himself to leave or he thought he wouldn't be able to make it. I have no sympathy for actual child predators, they deserve the worst punishment they can get, but I can't watch a show like To Catch a Predator or listen to these cases, because I dont know the story of the guy. My friend was a good man, that they manipulated and forced into a bad position that ruined his life. So whos to say that all these cases, all these shows, dont just skew the information and manipulate people to fit their formula. The way I see it, they create predators, not catch them.
TL; DR: I had a friend who was manipulated into a situation where he could be arrested, he didn't deserve it, he was a good man, they broke him, lied to him and made him pay for trusting someone he thought was his friend.
TL; DR: I had a friend who was manipulated into a situation where he could be arrested, he didn't deserve it, he was a good man, they broke him, lied to him and made him pay for trusting someone he thought was his friend.
#219 to #80
-
hoponthefeelstrain (09/22/2015) [-] they tell you the predators background in most cases, they're not men like your friend. They're usually over 30 with wives and children of their own. A few men were priests/pastors/ministors and school teachers...
#136 to #80
-
nobleknight (09/22/2015) [-]
Dude I'm so sorry for your friend. He certainly didn't deserve that.
#56 to #36
-
hoponthefeelstrain (09/22/2015) [-] they made the show to warn parents about the predators their underage teens could encounter online. you guys only hate the show because it's men who are being shamed. If you ever actually watch it, the predator is the one who starts talking sexual, asks to meet up, and then makes the trip down. It's no more entrapment than when police put an unlocked car unattended and then arrest the people who get in it and try to drive off.
#94 to #36
-
infurnus (09/22/2015) [-] Besides, I'm pretty sure when they're in the lobbies of the chat rooms they wait for people to iniate the contact. Once they do, they're straight forward about their age and still resume to continue the conversation. So despite them knowing of the legality of the traps age, they continue to chat them up will full intent. So I wouldn't say it was entrapment.
#93 to #36
-
kittywithclaws (09/22/2015) [-] Actually, they just start normal conversations and dont bring up meeting or sex or anything like that until the potential predator makes their intentions clear
#50 to #36
-
thismustbeseen (09/22/2015) [-] I agree with this completely. It certainly is entrapment, and it is disgusting.
#65 to #36
-
improbable (09/22/2015) [-] hey if it prevents them then its doing something other than entertainment
still, i saw one episode where the guy expected it to be a trap but his pedo instincts just overcame him
still, i saw one episode where the guy expected it to be a trap but his pedo instincts just overcame him
#95 to #28
-
askafj (09/22/2015) [-] Me and my mom was talking about if police were allowed to trick people into doing illegal things. We came to the conclusion that it's illegal in Sweden, but it must be legal in the US since they have 2 TV shows about it. "To Catch a Predator" and the one where they dress up a cop as a hooker and then sell sex to people.
#185 to #95
-
ainise (09/22/2015) [-]
It's a very strange area. It /can/ be entrapment, but here's a quote form a lawyer on the subject:
"A defendant may enjoy the defense of entrapment under one of two theories: "subjective test" entrapment and "objective test" entrapment....
Under the subjective test, a person is entrapped if the police action actually causes the person to decide to commit the crime. To prevail under this test, a defendant must show that he wasn't predisposed to committing the crime in the first place.
...Under the objective test, the Court looks to the conduct of the police (instead of the mental state of the defendant) and asks whether the police conduct would cause an average, law-abiding person to commit the crime."
He continues with:
" I've seen the show a few times, and the police at times do much more than simply offer the opportunity to commit a crime. They're downright persistent in some cases. In my mind, if a man declines to meet with a "minor" in the first instance, the cops are at risk of entrapment if they go forward."
and finishes with:
"If the "minor" keeps pressing him and he changes his mind thereafter, that looks an awful lot like entrapment, particularly under the subjective test.
Now, it's not an easy defense to prove up in any event, but I know at least a couple of these cases have been thrown out on entrapment or entrapment-like grounds. So I think, at the very least, many of these individuals have a colorable claim of entrapment."
Another person commented saying how the people talking to the predator aren't police and another lawyer responds with:
"I don't think that changes the analysis materially. Entrapment law is rich with cases where the cops use the cooperation of non-police to get an arrest."
Also, they're generally deputized, which make sit all irrelevant.
A judge threw out a case and it made headline news on some sites, as seen here:
www.imperfectparent.com/topics/2011/08/18/judge-to-catch-a-predator-is-entrapment/
This even continues with court proof showing some of the scripts are altered to infer that the 'predator' was looking for sexual conduct, as one man in the army found out. He wanted to help a girl going through a hard time and ended up getting arrested. He got the entire case thrown out because he was just going to watch movies with the child. Not saying it's normal, but 18 year old and 15 year old watching a movie together isn't that weird.
There are numerous cases that have been thrown out if they even make it to court from To catch a Predator. It's entrapment, and that is not allowed in America. It doesn't stop the cops from doing it, though.
"A defendant may enjoy the defense of entrapment under one of two theories: "subjective test" entrapment and "objective test" entrapment....
Under the subjective test, a person is entrapped if the police action actually causes the person to decide to commit the crime. To prevail under this test, a defendant must show that he wasn't predisposed to committing the crime in the first place.
...Under the objective test, the Court looks to the conduct of the police (instead of the mental state of the defendant) and asks whether the police conduct would cause an average, law-abiding person to commit the crime."
He continues with:
" I've seen the show a few times, and the police at times do much more than simply offer the opportunity to commit a crime. They're downright persistent in some cases. In my mind, if a man declines to meet with a "minor" in the first instance, the cops are at risk of entrapment if they go forward."
and finishes with:
"If the "minor" keeps pressing him and he changes his mind thereafter, that looks an awful lot like entrapment, particularly under the subjective test.
Now, it's not an easy defense to prove up in any event, but I know at least a couple of these cases have been thrown out on entrapment or entrapment-like grounds. So I think, at the very least, many of these individuals have a colorable claim of entrapment."
Another person commented saying how the people talking to the predator aren't police and another lawyer responds with:
"I don't think that changes the analysis materially. Entrapment law is rich with cases where the cops use the cooperation of non-police to get an arrest."
Also, they're generally deputized, which make sit all irrelevant.
A judge threw out a case and it made headline news on some sites, as seen here:
www.imperfectparent.com/topics/2011/08/18/judge-to-catch-a-predator-is-entrapment/
This even continues with court proof showing some of the scripts are altered to infer that the 'predator' was looking for sexual conduct, as one man in the army found out. He wanted to help a girl going through a hard time and ended up getting arrested. He got the entire case thrown out because he was just going to watch movies with the child. Not saying it's normal, but 18 year old and 15 year old watching a movie together isn't that weird.
There are numerous cases that have been thrown out if they even make it to court from To catch a Predator. It's entrapment, and that is not allowed in America. It doesn't stop the cops from doing it, though.
#16
-
micekill (09/22/2015) [-]
i dunno, i never liked this show, i can understand catching pedophiles, but they pretty much went out of their ways to hit on poor bastards with no chance of getting laid otherwise. sometimes they even got young dudes, like 18-20 years olds. which i do not find as disgusting because they have just exited that age. it is like you are suddenly prohibited eating the cookies you were taught to eat your whole life.
also it painted an image about all child molesters being men, there were close to zero women saying this cus i saw the show like a couple of times even though female pedophiles are nearly as frequent as male.
again, im not stating the fact that pedopilia is good, im just saying that the show itself was bad
also it painted an image about all child molesters being men, there were close to zero women saying this cus i saw the show like a couple of times even though female pedophiles are nearly as frequent as male.
again, im not stating the fact that pedopilia is good, im just saying that the show itself was bad
#38 to #16
-
iqequalzero ONLINE (09/22/2015) [-] "again, im not stating the fact that pedopilia is good"
Hehe, this makes it sound like you think that is an actual fact.
Hehe, this makes it sound like you think that is an actual fact.
#27 to #16
-
killerjhtwo ONLINE (09/22/2015) [-] That's why most of the cases fell through dude.
It's a thing called entrapment.
They always defended themselves by saying "We never initiated contact, it was always the predator"
but then rational judges who knew the law were all like
" ***** you serious? You are making a show about entrapment and you claim to not be baiting ****** into this **** . I rule in favour of the sweaty guy over there."
It's a thing called entrapment.
They always defended themselves by saying "We never initiated contact, it was always the predator"
but then rational judges who knew the law were all like
" ***** you serious? You are making a show about entrapment and you claim to not be baiting ****** into this **** . I rule in favour of the sweaty guy over there."
#37 to #27
-
albeit (09/22/2015) [-] Right, there were even episodes where the person would be about to back out and they had the girl or guy talk them into coming inside. I respected the show a lot more when it was just about exposing people who went after the decoys, and not about creating a police show spectical for viewings
#39 to #37
-
thekieran ONLINE (09/22/2015) [-] Well, hang on.
If I know the law correctly (sometimes I do) then shouldn't there be no charge there? I mean, yeah, he met her for sex, but they didn't do it. That's like arresting a guy who's about to buy weed, but there's not actually any weed in the house.
Is he a gross ************ ? Yeah. Is he breaking the law? Technically, no.
If I know the law correctly (sometimes I do) then shouldn't there be no charge there? I mean, yeah, he met her for sex, but they didn't do it. That's like arresting a guy who's about to buy weed, but there's not actually any weed in the house.
Is he a gross ************ ? Yeah. Is he breaking the law? Technically, no.
#41 to #40
-
thekieran ONLINE (09/22/2015) [-] I mean, it's not just that episode.
To my knowledge, none of the "predators" had sex with the actress/actor. I mean, soliciting sex from a minor isn't really soliciting sex from a minor if it's actually a 30 something guy on the other side baiting you into a cardboard stick trap.
To my knowledge, none of the "predators" had sex with the actress/actor. I mean, soliciting sex from a minor isn't really soliciting sex from a minor if it's actually a 30 something guy on the other side baiting you into a cardboard stick trap.
#100
-
thechosentroll (09/22/2015) [-] You will always remember this as the day you ALMOST caught captain Jack ************ .
#43
-
kingmonkeydoo (09/22/2015) [-] >Find one of these "underaged cop girls" online
>Say a time and date to meet them with some "friends" dressed as fake cops
>Call some cops to inform them about pedophiles dress as fake cops at that house
>Meet the "girl"
>Chris Hanson walks out
>Run as fast as you can towards cops you called saying the pedophile is escaping.
>Watch 2 units of cops tackle each other
>Say a time and date to meet them with some "friends" dressed as fake cops
>Call some cops to inform them about pedophiles dress as fake cops at that house
>Meet the "girl"
>Chris Hanson walks out
>Run as fast as you can towards cops you called saying the pedophile is escaping.
>Watch 2 units of cops tackle each other
#25
-
anon (09/22/2015) [-]
The video ends with a ******* Nike logo and all you guys are up in the comments like, "IS IT REAL?!!!"
#233 to #230
-
nowthatsedgy ONLINE (09/29/2015) [-] I don't know about the actual source of the vid, but I just edited the Sanic theme song over it. 
#234 to #233
-
homosexualpirate (09/29/2015) [-] Nvm I found out. By the way your edit was glorious.
