Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
darknation

pedophiles even stupider than previous estimates suggested

Recommended Posts

-First of all, the fuckers deserve it.
-Second, "she" doesn't look that real. So yes, they either are stupid or have myopia.
-Third, I don't know how the laws regarding entrapment work in Netherlands. I hope it won't give them an opportunity to go free.

chesse20 said:

isn't a major portion of the doom community furries?


Then I guess I'm a minority here.

Share this post


Link to post

That is quite clever and devious, maybe they should also try more than one account at a time so they can catch even more of the sick bastards.

Share this post


Link to post

You'd have to be completely retarded to think that's a real person. So yeah, good job in weeding out the sub-IQs from the population.

Share this post


Link to post

From what I understand this was more of a controlled experiment or an amateur/voluntary sleuth op, rather than an official police op, and I recall reading about a similar experiment though not with a realistic avatar -maybe with just a chat- not so long ago. It almost looks as if they copy-pasted part of the text, too, just with a different context.

So I'd take this with a pinch of salt and not exclude the possibility that it's simply a psyop ("Oooooh, see how scary 1337 cyb3r t00lz are out there to get them pedos, better behave yourself in EVERY respect, citizen!").

OK, so even if this was real and they actually passed the names of the "caught" men to the police....practically, what can they be formally charged with? Technically, they offered money to see a (somewhat realistic) puppet strip. I admit I'm not familiar with the legalities of artificial/CGI porn. Maybe the "caught" men could in turn sue for consumer misinformation? Or can they claim that they were also doing amateur sleuthing of their own, "as part of their duty as concerned citizens, to verify that child abuse was indeed taking place"?

But then again you can be blacklisted just for having a loli manga mailed to you....

Share this post


Link to post
Maes said:

OK, so even if this was real and they actually passed the names of the "caught" men to the police....practically, what can they be formally charged with?

They can be charged with absolutely nothing. It's a Dutch non-governmental organization passing a list of names to police forces in other countries such as US, UK and India and claiming that these people tried to buy a show from a child. Rather, all those one thousand and so people could sue the organization for defamation since the organization's claim wouldn't hold in any court. Rather, they actually may have broken some laws themselves depending on how they collected logs of conversations with the "accused" men. Ie. recording phone calls without the other party's permission is illegal in some countries, and I'd assume the same would go for Skype calls and such.

Share this post


Link to post
Jodwin said:

Rather, all those one thousand and so people could sue the organization for defamation since the organization's claim wouldn't hold in any court.

Sue? And spread their names around even louder? I kiiinda don't think they'll go that way. :P
Even if they cannot be held legally responsible, public naming & shaming can still ruin lives.

Share this post


Link to post
Jodwin said:

They can be charged with absolutely nothing.


That's where it would end, if it wasn't about such a sensitive topic as child pornography and/or pedophilia. They said that in Afghanistan, under the Taliban, if you wanted an Afghan you hated to be executed, all you had to do was mail him a deck of cards or some dice: the Taliban would intercept the package, see the "forbidden" goods, and summarily execute the recipient with blind fanatism (OBVIOUSLY the sender would have to be anonymous or out of reach of the Taliban).

In the Western world, pedophilia (or anything considered "just as bad", including lolis) is similarly punished with a knee-jerk response. There are people in the USA and the UK who got charged as pedophiles and put on sex offenders lists simply by ordering a loli manga from Japan.

dew said:

Even if they cannot be held legally responsible, public naming & shaming can still ruin lives.


Then at that point they'd have nothing more to lose by suing, amirite?

Share this post


Link to post
Maes said:

Then at that point they'd have nothing more to lose by suing, amirite?

Having already outed themselves as inept pedophiles - or just plain stupid - the best they could hope to achieve through litigation is a pyrrhic victory.

Share this post


Link to post
GreyGhost said:

Having already outed themselves as inept pedophiles - or just plain stupid - the best they could hope to achieve through litigation is a pyrrhic victory.


When doing retaliation-suing in this manner, first and foremost you aim for full name-clearing and try to prove that everything is a bunch of horseshit -on top of demanding monetary reparations. Of course you won't sue by "pledging guilty" of anything. Take lessons from Berlusconi or politician: whether in the right or the wrong, he starts from a "I'm Da Shit, you're just shit" premise. And it usually works, for him.

Share this post


Link to post

A portion of those British men probably work at the BBC. That aside, all paedophiles should be executed in my opinion and this just proves that most of them are utterly stupid and will do anything to get what they want.

Share this post


Link to post
Maes said:

When doing retaliation-suing in this manner, first and foremost you aim for full name-clearing and try to prove that everything is a bunch of horseshit -on top of demanding monetary reparations. Of course you won't sue by "pledging guilty" of anything. Take lessons from Berlusconi or politician: whether in the right or the wrong, he starts from a "I'm Da Shit, you're just shit" premise. And it usually works, for him.

Okay, that might work for that slick perv, but a random pedophile who got caught with, uh, his pants down? He doesn't want his name "cleared" by a court, he wants it to never appear anywhere near to even just a mention of soliciting sex from kids. That smear on his reputation is there to stay and since the court can hardly make everyone forgive and forget, he probably won't be able to afford to ignore it. You know, like when you don't own several national media, an almost infinite bag of money and the power to write your own laws to cover your ass.

Long story short, if their names leak somehow, they're fucked and suing could prove exhausting and bitter even if they manage to clear themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Maes said:

In the Western world, pedophilia (or anything considered "just as bad", including lolis) is similarly punished with a knee-jerk response. There are people in the USA and the UK who got charged as pedophiles and put on sex offenders lists simply by ordering a loli manga from Japan.

There's a difference though, if you're caught purchasing goods that are illegal in your country of residence for yourself by the customs, then that is enough for them to pursue legal action against you. You bought those goods and they have more than enough legally suitable evidence to prove that had the customs not caught the items, they would have ended up in your possession. It is not the same as you being claimed to have done something illegal by a foreign organization which, in its home country, holds no power what so ever. This Dutch organization contacting UK police is no different from if I called the Greek police claiming that you googled for child porn. It wouldn't be worth shit.

Share this post


Link to post

I find the perception of "justice"" that seems to transpire in this thread to be more disturbing than all the pedophiles in the world: that it's A-OK to fuck up a man's life based on anonymous snitching, itself using unofficial "detective" tools and a skewed interpretation of any "results".

And of course without any such thing as benefit of the doubt, having the accuser bearing the burden of proof, or the presumed innocence of the accused, simply because of that knee-jerk emotive response I mentioned. Not uncommon, but disturbing nonetheless.

If you think that it's A-OK because it's all about dirty pedophiles, keep in mind that at this point we're still talking random anonymous accusations produced by an arbitrary methodology, not technically admissible proof produced by legally empowered agents, which could one day turn against YOU, randomly.

And if this way of "collecting evidence" becomes admissible (or at least ethically acceptable) in one field, it's just a matter of time until it becomes admisible in another. Up next: snitching everybody you know for things that they might have done. And as we all know, if you have nothing to hide you won't have any problems with a little check, amirite?

@Jodwin: what would happen if someone sent such a parcel your way, with content which is illegal and with an untraceable/obscured/bogus sender (it could also be e.g. drugs, firearms or other contraband). Who do you think would bear the most questioning and be the center of focus of the police? Before they moved their investigations away from you and towards the actual source, they'd simply fuck you and your life up until they accepted that you might not be a drug dealer/smuggler, simply because you are right there in front of them, handy for arrest and questioning, while finding the mysterious sender would be too much trouble.

As for the other snitching example you mentioned, that depends a lot on the political stability of a country and the level of corruption and heavy-handedness of the police. In unfree countries they take EVERYTHING to the letter just for the heck of it (hence the Afghan Remote Dice Homicide-by-cop method).

Share this post


Link to post
Maes said:

And if this way of "collecting evidence" becomes admissible (or at least ethically acceptable) in one field, it's just a matter of time until it becomes admisible in another.

I heard you downloaded some warez once. wink-wink nudge-nudge.

Share this post


Link to post

Steam switched around some settings so your friends list doesn't immediately go online.... just incase there are kids.

I was playing TF2 and there was a guy from Europe bluntly saying he wanted child uh you know (I'd say it, but I'd get flagged). Everyone ignored it. 5 minutes go by and he asks again. Anyone have any child.... He said the 2 key words, then he typed it out incase people didn't hear him. Then someone asked if he's serious. He argued with someone that said it's illegal. The philer bluntly said he's in Europe laws don't apply to him.

I reported him to Valve.

My female friend that is like 4'10" and 85 lbs works for my county's sheriff's department looking for pedos online. She's been deputized and everything. They go around to different towns and have stings. She's told me the big catch is always nothing happens and is it a crime if nothing happens?

Actually wait.... Shack... the baskeball player poses as little girls >> http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/AmericanFamily/story?id=1020604

Share this post


Link to post
geo said:

The philer bluntly said he's in Europe laws don't apply to him.

Heh, sure. You might have encountered an agent baiting "fellow" predators.

Maes: Yeah, not playing by the book just to get quicker results and turn in more *insert a category of villains* shouldn't be condoned, because it inevitably leads to a slippery slope and sacrificing innocents in the process. But to be honest, catching stupid unsuspecting pedos with such a cheap trick is quite funny and one does feel that poetic justice has been delivered. Oh well, it's not a black and white world.

Share this post


Link to post
dew said:

Heh, sure. You might have encountered an agent baiting "fellow" predators.


Hmm....how might an exchange between two agents -unbeknowst to each other- turn out? With one of them playing the "victim" (innocent little girl) and the other one playing the "predator" (hoping to lure real predators to come into the open)? With both playing the part of little boys/girls? With both playing the part of dorky "I WANT PEDO PHILEZ!" doods? Will end up writing each other down, thinking that they "struck gold"? Or do they use some form of code to avoid stepping on each other's work? How do agents belonging to different law enforcements agencies or even countries co-operate? What if real pedos learn the "code" and manage to evade or even impersonate real agents?

Also, what about pretending to be a pedo just to out real ones WITHOUT being deputized (amateur undercover sleuthing, in other words)? What about just pretending to be a pedo for shits'n giggles, just to fuck with real ones and agents? Do you risk being prosecuted as the real thing (pedo) by the real thing (undercover agents)? Can you then claim that you were amateur sleuthing or fooling around or is there a specific law against that? Will it be considered justice obstruction? Operations' sabotage maybe?

^ In relation to the above, the researches in the article essentially pretended to be pedos without them being deputized (the very least, they appeared as pedo pimps). What if someone took them too seriously (concerned) and ratted out their entire operation as suspicious and the police got to them FIRST? Would they be able to simply explain what they were trying to do?

Where I'm taking the point at, is that with such vague operating guidelines on a topic addressed more by emotion and cheap trickery rather than by traditional police methodology, it's very easy to lead either to a complete abuse/instrumentalization (e.g. you could accuse pretty much ANYONE of being a pedophile, and the burden would lie immediately ON THEM. Very "useful" for taking out competitors and adversaries in nearly any field), or to a system so broken that anyone could deliberately (or bona fide) game and trick, misleading agents etc.

Share this post


Link to post
dew said:

Heh, sure. You might have encountered an agent baiting "fellow" predators.


Ha yeah on a server with 6 people :-) I have a feeling agents pose as little girls.

Share this post


Link to post
Maes said:

Hmm....how might an exchange between two agents -unbeknowst to each other- turn out?

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/10/entrapped-when-craigslist-predator-stings-go-too-far

They have a system for it. A "battle" of two agents would probably be unlikely, but given the scale and frequency of those stings geo mentions there's a big risk of multiple agents following/baiting the same suspect. There are too many agents and not enough pedos. Some parts of that article are a scary reading.

Share this post


Link to post
geo said:

Ha yeah on a server with 6 people :-) I have a feeling agents pose as little girls.


Somehow I got this mental picture of a server with 6 people, all being "little girls" (agents, counter-agents, activists etc.) eagerly waiting for the first, hapless male to log on, and then all try to outcompete each other at aggressive snitch/agent provocateur tactics in order to elicit a "positive" response.

dew said:


I don't understand how this Genette guy acted like an agent or activist at any time -he simply seems to be the "victim" of the investigators. Again, if there really is a "code", what prevents real pedos from learning it? After all, there are no badges to flash to each other over a chat line...or maybe agents can be suckered to mutually exchange their serial number/photos of their badges? But this is also risky -a real agent risks giving out genuine information which can then be used to be ignored from other agents.

Share this post


Link to post
Memfis said:

Are you hating on them for having sexual preferences that they didn't choose and that just came to them naturally?
Also I hope they won't get me for listening to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9s4L2AErVo


Hey, cool, glad someone brought this up. There's a big difference pedophiles -- people with a sexual preference for children -- and child molesters -- people who engage in sexual conduct with children. Media, especially news in Britain I gather, typically makes no distinction between the two and loves to get people worked up about anything related to pedophilia. It is true that social attitudes and laws make life quite hard for non-offending pedophiles and really don't help keep them as non-offenders.

That said, for all that is wrong with a "sting" operation like this, I think dudes who are going to ask a 10-year old to take off her clothes on a webcam are firmly in the child molesters category.

Also I like noise music but I can't really get into that track, seems like it's trying too hard to be random/choppy but at 45 seconds it doesn't get boring at least.

Share this post


Link to post
Springy said:

That aside, all paedophiles should be executed...

The only crimes that deserve execution are the ones that cause death, and anybody who thinks otherwise is a disgusting piece of shit.

Share this post


Link to post
plums said:

That said, for all that is wrong with a "sting" operation like this, I think dudes who are going to ask a 10-year old to take off her clothes on a webcam are firmly in the child molesters category.


Or perhaps the pedos are much more advanced than we thought: they REALIZED it was a CGI character, and reasoned that it must be some sort of NEW and ENHANCED realistic/interactive service to give them their viewing pleasure(?) without(?) the RL consequences of molesting real children, including dirty talk/figurative money "offers" (hey, it's all part of the "experience"), and so decided to "try it out" or "play the game".

Think about it...what if someone adamantly brings THIS interpretation up? After all, it's obviously CGI, right? At most you can condemn the idea that someone thought such a service could exist...but it does no more RL harm than a loli hentai manga.

Other interpretation: the "pedos" actually knew this was some sort of sting and decided to rig it/flood it with false positives. Of course this would only make sense if it turns out their data/names are fake/bogus, and even their IPs are masked.

Share this post


Link to post
Maes said:

Or perhaps the pedos are much more advanced than we thought: they REALIZED it was a CGI character, and reasoned that it must be some sort of NEW and ENHANCED realistic/interactive service to give them their viewing pleasure(?) without(?) the RL consequences of molesting real children, including dirty talk/figurative money "offers" (hey, it's all part of the "experience"), and so decided to "try it out" or "play the game".

Think about it...what if someone brings THIS interpretation up? After all, it's obviously CGI, right? At most you can condemn the idea that someone thought such a service could exist...


Interesting idea but I wouldn't want to try it court :P
Besides they asked her to get on a webcam before they knew anything about what she looked like, according to the video in the article.

Speaking of which, you only get to see her move for a few seconds in the video, but that CGI girl is quite creepy. And I don't mean creepy in an "attracts child molestors" way, I mean uncanny-vally, "looks like something from a horror game" creepy. The pictures don't really do it justice.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×