Cyber Crime Question?

JackLuis

Literotica Guru
Joined
Sep 21, 2008
Posts
21,881
There are several ways to look at this.

Considering the circumstances is this a crime, or a fraud?

And if so who committed it?

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/This-handout-picture-released-by-Terre-des-Hommes-Netherlands-shows-a-computer-generated-10-year-old-Filippino-girl-called-Sweetie-AFP.jpg

A Dutch rights group said Monday it had identified over 1,000 paedophiles around the world by offering online sex with a computer-generated 10-year-old Filipina girl called Sweetie.

Terre des Hommes Netherlands has now handed over to police the identities of those who were willing to pay children in developing countries for online sex, a growing phenomenon, it said.

“They were ready to pay Sweetie for sexual acts in front of her webcam,” the rights group’s head Albert Jaap van Santbrink told journalists in The Hague.
 
It's fraud, but it technically would be a crime in some jurisdictions, as well, I would think. The acting on a supposition should be enough some places to roll it into a crime, even if the image was computer generated.
 
Dicey, I'm all for trying to get these guys off the streets, but...

This is entrapment pure and simple. No different then a female police officer putting an ad on Craigs list.
 
But . . . but, that wasn't one of the choices Jack gave.
 
All I know is just when you think the net can't get any creepier you see this.
 
In actuality there was no crime committed. Everyday people just like us put up a false profile to make people believe we are someone we're not.

Now that they flushed out a bunch of sick fucks around the world is nothing new. It has been done before using altered pictures of children and women around the world.

And while everyone will scream bloody murder about it, no one will be arrested for asking a fictional person to get in front of a web cam and do things she can't do...because she's fictional. And that's the rub.
 
I got the impression the object of the exercise was not "charge people for propositioning the CG girl" but "give the cops a list of people who they might want to keep an eye on in case they're up to something else".
 
I got the impression the object of the exercise was not "charge people for propositioning the CG girl" but "give the cops a list of people who they might want to keep an eye on in case they're up to something else".

But the OP questioned whether a crime was committed. That's what I answered. As for the creepazoids, yes definitely keep an eye on them.
 
As creepy as this is, we could be looking at the future regarding how people with unacceptable or unrealistic fetishes can get their rocks off.

If pedophiles can settle for looking at pictures of artificially computer-generated kids maybe we can keep them off the streets and away from real kids. After all that's what it's all about. I couldn't care less if they're drooling over a collection of pixels.
 
As creepy as this is, we could be looking at the future regarding how people with unacceptable or unrealistic fetishes can get their rocks off.

If pedophiles can settle for looking at pictures of artificially computer-generated kids maybe we can keep them off the streets and away from real kids. After all that's what it's all about. I couldn't care less if they're drooling over a collection of pixels.

Unfortunately it's already been proven that, while porn of any kind is an outlet, it doesn't last forever and the real thing will be sought out.
 
Unfortunately it's already been proven that, while porn of any kind is an outlet, it doesn't last forever and the real thing will be sought out.

When Finland removed all restrictions on what pornography could be published, the incidents of sex related crime fell.
 

Most of us would have no idea whether this is a crime or not. The group were operating out of The Netherlands and so Dutch law would have to be applied. Unless you know your Dutch law you can't answer.

If someone did actually pay up the law may have been broken in their country. Here in the UK the defense of entrapment does not exist so if someone here paid for an actual girl to perform sexual acts he or she would be breaking the law, whether they were lured into it or not.

Excluding legal arguments, I can tell you what it is. It is a publicity stunt by Terre-des-Hommes-Netherlands, designed to raise their profile and generate donations.

Knowing that we have people on here who are experts on absolutely everything(a bit like Peppa Pig's daddy) I'm sure you'll get an answer.
 
Most of us would have no idea whether this is a crime or not. The group were operating out of The Netherlands and so Dutch law would have to be applied. Unless you know your Dutch law you can't answer.

If someone did actually pay up the law may have been broken in their country. Here in the UK the defense of entrapment does not exist so if someone here paid for an actual girl to perform sexual acts he or she would be breaking the law, whether they were lured into it or not.

Excluding legal arguments, I can tell you what it is. It is a publicity stunt by Terre-des-Hommes-Netherlands, designed to raise their profile and generate donations.

Knowing that we have people on here who are experts on absolutely everything(a bit like Peppa Pig's daddy) I'm sure you'll get an answer.

OMG I hate that show.
 
I suspect that the legal outlook is perhaps similar to this:
A driver is operating a car at well in excess of the legal speed limit. The scumbags give chase, also at well in excess of the legal speed limit. The scumbags catch the speeder. The speeder goes to jail or pays a fine. The scumbags are not guilty of any breaking of the law.
 
When Finland removed all restrictions on what pornography could be published, the incidents of sex related crime fell.

There ya go, proves my first point. Now we sit back and wait until they get tired of self flagellation and pictures and seek out the real thing.

How long ago did Finland do that?
 
There ya go, proves my first point. Now we sit back and wait until they get tired of self flagellation and pictures and seek out the real thing.

How long ago did Finland do that?

About thirty years ago. Rising sexual crime figures too a drop in five years they started to rise again but if you extrepolate the graphs it has not come close to the predicted value prior to the liberation.
 
I suspect that the legal outlook is perhaps similar to this:
A driver is operating a car at well in excess of the legal speed limit. The scumbags give chase, also at well in excess of the legal speed limit. The scumbags catch the speeder. The speeder goes to jail or pays a fine. The scumbags are not guilty of any breaking of the law.

Of course. They would be driving emergency vehicles with flashing lights and sirens.
 
Unfortunately it's already been proven that, while porn of any kind is an outlet, it doesn't last forever and the real thing will be sought out.

But still - isn't this kinda like arresting people for reckless driving based on their performance in GTA V? In that case you could pretty much put everybody who has finished that game on death row - yours truly included.
 
Considering the circumstances is this a crime, or a fraud?

And if so who committed it?

The people who agreed committed a crime (assuming it's illegal there to solicit sex stuff with a minor over there)

It doesn't matter that that the act never happened, or that the girl never even existed. The only thing that matters is the intent of the guys who wanted to pay.

And it isn't entrapment because the police or government never enticed anybody to do something they wouldn't ordinarily have done. All this group did was to give people the option. That's legal.


I've never thought of the those fraud thing before. I don't think this can be considered fraud because it if was, then all police stings can be sued for fraud. There must be some sort of exception for these types of undercover things.
 
It made the national news last night. Showing pictures of sweetie. She looked about as real as as the characters in Grand Theft Auto.

The reporter said that police were following it up. He didn't say whether they would be charging people or simply recommending an eye test.

The people who responded could easily argue that they could see that she wasn't real and were just playing along to see where it went. Even better would be to say they were simply trying to gather evidence to give to the police, because they suspected a scam.

In reality this was very much a non-event on a slow news day. However it did raise the profile of the hitherto unknown organisation that carried it out. In that respect it was a resounding success.
 
But still - isn't this kinda like arresting people for reckless driving based on their performance in GTA V? In that case you could pretty much put everybody who has finished that game on death row - yours truly included.

Well I won't be in prison then, never played it, so I'm safe.
 
What was the purpose of this deception? To bring awareness to the fact that paedophiles use the internet to seek and stalk their prey? Uhmm... Yeah, we already know that.

To identify and punish some pervs? I don't know the law well enough but my guess is that in most places (since no crime actually took place) it would be hard to seek legal recourse...



I call publicity stunt like an earlier poster.
 
My guess is that those responding wouldn't particularly like to find their name on the list.
 
Back
Top