Cyber Crime Question?

[Zeb_Carter]

My guess is that those responding wouldn't particularly like to find their name on the list.

Well, just because they are a bunch of perverted, sick fucks, is not reason to persecute them.

 

[subdued_passion]

My guess is that those responding wouldn't particularly like to find their name on the list.

Realistically what is any law enforcement agency even going to do with any list? 1000 pervs from all over the world.


Rather than going after individuals it would've been more useful to go after the host sites. Make it difficult for the supplier to reach out to the consumer base.

 

[sr71plt]

Realistically what is any law enforcement agency even going to do with any list? 1000 pervs from all over the world.


Rather than going after individuals it would've been more useful to go after the host sites. Make it difficult for the supplier to reach out to the consumer base.

You missed the point. What does not wanting to see your name on a list of scumbags have to do with anything else?

You wouldn't mind seeing your name on their list?

The danger here, of course, is that it's a private advocacy agency. They want the list long and have little incentive (until lawsuits start floating in) of being positive a specific name belongs on the list.

 

[subdued_passion]

You missed the point. What does not wanting to see your name on a list of scumbags have to do with anything else?

You wouldn't mind seeing your name on their list?

The danger here, of course, is that it's a private advocacy agency. They want the list long and have little incentive (until lawsuits start floating in) of being positive a specific name belongs on the list.

How would I, are you suggesting that they can make this list public?

Do you realise the kind of slander/libel lawsuits they would be opening themselves up to if they did name names publicly.

 

[sr71plt]

Yes, the list is being made public (according to the CNN report on it today).

All I can do is keep repeating that you're missing the point. Other than that, I have no interest in arguing this continually.

How many on such a list do you think are interested in making it even more public by suing about it? Most of the names on the list would be valid.

God, you're talking abut legalities. That's not what happens to people's reputations and relations with others from something like this. You don't get the connection out of people's minds by smugly saying the law will take care of it.

What planet do you live on?

 

[subdued_passion]

Yeah, I get that many people prefer the tar and feathers or kangaroo court resolution. But despite the noble cause, the method does not sit well with me (I have this issue with sting operations in general). I'm just thinking about all the ways they would've gone about verifying the identities of these individuals...


Activist groups, NGOs try to avoid situations that open them up to lawsuits. I agree that the individuals identified wouldn't be likely to initiate any action. But if I were a judge I would ask for suo moto proceedings (agreed I would be highly unpopular) because
1. no crime actually took place, and
2. clear case of entrapment

 

[slyc_willie]

It's not entrapment, regardless of how anyone would want to claim this is "a clear case of" it.

For one thing, entrapment refers to the activities of a government or law enforcement agency. This was a private rights group. For another, the group did not approach any particular person in the chat room. They simply posted a CGI picture and waited.

Lastly -- the most important distinction -- is that entrapment requires that someone be coerced or otherwise convinced to do something they would not already be predisposed to doing.

So all we have is a group of people exposing those who would already be willing to watch a pre-teen girl get naked and fondle herself. Good for them.

 

[sr71plt]

I don't think it's entrapment either. I worry, when done by an advocacy group, that it can sloppily become misidentification. You don't put that genie back in the bottle easily, if at all.

 

[slyc_willie]

I don't think it's entrapment either. I worry, when done by an advocacy group, that it can sloppily become misidentification. You don't put that genie back in the bottle easily, if at all.

More often than not, rights groups have good intentions, but like a lot of people, don't understand all the legal intricacies of their actions. Cases like this could very easily lead to mob justice, which could potentially cause more harm than the group was trying to prevent. But that would be a totally different discussion.

 

[lovecraft68]

I don't think it's entrapment either. I worry, when done by an advocacy group, that it can sloppily become misidentification. You don't put that genie back in the bottle easily, if at all.

Oh Wylie I don't think it is either!

As always I agree with everything you say because I have a huge man crush on you and I am pathetic!

Christ you two make me sick. I never thought I would run into another poster who knew it all as much as you until dick Wylie showed up,

 

[slyc_willie]

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.

Your ignorance is typical. And ridiculous.

Oh Wylie I don't think it is either!

As always I agree with everything you say because I have a huge man crush on you and I am pathetic!

Christ you two make me sick. I never thought I would run into another poster who knew it all as much as you until dick Wylie showed up,

Well, you did get one thing right, kid.

 

[sr71plt]

What's pathetic is to suggest--with my posting history so obvious--that I don't say here exactly what I think about everything, no matter what anyone else posts.

If the AH is being soured by this constant crap, LC, it's you who are doing it. You've made it obvious that you don't like it here and that the Web site isn't entitling you enough. Just walk off. Let the sunshine back in.

 

[lovecraft68]

The question/issue is what is this "private group" going to do with this list?

If they cannot legally make it public-which I doubt they can-what is the point?

Also I still believe its entrapment because fact is although this is a private group, how do we know who is truly funding said private group?

Maybe no one, maybe someone looking to make use of the list and what use can be made of it other than prosecution?

Bottom line if the list is released there is serious litigation coming their way, slander, defamation etc...etc...

What's to stop these people from saying "I knew she wasn't real all along, it was just an online fantasy. Now pay up."

 

[lovecraft68]

Your ignorance is typical. And ridiculous.



Well, you did get one thing right, kid.

NO I was saying Pilot was saying he was pathetic, how did you miss that Oh, great wordsmith who reinvented the erotic publishing world with his handful of titles.

You and your asshole paramour think you're too good to be here, but seeing you're no on in real life have to come here and toss your crap around.

You're a pompous arrogant know it all jerk just like Pilot

as for ignorance? My best friend works in SVU in New York I know what entrapment is. I'd have him show up and post, but you would say you know more anyway.

Another cyber wanna be who needs to say they know everything about everything.

 

[sr71plt]

When did legalities stop anyone from publishing a list?

That's the whole point here--an advocacy group can operate outside legalities--and just evaporate, when needed. This is a Pandora's box. You don't have to be charged with anything for what an intentional group can do to you in public.

I don't have heartburn with anyone biting on a sting like this being publicly identified--but only if they are truly caught and not mistaken with someone else.

 

[slyc_willie]

Your fragile ego just can't stand it when it's pointed out that you're wrong, can it, kid?

Here. Have a look for yourself : Entrapment.

Go ahead and take your time reading it. There are some big words you might need to look up.

 

[sr71plt]

And just cut the personal attack crap, LC, and stop ruining a serious discussion here.

 

[lovecraft68]

Your fragile ego just can't stand it when it's pointed out that you're wrong, can it, kid?

Here. Have a look for yourself : Entrapment.

Go ahead and take your time reading it. There are some big words you might need to look up.

No sweetie, I have no ego, at least not here. But you prove yourself by insinuating I wouldn't know "big words" but that, my asshat friend, is EXACTLY what you are.

A low self esteem fool who needs to be somebody so bad they resort to "you be stupid!" meanwhile the search is on across google for the definition of entrapment so you can pretend you know about it.

I rarely if ever get into anything serious here because no one needs to know what I know and point is? No one believes much of what anyone here says anyway, its the net. A point I get.

I give an opinion on writing if I feel I have one to give, if not I wander away. And anyone who disagrees with my take? is free to feel that way, I don;t need to get into "well I..."

But you and super fraud? Oh, no you have just got to tell everyone how it is, don't you?

Its sad to see adults still acting like they think they're the cool kids, but that's what chat boards end up being a haven for the IN-SE-CURE.

Broke that down for you, being three syllables and all.

 

[slyc_willie]

As usual, you have revealed your true pettiness, lack of self-control, and overall childish demeanor. This why I refer to you as "kid," in case you needed it spelled out.

And I seriously don't think I or anyone else needs to point out the numerous contradictions you just made in your last few posts regarding what you do and do not on this forum.

I am going to leave this pointless banter now and let the real discussion resume.

 

[lovecraft68]

Don't worry, Wylie, your ego will be just fine soon.

If I have the time line right you're do to win either the Winter or V-day contest. That will make you feel good now won't it?

 

[sr71plt]

You've hijacked this thread with your bitter hatred, LC. It's ruined now. I'll go off to another thread and you can follow me there and put your nose back up my ass there.

 

[Handley_Page]

Realistically what is any law enforcement agency even going to do with any list? 1000 pervs from all over the world.

Rather than going after individuals it would've been more useful to go after the host sites. Make it difficult for the supplier to reach out to the consumer base.

The problem with a published list is that it can lead to Vigilante actions, which is not exactly lawful or pleasant.
I suspect that the law agencies will clock the names and investigate heavily if that name appears AGAIN in an active case.

 

[DeYaKen]

I find it interesting that the so-called Rights group (they were called a charity on the news) has a name that translates to Land of Men. I wonder whose rights they are supporting or vice versa.

 

[subdued_passion]

It's not entrapment, regardless of how anyone would want to claim this is "a clear case of" it.

For one thing, entrapment refers to the activities of a government or law enforcement agency. This was a private rights group. For another, the group did not approach any particular person in the chat room. They simply posted a CGI picture and waited.

Lastly -- the most important distinction -- is that entrapment requires that someone be coerced or otherwise convinced to do something they would not already be predisposed to doing.

So all we have is a group of people exposing those who would already be willing to watch a pre-teen girl get naked and fondle herself. Good for them.

Well I used the term entrapment in a broader sense to even include sting operations. Sting operations are illegal in my country and I do believe in the Netherlands as well.

Now as far as the 'lure' part is concerned, do you really believe that they group created a CG kid and just sat all quiet in some corner of the internet hoping the smell of the e-putang would be enough to draw the pervs out?

The problem with a published list is that it can lead to Vigilante actions, which is not exactly lawful or pleasant.
I suspect that the law agencies will clock the names and investigate heavily if that name appears AGAIN in an active case.

Precisely why I have a problem with this... I don't like mob justice or the tar and feathers approach because nobody bothers to verify facts before they act.

 

[slyc_willie]

Well I used the term entrapment in a broader sense to even include sting operations. Sting operations are illegal in my country and I do believe in the Netherlands as well.

Now as far as the 'lure' part is concerned, do you really believe that they group created a CG kid and just sat all quiet in some corner of the internet hoping the smell of the e-putang would be enough to draw the pervs out?

There is no "broader sense" when it comes to the use of the term "entrapment." It's a legal definition, not a social or colloquial one. To entrap someone, under the legal definition, is to present them with a situation and then foster an environment in which they would act against their norm. This group, as far as can be discerned, did nothing to 'lure' anyone to 'Sweetie.' They simply posted a CGI picture.

As to the second part of your question, of course I can believe that a group that created a CGI child "just sat in some corner of the Internet . . ." Child predators are not passive by nature, waiting for some kid to come their way. They seek out their prey. They look for it. No one would have to do anything other than post a simple picture of an underaged child in order to garner their attention. They wouldn't have to do a damn thing otherwise. The predators will reveal themselves based on their comments and requests, as was revealed in the original article.

As someone who was once involved in numerous sting operations, I can tell you that it takes very little to attract the attention of someone already predisposed to committing a crime. Whether you agree with the policy of stings or not, it does not change the fact that when a sting is performed properly, there really isn't a whole hell of a lot a law enforcement agency has to do to build a case. The criminals reveal themselves readily enough.