Show star: self-righteous Chris Hansen
NBC’s ‘To Catch a Predator’ sued over man who killed himself as police arrived | KOMO-TV – Seattle, Washington | Entertainment — Something like this was bound to happen. This creepy show, which is essentially institutionalized entrapment for the purposes of entertainment and humiliation, was bound to get more bold as time went on and as ratings went up.
Curiously there was a Law and Order episode sometime back where something like this happened and the producers were found guilty of murder by depraved indifference or something like that. These guys exhibit a lot of depraved indifference by showing up at some jokers home like this. Normally they let the “predator” (usually some pathetic and gullible cross-eyed loser thinking he is going to get lucky with some underage girl) show up at the sting site. Actually going to the guys house before he actually does anything overt may be an issue in the lawsuit.
In the “Dateline NBC: To Catch a Predator” show, men accused of having explicit online chats with people they think are underage children go to a house to meet them, where TV cameras, host Chris Hansen and police await.
Louis William Conradt Jr., of Terrell, Texas, a Dallas suburb, was suspected of being one of those men, except he didn’t show up at the house. That didn’t stop the TV producers and police from showing up at his, though, and as officers knocked on his door and a camera crew waited in the street, Conradt shot and killed himself.
What do I think about all this? NBC and the other networks should be supporting and developing shows such as Americas Most Wanted which tries to get criminals off the street rather than try to create new criminals with this sort of exploitation of the feeble-minded. Hansen himself says this on his blog: “More often than not, when a potential predator shows up at one of our hidden camera houses he has no criminal history for sexual assault or soliciting a minor online for sex.”
So let’s see if we can make them criminals for ratings? This is beneficial to society? It’s sick.
found by Aric Mackey
# 22: I am Not a member of Nambla and am not a pedophile.
Why would you think that? Just because I take a stand against what NBC is doing?
I’m merely a citizen concerned for human rights, and take special attention when the media places ratings over the basic human rights of others.
This is nothing short of organised legal entrapment for the sake of ratings and money!
The cases in one muncipality were completely thrown out in one municipality, in fact the DA there would not even pursue any charges to begin with, due to “contamination”– the inclusion into the process by a TELEVISION NEWS REPORTER. The main issue was that the transcripts of the chat sessions were an un-verifiable source. The Catch a Predator folks just hand over to the DA these transcripts that could have been completely fabricated. Any Public Defender could get an aquittal easily.
I think the US Supreme Court should get involved in this.
Leave the crime fighting to the professionals! Keep the MEDIA MACHINE out of it!
There is a great danger to LIBERTY when a self-serving news media gets involved in the process.
31–What basic human right are you championing here? Specifically, which one?
Same could be asked of #27==but he’s having too much fun blowing up people he thinks are douches.
This is such a dumb issue.
These kinds of sensationalist pseudo news show are unethical at inception. Who can’t figure that out?
I have to wonder if this was NBC doing a sting to prove that Bush knowingly lied about WMDs or that Cheney likes goats as sexual partners would the bulk of posters here think that NBC should, “Leave he law enforcement to the professional.”
Professionals, I might add, that many here bash every time they get a chance.
Who cares whether it is entrapment or not?
The big picture: If you’re an adult and you flirt with a 13 year old or you seriously consider going to a 13 year old’s house to have sex, the Internet and the world should be a dangerous place for you.
What’s really bizarre are all those comments from those who want to assault Hansen, because he doesn’t run stings up to the highest legal standard, basically making themselves judge & jury. Now that’s ironic and sleazy.
I’m sorry these pre-pedophiles who are involved with “pre-crime” are so ill. I hope they get help. But until they do: Go Chris Hansen! Maybe this show will spur them to get some help or at least chase girls their own age.
I’ve heard them describe using a picture of an 18 year old as ‘bait’. One article I saw some time ago showed the picture, and the girl in the picture doesn’t look 13, she looks much older. That fact alone made me question their tactics.
These guys that are getting nailed by Predator are really stupid, ignorant dipshit pedophiles. How could an overweight, disgusting older man think for a moment that a 13 year old girl would be remotely interested in him? Every one of these jerks knows what they plan on doing is patently illegal yet they show up anyway. I say tough shit to these jerks. They initiated the whole situation anyway by hanging out in chatrooms with kids. I really enjoy watching these idiots squirm when they get caught. Who, in their right mind, would be caught in this situation? These guys are supreme losers and deserve whatever they get.
I will admit, however, that this is NOT stellar television. But maybe it serves the purpose of deterring other pedophiles. And the cops on the show definitely go overboard on the arrests.
Both sides here make valid points – but when you boil off the emotion, what these molester wannabes wanted to do and planned on doing are bad things. But the fact remains that they did not do these things, and there was never any danger of them doing so, since there was a] no underage person, and b] no person of any age who was going to engage in any illegal activity with the pervs. Planning it? Thinking about it? Preparing for it? Buying condoms? Buying alcohol? Driving somewhere? Which of these acts is an actual crime? Where is real, tangible harm done to any person?
It’s very like the situation with these bogus laws against selling imitation drugs; put someone in prison for selling someone else something 100% legal and harmless, because they pretended it was something illegal, to cheat the buyer? That’s horseshit. We already have laws against fraud.
To prosecute for a crime that could not possibly take place is equally horseshit. This lemon who offed himself – he was a sicko, society is safer without him, &c, &c. But nonetheless, in the case they were going to pick him up for, he did not solicit any child. He did not touch any child. There was no child.
When the desire to rid society of such highly dysfunctional and undesirable persons leads us to imprison them for wanting or planning to commit a crime, but still doing, in fact, absolutely zero actual harm to anyone, then we have indeed started down the slippery slope to totalitarianism and ‘thoughtcrime.’
Again: in order that we abide by the root principle that before all else, no innocent person shall receive undeserved punishment, we must accept that no matter how ostensibly noble the cause, fabricating nonexistent crimes is unethical, immoral, corrupting and corrosive to a society that professes to value justice and freedom.
Playing fair, even with people who are cancers on society, must remain the rule. Once started, twisting the letter of the law will, as history has shown, inevitably lead to abuse of the law.
If shit like this is going to be countenanced, the Road to Hell is gonna get an express lane.
• • • • • • • • •
…and as far as involving the for-profit media in such corruption of the concept of justice, it’s devolving already into a high-tech lynch mob.
That wall between religion and the State needs some company, in the form of a wall between private, for-profit interests and the government’s duty to conduct impartial justice. I’m afraid we’re already near the stage when the ‘corrections industry’ will realize that, to increase their profits, all they need to do is talk to their bought-and-paid-for legislators about what can be done to manufacture “crimes” that will result in the greatest number of convictions and incarcerations of otherwise law-abiding citizens. It’s drug users today, but who tomorrow?
That’s the insidious thing about police states – they just creep up on you before you notice, and by the time enough people do, it’s too late.
• • • • • • •
“Where are we going? And what are we doing in this handbasket?”
38==Lauren, you and OFTLO really surprise me. So, no “sting” operations at all???
Only real crimes and real victims before catching perverts after the fact huh?
Well, I won’t say that “that is so far over the line as to not justify a response” but thats not good argument.
You argue as if the laws regarding “mistake of fact” don’t exist? Yes, your issues have all been used and lost in a court of law which is why sting operations do exist, should exist, and are valid and valuable.
I could go on by analogy ((why get innoculated, just wait for the disease?)) and by analysis that the criminal INTENT of these perv’s is 100% real, but I think I’ll go google a bit for “sting” or “entrapment” articles. I’m sure someone has summarized the common sense of such concepts in better words than I can.
In the mean time—-tisk, tisk,==shamefull.
#38 Lauren:
These pre-pedophiles get humiliated. They walked into enough of a gray area to get called out.
The police let a guy running a light off with a warning after sucking up 20 minutes of his time. Maybe the policeman wasn’t 100% sure, but thought it was close enough to hassle the guy about it.
You don’t need to convict or even prosecute someone for anti-social behavior to make your point. There is no doubt these guys are behaving anit-socially. At least they aren’t in jail AND humiliated and no child is damaged for being stupid.
I appreciate the points of view, but my point is lost here. Let me re-quote Hansen: “More often than not, when a potential predator shows up at one of our hidden camera houses he has no criminal history for sexual assault or soliciting a minor online for sex.”
SO what is wrong with this picture? What changed? If this wasn’t about molestation (a untouchable issue that can never be questioned and can be thus used for reverse abuse by law enforcement) I wonder what people would think. After all people can be conned into doing a lot of things by professional con men.
I just think the show is sick and creepy. And it makes people into criminals by conning them.
Let me repeat the quote once more: “More often than not, when a potential predator shows up at one of our hidden camera houses he has no criminal history for sexual assault or soliciting a minor online for sex.”
Actually, pretty easy.
I googled (( sting “mistake of fact” entrapment )) and the following case was about the 4-5 one. Could google more for a closer fit on facts, but this is close enough.
I think “the law” has this one just about right.
http://tinyurl.com/27lyng
41—42 was not posted in response to you, even though it fits. Yes, the show is creepy—because it is showing PERVERTS in action. “CRIPES!”
The difference between those “first time pedophile wanna be’s” and YOU is that YOU would not go to the houses. The difference between those creeps and YOU is “predisposition to commit a crime” and IS and SHOULD BE illegal.
I’ll go back and repeat post #14–the only sympathy that should be present at all is whether these guys should get mandatory, locked-up mental health services rather than further damaging jail time.
I actually don’t even see the “basis” for an opposing view on this issue. I guess some are so imbued with potential governmental abuse, they can’t see real predators walking into a kiddies house 300 miles from home????
What would YOU do if you came home and a nude guy was in your kitchen chatting up your daughter with a condom and a six pack?? After all- – – – he’s just talking?? No crime. Wait until he is on top of her???
Get Real.
I think the people that produce To Catch a Predator are at least as sick as the people they’re trying to catch, and I won’t comment on what I think of the people that watch it. According to the story jz links to above, a prosecutor has refused to prosecute some these cases because of questions regarding PJ’s methods and NBC’s involvement.
When mere accusation of being a child molester or predator is enough to ruin someones life, it’s completely irresponsible to show up at someones house with cameras and law enforcement to accuse him of being predator based only on the suspicion of volunteer conducting the chat. So I hope NBC is made to pay for this.
41 John
These guys don’t belong in those chat rooms in the first place and they certainly shouldn’t be chatting up children about sex. They aren’t being conned, they’re being outted. Yes, it is absolutely humiliating for everyone to know that you chat up children about sex, whether you intend to molest or have molested or not.
Children are different. They need more protection than adults in society. No one debates that it’s tough to get the balance right and that the government has gotten it badly wrong a number of times. But that doesn’t negate the central principal of child protection.
So, what’s your issue, that these guys should be allowed to roam children’s chat rooms for sex or that you have a better way to handle the situation? If you do, what is it?
44 Patrick.
And why would an adult hang out in a children’s chat room? Are you saying that these guys weren’t in the chat room in the first place? That NBC made that up?
The fact is these guys hang out in chat rooms. It’s that same as having a heavily armed masked man lounging in a bank. You can certainly understand why people would assume he’s a bank robber, even if he’s not committed a crime and swears he had no intention to. He doesn’t belong there in the first place and shouldn’t be surprised when something bad happens to him.
I really have a deep revulsion to the type of people who have illicit sexual conversations and send pornography to what they perceive is a 13 or 14 year old child. I think that when they follow that up by showing up at their potential victims house with alcohol and condoms, it shows a clear intent to commit a sex crime against a minor.
That being said, I think society can best be served not by arresting these people but by forcing them to attend therapy to try and help prevent them from becoming full blown pedophiles.
44—Patrick==a person who unskillfully pursues a criminal is as bad as the criminal himself??? Really???
jz’s link had almost no details. More were supplied by Post #26–lack of jurisdiction, if true, is completely valid reason not to go forward having NOTHING to do with the merits.
There was no “mere accusation” but rather a missed arrest based on significant hard evidence and course of conduct. Lets see–who more likely kills themself when the police come calling==the guilty or the innocent.
What do you think of the 20,000 ((or was is 60K)) REGISTERED sex offenders who were taken off my space??? Violation of their rights I must assume. Yes, give the child perverts full access and then wonder why kids get fat because they are afraid to walk to school.
Talk about self destructive behavior. Simply “Amazing!”
#43 – Here’s a question I need to ask you more and more… WTF are you talking about?
I never argued any of that BS in your post… all I said was the the show wasn’t ethical… and it isn’t.
What are we? An audience of Romans cheering as Christians are devoured by lions? This BS doesn’t need to be on TV.
49==OFTLO, Post #43 was directed to our misguided Host and Blog Provider, not you.
On your point though, is the show unethical? Is investigative journalism unethical?? Whats unethical is the failure of the cops to STILL not have any active programs providing this service.
I have watched about 2 of the shows. No cheering. Amazed at how meek and unrealistic the perps are. Did see that one guy get caught two days in a row?? I came away thinking the guys needed mental health services, as do the cops that arrested them, and that neither will get the help they need. I thanked bejeesuz the kiddies weren’t harmed by those creeps.
Time to google if John Walsh has commented on the show.
WHATEVER it is you people don’t like about the show==is the alternative of having these pedophiles loose in society really a better situation?
I googled ((“John Walsh” “To catch a predator”)). Turns out
John Walsh is all for it.
http://tinyurl.com/ytz2b9
Let me make an ad hominem argument–if you have ever been the victim of crime, you move out of the ivory tower and actually want something to be done about it. Sad it takes that kind of tragedy to align private fantasies with the real world.
#50 – Post #43 was directed to our misguided Host and Blog Provider, not you.
Yes… That was really clear when you wrote… 🙂
38==Lauren, you and OFTLO really surprise me. So, no “sting” operations at all???
=====
Whats unethical is the failure of the cops to STILL not have any active programs providing this service.
Providing what service? That’s a service? I happen to be personally aware of several dozen sting operations because I have friends and family who are cops in several different locations.
In my last job, I built several PCs that were used by a team of cops who investigated sex crimes against kids. They are doing hard drive recovery and such…
Both federal and local resources are dedicated to this “problem” – but on that note:
is the alternative of having these pedophiles loose in society really a better situation?
Well let’s just slow down? Who is a pedophile? Let’s use that word a little more carefully. A pedophile seeks sexual gratification with children. How are we defining “child”? It is, in my opinion, very wrong and certainly criminal for a 30 year old man to have sex with a 14 year old girl, but that act, in my mind, does not make him a pedophile. It just makes him a creep, but a 14 year old is sexually mature (physically speaking) In fact, only in the last 100 years have we started treating 14 year old women as if they weren’t ready for sex. Prior, we married them off)
And are pedophiles “running loose”. Are there roving gangs of pedophiles grabbing children and taking them off in mass numbers?
No. There are not.
The vast majority of sex crimes committed by adults against children are committed by family or friends of the family. They aren’t being stalked in chat rooms. I have no numbers, but I’ll bet there are more cops than kids getting chatted up in those rooms… We’ve sort of created a self-fulfilling prophesy when we created a pedophilia playground on certain chat rooms.
Pedophiles are a boogyman whipped up to scare parents and pander for votes. It is a tragedy when it happens, but is it happening in the numbers we’d be lead to believe. I sincerely doubt it.
I know you are often in favor of trading liberty for security, but as a bedrock principal, I cannot stand for that. It isn’t worth the trade. And we’ve certainly stepped over a line when a TV network gets into law enforcement.
I lost my virginity at 15. Ask your girlfriend what age she lost her virginity. I spoken with A LOT of females who have opened up to me. SO MANY of them told me that they lost their virginity anywhere from 12 to 16 years old. Usually by a guy that was over 18– and usually much older. THAT IS A FACT. GIRLS ARE ALREADY HAVING SEX AT AGE 13 BY CHOICE! And usually with OLDER (pedophiles– HA!) GUYS!
The world is freakin’ crazy. Seriously, you guys are out of touch with sexual reality.
bobbo
“a person who unskillfully pursues a criminal is as bad as the criminal himself??? Really???”
Potentially.
“z’s link had almost no details. More were supplied by Post #26–lack of jurisdiction, if true, is completely valid reason not to go forward having NOTHING to do with the merits.”
I think you should read the last few paragraphs on the first page of that MSNBC story. Specifically the paraphrase of the attorney John Roach comments, “As for the rest of the cases, he said neither police nor NBC could guarantee the chat logs were authentic and complete….”. Sounds like merit had something to do with the decision.
“What do you think of the 20,000 ((or was is 60K)) REGISTERED sex offenders who were taken off my space??? Violation of their rights I must assume.”
MySpace is within their rights to remove users. They clearly state in their TOS that they reserve the right to delete any users account for any reason and without notice. Also I suspect the police probably do a bit more investigation of any information they receive from MySpace to make sure the person that was remove is actually a registered sex offender. To my knowledge MySpace isn’t publishing the names for viewing by the general public.
“Yes, give the child perverts full access and then wonder why kids get fat because they are afraid to walk to school.”
Nice straw man argument. I am not questioning the need to pursue predators and child molesters. I am, however, questioning turning it into a tv show and the handling of this case as well as some of the others NBC has been involved in. I think these stings should be handled entirely by law enforcement professionals instead of amateurs and vigilantes to avoid foul ups like this.
“Talk about self destructive behavior. Simply “Amazing!””
That might be true, if it wasn’t based a misrepresentation.
[Duplicate post. – ed.]
#53 “The world is freakin’ crazy. Seriously, you guys are out of touch with sexual reality.”
Just because there are many sick individuals out there doesn’t mean I have to accept it or stop fighting to try and end the cycle of sexual abuse.
Don’t forget: NBC News was the same bunch of jokers who rigged GMC pickup trucks with explosives to “prove” the outboard-of-the-frame fuel tanks caught fire in collisions. That was the day that I gave up totally on NBC News.
The show is a perversion of justice. When you allow an entertainment group to determine who is or isn’t a criminal you abdicate your rights under the system to **blind justice**.
From what I have read, the man alledgedly chatted to a *minor* girl, who wasn’t a minor or a girl. He didn’t send any porno to *her* and he didn’t show up at *her* house. Hence no crime was committed. But the program producers decided that based on his supposed chat room conversations they would go to his home and publically humiliate him, by naming him as a peadophile. He took his own life because of the shame of what was being done. HE actually was the victim here…..not a phoney 13 y/o girl. Peadophile or not (and he had never been arrested or even had charges filed previously) he still has rights under our system(you bobbo, and some of the others on your *team* here are some of the biggest whiners about the Bush team taking away your fundemental rights), he is **innocent** until PROVEN guilty.
I don’t care what he might have done or is thought to have done or thinks about(thinking still isn’t a crime by the way, or most of us would be in jail), he was in the eye’s of the law( NOT cops wanting on t.v.) innocent…….is it that hard to understand?????
Well, none of us are looking at the same set of “facts” as we discuss these various issues. Have to narrow it down to a given set–would still allow for disagreement I think, but maybe straighten some of it out.
A major source of confusion is thinking that somehow “To Catch a Predator” is somehow part of the justice system. They are not. That is why certain prosecutors have not gone forward, and others have. Guilty or Not Guilty is determined in a court of law with all the protections.
Another confusion–that a sting operation somehow is unfair to the culprit/defendant. Preventative law is based on that concept–just read the case at Post #42. Whether this is good effective police work, or an exchange of freedom for security is a deal I’ll take anyday and only wish the police did more like this to tamp down car repair fraud, medicare fraud, home repair fraud, fraud, fraud, fraud. Harder to catch people on the fly. Sounds to me if cops guarded a Bank, that would violate the robbers rights in you good folks mind??? Well, its unusal for me, but the law is on my side on this point. Stings are good police work. If you don’t like it, don’t leave your house—expecially and drive 300 miles to have sex with an underaged girl. What a violation of rights that is.
Another confusion–that there is little evidence before the guy walks into the house. NO–there is a full record over many days on the internets, the guy acts out in driving to the house etc. And they all lied about the character of their interactions. I thought she was 20 years old. How come you say here I would love some 12 year old loving? Anybody got a reference the internet logs are made up??? Those that were incomplete led to case dismissals. And THAT would be my major complaint re Chris Hanson–if you are going to do this type of investigative work, do it extremely well, above reproach.
Well, thats enough. Yes, different people can have different views on the same set of facts. We’ll never know as scattered as this discussion is. People sure do disagree on what the other side sees as “so basic?” How does democracy ever work??
53–Man of Liesure==I think that actually is a good argument re changing the basis of the debate. I didn’t see it until you posted. I missed one.