entrapment or not

Has anyone found significance
in the assertion of the opening post of this thread
that she said she was BRINGING "A PERSON OF AGE" as a CHAPERONE ??

1 Reply

@djjd62,

Quote:

i guess it's that weird american freedom at any cost thing

not for this American.

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

Jesus David - to chaperone what? Their tea party?

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Quote:

But, any guy stupid enough to fal;l for that crap deserves whatever he gets
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes but does his wife and children deserve what happen to their family as a result of the man stupid actions?

....here's a novel way to sentence pedophiles....if they're single, you throw the book at them.If their wives and children are dependent on him as a wage earner, they get the minimum....but if they also have a mother-in-law who's terminally ill living with them....it's probation baby!

2 Replies

@panzade,

Given no one was harm and there was no real child sending someone with zero criminal record to a five years or so sentence is sense free in any logic system I am aware of.

Because first you will be harming real children IE his, you will be taking a tax payer off the roll and forcing the rest of society to support his family as you pay 30,ooo or so a year to keep him lock up. Let see that would be 150,000 dollars just to keep him in prison for 5 years add another 100,000 to keep his children alive and add another 50,000 or so of taxes he will not be paying so we get a grand total of 300,000 dollars lost to the government in 5 years and more to the society as a whole by removing a skill worker from the society for the rest of his life as anyone with that kind of record will only be able to get minimun wages jobs after his release.

The date line tv show have somewhere like a 100 such men so we are talking about 30 millions just so you can feel good about getting those evil guys who had not harm one real child.

Good going fool.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

Obviously you have no familiarity with situations...

Quote:

Obviously you have no awareness of situations...

Why? Because I don't share your sentiments on this subject?

By way of context:

I am the father of two boys (27 and 23) and one girl (25). I have been quite involved in my kids’ lives, coaching sports teams, joining my daughter in the Indian Princess organization, volunteering as a chaperone on day and overnight trips, etc. I point this out not to blow my horn as a father but to indicate that I have spent plenty of time with my kids and their friends and schoolmates, and have met plenty of parents with similar experiences.

I can certainly imagine that there are some smart ass kids who, when they don't get there way, threaten to report their parents to CPS. I have no personal experience with such kids nor have I been told personal stories about such kids by friends and colleagues.

Assuming the parents don't deserve to be reported, if their kids make this threat with any regularity, the parents are not doing a great job being parents, and even less so if they capitulate.

I don't doubt that there are people who will maliciously and falsely accuse neighbors or fellow employees of all sorts of crimes. It's never happened to me or, to my knowledge, my friends and colleagues.

So you, apparently, have had personal experiences with the sort of people who falsely accuse others of sexual impropriety. I have not.

Maybe you have been unlucky and I lucky. It really doesn't matter because your personal experiences are no more proof of a widespread problem then mine are that one doesn't exist.

In any case the original issue of this thread (to which, heretofore, I have limited my comments) is whether or not the individual in the scenario was a victim of entrapment.

There is no reason to believe (no matter how the scenario gaps are filled) that this guy was the victim of a kid or parent falsely accusing him of a sex crime.

I have already acknowledged that some people have been falsely accused of sex crimes, but that's not part of the scenario.

Even if you and the others are correct and false accusations of sex crimes are rampant in our society this would not logically give rise to a heightened concern over possible police entrapment in connection with a sex crime.

The two things are connected only in your anxiety over poor innocent souls getting steamrolled by evil little girls and their sinister parents.

The fellow in the scenario is not a poor innocent soul. He is no Edmund Dante.

He has the right to assert the entrapment defense on his behalf, but I don't believe he will be successful, and I don't think he was entrapped.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Based upon your posting history I have faith that once you become convinced that the societal systems are unfair and that they manhandle innocent's....at that point you will have a problem with the way we do business. It takes a while to see through to propaganda on victim protection and see what is really taking place, I trust that you will get there eventually.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

Quote:

You do not remember the day cares centers where whole staffs was claimed to be pedophiles and it took years to clear those people names as mass panic and stupid interviews errors cause the police wrongly at first to think they had hit pay dirt. Ruin more then one life.

Yes I do, and it was tragic, but it and the two other examples you've offered do not prove that there is a widespread failure of the criminal justice system as relates to overzealously investigating and prosecuting sex crimes.

If limited anecdotal evidence was a legitimate source of proof, we all could prove just about anything.

I could be wrong, but you seem to be the only participant in this thread that can somehow see the person in the scenario as an innocent dupe.

3 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

If limited anecdotal evidence was a legitimate source of proof, we all could prove just about anything.

I could be wrong, but you seem to be the only participant in this thread that can somehow see the person in the scenario as an innocent dupe.

A rare event--i completely agree with Finn.

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Perhaps however I see them as fools who when approach by a fantasy of a young teen with the sexual drive of an adult they allow themselves to get carry away due to faults in their own sexual nature and development.

Faults that I do not think a real young teen acting like such a teen would act would had trigger them into harmful actions.

In other word we are using the criminal justice system to punish people who fail the test of resisting the play acting of other adults who are using the skills of adults to seduce them and therefore it does not follow to me that such men are likely to be a threat to real teens and that is my problem with this whole entrapment nonsense.

Most of the men so entrapped seem to had have no criminal record of any kind and that would be odd if they could be set off to behave badly by real young teens would you not say?

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Quote:

In other word we are using the criminal justice system to punish people who fail the test of resisting the play acting of other adults who are using the skills of adults to seduce them and therefore it does not follow to me that such men are likely to be a threat to real teens and that is my problem with this whole entrapment nonsense

We don't know if you are right or not. But I think that we do know that no one cares. A person who can be seduced by ANY means meet up with a presumed kid for any erotic purpose is deemed to be a perp in need of retribution. It is the Bush doctrine of preemptive war as applied to sex.

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

We don't know if you are right or not. But I think that we do know that no one cares. A person who can be seduced by ANY means meet up with a presumed kid for any erotic purpose is deemed to be a perp in need of retribution. It is the Bush doctrine of preemptive war as applied to sex.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And like the Bush doctrine it is one hell of a waste of resources and is likely to result in far more harm then it prevent.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Quote:

And like the Bush doctrine it is one hell of a waste of resources and is likely to result in far more harm then it prevent.

quite possibly, however it does make the citizens feel safer, and since we know that the majority of citizens care much more about feeling safe than they do about being safe or than they do about preserving freedom for themselves or their kids the move does have a payoff for the politicians who write the laws.

You know darn well from your time at a2k that protecting children from real or imagined threats is a third rail in this society. It is damn near impossible to hold a rational discussion on the subject, so politicians know that they are never going to be challenged. It will take a generation or more of failure to move ahead on child welfare before a sizable minority will become willing to examine what we think we know about child welfare, and how best to promote it. Children become adults, at the end of the day what we are supposed to care about is raising happy healthy adults. This has been lost in our zeal to protect kids from the boogie men.

This is going to be just like "dare" and "just say no" and " the abstinence from sex pledge"....it will only be after the kids who suffered from these program become adults and gain the power to end the foolishness that it will end. The adults who instigated the programs are till the end deaf and blind to reality that upsets their beliefs.

0 Replies

@aidan,

aidan wrote:

Jesus David - to chaperone what? Their tea party?

ALL we know from the post,
was that a MEETING is contemplated.

That is to say: to chaperone a meeting,
perhaps similar to our own first meeting
if your son had chosen to accompany u to safeguard his mother,
or if your father had joined us for the same reason.

David

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

A person who can be seduced by ANY means meet up with a presumed kid for any erotic purpose is deemed to be a perp in need of retribution.

Well yeah...this seems reasonable to me. It doesn't to you?

The fact that someone can't be SEDUCED into having sex with someone who doesn't interest them sexually hawkeye, says absolutely nothing about whether that person has a healthy sex drive or is repressed.
It means they have no interest in that specific sexual scenario - that's all it means.
I've never been able to be seduced by a woman. I'm just not interested - never have been - never will be.
Same (for me) with a child. I don't frigging care if the kid stripped naked and did cartwheels to try to seduce me- hello- there's nothing there.

If there IS something there, that person is a potential danger to any child in his or her life.
It's not a war on sex - I think a lot of people who could not be seduced by children probably like sex as much as you do. They just know what's appropriate (and legal by the way) and thank god have the morals and ethics to stick to it- along with normal urges.

It is not normal sexual practice to want to have sex with an underage child.
If a child started speaking to an adult in a sexual manner, most adults would feel extremely uncomfortable. The normal adult response would NOT be to get excited and tempted.

1 Reply

@panzade,

Quote:

....here's a novel way to sentence pedophiles....if they're single, you throw the book at them.If their wives and children are dependent on him as a wage earner, they get the minimum....but if they also have a mother-in-law who's terminally ill living with them....it's probation baby!

2 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

Quote:

ALL we know from the post,
was that a MEETING is contemplated.

And what would an adult male do at a MEETING with an eleven year old girl whom he met in an internet chatroom David?
I'm a mother and a teacher and I really can't imagine taking time out of my day to go to a meeting with an eleven year old that I'd never met, unless it was something to do with my job.
For what purpose?

Quote:

That is to say: to chaperone a meeting,
perhaps similar to our own first meeting
if your son had chosen to accompany u to safeguard his mother,
or if your father had joined us for the same reason.

Actually, when I told my dad the restaurant we were meeting at - he wanted to come. He'd eaten lunch there quite a lot when he worked in the city.

The difference here is- I'm an adult.
It makes sense that we might enjoy a dinner and conversation together.
Can you picture yourself meeting an eleven year old you'd never met before for dinner and conversation David?
If so - why?

1 Reply

@aidan,

aidan wrote:

Quote:

ALL we know from the post,
was that a MEETING is contemplated.

Quote:

And what would an adult male do at a MEETING
with an eleven year old girl whom he met in an internet chatroom David?

I remember social situations in which this has occurred,
e.g., some of my cousins have had several children of both sexes,
whom I have known for years n decades. During their childhoods,
at family gatherings, in an ambience of relaxation, we discussed
whatever came into our minds, the same as the adults,
like what was happening in their lives, their current interests or mine.
People contributed their individual opinions qua newspaper stories
or TV shows, regardless of age. I certainly had strong opinions at all ages that I remember.
I remember my Uncle Bill repeatedly telling me not to argue.
He scoffed at me, that as a lawyer, I 'd be priceless.
I did not comply with his wishes.
I don 't think that it was anything out of the ordinary.

Over the years, I 've attended summer vacation resorts
where families r friendly and social with one another, swimming, eating, etc.
including ordinary conversation among all of us; maybe something
note worthy in the newspaper or an event in one of our lives.
When one of the children had something to say, we did not shun him
and pretend that the 1st Amendment has an age limit on it.
Just talk nicely. In this case, we were informed that the 11 year old girl
said that she was bringing along an adult, who presumably woud not
countenance felonies committed against her in front of him,
without complaints to the police. Remembering back to my own
childhood, I conversed with adults all the time, with no ill effects.

Quote:

I'm a mother and a teacher and I really can't imagine taking time out
of my day to go to a meeting with an eleven year old that I'd never met,
unless it was something to do with my job.
For what purpose?

According to the opening post of this thread,
thay made friends, and she asked for a meeting
to which she was being accompanied by an adult BODYGUARD.
How thay choose to entertain themselves, is a private matter of personal taste.
Do thay wish to visit an art museum, or just chat over lunch,
or go horseback riding with the bodyguard, maybe a movie or a concert.
If the bodyguard (like her mother or father) is there,
what difference does it make ?
One of the options that we have in enjoying life on Earth is friendship.

Quote:

That is to say: to chaperone a meeting,
perhaps similar to our own first meeting
if your son had chosen to accompany u to safeguard his mother,
or if your father had joined us for the same reason.

Quote:

Actually, when I told my dad the restaurant we were meeting at - he wanted to come.
He'd eaten lunch there quite a lot when he worked in the city.

Yes; I remember your mentioning that.
I am putting the O M SIG in there for dinner in 2 weeks on June 24th.

Quote:

The difference here is- I'm an adult.
It makes sense that we might enjoy a dinner and conversation together.

Can you picture yourself meeting an eleven year old you'd never met before
for dinner and conversation David?
If so - why?

Not one whom I had never met,
but in fairness, I have never done that with a person of ANY age.
I 've gone to restaurants with friends whom I have known,
or with people who I don 't know with whom I have business,
e.g. discussing the possibility of employment of professional legal talent.

Admittedly, most of them were over age 11.

David

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

If limited anecdotal evidence was a legitimate source of proof, we all could prove just about anything
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Odd when I ask for studies to be done to see if those men who are likely to be real danger to real children before we spend resources to lock them up I am told that this is not needed at all!

0 Replies

@aidan,

Well yeah...this seems reasonable to me. It doesn't to you?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hell no repeat hell no.

We should not lock up people that we do not like but people who are a threat to real people or does some form of harm to real people.

And this is not proven by any study I am aware of is there one you would care to point/link to?

0 Replies

entrapment or not

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know