Self Styles Paedophile Hunters.

Former senior police officer and child protection expert, Jim Gamble, warned some of the tactics used by the groups are criminal.

"Anyone live streaming these incidents is not about the justice of catching someone who represents a threat to children, they are about the self-publicity and the self-centred approach about themselves, much more than about making children safer," he said.

I'm not sure how he can make that deduction....are police officers armed with psychic powers these days?

OT and tasteless given the topic but still - that reminds me of a funny story - after failing to get a conviction for one assault on me, due to insufficient evidence, the primary officer dealing with the case said to me (paraphrased) "If somebody assaults you again try to film it on your phone". Can you imagine? "Hang on a minute m8, be with you in a minute and then go ahead and hit me...let me just get my phone out and navigate the menus...nearly there...ok filming...and....action!"

Nope - I've decided his suggestion is/was in fact useful. I retract the implication and image in the above post.

A man killed himself three days after being confronted by a "paedophile hunter" group, an inquest has heard.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-43198275

They were in the wrong to post his actual address but not to catch him in the sting. They should have not posted information about him prior to a conviction because it would be classed as contempt of court had the trial already begun. The law in this country is incredibly strict about this and judges take it very seriously indeed and rightfully so too. It is there for a very good reason which is to ensure as fair a trial as possible regardless of the nature of the crime

Generally paedophile hunters only go after men who post persistently to children on social media and know the age of the child in question. The child in question might actually be a paedophile hunter who then arranges a meeting with that man
When they do he is then arrested and all relevant screenshots are handed over to the police

Paedophile hunters are often referred to as vigilantes. This is totally false as they do not physically assault any of the men they catch because they know that that would easily prejudice any subsequent criminal investigation. I have actually seen paedophile hunters intervene when a suspected paedophile has been assaulted by someone. Also every thing is filmed and
so they would simply be incriminating themselves if they were to actually assault anyone

All of the main ones are entirely legitimate and have very good track records for securing convictions. They are an example of the right way to do this type of work. They do not go after anyone based on rumour but hard evidence. They co operate fully with the police. I support their work a hundred per cent even though I no longer watch them anymore because it gets
too depressing after a while watching it even for someone as emotionally detached as me

I sometimes wonder why men engage with children online knowing that they could actually be talking to a paedophile hunter or undercover police officer and also that their screenshots could be used as evidence against them. It is an incredibly stupid thing to do and yet they still do it. Do they seriously think that because they are posting online from the privacy of their own home that they are incapable of ever being caught. Now the internet might be catching more and more paedophiles but it is also creating greater opportunity for them and so it is a double edged sword. But so long as they exist then there will always be the need for paedophile hunters. The police unfortunately cannot do this all on their own

Excellent post sur.

It seems I have decided that I can still post here; but that my "flounce" (nod scott) need manifest as my being disabled from posting anything heavy/academic.

Great idea, you not posting anything heavy/academic will surely encourage the mods to hurry up and penalize Bart for not breaking the FUA!

It certainly wouldn't be the first time somebody here has been reprimanded despite not technically breaching the FUA.

Keep It Real wrote:It certainly wouldn't be the first time somebody here has been reprimanded despite not technically breaching the FUA.

That may be so, as irrelevant as it is to your ridiculous flouncing and dramatics.

Nope, doesn't even tingle.

So the fact that I totally called you being unable to do what you said doesn't mean anything to you at all?

Does not parse SAM.

'Called you' as in 'called it'.

Keep It Real wrote:Does not parse SAM.

Sure it does. Read it extra slow if that helps.

SafeAsMilk wrote:So the fact that I totally called you being unable to do what you said doesn't mean anything to you at all?

I could reply to this; but as I said I'm currently disabled from posting anything heavy/academic.

Keep It Real wrote:

SafeAsMilk wrote:So the fact that I totally called you being unable to do what you said doesn't mean anything to you at all?

I could reply to this; but as I said I'm currently disabled from posting anything heavy/academic.

No academics, just dramatics. But hey, as always, tell yourself whatever you need to hear.

Most of your posts are so very mildly irritating SAM.

To paraphrase Peter Steele, if you aren't pissing anyone off then it isn't rock n' roll. You shouldn't assume it's just rock for rock's sake, though.