Collaboration

Retired police officer nabs Internet predators

Retirement should be the time when you step away from the work world and relax. Retired police chief, Jim Murray intended to do just that. And then he bought a personal computer.

Retirement should be the time when you step away from the work world and relax. Retired police chief Jim Murray intended to do just that. And then he bought a personal computer.

From Yahoo:

[But] the 69-year-old retired police chief of this small Missouri town cuts a credible figure as a 13-year-old girl surfing the Web, looking for friends. He knows all the instant-messaging shorthand, the emoticons.

Murray's retirement job from a rural home office has netted 20 arrests since he started in 2002. His latest catch was the biggest: four felony enticement charges against a town mayor, who after his arrest called Murray up and begged him to make the case go away.

Nineteen other defendants have included a Missouri furniture company executive, an Arkansas professor and a Tulsa, Okla., school security guard. Ten of those men have been convicted and sent to prison. One was deported. The other cases are still pending.

The defendants ranged in age from 24 to 62, with an average age of 39.4 years, and mainly come from Missouri, Arkansas and Oklahoma, Diamond police said.

While the good work that Mr. Murray is doing is obvious, what drew my attention was the fact that, until he retired in 2000, he didn’t have any computer experience. When he discovered chat rooms, he was angered to be offered pictures of young girls.

Continued from Yahoo:

He contacted experts in the field of Internet sting operation and got training from the National White Collar Crime Center on basic computer data recovery.

Now, Murray patrols the Web from a cramped home office divided between his police computer and a personal computer ringed with photos of his six grandchildren and three adult kids.

Murray remains a detective on reserve status with the Diamond police but he donates his investigation time. He says he only spends about 30 minutes a week on average in chats but several hours more going over hard drives of arrested suspects looking for contacts with other potential victims.

It’s good to know that there is life after retirement. It is better to know that there are people out there thinking of the safety of children on the Internet.

As a technology professional, is this kind of work something that you would consider doing after you retire?

141 comments
PeterPac
PeterPac

I posted earlier in the thread but have returned to read the rest of the posts. There are a lot of steps before the actual apprehension of a predator and one must remember just because the person is chatting with a minor does not always make them a predator. We do not just single out one person and wham bang he is in court and it is not entrapment because we do not initiate the contact, they do. They make the overtures, we do not, and everything is recorded and logged. We do not lure, entice nor sound provocative and we certainly do not endanger the well being of any child that is in the chat room. It is a long road from initial contact to an actual apprehension while some do wash out it is the ones that are proven guilty and taken out of population that we know will not be harming another child for many years to come that lead us to continue our search for predators of our children.

The Listed 'G MAN'
The Listed 'G MAN'

keep it up! But how long until it is illegal to pretend to be a 13yo girl on the Internet in the first place?

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

I'd get too emotionally involved. First one I caught I' d be in jail myself for executing the b'stard. Given he's trained up to avoid so called entrapment, I have nothing but admiration for the guy and wish him a long and fruitful retirement. Maybe he should train some unretired police to do it as well, course the guilty who have power can threaten their career and retirement.

NickNielsen
NickNielsen

Forensics would be a challenge I would enjoy. I couldn't stay in character on a chat site though. My first response would be to call the predator a perv and ask him if he's chasing girls because real women won't have anything to do with him.

Jaqui
Jaqui

Use your IT skills to get the ip of the person / people. keep a log of the chat. forward ALL of the information to Their local police department, or the F.B.I. / Interpol ... When I have found child porn sites, I have traced their server, and the owner of the site and sent that information to the appropriate police force. [ usually the site is gone in 24 hours ] My "Kink" interests often has me following links for content that fits the interest, for some reason I seem to find child porn following the links. The offending websites are most commonly owned and based in the U.S.A., where such is illegal under Federal law. ]:) The FBI get my "leads" for investigation, at the office local to the offender. All police departments accept such reports as ground for investigation, give them such grounds and they will easily find sufficient evidence to lay charges.

aaronsapp12
aaronsapp12

I think it is great what he is doing for his community and other communities. It is a great line of work.

Tig2
Tig2

Knowing that there are people in the world like Jim Murray makes me feel just a bit safer. I wish that there were more like him, if only because a retired cop is less likely to trip on any laws when doing this kind of work. But how about you? As a technology professional, can you see yourself doing something similar?

ben@channells
ben@channells

There used to the Criminal Intelligence Squad, High Tech Crime Squad, E-crime unit and Old Flying Squad all doing card fraud, Phissing, eBay scams, child porn and others. for the last 3 years there and been no police activity except for (SOCA)were the crime must be committed by Serious and Organised Criminals. As an police agency they do not enforce law or chase the criminals only provide intelligence to regional police commanders. Even when the perp's were caught there names were not put on the sex offenders list and NO reason why? even when the UK police have been given the evidence there is little or NO action. last big sting 2 years investigating for convictions of 2 years. The exploding GPS collar sounds good, but what if some one is close to them when it goes off!! They could become blood or body part donors ;-)

jdclyde
jdclyde

I know someone (in another state) that found hard core child porn videos on a laptop that he was working on while he was backing up the data. The cops came, looked at the video, and left, leaving the porn saying there usually wasn't much to be done about it. He called the feds, and no one showed up for three days. his shop was broken into in the mean time and all the laptops in the place were taken (accept for this one that he had locked away). To my knowledge, nothing was ever done to the guy that owned the laptop. It all depends on your family connections it seems. I told him that he did all he could and to go on with his life.

The Listed 'G MAN'
The Listed 'G MAN'

when you report, how you came across the site in the first place? EDIT - Sorry that question reads bad - not implying anything here.

shardeth-15902278
shardeth-15902278

Didn't know him very well, but it still was a bit of a suprise ('didn't seem the type.') The truly amazing thing to me - he (and much of his family) think he is the victim. The police conspired against him and tricked him into going to a hotel to meet a 14 year old girl (he's 40something, or maybe 50-something, I forget)... How the #$$% %##!@! Do you rationalize that??!!

DanLM
DanLM

I'm supprized that the civil rights people on this forum have not cried out foul to activities such as this... I can hear these bleading hearts now. First and formost comeing from them would be: It's entrapment. Second and formost, false representation. Me, I'm one of the people that Neon mentioned.. I think preditors(be it hacking or otherwise) should be fried at the steak... Hackers, have a message that pops up saying... your cooked, and then the hard drive goes into a burn spin... shattering. The scum that prey on children, they have no rights in my eyes... None, none at all... Sorry... I could care less if the law was broken to capture this type of scum. Some say, turn the other cheak.. I would turn my eyes as they torture the scum so they could do it with immunity. Dan

Canuckster
Canuckster

I have actually considered it. Problem is, at what point do I become an illegal operation? If someone offers me kiddy porn, its not a crime until I accept it (only hearsay or joke until then), but once I accepet it I am guilty of possession and the sender guilty of distribution. I would need some legal protection. Arranging a meet only ends in a positive way if I can get the police to show up in my place and I have enough evidence to allow them to make an arrest, etc. Finding the bad guys is not a problem, its being able to do something about it that is the problem.

brian.mills
brian.mills

w00t! It's nice to see someone from my home state making such a difference. It's also nice to see someone not afraid to learn something new, even after reaching retirement age. I don't think I could do something like that in my retirement years, because I'd end up on the vigilante justice side of things. I'd end up causing more problems than I solved. I could offer up free tech support to people like this Murray guy, though.

Neon Samurai
Neon Samurai

If he can manage to remain within the law, provide due process and identify child predators while managing to not become just another vigilanty then that is a heck of a retirnment hobby. Many in geekdom that I've talked too would love to instate vigilanty law on the internet ("you released a virus, we will now burn out your computer through the network link. have a nice day.") but that skips due process effecing innocent people as much as criminal behavior in it's zeal for self imposed justice. (We all love Batman but in the real world it doesn't work) I know I personaly don't have the legal background to make a hobby of hunting criminals through the internet but if this guy is managing to do so in partnership with unretired police forces then; "Go Get'em Master Chief" (Edit) I also wouldn't be disapointed to hear that those found guilty of child abuse arrived in prison to find out that the "rumour" had already "gotten around" ahead of them.

Absolutely
Absolutely

the collar should contract, not explode. So as not to traumatize any minors in the vicinity, it should do so slowly enough that parents can get their children out of sight while the perp begins to suffocate. Call it "a seizure" until they're old enough to be told the truth. In reality, life in prison should be the maximum possible sentence. There is never going to be a sure-fire means of proving that everybody on death row was not convicted on false charges. Besides, execution costs more to taxpayers, and criminals should be pressed into menial factory jobs instead of having televisions.

Jaqui
Jaqui

local laws, federal laws, state laws, it's often a quagmire to figure out for the US. That's why I would grab the hidden history off the computer and try to find the websites ( if any ), that way the legal process can start going after the distributors. if he got it from p2p, then grabbing the logs and tracking the sources down in that is much harder. I can understand why the local law enforcement don't want to invest that level of resources into a very small return. kind of like the DEA just chasing down the street level dealers instead of tying to cut the action off at the source.

Jaqui
Jaqui

since I tell them that in the report. :D I'm pretty sure that if I didn't tell them how and why, they would ask. I'm also pretty sure that by reporting it, I'm helping improve the impression law enforcement has of the kink communities. If we are all as bad as some think, I wouldn't be reporting it.

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

for being a stupid waste of valuable resources like oxygen and stuff. They never look like child molesters, and it always comes out as a shock. THEN people start remembering well he was a bit weird.... Aside from ops like this the only way to detect a child molester is to look for molested kids. If one or two complete dumb f'ks get caught as well, WTF...

Absolutely
Absolutely

Enforcement of statute is preferable to expansion of statute.

hbgmike
hbgmike

I think many people don't understand the definition of "entrapment." Entrapment is when Agents of the Government compell someone to commit a crime they would not otherwise have committed. A person can be online all day and not have a propensity to engage in sexual conversation with a 13 year old child, despite anything that could be done or promised. These people are online for the specific purpose of preying upon children. There are two ways this problem can be addressed, without infringing up peoples "rights" to indulge in their quirks. One, wait until a child disappears, and then try to figure out who did it or two, pro active police work. Basically fishing, and pulling these predetors out of society, hopefully before they become emboldened enough to touch a child outside of the cyber world they are fantasizing in. They already have the thought process in mind when they engage in conversation with the child/police agent

jdclyde
jdclyde

is everytime some sleazy politician starts hiding behind "it is for the children", it sets off the bu11sh1t detector. There are ways to do this, but it doesn't include illegal search and seasure or invasion of guaranteed RIGHTS. It does bother me when there is VIDEO proof that someone committed a crime, but it is not allowed in court because of a technicality. Lawyers should not be ALLOWED to plead someone not-guilty if they KNOW they are guilty. That is purgery in my book because it is INTENTIONALLY lying in court.

PeterPac
PeterPac

This is one area of the internet that needs more support. Parents need to teach their children about on line predators and we must develop better safeguards for children. The internet is a good learning tool and we cannot lock our children out because of predators. I also became involved after a neighbor's child became a victim of a predator. One might say we are entraping or violating their privacy but to the ones who say that, wait till your child becomes a victim than see if we are. This is one person who will always be behind and supporting people like you. Do the crime and you can do the time.

TonytheTiger
TonytheTiger

if the perv initiates the solicitation. Also since he's a private citizen, he doesn't have to protect civil liberties to the extent a policeman does. To get rid of the other potential problem, falsification, have a real child create the account and put truthful information in the profile, have them log in, then leave the room and let the ex-cop take over.

Dumphrey
Dumphrey

beliver (freedom == responsibility), and I see no problems with the steps reported. My problem is in the attitude that gives the legal and enforcement branches of our government carte blanche to do what they will. Maybe 80% of those thus convicted will actually be guilty, and YOU may end up part of the 20% convicted anyway. This is the attitude that leads to National Identity Cards and a surrender of Privacy and Constitutional Rights... Oh... Wait... too late.

wmlundine
wmlundine

...and the atrocious spelling is becoming all too predictable.

PSer
PSer

Dan, I am a little surprised that you think so little of us bleeding heart, civil liberty, long-haired, pot smokin? hippy, pinko fagg0t types. As a card-carrying member of this group, I see no problem with what the retired officer is doing. Truth is I see no problem at all with any cyber crime being dealt with by cyber means. Sounds like this guy is doing everything he would in a ?real world? investigation of any crime or potential crime. Giving the perp. enough rope to hang himself by his own actions, nothing more nothing less. My wife is a Licensed Counselor and 100% of her clients are either victims of and/or parents of victims of child abuse. We met working at the same Non-Profit where she worked with ?at risk youth? (I was the Network Admin). Most of our volunteer work revolves around the issue of child abuse. We fly the colors of the local chapter of B.A.C.A (Biker?s Against Child Abuse) We may disagree on many issues (not sure which ones but your post implies as much) but this isn?t one of ?em! I have no political agendas or ulterior motives whatsoever, when it comes to child abuse of any kind and neither should anyone else. ?Anyone who hurts a child is gonna burn until their done!? - Ray Wylie Hubbard

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

one of these parties, I'll tend for the burger concession, and hire out wire brushes on the side.

boxfiddler
boxfiddler

provide free popcorn, and then raffle the proceeds to child abuse agencies! "I would turn my eyes as they torture the scum so they could do it with immunity." edit, edit, edit, cripes

The Scummy One
The Scummy One

Me, I wouldnt just turn my eyes away, I would be more likely to bring a toolbox-o-fun :0

Tig2
Tig2

Is that he works in conjunction with police agencies and with knowledge of the law. The time he spends doing this work is a donation on his part but is done with the knowledge of the police force that he used to be the chief of. You're right. This kind of work can only be undertaken with that level of protection in front.

alex.kashko
alex.kashko

Is he not in danger of acting as an agent provocateur? Supposing one of the defendants says he was led on by the ex cop and persuaded to do things he would otherwise not have done?

Forum Surfer
Forum Surfer

Yes, those do leak out alot. My uncle is a prison guard, and people that perform sex crimes against children are often punished severely by fellow inmates. I can't think of anything that would really be "too far" IMO. People that performs crimes, especially sex crimes against children are the worst part of our society and deserve whatever horrible punishment happens to them whether it's through the justice system (never harsh enough) or fellow inmates. Speaking of which, I'm sick and tired of hearing them whine about sex offendor registries for the rest of their lives. The rest of society does need to know there is a sick puppy next door. The child has to deal with it for the rest off their life, so the criminal should too. ::End Rant::

Locrian_Lyric
Locrian_Lyric

My neurology prevents me from being an effective liar.

Absolutely
Absolutely

"You guessed it." Who did? Not me...

santeewelding
santeewelding

Guy came in with a plastic shopping bag. Looked both ways as if to see who might be listening. "I don't know if you do anything like this, but..." You guessed it.

Absolutely
Absolutely

[i]The unions would complain.[/i] Also, free labor from prisons would interfere with the free market, which I wouldn't like, either. That goes into the category "good idea, if you don't think about it."

TonytheTiger
TonytheTiger

[i]and criminals should be pressed into menial factory jobs[/i] The unions would complain :)

Absolutely
Absolutely

... I meant only whatever menial jobs are unwanted after the "law abiding types who want them" get our pick. [i]Make the criminals do tv station demographic quizzes after being subjected to non stop daytime tv in 24 hour stetches. We could also put them to answering all cold calling telephone sales people. Twenty years of that will be a real deterrent.[/i] Yes, that is the type of work I mean; cleaning sewers, and whatever else good, honest people least want to do.

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

to law abiding types who want them instead of welfare. Make the criminals do tv station demographic quizzes after being subjected to non stop daytime tv in 24 hour stetches. We could also put them to answering all cold calling telephone sales people. Twenty years of that will be a real deterrent.

Jessie
Jessie

explicitly states that any child porn peddlar's personal information will be passed on to their local authorities, the files removed, and the user banned from the site. I think he's only actually had to report someone once, and I'm not sure what came of it.

Jaqui
Jaqui

could also be that the cop likes child porn. could be it was adult made up to look like a child. since I never saw it, I'm not going to second guess the actual content, or the actions of the officer. your friend could have taken the officer's badge number and reported the incident, getting the officer investigated as well. [ which is what I would do. ] maybe we are lucky here in Canada, the child porn laws explicitly do not recognize a difference in computer generated images and photos, so even something that only ever existed as bits on a hard drive and was created with 3d software is illegal if it presents as child porn.

jdclyde
jdclyde

as the local cop WATCHED the video, and then LEFT it there! WTF????? He didn't want to deal with all the paperwork.

jdclyde
jdclyde

And of course, the belts all have the same explosives as Pipers belt did....

TonytheTiger
TonytheTiger

[i]a male chastity belt should be installed[/i] Although it's what most people think of, most reported molestations don't involve penetration. It's more of a thought crime. If you help a boy up on a horse by placing a hand under his buttocks and boosting him up, it's fine. If you gain sexual satisfaction from doing it, it's molestation.

Absolutely
Absolutely

Instead of cutting anything off, a male chastity belt should be installed. I leave the details to be resolved by registered nurses and welders.

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

bloke, he's going to be upset. If he's dead this will be much less of a concern.

boxfiddler
boxfiddler

make 'em live without that handy dandy gadget for a picnic.

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

at ignoring that sort of thing, or coming up with some lame excuse, or suggesting that they've done their time and now they are 'cured' I'd cure'em, flat out guarantee they won't try it again, not unless they get reincarnated. No intentional offense to any believers amongst us, but may be if the guy remembered why he came back as a sh1tfly this time round, he might learn something.

shardeth-15902278
shardeth-15902278

I just was amazed that he - and even more amazed that his family - believed he was an innocent dupe in this. It was absolutely baffling to me that they could make that rationalization. He drove several hours, to a different state to meet (what he believed to be) an underage girl at a hotel. And somehow he was the victim??!! I realize you stick up for family,and give them the benefit of the doubt and all, but at some point an overwhelming reality can't be ignored, can it??

TonytheTiger
TonytheTiger

get rid of children's services by enforcing abuse and neglect laws.

TonytheTiger
TonytheTiger

[i]Good root cause analysis, with just enough conspiracy theory to meet Internet standards.[/i] The problem is: the people who have the power to do anything about couldn't possibly know about it, because they don't associate with the people who illustrate it. These are the the same people who want to claim credit for raising a lot of OPM to "help the poor", but wouldn't let one of (eww!) [b]THEM[/b] into their home. To them, entitlements are not humanitarian aid... they're "protection" money.

NickNielsen
NickNielsen

[i]I was torn when ThingTwo was taken to the Homecoming dance by a senior. There was the "attaboy!" instinct, which was mellowed by the "don't knock her up" instinct.[/i] My oldest son dated seniors his first three years of high school and went to all three proms with them. I offered condoms and he said the girls provided...I spent all three years worried about becoming a grandfather. For whatever reason, he dated an 8th-grader during his senior year. :0 That brought different worries! Edit: the usual

jdclyde
jdclyde

When you take the "they are going to anyways" approach, you have to watch the fine line between providing information and providing encouragement and validation. That was what I MEANT with my "natural" comment. My bad for not being clearer as to my meaning. Meant perfect sense to me at the time.... ;\ I do not understand why people would EVER encourage sex for the very early teens. I have personally talked to my boys (15) and explained the birds and the bees. I then gave them each a box of condoms stating I would prefer they waited, but the box would be replaced, no questions asked if they did anyways. And yes, to cut on the embarrassment factor, I talked to them individually. I was torn when ThingTwo was taken to the Homecoming dance by a senior. There was the "attaboy!" instinct, which was mellowed by the "don't knock her up" instinct.

NickNielsen
NickNielsen

I was assuming a perfect world (yes, I know...). My personal feeling on the matter is that birth control should be available without legal restriction from the start of sexual activity, whether it be 14 or 24. If that means little Janie doesn't need parental permission to go on the pill, so be it. As you pointed out, not all kids have adequate parental supervision. The other was merely an observation; I'm not sure how it attaches strings. If you are referring to "in the context of," that, to me, is simply the most responsible sex ed program: the reproductive system and mechanics of sex, the potential consequences of sex (pregnancy, disease, etc.), eliminating the risks by not having sex, and minimizing the risks if you're going to have sex. Making parents responsible for their children's conduct is indeed, probably too much to ask.

Absolutely
Absolutely

[i]Edited to add in liberals that are teaching sex ed as if sex is perfectly natural...[/i] Sex is perfectly natural! Unlike Trix, it is not for kids, but it is perfectly natural. [i]...and then hands birth control pills to 12 year old girls without the parents knowing about it. After all, we can't have the rate of knocked up teens go down, or we lose our future welfare class, and the voter base that goes with it.[/i] Good root cause analysis, with just enough conspiracy theory to meet Internet standards. ;-)

Absolutely
Absolutely

[i]The problem is that too many parents forget how they got that way and think ignorance (theirs!) is bliss. They either don't want to know that little Janie is doing it or Daddy's proud as h3ll that little Johnny's "gettin' some."[/i] Why would you attach strings to their kids' information? [i]Don't have a problem with sex ed as sex ed, as long as the context is "this is how it works, these methods of preventing pregnancy exist, but the only truly effective method is not to do it! Ask your parents to obtain or approve birth control if you are going to do it."[/i] Some kids have adequate parental supervision. Assuming that all of them do when we know that some of them don't, might just add to the problems, including the expanding welfare class jd mentioned.

NickNielsen
NickNielsen

Hey, here in SC, we get the shorts with "c0cks" across the butt! Now [u]that's[/u] a sight! Makes me want to ask a certain personal question... Don't have a problem with sex ed as sex ed, as long as the context is "this is how it works, these methods of preventing pregnancy exist, but the only truly effective method is not to do it! Ask your parents to obtain or approve birth control if you are going to do it." The problem is that too many parents forget how they got that way and think ignorance (theirs!) is bliss. They either don't want to know that little Janie is doing it or Daddy's proud as h3ll that little Johnny's "gettin' some."

jdclyde
jdclyde

look at the advertisers, look at the media, look at the movies, look at the pathetic parents. They all do it, and it is very disturbing. What scum would buy their 12 year old girl shorts that say "juicy" on the ass? Why would you put ANYTHING on their asses? Why are you intentionally calling attention to their asses? If you do this, you should be ashamed of yourself. No, I don't find it attractive in women either. Tacky and crude while not being clever at all. Edited to add in liberals that are teaching sex ed as if sex is perfectly natural and then hands birth control pills to 12 year old girls without the parents knowing about it. After all, we can't have the rate of knocked up teens go down, or we lose our future welfare class, and the voter base that goes with it.

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

so the local squire wouldn't have to face the prospect of being judged by those he'd preyed on. Especially the parents of the young girls and sometimes boys he 'borrowed' The british in general have far less reverence for law than the average american, I personally have none whatsoever. My favourite recent example that show my utter contempt for what it has become is this one. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4291388.stm If you want more things to cry over as a Brit I recomemnd the Scott report particularly the part around Public Immunity Certificates. Of course the all time classic is that of the Guildford four, not that they beaten into confessions, not that the evidence was manipulated, not that they found guilty by their 'peers', not that they were given mandatory life sentences, not that they were labelled as murdering terrorists and stuck in general population. Not even that early appeals were consistenty quashed in an unsoken conspiracy to cover up this mess. What I find truly fascinating is that the three police officers deemed responsible for this were NOT tried on the basis that it could not be fair because everybody knew that were guilty. Now somebody explain to me where the justice is in that, because I'm missing something. Couldn't find 12 bent police officers to sit on the jury? Statistically unlikely in my opinion.

TonytheTiger
TonytheTiger

if your not human, humans have no right to judge you (jury of peers and all that).

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

They know it's likely that if they admitted it they'd get punched out. Except to their lawyer of course, or their bishop or some numb nuts gooder. To be fair some of them might have been victims, but that's a reason not an excuse. We all do things we know are wrong (at least according to some), if you can cross the line and see a child as a sexual object though, as far as I'm concerned you stopped being human, all rules suspended. I wish there was a reliable test, I'd make everyone take it and then stamp the result on their forehead. Would n't have to be a big long word, five letters would do Human or Human with strike through. I'd be proud to wear mine.

boxfiddler
boxfiddler

that promotes 'criminal as victim'. As long as that mentality pervades the public mind, crime will flourish. With the exception of a rare case here and there I can't for the life of me bring myself to accept that pedophiles don't know they are doing something wrong. If they don't know it is wrong, why do they hide it?

NickNielsen
NickNielsen

But I've noticed there are people who believe that anything law enforcement does to get a criminal to reveal himself is entrapment. I've also noticed that these are the same people who believe it's not the criminal's fault.

TonytheTiger
TonytheTiger

The defense attorney's job is to make sure the prosecutor does his correctly.

santeewelding
santeewelding

Criminal defense is prosecution of the people, and what they (we) are of a mind to do. This is the whole other half of what goes. The defendant is only along for the ride.

TonytheTiger
TonytheTiger

Even confessed criminals are entitled to a defense. That defense might not be to determine guilt... maybe to argue for a lenient sentence, or to argue "guilty, but....".

jdclyde
jdclyde

perjury is looked upon more harshly, especially if done by a lawyer, than many crimes because it undermines the legal system as a whole. Scooter Libby anyone? In jail for allegedly lying about something that wasn't a crime in the first place, when the prosecutor had already KNOWN who the leak was before Scooter even was questioned. I see chaos.

Tig2
Tig2

I was using Safari last night as Firefox had been being a pain. I guess I won't try that again! Thanks for the heads up!

Absolutely
Absolutely

I have no problem with any of that. My message to JD is mainly that whatever he's proposing ought to apply first to defendants, and only secondarily, if at all, to lawyers. I think lawyers' neutrality is generally good as-is. The problem is the way criminals are coddled once convicted, not their advocates.

Absolutely
Absolutely

They're being displayed all "weird".

Tig2
Tig2

I know that it is considered an ethical breach to actively participate in the defense of someone you KNOW to be guilty. I believe that it is also against the law. Where it can become slippery is determining what constitutes sufficient knowledge to require an attorney to recuse him or her self. It can be argued that the only way for an attorney to have sufficient knowledge, the attorney would have to be guilty of participating in the crime. In other words, unless the attorney was present at the commission of the crime, there would be no way to know with certainty of the defendants guilt.

Absolutely
Absolutely

[i]Lawyers should not be ALLOWED to plead someone not-guilty if they KNOW they are guilty. That is purgery in my book because it is INTENTIONALLY lying in court.[/i] It's the job of lawyers to represent their clients, period. Never punish an accomplice or accessory to any crime harder than the primary perpetrator. That leads to chaos.

DanLM
DanLM

of national id's.... The blame for the extremes that might happen, or the glory for stopping any horrendous attack should be applied to everyone. Both democrat and republicans. I agree with a standard id, just because I believe in standards for everything that is universally used. What makes id's any different. Dan

jdclyde
jdclyde

right now, here in Michigan, it is ILLEGAL to walk around without picture ID, and it has been that way as long as I can remember. I don't see anything wrong with that. Making the card good nation wide is a problem how? why is there so much "private" information readily available able? look to the many lawsuits by groups like the ACLU that have demanded the opening of records to the public. Knowing who people are is not an invasion of privacy. Going into someones home without a VALID reason, and protections in place to keep bad cops from planting evidence are all good things. It is too bad that as a society we care more about animals than we do about people. The DNR officers can walk into your home without a warrant if you are suspected of poaching, take all the meat in your freezer, your guns, any gear you MIGHT have used to poach with, and of course they will take you with them. If it was a PERSON hacked up and in the freezer, they would have to have a warrant saying what they are looking for and where they are looking.

wmlundine
wmlundine

...or minutiae if you prefer, is that pointy place where you put your cap.

wmlundine
wmlundine

...they get bogged down in minutia. You might better wonder why exchange ending epithets are even needed in a forum such as this and how often they can be used to invoke terminus in one thread.

Absolutely
Absolutely

The "A" & your "H" both derive from a single word, don't they? Or, did you mean to call him "accomplished human?"

DanLM
DanLM

I could have responded to the last post and didn't. Dan

chrisbedford
chrisbedford

Like all religious arguments, like all religious wars, there is no winner. The more each one takes the moral high ground, the more the other does the same. Neither of you is paying the scantest bit of attention to the other's argument; both of you are repeating yourselves; you both went w-a-a-a-a-y off topic long ago; and the rest of us are tired of it, already. So be good children now, give up. YOU'VE MADE YOUR POINT. No, you will NOT change his mind, so STOP TRYING. OK? Please? Tigger's asked you nicely already, you had already said too much by then, but you still insisted on repeating yourself AGAIN afterwards, WHAT'S THE POINT!!!

wmlundine
wmlundine

...in a L. Frank Baum fairy tale. You are the Straw Man, the Tin Man and the Cowardly Lion all rolled into one. FOADAH

DanLM
DanLM

How many billions do you now see in state coffers because of this suit which is directed at children and health issues. Moron. Now deal with my issue with you. Prove me wrong that your an uncaring self centered individual who feels his life and privacy is more important then any ones else. Dan

wmlundine
wmlundine

...if you really want to save some kids...take on the tobacco industry.

DanLM
DanLM

Is more important then a life. Never. They need to be shown how uncaring and self centered they are. Others need to know what a menace they really are. Would you want a friend who feels this way? Would you want someone that has that attitude to possibly have your life in their hands? Or someone you love to be at the mercy of someone like this? Their wim... Hmmmm, should I protect this person or is my personal safety more important? If he feels his privacy is more important, then you know he will chose himself over anyone else. No, I do not expect you to answer that. But, I will not back away from this person. I have watched my language. I have stated explicitly why I don't like him. I have stated explicitly why I feel he is a menace to society. This person is as dangerous as any child molester because of his total disregard of others lives. It's about him, and nobody else. No, I won't back off.

DanLM
DanLM

No child deserves a father like you. By your comments here, you have shown how little respect you have for life. You shouldn't be trusted with anothers. I can say my position saves lives, can you say the same? Who is the one without a brain? The one who holds a position to protect a life, or the one that holds a position that doesn't care. Dan

Tig2
Tig2

I understand that you both have strong feelings. But attacking one another is not the best way to express them. Let's not do this, please. Thank you.

DanLM
DanLM

precious privacy is more important then anything or anyone else. Let the children die and be abused, your previous privacy is so more important then that small detail. Your disgusting. Dan

wmlundine
wmlundine

...you changed your name but not your modus operandi.

DanLM
DanLM

You just proved my point and are a primary example of why I have this attitude. You quibble over spelling when my position is fully justified. You don't even have the caring to justify your position of why this is a knee jerk response. That in itself shows how little you care about others or the conversation that is being had here. You wouldn't happen to be the idiot who I had the previous conversation with would you? Your privacy so much more improtant then a childs welfare? Dan

Absolutely
Absolutely

I disagree with that decision, but I respect your right to waste your keystrokes. I happen to share your opinion, on the particular verbiage I've seen, but wmlundine isn't worth it. He's parodying a legitimate concern, that the fear for the children trumps all other rights, and gets used to permit ridiculous levels of surveillance on everybody regardless of whether suspicion is "reasonable." Personally, I think he's perverting the civil liberties position and the famous line about letting 10 guilty men go free rather than hanging one innocent man. On you, he is predictably having the effect of sullying that view of justice, by false association with himself. Look at your own first post. You lump all civil libertarians and privacy advocates in with wmlundine. What result would be more desirable to somebody who wants to spy on you than to have you oppose, knee-jerk style, all things "civil libertarian"? I think you're arguing against a straw man, which wmlundine creates to encourage you to be suspicious of your essential liberties, to encourage you to hand them over voluntarily, one-by-one. edit:

wmlundine
wmlundine

...said the Cowardly Lion...before the straw man got a brain and Tinny a real heart.

DanLM
DanLM

If I hung myself, so be it. But at least it only affected me. And not like him, where innocent children are affected by his position. It should be him instead of some innocent child, it's as simple as that. What bothers me is I can't track down a link to the comment he made in march of last year during a discussion just like this one that totally disgusted me with him. I have emails with AV where I discussed it with her, but the search on here just won't pull it up. His comment as noted in my email was he would rather see a molester go free then give up his freedoms. That, is why I am so volatile in my responses to him. I wish the hell I could find that discussion. I'm going to search google for it, you have to see what type of scum this guy really is. Dan

Absolutely
Absolutely

[i]I'm surprised that the civil rights people on this forum have not cried out foul to activities such as this... I can hear these bleeding hearts now. First and foremost coming from them would be: It's entrapment.[/i] So, firstly, why attribute that to all civil rights people? Second, why put any words in anybody's mouth? Somebody made a similar argument, using the term "agent provocateur," without any prompting from you, but you stole his rope, and hung yourself.

wmlundine
wmlundine

...sitting in a circle? Is this limited to ego stroking? Are you serious? Just asking.

DanLM
DanLM

And I know that just because a person has a differing political view does not make them a bad person. And that you should never catagorize people just because of their political beleifs. Your right, I took the flame bait hook line and sinker. Dumb is as dumb does. I was dumb, and my reactions reflect that. And actually, I did go back through my posts from last year and this person was exactly who I thought it was. Dan

Absolutely
Absolutely

That sounds like the character of an anarchist, encouraging you to beg the state for Fascism or some similarly unaccountable level of regulation-of-all, knowing that bloated government taxes its taxbase, then itself, into poverty, leaving a void, "anarchy." Really, nobody with any philosophical basis for their political allegiance is against this kind of investigation. Somebody was just flame-baiting you, and you're still p!ssed about it, and ticking off honest, bleeding-heart pinko dopes who fully agree with you about busting predators.

DanLM
DanLM

Where I had an individual tell me in so many words that they felt this type of activity was such an intrusion on privacy, that this should be outlawed... That it was entrapment, and should not be allowed. This conversation dealt with full time police officers posing as children. I flat out asked the individual if he thought his precious privacy was that much more important then a child's life and welfare, they said yes. This person admitted to being left leaning in their political beliefs. yes, you are absolutely correct. That was a very large categorization on my part. But that conversation still haunts me. The type of abuse that is being discussed here is so horrendous in my eyes, the actions being taken to stop it are not even close to being entrapment in this example. If you find yourself in the wrong chat room, and someone tells you they are a child... If you are not guilty, you should say I'm sorry and leave. Otherwise, that is exactly what you are looking for. Children. I'm sorry, I can't understand anyone that feels they are more important then stopping that type of activity. I apologies for capturing you in this broad categorization, and your absolutely correct. It is to broad of a brush stroke. Dan

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

would take your card off you for saying that. There's a standing order for me to have mine removed anytime I appear on american soil. :p Apparently I'm not a real socialist.

Locrian_Lyric
Locrian_Lyric

The perp would have as much of a chance with that defense as "The devil made me do it!"

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

to have sex with a child, is a provocation. As long as he's up front about who he's purporting to be, there is no entrapment argument. Or are you saying that if presented with the opportunity of a willing minor, you would take it up. ?????? No, then what are you saying?

NickNielsen
NickNielsen

For child predators, the arrest, in most cases, is made when the perv shows at the agreed-upon meeting site. [u][b]Not[/b][/u] a lot of wiggle room there...

Absolutely
Absolutely

There are not a whole lot of "extenuating circumstances" coming to mind, though, that excuse the old pervs we're talking about here. Now, if an actual underage female lied about her age and said she was an adult, well, that would be a new thread.

TonytheTiger
TonytheTiger

[i]a cop *could* give you a summons for both offences.[/i] The offense is "speed unsafe for conditions" (xx in a yy zone being one of the 'conditions'), so you'll only get one ticket :) (as info: The posted speed is the upper limit. In Ohio, the lower limit is 15 mph below that unless you're slowing to make a legal turn or to obey a traffic control device or a public safety officer's directions.)

Absolutely
Absolutely

But for driving [u][b]a[/b][/u] drunk? What about taxi drivers? Can they get tickets if their fares are over the legal limit? Ridiculous, and I think L_L is making that up.

Locrian_Lyric
Locrian_Lyric

Technically, yes. you could get a ticket under those circumstances. Chances are, you won't though. You could also get two tickets simultaneously, one for speeding, and one for driving too slowly. Edited to add: I know this because I worked for six years in traffic safety. Let's say the speed limit is 55, the traffic around you is going 65 and you are going 60. At that point, you are technically in violation of two traffic statutes. 1)Failure to maintain speed with flow of traffic. 2)Failure to obey posted speed limit. a cop *could* give you a summons for both offences.

TonytheTiger
TonytheTiger

[i]You can be both arrested and convicted for drunk driving if you are in a place where you can reach your vehicle and you have the key to that vehicle on your person.[/i] So my wife is driving me home because I'm ".09". I have a spare key to the car in my wallet :)

NickNielsen
NickNielsen

I don't know about other states, but [u]attempting[/u] to solicit a child is a crime in SC: [i]SECTION 16-15-342. Criminal solicitation of a minor; defenses; penalties. [SC ST SEC 16-15-342] (A) A person eighteen years of age or older commits the offense of criminal solicitation of a minor if he knowingly contacts or communicates with, or attempts to contact or communicate with, a person who is under the age of eighteen, or a person reasonably believed to be under the age of eighteen, for the purpose of or with the intent of persuading, inducing, enticing, or coercing the person to engage or participate in a sexual activity as defined in Section 16-15-375(5) or a violent crime as defined in Section 16-1-60, or with the intent to perform a sexual activity in the presence of the person under the age of eighteen, or person reasonably believed to be under the age of eighteen.[/i] http://www.scstatehouse.net/code/t16c015.htm As I read it, if the predator posts in a juvenile chat room or forum in an attempt to make contact, he's attempting to solicit. Edit: fixed link

TonytheTiger
TonytheTiger

[i]In my state, if you are in a car and drunk, and have the keys in your physicall posession, you can be arrested, tried and convicted, even if you are in the back seat sleeping it off in the bar's parking lot.[/i] Here, the worst you could get from sleeping it off in the bar parking lot (private property) is a trespassing charge and only then if the owner objects!

TonytheTiger
TonytheTiger

[i]He does not charge the police for what he is doing. He's retired. He works with the police to help them both track predators and convict them.[/i] And as being "not a police officer", he has (and should have!) greater latitude in "preventing" crime. I still am not comfortable with the "since the subject is not propositioning a real minor, but someone who is pretending to be a minor" thing. I have the same lack of comfort with cops pretending to be prostitutes, and cops selling oregano as marijuana. What I might be more comfortable with is for him to pretend to be a minor, get propositioned, alert the police, then have the police get a warrant to observe the subject's online activity, then when he propositions a [b]real[/b] minor, grab him.

Locrian_Lyric
Locrian_Lyric

In my state, if you are in a car and drunk, and have the keys in your physicall posession, you can be arrested, tried and convicted, even if you are in the back seat sleeping it off in the bar's parking lot.

Tig2
Tig2

He does not charge the police for what he is doing. He's retired. He works with the police to help them both track predators and convict them.

Tig2
Tig2

You can be both arrested and convicted for drunk driving if you are in a place where you can reach your vehicle and you have the key to that vehicle on your person. You have the ability and the intent, therefore can be arrested.

TonytheTiger
TonytheTiger

[i]The predator, by soliciting children for the intent of having sex[/i] But he isn't soliciting a child, is he? He's soliciting a cop who is pretending to be a child. I have a problem with an agent of the government being deceptive for the purpose of generating a crime which he can then solve. That's why government is so big... we let them create their own jobs!

Forum Surfer
Forum Surfer

In my state, if you have your keys in the ignition or in hand when you are in the car that's a DUI (I suppose sitting in your driveway would be an exception)...granted a good lawyer can argue anything, but that's the rule. So if you sit down to get your favorite CD...don't forget to toss your keys out the window.

NickNielsen
NickNielsen

One answer to (I hope) everybody: As I understand the process, the cop is not trolling the chat room, but monitoring until he detects certain activity normally associated with a child predator (apparently the electronic equivalent of "Candy, little girl?" ), when he slips into character and responds. The predator, by soliciting children for the intent of having sex, has [u]already[/u] broken the law. Under the law, all actions taken after that point are part of the investigation of that crime. In short, I simply don't see any threat to the Constitution or our rights by this gentleman posing as an underage girl to a person soliciting underage girls for sex. Edit: grammar-check failure

Absolutely
Absolutely

j: [i]You stated you can't arrest someone for drinking and driving until they actually drive. True.[/i] I believe that [u]turning the ignition[/u] while intoxicated is sufficient proof of intent. Tony's analogy holds, as-is. * A drunk might legitimately sit down in the driver's seat, to retrieve a CD or other item from its car, while intoxicated. The burden of proof should be high, but not higher than engaging drive gear or undoing the parking brake on a manual transmission, which has no "parking gear."

wmlundine
wmlundine

...that you are a friggin' liar if you pretend to not know the answer to your "innocent" question. NN, "Who me"?

Forum Surfer
Forum Surfer

TonytheTiger, I mean no disrespect and I see your point, but here is my take on this. You stated you can't arrest someone for drinking and driving until they actually drive. True. However, if a low life is trolling for underage girls...he is already initiating the crime. He's already thought it out, now he is trying to find a victim...just by using the anonymity of the internet as opposed to trolling the playground. He's in the act of committing a crime by soliciting the alleged victim, and if he actually meets the cop in person...he was well on his way to committing the crime. None of his constitutional rights were violated.

TonytheTiger
TonytheTiger

[i]Is law enforcement not allowed to try to prevent crime? I'm not seeing the logic.[/i] Police's job is not to "prevent" crime, it is to [b]detect[/b] crime and then (try to) apprehend the offenders (that's why, for example, they can't arrest drunk drivers [b]until[/b] they get in their car and drive away). I think that there are big constitutional problems with some of what the police are doing. "Good intentions" may make it popular, but it doesn't make it right!

Forum Surfer
Forum Surfer

Lol...so, if this retired cop is trolling and we were to think of that as unconstitutional (which I do not)...wouldn't that make trolling on any message board unconstitutional? If trolling becomes criminal, the message boards anywhere won't be very crowded. :)

NickNielsen
NickNielsen

but how is this an attack on the Constitution? If a child predator is trolling teen-age (or younger) chat rooms, he's most likely doing so with the intent to commit a crime. Is law enforcement not allowed to try to prevent crime? I'm not seeing the logic. edit: spell

wmlundine
wmlundine

...not mine; but then my founding fathers were not also my founding brothers.

jdclyde
jdclyde

The rape and forcing, yes, but a lot of the people are busted for "underage" consensual, which is something we as a society is not acceptable, so have made it illegal. 200 years ago, 12 year olds were still getting married, and in someplaces here in the US, I believe as low as 14 still can. And we in the "Western Cultures" are the ones held up to the world as the decadent ones, while they still allow a lot of this.

TonytheTiger
TonytheTiger

I mostly agree with you. If one has indeed "done their time", one should be under no more restriction or scrutiny than any other ex-con. If they haven't "done their time", put them back in. (and no, it wasn't a serious suggestion, given the fact that this particular category of crime generates the overwhelming majority of false convictions in this country, and I certainly would not be a proponent of executing possibly innocent persons!)

Forum Surfer
Forum Surfer

wouldn't have addressed the issue, lol...they would have taken the predator out back and executed him on the spot. Such evil was recognized and dealt with swiftly and harshly in those times. Give 'em a fair trial and execute them...no chance for repeat offenses.

wmlundine
wmlundine

...but in the same breath I must question the wisdom of those who would use a parents worst nightmare to attack the Constitution. We have managed to fight crime and defend the Constitution for some 200+ years. Will our generation be the one that abandons the fight?

shardeth-15902278
shardeth-15902278

I think you may have sold me on that. I'm not a fan of paying tax dollars for their room and board, so I'd favor a labor camp over a prison... What about the wrongfully accused? I guess a wrongful life-sentence is better than a wrongful execution (Though some might disagree, particularly the wrongfully accused who spends x-years in prison, with criminals, losing a potentially significant portion of his life). Still, of all the (rational) options... Okay, you have my vote.

santeewelding
santeewelding

The heartfelt here is as strong as felt in other relations between any one of us and another, any one of us and the rest, and -- in particular -- the rest of us with respect to any one of us. It is for that third instance you propose Constitutional treatment. At the moment, the closest that document gets is our resolve of How to go about instances of the rest of us with respect to any one of us. You propose a What. I see the line forming even now, each with his What.

Absolutely
Absolutely

[i]Validation, alongside dispute resolution, as another ...[/i] What has "dispute resolution" to do with the present topic?

santeewelding
santeewelding

Validation, alongside dispute resolution, as another fundamental of government?

Absolutely
Absolutely

Unlike the exploding collar, this is a serious suggestion. Actually, knowing Tony, that was a serious suggestion; unlike the exploding collar, this has a chance, both with voters and the Supreme Court: child molestation should be a life sentence, every single time. Try to come up with an argument why not.

Forum Surfer
Forum Surfer

Good idea. I've worked with a company that did ankle bracelet monitors for juveniles. I often thought the "youth" model should have a taser built in, while the adult models should be far more severe. You wouldn't have to waste government money and resources tracking them if you incapacitated them!

TonytheTiger
TonytheTiger

"I'm sick and tired of hearing them whine about sex offendor registries for the rest of their lives." If they whine about it, tell them you'll take care of it right away, then shoot them :) [added: Either that, or a GPS collar that explodes if tampered with :) ]

Editor's Picks