To catch a Predator scandal

[vegeta rocker]

hello,

i know we have had a thread about this before, and i know i said NBC probably staged a few of their stings since Dateline has a bad record in the industry.

But NBC is now being sued because one man commited suicide because he was humiliated.

I think it sucks he killed himself, what are your views on it?

Do you think he was a victim or that he deserved what he got?

Its also worth mentioning that the article also talks about other suspects that have gotten off the hook since Dateline and police can't prove some of the conversations taking place online are authentic.

Well here is the article.

[URL="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/07/24/wbrother124.xml"]HERE[/URL]

[Darren]

0_O

Wow... Just wow...
It's strange, because I've just been watching "To Catch a Predator," and I find it quite entertaining...
Some of the guys deserve what they get, but then there are others that shouldn't get a thing... (Except in certain states where even talking sexual is illegal) Like last night, I saw this one old guy who even told the Decoy that they couldn't do anything. And he still may have been an old perverted freak, he still had a concsience and changed his mind about even goin to the girl's house.

I've seen a lot of guys on there that change their mind

And not that I support the guys, but I kind of feel sorry for them because those Decoys are really leading them on... I understand the purpose but seriously, some of those men wouldn't ever be tempted if it weren't for that damn show

Still, I guess they got what they deserve. The man that killed himself: Bad luck, but if he didn't want to be humiliated, then he shouldn't have shown up at a house where a 12-15 year old was staying. Besides, it's not like he would go unnoticed if he wasn't on Dateline.
Less noticed, yes, but he would have become a convicted sexual predator. And they have a website, I forget what it's called, that you can type in your neighborhood and it will show you all the criminals in that area and what they were convicted for... You'd be surprised at how many live in your area.

[Horendithas]

[COLOR="Indigo"][quote name='Darren']And not that I support the guys, but I kind of feel sorry for them because those Decoys are really leading them on... I understand the purpose but seriously, [B]some of those men wouldn't ever be tempted if it weren't for that damn show[/B][/QUOTE]Not that I think they got what they deserved, but no. The idea that the show tempts these people to become sexual predators is complete and utter BS. About the only good that show does is perhaps a few of the less sick ones might change their mind for fear of being caught publicly on the show.

Besides, it's just as you say, those who really are predators eventually do get noticed, though I assure you I'm not at all surprised at how many there are out there. Kind of sad really.

As for the show itself? It's sensationalism garbage in my opinion. I have no problem with the police handling such stings to catch predators, but that sort of thing has no business being handled by people who really aren't trained. NBC is after viewers and ratings instead of any true form of justice.

Was the guy a victim? If he really was trying to meet a minor for the stated reasons, no. And you can't say the show tempted him because the harsh truth is he still choose to take part in the conversations, had he not done so the show would have never even known who he was. It still shouldn't be handled by people who's only interest is in getting ratings for their station though. [/COLOR]

[vegeta rocker]

Well Darren he never went to the house to meeet the girl, the police and video cameras came to his door.

I mean we don't know the circumstances, he might have just made a mistake.

The show i believe is just crap honestly, I'm still sure part of its fake but obviously this story got very real.

[Rachmaninoff]

[quote name='indifference'][COLOR="Indigo"]As for the show itself? It's sensationalism garbage in my opinion. I have no problem with the police handling such stings to catch predators, but that sort of thing has no business being handled by people who really aren't trained. NBC is after viewers and ratings instead of any true form of justice. [/COLOR][/QUOTE]Agreed, that show is pointless and unnecessary. It's not justice at all. And even if that guy was a predator and needed to be caught, it was pointless for them to do what they did. Attempting to publicly humiliate him. I doubt that type of thing would actually make a true sexual predator change.

If he's innocent, then they deserve to get sued, if he's not. Well, he needed to be brought to justice. But instead it seems he killed himself. And I can't help but wonder why he would do that. I know if I was falsely accused of something like this I sure as hell wouldn't kill myself. I'd sue their butts for slander.

Anyway, stupidity like this is why this type of show shouldn't even be allowed to air.

[TheShinje]

Gut reaction: I think he totally got what he deserved. If the whole setup is devised to catch these pervs because they're meeting underaged kids for immoral practices, then these people get what's coming to them, right?

If they guy was innocent, he should have stuck around on this mortal coil and wtfpwned NBC for millions in damages, and scooted off to a new life in Honolulu....or something. o_O


Food for thought: We get year-old America's Most Wanted re-runs here, and about 2 months ago, two "catch-a-predator" type episodes aired. I thoguht it was odd that, while NBC Dateline gets scorned for being ratings-hungry pariahs, America's Most Wanted does a very similar show, and it doesn't even rate a mention )in either thread).

In allegorical terms, the Fox runs away with the rabbits while the Peacock gets a beatdown.

[Aberinkula]

[COLOR="navy"]Well where I live, FOX, the channel that shows America's Most Wsanted, doesn't advertise the episode. Unless I don't pay attention to the commercials. And to cacth a predetor gets advertized in the local newspaper and TV. So really it's just lack of ads I guess. That and hardly anyone watches AMW where I live. This is just an asumption though, for I don't know if they advertize AMW where you live.

They ARE ratings hungry. Catching the predator and showing it on TV is called public exploitation. If they plan on doing this, let them do it without showing it. I'm up for private exploitation against these sick people but I am against showing it on air.[/COLOR]

[B][COLOR="Navy"]And like Rach said: humiliating them isn't going to solve jack ****.[/COLOR][/B]

[Rachmaninoff]

[quote name='Jeremiah']Food for thought: We get year-old America's Most Wanted re-runs here, and about 2 months ago, two "catch-a-predator" type episodes aired. I thoguht it was odd that, while NBC Dateline gets scorned for being ratings-hungry pariahs, America's Most Wanted does a very similar show, and it doesn't even rate a mention )in either thread).[/QUOTE]Oh I don't know, usually the people portrayed on America's Most Wanted have already been tried and convicted instead of like the people on 'catch-a-predator' who have yet to be convicted of anything. The first one is going after someone who already is guilty where the second is attempting to catch them in the act, a position that is open to mistakes, especially when most of those people on the show are not genuine law enforcement.

But America's most wanted? [I]Its purpose is to profile and assist law enforcement in the apprehension of fugitives wanted for various crimes, including murder, rape, white collar crime, armed robbery, gang violence, many of which who are currently on the FBI Ten Most Wanted Fugitives list.[/I] [[SIZE="1"]quote from wiki[/SIZE]]

I can easily see how the second is a problem where the first is no different than looking at a list of people who are wanted by the law already. It's not 'catch a criminal' in the sense that they suspect they are murderers etc. It's 'catch a criminal' because they really are one.

[Gavin]

[SIZE="1"]Wow, TV sensationalism has really reached a new low with this one hasn't it ? On a side note, I don't know what this guy did for a living, but his sister will not get $105 million out of NBC for being the cause of his death, which is going to be hard to prove in and of itself.

Anyone who says this guy got what he deserved for preying on kids, as disgusting and abhorrent as that is, reread the article a little more carefully.[/SIZE]

[QUOTE]NBC was about to confront Mr Conradt with evidence that he had took part in a sexually explicit online chat with an adult posing as a 13-year-old boy. [/QUOTE]

[SIZE="1"]Paedophiles are sick, sick people, both in a literal and mental sense who need psychiatric help as much as locking up. But this show is exactly as Crystia put it, sensationalist garbage designed to get ratings. Police have hard enough jobs dealing with these people already without the media creating witch hunts designed to evoke mob-creation from the audience. Leave the police do their ****ing jobs people, that's what we pay them for.[/SIZE]

[QUOTE]According to the lawsuit, a police officer at the scene of the shooting told a Dateline NBC producer: ?That?ll make good TV". [/QUOTE]

[SIZE="1"]Worst. Choice. Of. Words. Ever.[/SIZE]

[Horendithas]

[COLOR="Indigo"]I'm in agreement with Rach on this one when it comes to why America's Most Wanted isn't the same as the to Catch a Predator shows. And these quotes Gavin provided show why:[QUOTE]NBC was about to confront Mr Conradt with evidence that he had took part in a sexually explicit online chat with an adult posing as a 13-year-old boy. [/QUOTE]The catching predators is sensationalism where America's most wanted isn't about catching the criminal in the act, it's about catching people who are guilty and running lose. There's a big difference between catching someone who has already been proven to be guilty vs someone who has yet to be convicted or arrested.

The psychological twist of seeing someone brought to justice isn't the same at all. One is simply catching someone who is already being pursued by the law, the other is making a circus out of the process of catching them so they can be tried for their crimes.[QUOTE]According to the lawsuit, a police officer at the scene of the shooting told a Dateline NBC producer: ?That?ll make good TV". [/QUOTE]That just seals it right there, the moment this type of nonsense has even the police looking at it form the standpoint of it making good tv, is the moment that officer loses his objectivity and shouldn't be assigned to that task anymore. Because he'll be biased towards cases that are more 'sensational' and that's not a good thing. It should be about catching them whether it's good tv or not.[/COLOR]

[Gavin]

[quote name='indifference'][COLOR="Indigo"]That just seals it right there, the moment this type of nonsense has even the police looking at it form the standpoint of it making good tv, is the moment that officer loses his objectivity and shouldn't be assigned to that task anymore. Because he'll be biased towards cases that are more 'sensational' and that's not a good thing. It should be about catching them whether it's good tv or not.[/COLOR][/QUOTE]

[SIZE="1"]I think perhaps as much as we would be inclined to, we cannot judge every officer involved in this distasteful show based on the reaction of one. Granted he should lose his badge for so cold a comment but that is another matter. [/SIZE]

[Rachmaninoff]

[quote name='indifference;786023][COLOR="Indigo"]That just seals it right there, the moment this type of nonsense has even the police looking at it form the standpoint of it making good tv, is the moment [B]that officer loses his objectivity and shouldn't be assigned to that task anymore[/B]. Because [B]he'll be biased towards cases that are more 'sensational' and that's not a good thing.[/B] It should be about catching them whether it's good tv or not.[/COLOR][/QUOTE][quote name='Gavin'][SIZE="1"']I think perhaps as much as we would be inclined to, we cannot judge every officer involved in this distasteful show based on the reaction of one. Granted he should lose his badge for so cold a comment but that is another matter. [/SIZE][/quote]I feel like I'm missing something here, but I got the impression that Crystia was saying that if the show is influencing the officers working with the station, then they shouldn't be working on those cases. Not that all police would behave that way or that every officer is guilty of this. Only that paticular one. And I have to agree, they need to be careful about not allowing what's going to '[I]make good tv[/I]' interfere with their judgment. Which only goes back to the point that this type of sting to catch a predator needs to be done without the cameras and such.

[TheShinje]

[quote name='Rachmaninoff']Oh I don't know, usually the people portrayed on America's Most Wanted have already been tried and convicted instead of like the people on 'catch-a-predator' who have yet to be convicted of anything. The first one is going after someone who already is guilty where the second is attempting to catch them in the act, a position that is open to mistakes, especially when most of those people on the show are not genuine law enforcement.
[/QUOTE]


Both shows used a setup operation, with faked internet chats, that lured predators into showing up to the setup for a little preteen action. This is why I was a little confused and a perceived double standard.

I went and had a closer look at how AMW conducted it's stings, and yeah, they were vastly different. AMW followed law enforcement carrying out the sting operations, to the letter of the law, while NBC dateline just took it upon themselves to go all vigilante and lynch some pedos.

I can now see why the Fox didn't raise an eyelid, yet the Peacock raised hell.

[Gavin]

[quote name='Rachmaninoff']I feel like I'm missing something here, but I got the impression that Crystia was saying that if the show is influencing the officers working with the station, then they shouldn't be working on those cases. Not that all police would behave that way or that every officer is guilty of this. Only that paticular one. And I have to agree, they need to be careful about not allowing what's going to '[I]make good tv[/I]' interfere with their judgment. Which only goes back to the point that this type of sting to catch a predator needs to be done without the cameras and such.[/QUOTE]

[SIZE="1"]Indeed, but just for the sake of clarity, that quote was presented by the deceased family in their lawsuit, so it may or may not be genuine. That said however I do agree that if officers begin to show a loss in their objectivity in favour of sensationalism then they should obviously be removed from that assigment.[/SIZE]

[Semjaza]

Even talking about these things with people that are known to you to be a minor (whether or not they actually are) is against the law in most states. It doesn't matter if he made the "mistake" or not, in that sense. it's just an attempt to stop things before they even happen, which I think, personally, is far better than waiting until they're just about to or after the fact.

There's also the fact that Dateline didn't invent this concept and that law enforcement has been doing stuff like this for years in different ways. Dateline didn't invent this concept or even the group they're working with. They're simply publicizing them.

I really don't see how it's that different from having a police officer pose as a prostitute and then get talked to by some random guy. He doesn't have to have sex with her or even give her money first to have broken the law. The [I]solicitation [/I]is enough.

It's the same concept, but obviously it has to be approached differently.
I mean, considering how integrated the Internet is into people's lives, you simply can not approach it in the same way as you would a traditional bust.

I mean, do people honestly expect them to have people show up undercover and actually meet with and talk with these men? I mean, what real example could you create where you could make a traditional sting/ambush set up given that this is about going after children? By simple appearances they'd be able to tell these people weren't underage for the most part. I know there's obviously ways to work this, but they're more expensive and involving. This is more about getting it before it becomes a major problem.

I always think there's kind of this question that pops up when you stick temptation under someone's nose in an attempt to convince them to break the law. It bothers me.

At the same time, we're talking about adult males who, at least in their minds, are significantly older than the so-called "victim", know the situation and still dive into it to some degree. They should be restraining themselves, if they can't manage to not even think about it at all. Who is to say how many of them would actually go through with it? I'm assuming the majority would not. The fact remains, however, that they shouldn't even have gone as far as they did in the first place. They all know it too and clearly some of them reappearing quickly shows... what would have happened if they reached an actual kid?

Some things are worth stopping before they even get to that level... and, beyond that, obviously getting caught chatting to some underage kid does not carry the same legal repercussions as actually going to their home or whatever else. The men who make some "mistake" in judgment in these chat rooms are not going to be subjected to the same things as those that actually take action.

Beyond that, though, I'd say show is mostly sensationalist drivel. They've shown it so much that I don't eveI really don't think any of it's faken know why they bother to put the Dateline header on it anymore. It's practically taken over the show. At this point I'm surprised they haven't done an episode about how people can use Pictochat on the DS and now all your kids are in trouble.

I do not think it's really that fake, however. Do people honestly believe that people would appear on that show, have their faces shown and their name give, simply as a volunteer or to make some money? Someone somewhere is going to recognize them. It's not something to be taken lightly. Even just making up phony portions of the case and presenting them as actual events could land the network in some hot water.... pedophiles or not.

[Horendithas]

[COLOR="Indigo"][quote name='Gavin'][SIZE="1"]Indeed, but just for the sake of clarity, that quote was presented by the deceased family in their lawsuit, so it may or may not be genuine. That said however I do agree that if officers begin to show a loss in their objectivity in favour of sensationalism then they should obviously be removed from that assigment.[/SIZE][/QUOTE]If I wasn't clear enough, that is what I was getting at. It's the police's job to take care of this type of deal and whether it would make good TV or not should be irrelevant.

If that comment by that officer was indeed correct then as far as I'm concerned it's either a case of his judgment has been compromised, or he's just an idiot who doesn't know when to keep his mouth shut.

In the end, for the most part I've never been a fan of this type of show or the operations done to catch these predators. It's one thing if they actually arrange to meet a kid and actually show up, but to go to their home and confront them with a chat log? That's a little too invasive in my opinion. Though I suppose that would depend on the content of said discussion.

Not that what they are doing isn't sick, but talking about it online isn't the same as those who are willing to actually go and meet the kid in person. Those who are willing to go that far are more dangerous in my opinion. Not that the others are any better mind you. But we have to draw the line some where.

Which brings it back the point that the police should be the one's making the call not the stations who are looking for stuff that'll get them good ratings and such.[/COLOR]