I have worked in the Protective industry for years. And this is the kind of guy who would do exactly as they say he did.
It amazes me anyone is surprised at this. The concern should not be that he may have been framed but how many victoms are out there!
This guy is scary stupid.
He also had explicit telephone conversations with the detective posing as the girl, authorities said.
I would hope I could tell if someone was 14 or an adult?
[quote]Kayrob wrote:
Not so much his political affiliation, just the fact that someone who works in intelligence could be dumb enough to use a work computer, and be so blatent about this.
[/quote]
A police officer who worked for a local department here in Minnesota used the department computer to sell stolen good on eBay.
Stupid people are everywhere. This should not be a surprise.
[quote]kiki16 wrote:
sounds like he’s being framed. Why would he tell the “girl” who he was?[/quote]
Come ON people. Power impresses. How far has naivete spread?
[quote]Professor X wrote:
vroom wrote:
Are you guys that are complaining afraid to get caught in a sting yourself or what?
Fry the bastard.
That’s what I don’t get. Why is anyone suddenly so worried about whether he was framed? Nothing suggests he was framed. He was simply caught red handed. Is it because of his political affiliation?[/quote]
I believe the fact that he works for Homeland Security, a federal agency that is supposed to secure the safety of all citizens is what is incedulous about all this. Of course he ought to be put away, not only for being a pediophile but for his mere stupidity; or it may be he thought he was above the law, i. e., working for Homeland Security, he would never be suspected nor caught. Yet, he tells the undercover who he is and where he works…what the hell is that?? I guess you don’t have to have any brains to work for Homeland Security or any morality. Scary and crazy shit really; who else is out there doing God knows what??
MB
[quote]PSlave wrote:
kiki16 wrote:
sounds like he’s being framed. Why would he tell the “girl” who he was?
Come ON people. Power impresses. How far has naivete spread?[/quote]
What the hell is that?
edit: Nvm. Thanks to good ol’ dictionary.
[quote]ExNole wrote:
The guy confessed, whats all this talk about framing someone?[/quote]
well, it is a frame but apparently a legal one.
what i’m wondering is( and that’s wondering not defending ):
what makes it legal for cops to tempt people with crime ? (in this case pedophelia but also drugs, or posing as hookers etc etc.)
also how is it a crime if this “14 yr old” he was communicating with doesn’t even exist ?
isn’t the police officer who’s chatting about sex w/ a minor(the 14 yr old she’s posing as) also taking part in the same crime ?
how is this different from statutory rape or consensual sex w/ a minor like w/ that blondie teacher chick who’s all over the news ?
[quote]swivel wrote:
ExNole wrote:
The guy confessed, whats all this talk about framing someone?
well, it is a frame but apparently a legal one.
what i’m wondering is( and that’s wondering not defending ):
what makes it legal for cops to tempt people with crime ? (in this case pedophelia but also drugs, or posing as hookers etc etc.)
also how is it a crime if this “14 yr old” he was communicating with doesn’t even exist ?
isn’t the police officer who’s chatting about sex w/ a minor(the 14 yr old she’s posing as) also taking part in the same crime ?
how is this different from statutory rape or consensual sex w/ a minor like w/ that blondie teacher chick who’s all over the news ?
[/quote]
Gee, you sure sound as if your defending it. I can’t help but wonder if all of these questions would arise if the perpetrator had been someone else or looked different.
None of this is new. This is how police have operated for years and no one raises a voice when a guy who just wants to get laid gets arrested for talking to a hooker who happens to be a cop. Not only is the guy not hurting anyone, the hooker (had she been real) wouldn’t be hurting anyone either…aside from STDs.
If there is any argument, it should be about issues like this, not in questioning why some old bastard who really wanted to screw a 14 year old got arrested.
Real issues that we should be mad at are the huge expenses of a failed war on drugs. We should be mad at millions wasted to stop the horrors of marijuana use. We should not be concerned because some old bastard wanted to screw a 14 year old girl and got caught.
I simply don’t understand how this issue brings forth criticism of law enforcement when all of these other issues don’t ever get discussed as needing to change.
Again, are people asking question because of his political affilitation? Some of you thought that people in high positions of government were “good people”? Wow, I sure as hell didn’t.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
swivel wrote:
Gee, you sure sound as if your defending it. I can’t help but wonder if all of these questions would arise if the perpetrator had been someone else or looked different.[/quote]
i understand your point. that’s why i wrote the disclaimer. really, take my questions at face value; i’m thinking about these things simply because this is when they came up. [quote]
None of this is new. This is how police have operated for years and no one raises a voice when a guy who just wants to get laid gets arrested for talking to a hooker who happens to be a cop. Not only is the guy not hurting anyone, the hooker (had she been real) wouldn’t be hurting anyone either…aside from STDs.
[/quote] i know it’s not new, but this is the time in my life when i’m wondering how it works. and i was just wondering it last week when i saw the show on these guys . it also made me think of the guy in my town, who’s a really good guy, who owns the beer store and he got stung by the abcc who sent this 20 yr “kid” who was 6’4" 250+ w/ phony facial hair and dressed like he’d been on a road crew all day in to buy a sixer. that was 2 years back and even the local cops thought it was a shitty deal… so much so they now tip off when a window when stings can happen. i was wondering back then if it’s a crime to sell to a minor isn’t it also a crime to purchase as a minor ? [quote]
If there is any argument, it should be about issues like this, not in questioning why some old bastard who really wanted to screw a 14 year old got arrested.
Real issues that we should be mad at are the huge expenses of a failed war on drugs. We should be mad at millions wasted to stop the horrors of marijuana use. We should not be concerned because some old bastard wanted to screw a 14 year old girl and got caught.[/quote]
the more i learn about those things the more they piss me off. and for the record screw this guy -it was probably his idea for us all to go out and buy duct tape and plastic.[quote]
I simply don’t understand how this issue brings forth criticism of law enforcement when all of these other issues don’t ever get discussed as needing to change.
Again, are people asking question because of his political affilitation? Some of you thought that people in high positions of government were “good people”? Wow, I sure as hell didn’t.[/quote]
i surely don’t disagree and really don’t give a flyin’ twofer who the guy was or who he works for; it’s hardly surprising another member of the gov’t, paticularily the current administration, is being arrested is it ? again i really am just looking for a legal answer and insight into the thinking because i’m curious about the world i live in.
[quote]BookemD wrote:
Not that this is by know means funny, the guy is obviously sick and not too bright, but he sent a picture with his DHS badge? WTF? He should be put away for life for going after children and beaten daily for being an idiot![/quote]
There has to be a relatively severe security breach in all of this.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Tank53 wrote:
Check this out. My jaw is hanging…
http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/04/04/homeland.arrest/index.html
You’re disturbed about the arrest but not the fact that he was seducing kids over the internet?[/quote]
Both!
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Tank53 wrote:
Check this out. My jaw is hanging…
http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/04/04/homeland.arrest/index.html
You’re disturbed about the arrest but not the fact that he was seducing kids over the internet?[/quote]
And T-Nation did change the name of my posting in the first place. Originally I had it “I’m distrubed” but I guess they felt it wasnt descriptive enough.
[quote]swivel wrote:
i know it’s not new, but this is the time in my life when i’m wondering how it works. and i was just wondering it last week when i saw the show on these guys . it also made me think of the guy in my town, who’s a really good guy, who owns the beer store and he got stung by the abcc who sent this 20 yr “kid” who was 6’4" 250+ w/ phony facial hair and dressed like he’d been on a road crew all day in to buy a sixer. that was 2 years back and even the local cops thought it was a shitty deal… so much so they now tip off when a window when stings can happen. i was wondering back then if it’s a crime to sell to a minor isn’t it also a crime to purchase as a minor ?
[/quote]
What you just described is definitely something I find to be an issue. Trapping people and baiting them to get an arrest is not only a waste of money, it makes very little sense in the long run and takes away the responsibility of the individual.
In the situation your described, if some 250lbs kid who looks 30 years old tries to buy a beer, we are really going to waste the time and money to set the shop owner up and arrest him for selling it to him? What other REAL crimes went down during this bullshit? Aren’t the kid’s parents at fault at all for their kid even trying this? I mean, shit, even the kids on the short bus knew to get someone older to buy it for them.
I bought a DVD from Walmart the other night and the machine asked if I was over 17 years of age. The clerk didn’t even ask for ID. I would hope I don’t look 17 years old right now. Should she go to jail too?
I don’t mind the discussion of crap like this because it truly does bother me that we actually have police who spend their time and our money setting people up for retarded reasons like this. What I do find fault with is that so many logged onto this thread actually acting as if this particular guy got set up.
Buying a beer at 17, considering I don’t know of even one person in all of my life who claims they never drank or at least closely knew someone who did before the age of 21, is a world apart from trying to seduce a kid when you are a middle aged dumbass working for the government.
As far as the “too much evidence” thing, he was obviously not framed. The article ended with “We found his communication still on his computer with our undercover detective.” He’s pretty fucking stupid, and knowing that he works for Homeland Security makes me feel really safe. I hope he rots in prison.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
What other REAL crimes went down during this bullshit?
[/quote]
This is something that we are seeing a lot of now. Recently, a young female teacher had to wait over an hour for police to get to her even though 3 men were trying to break into house. She was on the phone to 000 (our 911) for a 50 minutes. The 000 operator could hear the 3 men threatening the teacher with rape and death, but couldn’t get anyone there because of lack of resources.
This is the kicker - 2 days before hand, the police were bragging about their crack down on people using hand held mobile phones while driving. They were using a team of 7 police officers to pull over cars and write tickets.
So you have 7 officers handing out traffic tickets to cars one at a time (basically one to spot the offender and a team of 6 to write the tickets), but if you are going to get raped, we don’t have any officers available to help you.
Bottom line is is that states are using their police forces as revenue raisers, and not to keep the peace.
All the terrorists need to do to infiltrate homeland security is get a bunch of underaged girls to commit indecent acts on the Internet.
These guys will be trading secrets left and right in order to impress them!
I jest, but isn’t shit like this how the movies always set someone in a position of minor influence up for blackmail… ?
Some official who is in the know, who has committed serious or embarrassing crimes, then gets asked for bits of information that will be very hard to trace back to him.
C’mon, this is movies 101 stuff, not too hard to imagine.
P.S. This is not a partisan jab in any capacity.
[quote]swivel wrote:
what makes it legal for cops to tempt people with crime ? (in this case pedophelia but also drugs, or posing as hookers etc etc.)[/quote]
Because the surest way to prove intent is to provide opportunity. Without “the sting” catching filth in this kind of action is almost impossible. The problem comes when cops cross the line, and lure people in. There are regulations to handle that but, like all rules, they have their failings… and when they fail, they fail big.
Intent. It has to be accepted in this case, because the only other alternative is to place a child in harm’s way, or allow a child to remain in harm’s way, when dealing with this kind of filth.
The most constructive option is to place an adult in this position, who has the resources and maturity to try and deal with the situation.
Even so, the cops that work on the Ped squads go through heavy rotation and thorough, regular councilling. The burnout rate on the job is sky high.
There’s not enough money in the world to get me to do that job. The cops that bust Peds are a dedicated bunch who go through Hell in their attempt to protect the most vulnerable members of our society from the most wretched monsters we produce.
No. The officer is playing the role of a child, acting as bait for Peds. Your question makes it sound as if the officers are, themselves, Peds.
The why of it is answered above.
[quote]how is this different from statutory rape or consensual sex w/ a minor like w/ that blondie teacher chick who’s all over the news ?
[/quote]
It’s not. Women get off easier. It’s a grotesque double-standard in the system that needs to be addressed.