General Reports

[QUOTE=JoshWeinstein;2078251]I've been following the bust situation over on NR, and have a question that I have never seen the answer to. We all know (or should) that anyone can turn and set up people, and you can be set up by LE alone.

But how about your past activities. Say a provider is caught doing something and LE wants to look at past clents, but no one takes the bait. Can they come down based upon past emails, texts, voicemails, etc. Or do they actually have to catch someone in the act?[/QUOTE]Bro I don't know for sure BUT I think LE will do what ever they want and good luck to anybuddy they do it to. If they break rules then good luck to you to prove it. But I think for text and stuff that less you say is the better. BUT what gets me is if she gots a name in her phone that don't meen there all dudes who do IT with her. I am seriously thinking about quitting the hole hobby maybe. I don't feel good and been sick in my tummy and now there is this. I am sad for the team.

[QUOTE=JoshWeinstein;2078251]I've been following the bust situation over on NR, and have a question that I have never seen the answer to. We all know (or should) that anyone can turn and set up people, and you can be set up by LE alone.

But how about your past activities. Say a provider is caught doing something and LE wants to look at past clents, but no one takes the bait. Can they come down based upon past emails, texts, voicemails, etc. Or do they actually have to catch someone in the act?[/QUOTE](If someone has firsthand knowledge please correct me!).

They could use anything in their arsenal if they wished, but it's a much cleaner case for LEO if they catch you in the act, on audio or video. Since they are very good at doing that, it's a more efficient way to build a case with the limited time resources they have available.

Basically, research into past activity takes much more time than setting up a sting and making many arrests at once.

I would think an exception would be trafficking offenses, where the penalties are much greater and thus are worthy of the extra expense.

-Jeepster1.

[QUOTE=Jeepster1;2078692](If someone has firsthand knowledge please correct me!).

They could use anything in their arsenal if they wished, but it's a much cleaner case for LEO if they catch you in the act, on audio or video. Since they are very good at doing that, it's a more efficient way to build a case with the limited time resources they have available.

Basically, research into past activity takes much more time than setting up a sting and making many arrests at once.

I would think an exception would be trafficking offenses, where the penalties are much greater and thus are worthy of the extra expense.

-Jeepster1.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=JoshWeinstein;2078251]I've been following the bust situation over on NR, and have a question that I have never seen the answer to. We all know (or should) that anyone can turn and set up people, and you can be set up by LE alone.

But how about your past activities. Say a provider is caught doing something and LE wants to look at past clents, but no one takes the bait. Can they come down based upon past emails, texts, voicemails, etc. Or do they actually have to catch someone in the act?[/QUOTE]I basically agree with Jeepster. The benefits of nailing a few extra random providers or mongers on the typical misdemeanor charges involved in day to day hobbying wouldn't justify the large cost and time investment needed to follow the leads in the phones and computers of the ones they arrest. They tend to go for the low hanging fruit. On the other hand, if they think a provider or a monger is involved in something bigger (trafficking is one example, but it could be drugs, or suspected involvement in any serious ongoing criminal investigation) and the case gets handed over to prosecutors, or the TBI or FBI, then the stakes go up, and they might decide the benefit of maybe catching the "big fish" justifies the time and money of a forensic examination of hard drives, old text messages and phone numbers, etc. They operate on pretty tight budgets, and aren't likely to go overboard just to find if Joe Blow has been out spending a few bucks to get blown, to see if they can build a good enough misdemeanor case to send old Joe to John school. Just IMHO, but I do have some experience observing how they operate from the outside, and talking to a few folks who are in a position to know, in both the state and federal systems. It's a cost / benefit question.

Anybody know how to contact PAIGE off brand new amateurs?

So is there an annual award for "Patron Saint of Bottom Feeders"? If so, I have some nominations...

[QUOTE=AbbeyJones;2079951]So is there an annual award for "Patron Saint of Bottom Feeders"? If so, I have some nominations...[/QUOTE]I distinctly remember biting your bottom, Abbey, did I do something wrong?

-Jeepster1.

[QUOTE=AbbeyJones;2079951]So is there an annual award for "Patron Saint of Bottom Feeders"? If so, I have some nominations...[/QUOTE]There are so many choices! I was in the club at one time but learned my lessons! LOL.

However cast your choices! I'll play!

[QUOTE=UpForItNow;2078712]I basically agree with Jeepster. The benefits of nailing a few extra random providers or mongers on the typical misdemeanor charges involved in day to day hobbying wouldn't justify the large cost and time investment needed to follow the leads in the phones and computers of the ones they arrest. They tend to go for the low hanging fruit. On the other hand, if they think a provider or a monger is involved in something bigger (trafficking is one example, but it could be drugs, or suspected involvement in any serious ongoing criminal investigation) and the case gets handed over to prosecutors, or the TBI or FBI, then the stakes go up, and they might decide the benefit of maybe catching the "big fish" justifies the time and money of a forensic examination of hard drives, old text messages and phone numbers, etc. They operate on pretty tight budgets, and aren't likely to go overboard just to find if Joe Blow has been out spending a few bucks to get blown, to see if they can build a good enough misdemeanor case to send old Joe to John school. Just IMHO, but I do have some experience observing how they operate from the outside, and talking to a few folks who are in a position to know, in both the state and federal systems. It's a cost / benefit question.[/QUOTE]Not a big fish, however a few years ago when the hobby had some of the same issues going on. I was told that our fine folks in LEO was after me. LOL I know I slowed down during that period and watched my back more as time passed.

I don't know what defines a big fish in the hobby umless it's one of the guys running escort service. IE Fantasy.....and others.

[QUOTE=Jeepster1;2080215]I distinctly remember biting your bottom, Abbey, did I do something wrong?

-Jeepster1.[/QUOTE]Baby, not even remotely! I don't remember getting bit, but I may have been mentally compromised from the multiple O's...

[QUOTE=Blackhawk101;2080244]There are so many choices! I was in the club at one time but learned my lessons! LOL.

However cast your choices! I'll play![/QUOTE]After some of the shit recently, I feel like I'm an honorary member of the club.

Hey guys, hanging at San Antony taco company with Eden Franco. Not a paid date just good friends, good food and great times come on by and lets have a few beers.

[QUOTE=GottaRun;2081367]Hey guys, hanging at San Antony taco company with Eden Franco. Not a paid date just good friends, good food and great times come on by and lets have a few beers.[/QUOTE]I will be right there. As long as it just beer.

[QUOTE=Blackhawk101;2080286]I don't know what defines a big fish in the hobby umless it's one of the guys running escort service.[/QUOTE]I imagine that would qualify, or maybe even a pimp with multiple girls in his stable. That might lead them to get search warrants and start analyzing computer hard drives and such. My only point was that it's not cheap to mine hidden data off electronic devices, and they aren't likely to chase those trails very far in a standard bust.

OTOH, pulling recent call lists and texts off a cell phone and trying to use them to invite the person on the other end to set up an appointment is easy, not requiring much work on the part of LE in temporary possession of a busted lady's phone. Seems best to be suspicious if an unsolicited message comes out of the blue from a recently popped lady who might have your number in her phone or your handle in a recently used web browser that might also be on her phone. That kind of stuff for sure triggers my spidey senses.

[QUOTE=Mike1701;2081446]I will be right there. As long as it just beer.[/QUOTE]Grab christa and come on. Eden wants to eat at the stockyard tonight so you guys can just meet us there if you are running late.

A lady responded to a message I put up over a month ago out of the blue and wants to get together. She contacted me first!

Should I be nervous. They can't reach out to me first right?

Any helpers!

Please and thanks!!