News and Media Reports

[QUOTE=Ozymandias;3364928]I assume the way this played out is that after initial contact, the police maintained a text or other conversation in which underage status was "revealed" by the bait.

I imagine it's not unusual for mongers to question details of an ad ("are you sure you're 18? So it's easy, given 500 contacts, to say "actually I'm 14": 470 guys cut off the chat at that point, and 30 continue, or however the percentages play out.

O.[/QUOTE]And there's a fine line between enticement and entrapment.

[QUOTE=RondaColdSon;3365284]Isn't the age of consent here 16?[/QUOTE]Perhaps, but this is what I found on an excerpt from a Google search:

"If the child is under the age of consent (16), then you can be charged with a variety of felonies including statutory rape. If she is over the age of consent, you cannot be charged with rape, but may still be charged with contributing to the delinquency of a minor. The best advice for the future, don't have a relationship with someone under 18. ".

'Enough said.

[QUOTE=Niteluvr;3364771]Definitely all the makings of a trap.[/QUOTE]Along with the fact that it is a SWBell landline.

[QUOTE=RondaColdSon;3365284]Isn't the age of consent here 16?[/QUOTE]I'm not from the state of Georgia, but I know in most states the age of consent is 16 but it doesn't apply when the person is paid for sex, taken out of state or the person has power or influence say a school teacher a boss priest or pastor. Remember Jared Fogel from subway he was convicted of repeatedly having sex with minors but it was interstate travel to pay for sex with minors and the 400 images of child porn that got him. The best thing to do IMHO is not to even get involved with any lady under the age of 18 and if they aren't 21 no alcohol or anything illegal, most of us only have vague knowledge of the law the police and prosecutors know the law and will trip you up so bad it would be a very long time before the light of day was seen again. HL29.

[QUOTE=Stormrider;3365386]Along with the fact that it is a SWBell landline.[/QUOTE]Googled the number and found that too. Pathetic, isn't it?

[QUOTE=Ozymandias;3364089]Except there weren't actually any 14 year olds; there were only police pretending to be 14 year olds.

Consider an analogy:

There is almost certainly no weapons-grade plutonium (93% pure Pu-239) for sale on Backpage in Atlanta, and no one is looking for it. No one says "hey, I wonder?" and pokes around Backpage looking for Pu-239. That's not to say it can't be bought somewhere, but BP ain't where it's at. But let's say someone just goes ahead and posts "Pu-239,93%, $500/ oz OBO, cash only"; NOW some dumbass is going to see this, get curious, and call about it; naturally, the FBI will nab the guy when he goes to make the deal. Have they stopped a crime? No, they CREATED a crime for someone to commit, and THEN nabbed him.

When the police set up a trap like this, they are essentially creating a crime for someone to commit. Some dumbass is trolling BP for pussy, any pussy, almost certainly NOT looking for an underage provider (because who would? It's not "a thing" on BP), BUT when they stumble upon one, decide "hey, why not?" and fall into the net.

It's extremely arguable that any actual underage persons have been "protected" by this. Of course, it looks good for the heroic police and prosecutors who have "saved" vulnerable youth.

And read the article: there were FORTY police officer at the location. Who are they expecting? Sauron? The Hulk? If we conservatively estimate that 40 man hours of police presence costs $2500, a weekend operation of this type is costing north of $180,000, or about $6000 per arrest; that doesn't include prosecution fees, not to mention the economic impact of essentially removing these individuals from the economy (at median incomes, maybe $2 million per year), losses to foreclosures and seizures which will result, divorce costs, and so on.

Probably a million dollars at least for arresting folks for crimes they probably would never have actually committed.[/QUOTE]Nah, not buying that defense. If pu239 is illegal and you go looking to buy it, well you had intentions of breaking that law.

I have not seen the ad but it sounds like they went there knowing she was 14. If they had an actuall 14 yr old do the talking texting and meet them would it be different? Cause then there would be the 14 yr old you said was missing.

Anyways one does not see an ad for a14 yr old and think why not, well unless he is a child molester.

These always make me think of the to catch a predator show. So you came to tell this 12 yr old not to do this. Okay. Why do you have a bag of cookies and a box of condoms.

[QUOTE=AcWorthDude;3365475]Nah, not buying that defense. If pu239 is illegal and you go looking to buy it, well you had intentions of breaking that law.

I have not seen the ad but it sounds like they went there knowing she was 14. If they had an actuall 14 yr old do the talking texting and meet them would it be different? Cause then there would be the 14 yr old you said was missing.

Anyways one does not see an ad for a14 yr old and think why not, well unless he is a child molester.

These always make me think of the to catch a predator show. So you came to tell this 12 yr old not to do this. Okay. Why do you have a bag of cookies and a box of condoms.[/QUOTE]They got a lot of sickos to come over but since there was only cops there the charges will probably get thrown out since nothing happened really. They didn't charge anybody from To Catch a Predator years back because nothing happened there either. While these people are sickos for showing up to a house to meet a minor is bad, they have to do something to be charged. It's kind of like the law being on these guys side in a way.

Me personally. I've never even been a fan of the age of consent being 16 law. I always ignored that law and just stuck to 18 and up.

Now. I've seen an underage sting on youtube which was ripped from a tv show and in the show the cops posted an ad on BP and in the ad the verbiage was something like "I am 18 but I have a friend that's younger. " They will then set up a 2 girl special. Now this was a few lines into the ad and I remember thinking some of the poor schmucks that showed up probably didn't even read the whole ad! I've been on the highway and quickly glancing through ads, skipping the verbiage because I'm trying to hurry up and call the girl before I miss her exit on the highway. So sometimes I don't even read everything.

I know whatever ad these guys responded to could not of listed that they were underage bc I think BP would of flagged it. If they knowingly went there looking for a 14 year old then I think they should def be prosecuted but I think the problem lies in trying to prove that they knew and it was no way that they couldn't of known.

[QUOTE=NuGuy36;3364890]I'm curious how one gets arrested for soliciting an underaged lady when her online ad clearly states she's above 18 years. How would a solicitation of a minor charge stand up in court when the victim is clearly being baited and switched. Please clue me in? I also doubt any Online adult ad site would allow anyone under 18 years to post an ad.[/QUOTE]It came out in the texting / conversation. "tee hee I'm really on 14 is that ok?

Like others have said, I'm still not sure you can be convicted on intent if you don't actually do anything. I don't think the cops care about a conviction. They got their picture in the paper and a gold star on their record. Those creeps got outed and done is done. Try explaining to your employer (especially the USAF guy) why you were in that situation in the first place. (I was walking by, picked up a phone with a bunch of texts and ran in to save the girl?) Might work, who knows. It beats the cheating wife excuse, I was getting out of the shower and I slipped and fell on his dick. .

[QUOTE=Zipper34;3365636]They got a lot of sickos to come over but since there was only cops there the charges will probably get thrown out since nothing happened really. They didn't charge anybody from To Catch a Predator years back because nothing happened there either. While these people are sickos for showing up to a house to meet a minor is bad, they have to do something to be charged. It's kind of like the law being on these guys side in a way.[/QUOTE]If most charges are eventually dropped, perhaps the main point of these stings is to destroy the lives and careers of the hobbyists who show up.

Sure enough the mugshots of all the 23 hobbyists caught in this sting are on the FRONT page of the Gwinnett Daily Post Newspaper. These guys are going to be fucked over royally, even if the charges are eventually dropped.

[URL]http://www.gwinnettdailypost.com/local/suspected-child-predators-arrested-in-gwinnett/article_ca5e602d-a195-53d4-a96b-939825019f71.html[/URL]

That's some scary shit!!

Imagine your wife / gf finding out you were hiring hookers. Damn and the whole world.

[QUOTE=NuGuy36;3366257]Sure enough the mugshots of all the 23 hobbyists caught in this sting are on the FRONT page of the Gwinnett Daily Post Newspaper. These guys are going to be fucked over royally, even if the charges are eventually dropped.

[URL]http://www.gwinnettdailypost.com/local/suspected-child-predators-arrested-in-gwinnett/article_ca5e602d-a195-53d4-a96b-939825019f71.html[/URL][/QUOTE]Kind of surprising that they're all pretty much working class, blue collar types (only two guys in knowledge fields); sort of challenges my assumptions about the monger demographic.

(Obviously, location is a factor, Gwinnett, but still.).

O.

[QUOTE=Ozymandias;3366456]Kind of surprising that they're all pretty much working class, blue collar types (only two guys in knowledge fields); sort of challenges my assumptions about the monger demographic.

(Obviously, location is a factor, Gwinnett, but still.).

O.[/QUOTE]These four paragraphs in the story kinda says it all. No question, these dudes are in deep trouble!

Smiths said the "chatters" were trained to understand what child predators are looking for on different online forums. They posed as kids around age 13 on dating websites, chat rooms and notorious websites such as [URL]BackPage.com[/URL].

Then they waited.

"The offenders initiate the contact, not the chatters," Smiths said. "(Offenders) initiate any talk of anything sexual the chatters don't do that. That's how we know these are true offenders. They are initiating this; they are seeking this out. ".

Once potential offenders made contact with "chatters," the agents made it clear that they're underage. Smiths said they repeated the ages their pretend ages over and over again.

[QUOTE=NuGuy36;3366477]These four paragraphs in the story kinda says it all.

Smiths said the "chatters" were trained to understand what child predators are looking for on different online forums. They posed as kids around age 13 on dating websites, chat rooms and notorious websites such as [URL]BackPage.com[/URL].

Then they waited.

"The offenders initiate the contact, not the chatters," Smiths said. "(Offenders) initiate any talk of anything sexual the chatters don't do that. That's how we know these are true offenders. They are initiating this; they are seeking this out. ".

Once potential offenders made contact with "chatters," the agents made it clear that they're underage. Smiths said they repeated the ages their pretend ages over and over again.[/QUOTE]And that's why nobody feels sorry for them. They were on the hunt for underage girls and fell for the trap. With those "high-paying" blue collar jobs (of lack thereof), most will only get a public defender. But, as Oz said, it is a little strange that most were blue collar guys. I would've expected a few more to be white collar types as there are plenty of stupid guys in all income brackets.