Pretending to be a minor to catch online predators?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Reformed_Rob
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Reformed_Rob

Guest
Did any of yall see the Dateline show last night (Friday Dec. 16th)??

They did a special where they got with the fine folks (in an odd sort of way) at perverted-justice.com as they do their “work.” That is, they’re a group of adults who pose as minors, usually 12 or 13 year-old boys and girls on different chat sites, and just chat until approached by a potential sex offender. Often, their work ends up with criminal charges being filed and the sex offenders being arrested.

The show was very eye-opening!! Like, if you saw it you know what I mean, I could not believe the stuff that goes on and the people they caught trying to get with minors for illicit acts. Those guys (the online predators) were STUPID!!! One of them especially, you know who, the 2 days in a row guy!!

Anyways, I was wondering, since I don’t know, what is the Church’s teaching regarding the following, which is essentially what the “perverted justice” folks are doing:::

Giving the impression that you are somebody you are not, in order to catch someone doing something illegal.

The understanding is that you are in a place where the would be criminal, or usually, the criminal-at-large is at, and you are waiting to trap him. In a way, it’s undercover work. In a way, it’s lying.

What does Catholic moral theology teach in regards to this?

Keep in mind, in many states, it’s illegal for an adult to solicit sex from someone who is merely posing as a minor who is in fact an adult. The idea is that the person (predator) is intending to do something illegal. The fact that it’s not a minor has little or no bearing on the predator’s guilt or innocence.
 
I can not speak to the full morality of what the contributors of Perverted-Justice do, but I can speak from a personal perspective in what they do.

I support/supported what the contributors do on that site (except for some of the extreme harrasement.) I even became what they call a Human Shield, a human shield is somebody that doesn’t officially work/volunteer for the site but goes into the chat rooms to mess with the perverts. The idea is that if the person is talking to a human shield they are not talking to a youth. Also the human shield is supposed to throw some twist in at the end to embarrase, or upset the perverts. There are lots of rules to doing this (i.e. can’t claim to be law enforcement, can’t claim to officially work for perverted-justice, can’t even talk to anyone that may be under the age of 18, etc.)

The actual contributors shown on the Dateline show have a lot more rules they have to follow.

Now for my impression after doing it. It is a sickening world. I am impressed that the volunteers can live in the disgusting world that they have to deal with when talking to the perverts. I personally did the human shield about 5 times and it totally disgusted me. I have since retired from doing it because I personally felt for me it was either a sin or at least a near occasion of sin.

Some of the people on the site use it as a way to seek justice against the perverts. Some use it as a way to undo wrongs done to them (people that were abused as kids.) I do not suggest it to anyone that is even remotely tempted by sexual sin, the attempt to catch the perverts itself can be a seductive narcotic. Let alone the seductive nature of the sexual topics you talk about. I’m not saying that a contributer will become a pervert but it can tempt someone into doing other sexual sins.

I personally think that a person that is well grounded in their sexuality and moral ethics can do this the same way an undercover police officer can “lie” but it is a dangerous slippery slope and shouldn’t be taken without first talking over things with a priest and/or spirtual adviser to make sure the intent and process is proper. But that is my personal opinion since it is one of grey areas invoving undercover operations.
 
40.png
Marauder:
I can not speak to the full morality of what the contributors of Perverted-Justice do, but I can speak from a personal perspective in what they do.

I support/supported what the contributors do on that site (except for some of the extreme harrasement.) I even became what they call a Human Shield, a human shield is somebody that doesn’t officially work/volunteer for the site but goes into the chat rooms to mess with the perverts.
Click to expand...
Wow, Marauder,

That’s interesting and insightful. Thank you for sharing that.

I think I remember the couple of people that worked for Perverted-justice doing the “catch em” chatting, they said that it was very sickening, and this one girl, maybe 22 yrs. old or so, when she was like talking on to the phone with a guy, she had to really smile and laugh, so it would sound real. Then when she hung up, it was like the phone turned into a big dead maggotty rat and she was totally disgusted with the phone call.

So yeah, I see, from what you said, how it can be really trying, in several different ways.
 
Bear in mind that this is much the same as taking a gun to war even though it is a mortal sin to kill. They are engaged in a battle to protect innocent children from some really distorted personalities.
I sent someone to jail in order to keep him from victimizing the children in the elementary school where he was principal. I lured him to the police station in order to force a confession out of him. I wasn’t dishonest; I just didn’t tell him everything I knew. I have been ostracised by the community to some extent, but that doesn’t matter. What matters is that these children needed my help although I had never met them, nor had they met me. Suffer the little children to come unto me. But how can they come to him when we have left the lambs to the wolves?

Matthew
 
Marauder said:
(…)

Some of the people on the site use it as a way to seek justice against the perverts. Some use it as a way to undo wrongs done to them (people that were abused as kids.) I do not suggest it to anyone that is even remotely tempted by sexual sin, the attempt to catch the perverts itself can be a seductive narcotic. Let alone the seductive nature of the sexual topics you talk about. I’m not saying that a contributer will become a pervert but it can tempt someone into doing other sexual sins.

I personally think that a person that is well grounded in their sexuality and moral ethics can do this the same way an undercover police officer can “lie” but it is a dangerous slippery slope and shouldn’t be taken without first talking over things with a priest and/or spirtual adviser to make sure the intent and process is proper. But that is my personal opinion since it is one of grey areas invoving undercover operations.
Click to expand...
I think there would have to be proper training and regular debreifing to avoid the regular contact with preverts affect one negatively.

And while some may be tempted toward sexual sins, others will be turned off to sex entirely. Everything can end up looking perverted without a healthy context.
 
Reformed_Rob said:
Giving the impression that you are somebody you are not, in order to catch someone doing something illegal.

The understanding is that you are in a place where the would be criminal, or usually, the criminal-at-large is at, and you are waiting to trap him. In a way, it’s undercover work. In a way, it’s lying.
Click to expand...
Although I don’t watch television and therefore do not know about that program specifically, it does sound similar to what is defined as entrapment in the legal system in which there is a pecuniary interest to fulfill a quota. If one wants to catch someone stealing, the strategic placement of a diamond in a purposefully tempting location so as to pounce on and arrest the first hapless person who tries to grab it sounds morally questionable at best.

In Christ - J.M.J.
Mapleoak
 
I do not have TV, but happened to be in a hotel last week and caught Larry King and some other show talking about this “To Catch a Predator”, and I am thrilled someone is out there doing something.
Even if this is entrapment (which I don’t think it is) I do not understand why someone thinks entrapment is morally questionable. The fact is these men (are there any women?) were actually prepared, willing and desiring to have sex with a minor. And my guess is they would not have backed off if a real minor had changed his/her mind.
Law enforcement seems to be unable to do anything until a crime has already been committed, and that is a huge injustice to children, and victims of other crimes (domestic violence comes to mind).
The men featured on the news shows I saw responded to being caught with, “I wasn’t going to do anything.”, “This is the first time I’ve done anything like this.”. or “Your going to ruin my life.” This last one I find most offensive in that it is typical of people in this society to place the blame for their own actions on someone else.
This is not solicitation of an adult prostitute, these are our children.
Thumbs up to whoever got this program going!
 
These people are sick. Whatever we have to do to get these people off the streets and away from our children. God knows the system can not keep these guys locked up long enough. This is not entrapment, the culprits are NEVER approached, they approach what they believe is a child. This is no different than a cop pretending to solicite prostitutes in order to bust them. Again, they do not force the woman to be a prostitutes, that would be entrapment!:mad:
 
Semper_Fi said:
It’s a mortal sin to murder, not to kill.
Click to expand...
I don’t mean to sound sarcastic, but what about the commandment that says “Thou shalt not kill.” The intention is what’s important, like in times of war or self-defense.
 
StratusRose said:
I don’t mean to sound sarcastic, but what about the commandment that says “Thou shalt not kill.” The intention is what’s important, like in times of war or self-defense.
Click to expand...
Actually StratusRose it is Thou shalt not murder. When you look at it in the original language it literally translates to not murdering (or killing) “the innocents” which is considered murder.

As far as the moral implication of lying in a chat room for the express purpose of busting child predators; I don’t know if I am looking at it in the correct way but here is my thought:

Let’s say my job is to attract child predators. To do this I must act… as in a theatrical sense… as a child. How is this any different than an actor in the movies? Now, if someone engages me in conversation, I do not feel it is right to entrap them. If they are a predator, they will trap themselves… I would love to have that job! Yes I would!!! Nothing would give me greater satisfaction than to help incarcerate people who prey on children. Besides… it would keep me in touch with that “internet lingo” that kids that age use. As it is now, half the time I have to sit and ponder what they mean by some of it.
 
litllulu said:
These people are sick. Whatever we have to do to get these people off the streets and away from our children. God knows the system can not keep these guys locked up long enough. This is not entrapment, the culprits are NEVER approached, they approach what they believe is a child. This is no different than a cop pretending to solicite prostitutes in order to bust them. Again, they do not force the woman to be a prostitutes, that would be entrapment!:mad:
Click to expand...
Thanks for the clarification. Like I said, I haven’t seen the show so cannot really comment about it specifically. It was my impression that someone would be talking over the internet (or phone, or what have you) and trying to entice someone into agreeing to inappropriate behavior, only to bust them when they show up. Legally, an example of entrapment would be to park a car in a seedy part of town with the door left open and the keys in the ignition and wait for someone to try and drive off with it. Sure you would be catching them in the act of theft by doing so, but this does not neccessitate that the person would have stolen or even intended to steal another vehicle had this easy temptation not been placed before them.

In Christ - J.M.J.
Mapleoak
 
BlestOne said:
Actually StratusRose it is Thou shalt not murder. When you look at it in the original language it literally translates to not murdering (or killing) “the innocents” which is considered murder.
Click to expand...
So are you suggesting that the words kill and murder are interchangeable?
 
mapleoak said:
Thanks for the clarification. Like I said, I haven’t seen the show so cannot really comment about it specifically. It was my impression that someone would be talking over the internet (or phone, or what have you) and trying to entice someone into agreeing to inappropriate behavior, only to bust them when they show up. Legally, an example of entrapment would be to park a car in a seedy part of town with the door left open and the keys in the ignition and wait for someone to try and drive off with it. Sure you would be catching them in the act of theft by doing so, but this does not neccessitate that the person would have stolen or even intended to steal another vehicle had this easy temptation not been placed before them.

In Christ - J.M.J.
Mapleoak
Click to expand...
I think it’s more like the female cop dressed to the nines walking around an area where a rapist has been operating so the cops can flush him out and catch him. I doubt the “minors” are the ones who talk about meeting in person, that is the pervs who do that. Just like the female cop, they are bait to flush out a perv before he can cause more harm. And in most cases, the perv is a male. Not that females don’t offend (remember the teachers with their pupils) just that they don’t offend as often (which is why it makes the news).

I don’t think Catholic morality would forbid this. It’s like a cop who lies and says he isn’t a cop when he’s working undercover.
 
StratusRose said:
So are you suggesting that the words kill and murder are interchangeable?
Click to expand...
No I am suggesting that somewhere down the line people shortened it to Thou shalt not kill from Thou shalt not kill the innocents. And I am also suggesting that this was an expression that we translate as murder, because that is how it was meant. There has always been a distinction between justifiable homicide and murder.
 
Please stay on topic of the OP and start new threads for unrelated topics.
 
Sorry all for getting off topic. I think the possibility of saving many kids lives and spirits is both a worthy cause and sad. It is sad that I can’t let my kids have the same kind of childhood I had. I could wander out at 4 am for walks during summer vacation and nobody bothered me… Now with the internet the predators come right into your house.
 
Children also need to be educated about what happens when a predator entices them to meet their on-line friend.

Most children would think, “Well, if my friend were not to show up, or if he turned out to be an adult, why would I go anywhere with anyone?”

What happens, though, is that the pervert will give the name of an adult friend (say, “Uncle Bill”) and rave on about how wonderful “Uncle Bill” is, and when the kid gets to the meeting place,“Uncle Bill” is there, giving reasons why the child couldn’t show up, and saying, “But just jump in the car, and we’ll go meet him at McDonald’s.”

The kid doesn’t even think about “stranger danger” because this is “Uncle Bill” - someone he “knows” who has been recommended to him by someone of his own age (so he thinks) and that he trusts - so he jumps in the car with “Uncle Bill,” never to be seen or heard from again.
 
Wow didn’t realize this old thread had been restarted. You can see from an earlier post that at one point I volunteered as a Human Shield. That doesn’t mean I “worked” for Perverted Justice, just that I helped mess with the predators. See earlier post in thread for more details.

The actual contributors (the people that are allowed to say they work for Perverted-Justice) and Human Shields do not entrap the perverts, there are many rules that they use to ensure there is no entrapment and they have been worked out with law enforcement. I know the rules that the Human Shields had to live by but only the contributors and law enforcement know the rules that the contributors live by. The contributors live by stricter rules then the Human Shields.

As a human shield you were never allowed to instigate a conversation, you just went into a “normal” chat room and sit there. There isn’t supposed to be anything sexually suggestive about your profile and/or picture in your profile. The pervert always makes first contact. If you want to see how it proceeds from intial contact to final, go to their web site. They put all the transcripts up there, unedited, but be warned it is VERY sexually explicit. This can be a huge near-occasion of sin in some people. So much so I am not even giving you the link, if you really think you can take it you will be able to find their site.
 
I hope to the Good Lord that is not a near occasion sin to anyone, I mean to hear what a molester says to an child.:mad: Especially the people on this forum who are overwhelmingly Catholic Christian, I can not believe they would be “seduced” by such evil and disgusting conversation.:mad: :mad:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top