wonderfullife wrote: » Tell that to the people from the Guardian article I posted? One turned up after being told consistently for 2 weeks that the girl was 18. He went to Costa Coffee believing she was 18. They texted him while they were outside saying "I'm actually 15 do you still want to meet up?" and he proceeded to get up and leave. While he was attempting to leave they accosted him and videoed him accusing him of paedophilia while he tried to run away out of fear. It ruined his life and he is suing for defamation. He was cleared of all wrongdoing by the police but it was too late to save his job or his marriage. If you're in favour of lynch mobs accusing innocent people of paedophilia then I don't know what to tell you but it has happened enough times for multiple articles to be published about it. That's one good reason to be against these vigilantes and to favour leaving these matters to the police.
NIMAN wrote: » I just heard he was a teacher, so perhaps you are right.
gozunda wrote: » Jazus H Chrxst! He was caught sending pictures of his willy to the profile of the young girl. Plus grooming + arranging to meet a minor with sexual intent etc etc Keep on disparaging the group that handed him ovet to the police and keep on excusing paedophile type behaviour. :rolleyes: We do not know what other information about 'chats" other evidence or otherwise which has been collected at this point. At least let the feking cnut be sent to trial ok? You're something else....
SEPT 23 1989 wrote: » Amazing to see people attacking the group who nailed this toerag Do you have daughters?
circadian wrote: » In relation to the teacher in Derry, was he named or is there a news article on this?
wonderfullife wrote: » the majority of child molestors are not paedophiles.
wonderfullife wrote: » I'm not "excusing paedophile type behaviour". Anybody grooming children should be sent to prison. Anybody who sexually assaults anyone (child or adult) should be sent to prison. It's not complicated. Equally uncomplicated is the fact mob justice isn't justice. These vigilante groups have wrongly accused people and ruined their lives by uploading the video of the confrontation. This guy remains innocent at this moment of time despite you calling him a cnut and deeming him guilty. He's *probably* guilty but I'm not going to judge him based on a video made by a bunch of cowards. I'll judge him if he pleads guilty or is found guilty by a Judge and/or Jury. Out of interest, if your next door neighbour asks you for a chat and confesses he fancies young girls and needs some advice. What would your reaction be?
Laois_Man wrote: » Can you explain the difference please?
Billy86 wrote: » A paedophile is sexually attracted to children, a child molester has molested a child. A lot of paedophiles recognise there is something very wrong with them and go to extensive lengths to make sure they never act out, while for many child molesters there is something other than sexual attraction involved (e.g. a show of power, using the child to get back at someone else, etc etc). I don't know the ins and outs of it or how valid it is, but I've read that a few times before.
wonderfullife wrote: » Equally uncomplicated is the fact mob justice isn't justice. These vigilante groups have wrongly accused people and ruined their lives by uploading the video of the confrontation.
the term pedophile is sometimes used informally to refer to any person who commits one or more sexually-based crimes that relate to legally underage victims. These crimes may include child sexual abuse, statutory rape, offenses involving child pornography, child grooming, stalking, and indecent exposure. One unit of the United Kingdom's Child Abuse Investigation Command is known as the "Paedophile Unit" and specializes in online investigations and enforcement work. Source: "Child abuse investigation impact". Metropolitan Police Service (met.police.uk).
gozunda wrote: » The terms are frequently used interchangeably. I posted this previously ...
PeterParker957 wrote: » They may be frequently interchanged - doesn't mean that's correct. For example - Tom Humphries; sick individual guilty of many abhorrent crimes. Not a paedophile.
Tom Humphries is a convicted child molester and former sports journalist and columnist who wrote for The Irish Times. His journalism career was effectively ended after child sexual abuse allegations surfaced in 2011
BillyBobBS wrote: » Hopefully this dirty pedo didn't get his filthy hands on any Irish children.
gozunda wrote: » There was no "justice' meeted out - he was handed over to the police as is the correct thing to do. The group clearly states they used the video to document and to further gather evidence and to prevent others claiming that the group beat him up etc. They also explicitly stated they wished for others to know that he had been caught out in the act of meeting up with an underage girl (after posting pictures of willies to the profile of that girl). Sorry I don't engage in Whataboutery...thanks all the same.
wonderfullife wrote: » Time to delete account methinks rather than argue with some of you clowns.
orangerhyme wrote: » Could a good lawyer get him off? He could say that he knew all along he was chatting with an adult, was just playing a game etc