Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all, we have some important news to share. Please follow the link here to find out more!

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058419143/important-news/p1?new=1

RTE "paedophile" exposed (Read Admin note post #1)

1…1011131516…44

Comments

  • #362
    seamus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,173 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    TallGlass wrote: »
    Just thinking also, this guy been a producer for RTÉ I hope RTÉ launch an internal investigation to make sure that he hasn't done anything sinister while working there.
    There's a good chance that any investigation will include requests from the CPS to Gardai to RTÉ to dig into his digital activities on any RTE computers.


  • #363
    gozunda
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,992 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    wonderfullife wrote: »
    ....
    You should try lay off Breitbart and Fox News and learn some adult debating tactics. Screaming whataboutery to avoid answering questions and making sly insinuations is childish.
    You seem very interested in paedophile behaviour judging from your post count on this thread. See?
    Anyway, if the purpose of videoing the confrontation is to document it as evidence, there is NO NEED to stream it live or publish it, especially as these groups often accuse the wrong person
    Otherwise mob justice is EXACTLY what they're dishing out by sharing the video to the public. These groups can and have ruined peoples lives by this instant justice where they state unequivocally someone is a paedophile who absolutely isn't.
    They may have got it right this time. They may get it right 90 times out 100. I'm not in favour of ruining ten mens life for some bullsh1t witch-hunt that does absolutely nothing other than catch harmless/vulnerable/lonely middle aged men and does nothing to deter genuine sexual predators.And that "lonely" comment was made by the most famous UK vigilante paedophile hunter himself who admits the people he catches are relatively harmless and lonely.
    SMH. Some messed up opinions in AH these days honestly think a lot of you are more suited to Reddit or Breitbart. Or maybe this is the new way of the world nowadays.
    Time to delete account methinks rather than argue with some of you clowns.

    And once again you revert to attacking anyone whom with you disagree and everyone that does not subscribe to such a paedophile lite philosophy....

    Delete away - God forbid there is a record assigning any excuses for paedophilia and related behaviours ....


  • #364
    Rekop dog
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,584 ✭✭✭Rekop dog


    There is part of you that questions the groups actual motivation but If popularity if these videos lead to paedophiles thinking twice before attempting to pursue or groom a real child I think the balance or the moral dilemma on this weighs on the positive side.


  • #365
    tayto lover
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 54,573 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    Roger_007 wrote: »
    What is the significance of the RTE connection in the title of this thread?
    Are RTÉ employees to be treated differently from anyone else?
    It looks like an attempt to implicate RTE as an organisation in whatever was going on.
    Why? It has obviously nothing to do with RTE.
    It's probably the fact that if a teacher, a nurse, fireman, garda, soldier etc does something wrong they're all over it and his/her occupation is always mentioned. They seemed slow reporting this case.


  • #366
    _Kaiser_
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,331 ✭✭✭✭_Kaiser_


    Rekop dog wrote: »
    There is part of you that questions the groups actual motivation but If popularity if these videos lead to paedophiles thinking twice before attempting to pursue or groom a real child I think the balance or the moral dilemma on this weighs on the positive side.

    To be fair to the group in question (and I'm just going by the video of this incident), they were - mostly - polite and decent in how they spoke to him and dealt with him. They didn't attack him, didn't just hurl abuse at him, and recorded everything they said/did.

    This wasn't a witch-hunt IMO. They had the evidence with them and knew who he was when they approached him. In any case, there's another pedophile off the streets and that can be only be a good thing.


  • Advertisement
  • #367
    spurious
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 27,390 CMod ✭✭✭✭spurious


    I abhor paedophiles as much as the next person, but legally are these 'stings' not on shaky ground?

    Yes, he may well have had all sorts of evil intentions, and yes you could argue he is certainly guilty of grooming (even if there is not an actual victim) but it all seems a bit weak legally. If it's a first offence (which it may not be, but it may also be the first time he has been caught) I would not be surprised if he's bailed once he appears.

    I'm not saying a real child should have been used as bait, but how do we know if met by a real child he might not have realised what he was at and stopped himself? Could he argue he is some sort of fantasist that would not have followed through?

    Again, I don't want to appear an apologist for this guy and others like him, but legally is it not a fairly weak case?


  • #368
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,976 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    tayto lover wrote: »
    It's probably the fact that if a teacher, a nurse, fireman, garda, soldier etc does something wrong they're all over it and his/her occupation is always mentioned. They seemed slow reporting this case.


    well it only broke last night. they devoted a good piece of the news on radio 1 this morning to it.


  • #369
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,976 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    spurious wrote: »
    I abhor paedophiles as much as the next person, but legally are these 'stings' not on shaky ground?

    Yes, he may well have had all sorts of evil intentions, and yes you could argue he is certainly guilty of grooming (even if there is not an actual victim) but it all seems a bit weak legally. If it's a first offence (which it may not be, but it may also be the first time he has been caught) I would not be surprised if he's bailed once he appears.

    I'm not saying a real child should have been used as bait, but how do we know if met by a real child he might not have realised what he was at and stopped himself? Could he argue he is some sort of fantasist that would not have followed through?

    Again, I don't want to appear an apologist for this guy and others like him, but legally is it not a fairly weak case?

    i think legally they have him by the balls. saying that he wouldnt have gone through with it doesnt excuse what he did before he was caught. he sent obscene images to somebody he thought was underage. jail time for sure.


  • #370
    Hoboo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,679 ✭✭✭Hoboo


    spurious wrote: »
    I abhor paedophiles as much as the next person, but legally are these 'stings' not on shaky ground?

    Yes, he may well have had all sorts of evil intentions, and yes you could argue he is certainly guilty of grooming (even if there is not an actual victim) but it all seems a bit weak legally. If it's a first offence (which it may not be, but it may also be the first time he has been caught) I would not be surprised if he's bailed once he appears.

    I'm not saying a real child should have been used as bait, but how do we know if met by a real child he might not have realised what he was at and stopped himself? Could he argue he is some sort of fantasist that would not have followed through?

    Again, I don't want to appear an apologist for this guy and others like him, but legally is it not a fairly weak case?

    Not sure of the legalities, but quite often intention, or conspiring to commit an offence is enough.


  • #371
    retro:electro
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    MilesMorales1 wrote: »
    I'm all for the existence of these groups in theory in the sense of them gathering evidence to hand over to the police, but then filming and splashing it all over social media seems like glory hunting and endangering the actual work to get a successful prosecution.

    I think the purpose of the live broadcast is so the perp knows the jig is up. If it wasn't being filmed live anyone would just do a runner- but there's no point now, it's live so you're caught before you're even officially caught. Knowing it's being broadcast live almost paralyses them into submission.

    Another side of it is to shame others and prevent them from taking to young girls online due to the fear of being caught by these hunters. If it can get even one creep to think about the prospect of being caught before he chats to a young girl then I think they're doing good work. Being caught by police is one thing- being caught by a hunter group who intend on broadcasting your intentions live to the world is a whole other kind of deterrent.


  • Advertisement
  • #372
    spurious
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 27,390 CMod ✭✭✭✭spurious


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    i think legally they have him by the balls. saying that he wouldnt have gone through with it doesnt excuse what he did before he was caught. he sent obscene images to somebody he thought was underage. jail time for sure.

    Is it though? Is sending obscene photos (no doubt he will claim just the once) a jail time offence or a community service type thing?
    I absolutely think filth that groom kids should get the book thrown at them, I just don't know if he will.
    Partly thinking out loud here, so apologies if I'm not clear.


  • #373
    CIARAN_BOYLE
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,595 ✭✭✭✭CIARAN_BOYLE


    spurious wrote: »
    I abhor paedophiles as much as the next person, but legally are these 'stings' not on shaky ground?

    Yes, he may well have had all sorts of evil intentions, and yes you could argue he is certainly guilty of grooming (even if there is not an actual victim) but it all seems a bit weak legally. If it's a first offence (which it may not be, but it may also be the first time he has been caught) I would not be surprised if he's bailed once he appears.

    I'm not saying a real child should have been used as bait, but how do we know if met by a real child he might not have realised what he was at and stopped himself? Could he argue he is some sort of fantasist that would not have followed through?

    Again, I don't want to appear an apologist for this guy and others like him, but legally is it not a fairly weak case?

    There's always issues regarding chain of evidence, entrapment etc his lawyer will challenge these in the courts.

    He will be before the courts and hopefully the evidence will be seen as sufficient. If it's not it may serve as a lesson to vigilante groups to stay out of the situation or else that violence is the right response when their sting lures in someone rather than handing someone to the police.


  • #374
    mel123
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,285 ✭✭✭mel123


    can someone pm me a link to the video?

    If anyone watched 24 hours in police custody, Channel 4 if i remember, would have been last year they did an episode on pedophiles and them getting caught by these groups who go around trying to catch them. Worth a watch if anyone can find it on the aul internet


  • #375
    GypsyByName
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 307 ✭✭GypsyByName


    Two paedophiles caught the same way in Drogheda last night too and not a mention of them anywhere on the news?


  • #376
    _Brian
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,059 ✭✭✭✭_Brian


    spurious wrote: »
    Is it though? Is sending obscene photos (no doubt he will claim just the once) a jail time offence or a community service type thing?
    I absolutely think filth that groom kids should get the book thrown at them, I just don't know if he will.
    Partly thinking out loud here, so apologies if I'm not clear.

    Even the lightest charges he faces of grooming an underage would likely get jail time I’d expect.


  • #377
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,976 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    spurious wrote: »
    Is it though? Is sending obscene photos (no doubt he will claim just the once) a jail time offence or a community service type thing?
    I absolutely think filth that groom kids should get the book thrown at them, I just don't know if he will.
    Partly thinking out loud here, so apologies if I'm not clear.


    in fairness he can claim what he likes. but if he sent more than one then they will have a record of that. looking at the cps sentencing guidelines for the offence he is charged with i cannot see him avoiding prison time.


  • #378
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 13,822 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Great thread all in all. Satisfying result and Spanish Eye's contribution was an unexpected twist that really added to it.


  • #379
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,565 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    TallGlass wrote: »
    Just thinking also, this guy been a producer for RTÉ I hope RTÉ launch an internal investigation to make sure that he hasn't done anything sinister while working there.

    You'd think so, but at the same time do we really think RTE have the competency to investigate themselves.


  • #380
    baylah17
    Closed Accounts Posts: 790 ✭✭✭baylah17


    GypsyByName wrote: »
    Two paedophiles caught the same way in Drogheda last night too and not a mention of them anywhere on the news?

    Were they actually arrested?
    And if so under our legal system the case may never come to court due to adverse publicity.
    In this state you cannot be named until after you are charged and posting "evidence " prior to or during a trial would be contempt of court and probably lead to no case being heard at all.


  • #381
    tayto lover
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 54,573 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    I pity his wife and family though as they would have known nothing about his activities yet they will still suffer.


  • Advertisement
  • #382
    Penn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,981 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    spurious wrote: »
    Is it though? Is sending obscene photos (no doubt he will claim just the once) a jail time offence or a community service type thing?
    I absolutely think filth that groom kids should get the book thrown at them, I just don't know if he will.
    Partly thinking out loud here, so apologies if I'm not clear.

    Groups in the UK have been carrying out stings such as this for a number of years and I think most of the offenders end up being prosecuted in some way (might not always be jail time, could be community service or registering as a sex offender depending on the plea, severity of messages etc).

    I thought that generally the videos couldn't be made public until the person has been prosecuted though. Don't know if it changes anything that this one was broadcasted live.


  • #383
    Buford T. Justice XIX
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,633 ✭✭✭✭Buford T. Justice XIX


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Great thread all in all. Satisfying result and Spanish Eye's contribution was an unexpected twist that really added to it.
    Mod note: We'll stop that here. There is going to be no baiting someone that cannot post here to defend themselves so cut it out!

    Buford T. Justice


  • #384
    endacl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,434 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    GypsyByName wrote: »
    Two paedophiles caught the same way in Drogheda last night too and not a mention of them anywhere on the news?
    I’d imagine people have this one conflated with recent revelations about men in the entertainment industry. There’s a tenuous link, in that he worked in a room with tv cameras in, but that’s about it. If he was a bus driver, this thread wouldn’t exist.


  • #385
    voz es
    Closed Accounts Posts: 572 ✭✭✭voz es


    Spanish Eyes wrote: »
    Men are mysonigisitic bstds who think they have power. Well they thought they did.

    Been happening for donkey's years in every sphere of life.

    The worry is that like the "homeless" debacle, it will become a bit of a yawn. Now I don't mean to denigrate it, but too much publicity can often make it boring.

    Ah feck, not again, that kind of thing. They may all rely on this.

    Watch out and speak out.

    Every day is a learning day and you need plenty of them.


  • #386
    somesoldiers
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,846 ✭✭✭✭somesoldiers


    endacl wrote: »
    I’d imagine people have this one conflated with recent revelations about men in the entertainment industry. There’s a tenuous link, in that he worked in a room with tv cameras in, but that’s about it. If he was a bus driver, this thread wouldn’t exist.

    Totally agree- not sure it's fair to bash RTE on this one, hardly their fault


  • #387
    Rekop dog
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,584 ✭✭✭Rekop dog


    _Kaiser_ wrote: »
    To be fair to the group in question (and I'm just going by the video of this incident), they were - mostly - polite and decent in how they spoke to him and dealt with him. They didn't attack him, didn't just hurl abuse at him, and recorded everything they said/did.

    This wasn't a witch-hunt IMO. They had the evidence with them and knew who he was when they approached him. In any case, there's another pedophile off the streets and that can be only be a good thing.

    They're obviously not stupid enough to incriminate themselves on their own video but polite wouldn't be a word I'd use. They were by and large foul mouthed and toyed with him pretending at one point they'd let him go only to laugh it off as the offender was becoming a little relieved. If it's a group so concerned about the welfare of kids I'm not sure these would be the best videos to put out as plenty of children will invariably see them and their conduct isn't exactly role model behavior.


  • #388
    maudgonner
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,455 ✭✭✭maudgonner


    Has now been named by RTE.


  • #389
    tayto lover
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 54,573 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    maudgonner wrote: »
    Has now been named by RTE.

    Name and photo.
    https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2017/1120/921370-leeds/


  • #390
    suicide_circus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,801 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    Is this literally a victimless crime?


  • Advertisement
  • #391
    The_Kew_Tour
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,846 ✭✭✭✭The_Kew_Tour


    some right sick people out there.

    EVENFLOW



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement