KKkitty wrote: » They live stream it because the accused can't say they were hit or whatever. Obviously to be a decoy takes some doing with what they're seeing but I'm sure they're a bit desensitised by it all.
KKkitty wrote: » You can't edit a live stream though. The accused could say they were assaulted and the fact that it was live streamed will show they weren't.
Strazdas wrote: » SnakePlissken wrote: » Just to be clear, this was a 41 year old who travelled across the country to rape a 12 year old, the evidence gathered by "the scumbag" as you so eloquently put it, was substantial enough for the police to have begun proceedings against this sick individual.... and yet you speak of empathy? Online grooming does not carry the death penalty to the best of my knowledge. If I was a vigilante and I caused a man to commit to suicide, I would be absolutely wracked with guilt and self doubt in the aftermath, no matter what he was accused of.....it would be the most human of reactions. These chavvy creeps with their criminal records pretending to be "concerned citizens" is utterly laughable.
SnakePlissken wrote: » Just to be clear, this was a 41 year old who travelled across the country to rape a 12 year old, the evidence gathered by "the scumbag" as you so eloquently put it, was substantial enough for the police to have begun proceedings against this sick individual.... and yet you speak of empathy?
Chrongen wrote: » If they were afraid he would falsely accuse them of assault then wouldn't NO recording at all solve that problem and it would all come down to one person's word against the others?
Flippyfloppy wrote: » Surely the reasoning behind the live stream is to spare the public from the frustrating news articles that state; 'the sex offender, that cannot be named for legal reasons......'
SnakePlissken wrote: » It is most certainly not "a most human of reactions" to mourn the death of a grown man who set out that day to rape a 12 year old child. You keep introducing the word chav into your argument at every given opportunity, strange that you have such empathy for peadophiles, yet none for those from disadvantaged communities don't you think?
end of the road wrote: » ......... if these encounters are being streamed to get around that then it should be an automatic contempt of court.
gctest50 wrote: » They stream them so the likes of Creavan can't say they were attacked
20Cent wrote: » What's the problem with recording live? Think that some random guy will be walking along and they think he's the pedo and they confront him? They would have been swapping messages even photos. When meeting someone you could get them to describe what they are wearing.
end of the road wrote: » there is a reason for people not being named for legal reasons. if these encounters are being streamed to get around that then it should be an automatic contempt of court.
Strazdas wrote: » What happens if they confront an innocent man while live streaming? The man would be utterly humiliated and have enormous reputational damage done to him, given that hundreds of thousands of people would watch the video. This has already happened several times, men who had been on 18+ adult dating websites and ended up somehow being confronted by our scumbag friends.
Strazdas wrote: » The majority of people from disadvantaged areas are decent people. You have a much smaller subset who are criminals and vigilantes (I would make no distinction between the latter two groupings and frequently there is no actual distinction).
gozunda wrote: » What if, what if...the possible permutations are endless. Your projection of an imaginary persons feelings are exquisitely detailed btw. The group as far as I am aware had done their footwork before hand. Had identified their man and on the might in question confirmed they were dealing with that person. If they did per chance make a genuine mistake- they could simply have turned off the camera...
Strazdas wrote: » What happens if they confront an innocent man while live streaming? The man would be utterly humiliated and have enormous reputational damage done to him, given that hundreds of thousands of people would watch the video.
gozunda wrote: » The group in question appears to be quite legally savy and has presented evidence which helped secure previous convictions. They probably know what they were doing.
Chrongen wrote: » More made up nonsense. If a person is a convicted sex offender then they CAN be named unless you are trying to say that a newspaper reporter can call anyone they want a sex offender.
end of the road wrote: » this is why it needs to be left to the legitimate professionals, the police. not to criminals and all sorts.
gctest50 wrote: » Our friends who say they're 13 and these paedos you speak of continued the conversation - usually saying " no way you're 13"
Strazdas wrote: » What paedophile goes on a site like Plenty of Fish (a dating site for 18+ adult men and women) to arrange a meeting with a child? The profile and photo on the website of the vigilante "decoy" states that the person is aged over 18 and they also look over 18 in their photo.....this is where things become beyond farcical.
Chrongen wrote: » Hardly. These guys pose as young teenage girls. Generally adolescent but under 16 and they converse with older men and hope to get a "bite". They generally have to deal with maybe a few lewd comments at worst. A acquaintance of mine's brother works in the police vice unit. He has to actually watch child pornography for clues, track paedophile and trafficker rings, deal with the aftermath of raids of preteen prostitute dens and liaise with international police agencies. He has to undergo frequent psychological evaluations to monitor his mental health.
Galwayguy35 wrote: » In this case it was a female member of the team who was the person the dirty paedo was in contact with. They set up a profile on FB, the nonce sends a friend request and is immediately told the person is a minor, in this case 13. He sent pics of his penis and booked a hotel to have sex with a 13 year old, yes in reality he was talking to an adult but he didn't know this and it could have well been a child he was in contact with. And yet we have people like you on this thread criticizing the good work these people do.
Professor Moriarty wrote: » It's good work being done by the wrong people.
Galwayguy35 wrote: » The cops over there haven't the resources or the manpower to monitor all these guys online, I'd imagine it's the same here in Ireland. Like it or not if it wasn't for these people fellas like the subject of this thread would be able to operate under the radar.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w4.vanillicon.com/v2/4c2f272c464d99a9eee64a80fbe71a0c.svg)
