To Catch a Predator: Creating Crime

[cpk]

I think the ACers in this thread should know that what PJ used to do was catch people chatting with their decoys, post the chatlog to their site, determine through various means the target's (PJ called them "busts") real identity, and then engage in a massive community notification campaign against the bust (called "follow up"). They didn't go to the police unless police contacted them first.

I don't see where in the realm of AC theory this behavior on the part of PJ would be discouraged. In fact, I would guess that in the absence of the state, such watchdog groups would be ubiquitous and would cover everything from this sort of thing to rude driving.

Gradually, PJ's mode of operation changed. First there was "Information First", an agreement where select police departments were notified if PJ made a "bust" in their jurisdiction. Then they started doing "group media busts" with TV stations. I guess this gave them the exposure they needed to work with police directly. Now that working with police is a full-time job, they don't even bother with the community-oriented follow-up anymore until after they secure a conviction and the bust is released from jail.

I also guess that PJ's administration was concerned that their former ways could get them into legal trouble, though no lawsuits ever "stuck." But that's only a guess--they don't actually appear too concerned about legal ramifications, at least publicly. One guy in Minnesota tried to get follow-up stopped by filing a restraining order, but that was unsuccessful, as you can't file a restraining order against specific people behind PJ when it's really thousands of other people doing the work. Ingenious, really.

The other funny thing is that most of the administration of PJ, including the founder, Xavier von Erck, claim to be minarchist libertarians.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't see where in the realm of AC theory this behavior on the part of PJ would be discouraged.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, it wouldn't be discouraged by the state, obviously.

But if the state is dissolved and anarchocapitalism becomes vogue, the population would by necessity be composed largely of people who actually think about things rather than let primal emotion rule their actions. So yeah, you might have a few guys looking for troublemakers but you'd be unlikely to see lynchmobs. If you have lynchmobs, you basically are going to have people who want government so they can use it as a stick to boss other people around.

Many statists who seek to discredit AC try to paint it as impractical by using hypotheticals like this. Remove government, leave all other variables fixed. Of course it fails given these conditions.

If you went back 300 years, grabbed Isaac Newton off the street, returned to the present and just shoved him in the cockpit of a 747 in the middle of its landing approach at LAX, he'd probably crash the plane. That doesn't mean he would be incapable of learning to fly the thing.

[Poofler]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My question is how can they legally show the alleged perpetrators face and name on tv?

[/ QUOTE ]

Journalists have a lot of wiggle room, as long as they aren't barging into your home, your privacy rights are slim. You could always sue for defamation, but there's enough evidence on these guys that it's pretty unlikely to prevail.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I was serious..they have to get signed releases, or hide their identity. Just like on "Cops".

[/ QUOTE ]

Cops isn't "news". Those aren't journalists. Some argue Dateline isn't news either, but the courts don't agree. From MSNBC:

"From Nancy, Davenport, Iowa: How is that you are allowed to show the faces of the predators without their permission? I thought releases had to be signed. By the way, what you are doing is wonderful.

Chris Hansen: It would be more customary to obtain release, but Dateline is a news program not an entertainment program."

[canis582]

Somebody please pie chris hansen.

the reason there are so many pervs in the US is due to all the sexual repression...loosen up people

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
Chris Hansen: It would be more customary to obtain release, but Dateline is a news program not an entertainment program."

[/ QUOTE ]

What difference does this make (in a descriptive sense)?

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Chris Hansen: It would be more customary to obtain release, but Dateline is a news program not an entertainment program."

[/ QUOTE ]

What difference does this make (in a descriptive sense)?




[/ QUOTE ]

If they are relying on the interpretation that its a "news program" and not an "entertainment program" to defend against lawsuits, I hope their lawyers caveated the hell out their opinions.

One report can probably be argued as news. Installments II and III will have a much tougher time, unless there is something new about the techniques or the crimes themselves. Personally, maintaining that any of it is "news" is laughable. You dont need to follow perps into the decoy house and show their faces to provide all of the news value in the story. That part of it serves no purpose other than to entertain, whether its appeal is to the viewers sense of justice, revenge or prurient interest.

[Poofler]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Chris Hansen: It would be more customary to obtain release, but Dateline is a news program not an entertainment program."

[/ QUOTE ]

What difference does this make (in a descriptive sense)?

[/ QUOTE ]

Very broadly, you lose privacy rights when the information published about you is "newsworthy". The court holds legitimate public interest above your right to privacy. It gets murky with a lot of lines being drawn, so it's more customary to be safe than sorry. I personally think they have crossed the "news" line into entertainment. But good luck getting one of those guys to sign a release.

[Max Raker]

How big of a problem is the actual crime anyway? I mean how many cases are there in which a guy has sex with somebody underage that started with a sexually explicit chat?

Also, if you came home and found your 13 year old having sex with some dude, how pissed would you be at your son/daughter? This is different from a kid being abused by a coach or relative or something, here the kid was pretty stupid IMO to let a stranger into the house etc...

Would people have a problem if the police (or some group) did the opposite, go onnline pretending to be 35 year olds looking for kids to have sex with and going to kids house and punishing the kids or parents or something?

The biggest problem I have with this is that it is a relatively abstract crime. I mean the crime is not an issue of consent but that the party involved cannot inherently give consent.

I think entrapment should only be used for more serious and obvious crimes. For instance, I'd have no problem if an officer went undercover to pay somebody to kill his wife or something (who doesn't exist) and arrest him when he shows up at the house with a gun.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Chris Hansen: It would be more customary to obtain release, but Dateline is a news program not an entertainment program."

[/ QUOTE ]

What difference does this make (in a descriptive sense)?

[/ QUOTE ]

Very broadly, you lose privacy rights when the information published about you is "newsworthy". The court holds legitimate public interest above your right to privacy. It gets murky with a lot of lines being drawn, so it's more customary to be safe than sorry. I personally think they have crossed the "news" line into entertainment. But good luck getting one of those guys to sign a release.

[/ QUOTE ]

(descriptive opinion) It seems to me that any attempt by the government to define "newsworthy" or to effectively create two classes of speech would be a direct violation of the first amendment.

(normative opinion) Journalists don't (i.e. should not) get any special rights or privledges. This includes subponea shield laws &c. They are not more equal people.

[hmkpoker]

[ QUOTE ]
Somebody please pie chris hansen.

the reason there are so many pervs in the US is due to all the sexual repression...loosen up people

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT