FTA:Now prosecutors must rely on charges of child solicitation, a Class C felony charge that applies under Indiana law as long as the defendant merely believes the intended victim is at least 14 and younger than 16.

Looks like they still have laws supporting them, just a lesser one.

I've always thought it was odd that they charged people with something they didn't actually do.. and it seems that the law they have which explains that they merely have to believe they're soliciting a minor is all they need.

I remember once asking on here -- when a guy killed himself over being featured on the show -- how they can charge these guys with actually soliciting a child when there was no child, and how they can charge them for showing up, when you actually have no idea if they'd have gotten uncomfortable and done nothing. It's slippery because obviously, you want to catch them before they actually do something to a minor.... I think the law they're using makes the most sense, and while it's not 20 years, 8 years in prison is a good, long time to think about what they were intending to do.

I hope they give them mental help, though, because otherwise, they're not going to get better. Then again, I'm of the mind that almost everyone who is in prison, but will be released, needs mental help so they don't re-offend and are able to return to society with a better understanding of who they are and why they did what they did and how to not do it again.

The ruling probably depends on minor details of state law. Massachusetts courts went the other way and upheld an attempted rape conviction when the defendant tried to rent a nonexistent child from a police officer.

The existence of a solicitation crime may have convinced the courts in the linked story to rule otherwise. If every charge of solicitation implies the more serious charge of attempted something-or-other, that's that kind of redundancy judges don't approve of.

serpent_sky:
I hope they give them mental help, though, because otherwise, they're not going to get better. Then again, I'm of the mind that almost everyone who is in prison, but will be released, needs mental help so they don't re-offend and are able to return to society with a better understanding of who they are and why they did what they did and how to not do it again.

I would support 6 month psyche ward retreat for recuperating them along with 6 years probation and mandated therapy sessions. (Instead of prison if there is no actual victim).

So much for the "intent" part of the law.

serpent_sky, sloppy shoes

The problem is, current law does not really distinguish between pedophilia and lusting over 17 year old girls. Usually it's a slightly more serious degree of statutory rape if she's ten under instead of one under the age of consent. In my state it's the same crime.

ZAZ: The problem is, current law does not really distinguish between pedophilia and lusting over 17 year old girls. Usually it's a slightly more serious degree of statutory rape if she's ten under instead of one under the age of consent. In my state it's the same crime.

A lot of states don't have those lines, and it makes no sense to me. They have different degrees of murder, manslaughter, theft, fraud, and a host of crimes. Why would you not have a similar system in place? Someone who is pursuing a girl/boy in their late teens is not a pedophile, by definition, and even if you still want to keep that illegal, it's nowhere near the same crime as seeking twelve-year-olds. Much like stealing a sweater isn't the same as stealing a car.

sloppy shoes: I would support 6 month psyche ward retreat for recuperating them along with 6 years probation and mandated therapy sessions. (Instead of prison if there is no actual victim).

I would support that, as well. On the whole, society is too interested in punishment, rather than rehabilitation. I understand there is a need for punishment, and that some people can not be rehabilitated, but just throwing people in jails where they are exposed to worse criminals [and learn new crimes, new tricks, etc] isn't beneficial to society. I'm of the mind that people should only be incarcerated if it is beneficial to society for them to be. We have jails full of people who do not belong there -- they, and society -- would be better off if they were getting some sort of help for the problems that caused them to do what they did or would have done, in the case of these people who get busted in online stings.

ZAZ:
The problem is, current law does not really distinguish between pedophilia and lusting over 17 year old girls. Usually it's a slightly more serious degree of statutory rape if she's ten under instead of one under the age of consent. In my state it's the same crime.

Hmm...

I know my state says every sexual contact under 14 is illegal, for both parties, even if they are both under 14. And 16 is the age of consent here. Though- I don't know if a 17/16 relationship would get punished here, which plays to your point. I also don't know if the punishments are the same for farking a 7 year old as when you fark a 15 year old- which would also play to your point.

But for my state, at least, there is a degree of legal separation on face.

Even twelve years is kind of old for the Age of Pedophilia as many 12 year old girls are visibly into puberty. You may recall a Fark headline: "Pic of F-cupped 11-year-old in bikini reported to ease anti-Japan tension in China."

My impression from press coverage and appeals court decisions is that pedophiles tend to go for the ten and under crowd and merely creepy guys tend to go for the thirteen and up crowd.

Setting the division at ten would probably do the right thing. Ten happens to be the common law age of consent in my state, raised by statute in the 19th century to 13. (Over that age the crime was fornication, same as if you seduced an adult without marrying her first.)

serpent_sky:
I would support that, as well. On the whole, society is too interested in punishment, rather than rehabilitation. I understand there is a need for punishment, and that some people can not be rehabilitated, but just throwing people in jails where they are exposed to worse criminals [and learn new crimes, new tricks, etc] isn't beneficial to society. I'm of the mind that people should only be incarcerated if it is beneficial to society for them to be. We have jails full of people who do not belong there -- they, and society -- would be better off if they were getting some sort of help for the problems that caused them to do what they did or would have done, in the case of these people who get busted in online stings.

I would agree. To clarify my original statement though- I just made up the numbers based on how long people seem to go to prison / rehab. I'm sure people who study/research this could come up with a more detailed solution. They may also have more input on the benefits of prison. Personally, I believe prison is more about removing the people from society than rehabilitating them- that's why I suggested a psyche ward type format (those can have their own problems) to provide punishment, but in a facility geared towards placing them back in society in an effective manner.

I also would like to see my solution tried in some places, at least, just so we can do comparitive studies.

ZAZ: Even twelve years is kind of old for the Age of Pedophilia as many 12 year old girls are visibly into puberty. You may recall a Fark headline: "Pic of F-cupped 11-year-old in bikini reported to ease anti-Japan tension in China."

My impression from press coverage and appeals court decisions is that pedophiles tend to go for the ten and under crowd and

This is a large problem I have with the wave of prosecutions, etc- especially for younger kids. My experience with 20ish year olds is that the immature ones, who don't place value and aren't capable of understanding the complexity of emotional needs yet, simply relate more to younger girls/boys. I view putting an age limit restriction as necessary, but as people hit puberty and beyond- where they are sexually developed as you stated- it becomes harder and harder to say that a person over 18 is guaranteed to be more mature than a person under 18.

sloppy shoes: I would agree. To clarify my original statement though- I just made up the numbers based on how long people seem to go to prison / rehab. I'm sure people who study/research this could come up with a more detailed solution. They may also have more input on the benefits of prison. Personally, I believe prison is more about removing the people from society than rehabilitating them- that's why I suggested a psyche ward type format (those can have their own problems) to provide punishment, but in a facility geared towards placing them back in society in an effective manner.

I also would like to see my solution tried in some places, at least, just so we can do comparitive studies.


I agree with you. Obviously the numbers were just hypothetical -- I'm sure people who know more about dealing with these things would be able to come up with numbers. There may not even be hard numbers... therapy tends to vary based on the severity of the problem. Some people are "cut free" much sooner than others with the same diagnosis because they responded better/faster.

I can't say for certain, as I'm not an expert, but I can't help but think that gearing prisons towards more of a rehabilitation/therapy model would be a good idea, especially if people will be out in a few months/years. It's short-sighted to not think about what will happen when they return to society. And in the case of these guys, putting them on a list that limits their lives to the point that they can barely live them, really makes no sense.

Attempted pedophilia? Now honestly, what is that? Do they give a Nobel Prize for attempted chemistry?

What, no giggity?!

PC LOAD LETTER: So much for the "intent" part of the law.

This. If "intent to distribute" is a crime, why can't "intent to rape" be? (And if it isn't, that needs to be on the books....)

What about the female teachers that prey on (real) 14 year old boys?

brewssuds: What about the female teachers that prey on (real) 14 year old boys?

If said female teachers are hot, no foul.

/Amirite?

This thread is giving me Bar/Bri flashbacks.

legion_of_doo: brewssuds: What about the female teachers that prey on (real) 14 year old boys?

If said female teachers are hot, no foul.

/Amirite?

Apparently.

Jonathan Hohensee: Attempted pedophilia? Now honestly, what is that? Do they give a Nobel Prize for attempted chemistry?

Man!

Perfect thread for jailbait pics and FARK has gone and gotten all grandmotherly on us.

/I don't care to be banninated, again, because some Hanson wanna-be turns me in.

Pedo Bear: Does that mean it's safe to come out?



It sure is

APPROVES
PNSFW (new window)

That show and all their "convictions" are such complete bullshiat.

mistervague: This thread is giving me Bar/Bri flashbacks.

No kidding. I don't come to FARK for the enlightened discourse.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'll be over in TFA's comments responding to gems like this:
Also, I bet you will find that most all of these internet predators are addicted to porn. That stuff is evil.

Those "stings" were bullshiat too when it was just the organization minus the police parallel investigation going on.

And yet if I have sex with someone who says they are 18 and I believe is over 18 and they're really 14 I get to go to jail and register as a sex offender for the rest of my life.

Our legal system is fuxored.

ZAZ: The problem is, current law does not really distinguish between pedophilia and lusting over 17 year old girls. Usually it's a slightly more serious degree of statutory rape if she's ten under instead of one under the age of consent. In my state it's the same crime.

That's the way all these stings work, they pretend to be 1 year below the age of consent. That's why it pisses me off to hear about all these worthless stings -- go after the real pedophiles, the ones looking for 7 year olds, not 17 year olds.

It just seems to be the sexual equivalent of ticketing someone for going 58 in a 55 zone, and then giving a penalty just as harsh as if they were going 90.

Jonathan Hohensee: Attempted pedophilia? Now honestly, what is that? Do they give a Nobel Prize for attempted chemistry?

So I take it that people here think people who are charged with attempted murder or attempted assault should be let free as well? While no child is harmed, this goes beyond a thought crime. An action is taken, and removing the fear of being caught will only make it more likely that this sort of crime more commonplace.

Going after a guy looking to fark a 15 year old when the age of consent in most states is 16 is a farking waste of resources. Target the real pedophiles that are abusing actual children.

The_Sponge...

Nice picture, but people really, really need to learn how to spell...

FriarReb98: This. If "intent to distribute" is a crime, why can't "intent to rape" be? (And if it isn't, that needs to be on the books....)

I believe "intent to rape" would be "sexual assault" in most cases.

gorgor: APPROVES
PNSFW (new window)

You own me a new keyboard Gorgor :p

serpent_sky: I've always thought it was odd that they charged people with something they didn't actually do.. and it seems that the law they have which explains that they merely have to believe they're soliciting a minor is all they need.

It's called a thoughtcrime. Punishing it is reprehensible Read 1984.

Talking about something should not be a crime. Now if you are diddling kids you should go down.

Sum Dum Gai:

Police go for what's easiest to catch. I suspect you would snag a lot less people pretending to be a 7 year old online looking to get some hot 40 year old ass. (Plus you can't entirely fault them for going after people and sending them to prison for laws the legislature passed- they are at least part of the criticism as well).

...and to further clarify, I'm pretty sure talking about wanting to rape a fictional character [which is what these decoys essentially are] is not a crime, nor is even talking about raping a real person -- so long as nothing actually happens and you're not actively threatening the person.

Further, if someone was messaging me online about raping me, I'd not be encouraging their line of thought... I'd tell them to drop dead and block them. These stings spend weeks or even months encouraging the men, which I think is twisted. There's definitely something not right about it... though I'm not sure they could just do a reveal and lecture and stop the men, either.

It's a tough situation.

06Wahoo: So I take it that people here think people who are charged with attempted murder or attempted assault should be let free as well?

Those are actual physical acts. Seducing an adult who pretends to be a child is not child seduction. Prosecuting it is THOUGHTCRIME.

I wonder what their laws are for the "intent" to sell drugs. If I'm carrying a few ounces and don't actually sell it to anyone, does that count?

I wonder if, through the misspelling, subby has secretly revealed his favorite band.

MIguy: Going after a guy looking to fark a 15 year old when the age of consent in most states is 16 is a farking waste of resources. Target the real pedophiles that are abusing actual children.

True, but that's difficult to do when most of these types of crimes take place privately - within families, neighborhoods, etc. How do you capture a predator operating within his own house when chances are only he and his victim(s) know about it?

Going after predators who use the internet to procure potential victims is just picking the low-hanging fruit.

And sorry but puberty does not equal adulthood. I've known girls who started menstruating at 9 - so does that then make them fair game? Only if you're a sicko.

BeerBear: gorgor: APPROVES
PNSFW (new window)

You own me a new keyboard Gorgor :p

Alright, but try pointing the money shot away next time :)

It's time for the Paedofinder General to take over.

serpent_sky: ...and to further clarify, I'm pretty sure talking about wanting to rape a fictional character [which is what these decoys essentially are] is not a crime, nor is even talking about raping a real person -- so long as nothing actually happens and you're not actively threatening the person.

Further, if someone was messaging me online about raping me, I'd not be encouraging their line of thought... I'd tell them to drop dead and block them. These stings spend weeks or even months encouraging the men, which I think is twisted. There's definitely something not right about it... though I'm not sure they could just do a reveal and lecture and stop the men, either.

That bothers me, especially when the fake girl is pretending to be 17 or 16. Some of the busts are of 27 year olds- I had a friend in high school who had a 27 year old boyfriend.

As to the fictional character thing- wasn't the Simpson porn declared child porn? (I recall it as another country, but I feel that it could happen hear as well).

moothemagiccow: It's called a thoughtcrime. Punishing it is reprehensible Read 1984.

I agree... I think they should go after people who actually are doing something.

Are there any actual numbers as to how many *actual* teenagers are being seduced by men on the Internet? I get the sense that most teenagers [I do a music Web site that is frequented by them... which makes me uncomfortable, to be honest, because I have to censor my writing a lot due to the audience] are pretty much repulsed by older men searching them out, and the ones that aren't would be finding the older men, anyway, as older guys getting with/attempting to get with teenage girls didn't just start yesterday. They'd get fake IDs, go to bars, etc etc. Hell, they're probably more likely to do that than just try to find anonymous douches who could be lying about who they are on the Internet, anyway.

And I've read "1984" and I agree that thoughtcrime should not be punished. It's still an odd situation because if they did show the signs they were going to molest kids and nobody did anything, it's a tragedy. But if they were never doing anything more than thinking/exploring fantasy, it's a different tragedy.

Our society has a lot of trouble dealing with the lines between reality and fantasy and things people would and wouldn't act on.I remember being younger and thinking it would be awesome to be a prostitute... I still hold on to that fantasy sometimes, because you know, the mind wanders during sex, or when you're doing something yourself. Doesn't mean I'm going to start walking the docks because I understand the actual reality of it... but it doesn't make the fantasy any less exciting. I think that's a pretty good analogy, because nobody would arrest me for once in a while having my mind drift to that, or even for role-playing that with a boyfriend.

I don't care what the subject is. No victim, no crime. PERIOD. This pre-crime shiat irritates me to no end.

walnuts55: Now if you are diddling kids you should go down.

I'm hoping that was a completely unintended pun.