Do the police approve of 'paedo hunter' groups?

[lavenderscenteddrawerliners]

Perhaps approve is the wrong word, but do the police appreciate the work of these groups? Would they rather they didn't act as decoys or 'stingers'? I'm asking as I saw a live on Facebook where a hunter group went to the house of a man who had been online grooming a young teen. The police came, man was taken away. The main hunter guy said something along the lines of "the police work very well with us" and it made me wonder do the police think these hunters are doing a good job?

Pretty sure they don’t

No.

The groups often target completely the wrong people (eg thinking a hospital paediatrician is a paedophile) and just are mostly incompetent.

No - they can cause a significant public safety risk and jeopardise legitimate investigations and convictions.

They do also attract some people who get sexual gratification from what they are trying to incite/entrap people to do whilst “hunting”. Which I think we’d all agree is deeply disturbing.

No. Because the number of times they get it wrong (paediatrician cf paedophile being the most jaw dropping example of stupidity) and / or severely beat or even murder the person, creates more headaches than the occasional tip off or lead.

I should think it complicates matters extraordinarily. I’m a retired police officer and I’ve had cases of child abuse that I’ve been unable to charge because of leading questions asked by school staff. There is a way that information needs to be obtained that meets evidential standards. I’ve not worked with cases involving these groups though and I can see that they can behave in a way that police are unable to but those guidelines are there for a reason.

No they can cause more harm than good. What’s to stop them having a grudge against an innocent person and “outing” them as a child abuser.

if they have genuine concerns about a person send the evidence to the police

I wondered about this. They did a sting on an ex neighbour of mine and same thing, police arrived and took him off in cuffs. Seemed to be their big moment on camera.

I wondered how police would take their word for it and tell them when they would arrest them?

Seems wrong.

I was v pissed off because of how they treated his wife plus they filmed my exes house, and it looked like that's where the man lived, not next door.

I've never heard anything about any conviction. I wonder if it ever went to court.

Unable to charge due to 'Leading questions asked by school staff'

Wow 🥺🥺

They don't help at all. There have been more than a few cases of mistaken identity or where their rush to catch someone on camera has allowed that person to dispose of evidence before the police arrive.

When you see the man being taken away in these scenarios, it will usually be first and foremost for their own safety.

They don't help. It's difficult to take to court. They often get things wrong and drag the names of innocent people through the mud. If you have suspicions about a person, report them - don't try to trick them.

They don’t help. They are usually uneducated morons who do it for their own gratification (Facebook adoration from other uneducated morons and perhaps their own sexual gratification - takes a special kind of person to engage in this sort of talk, perhaps we should be checking their hard drives?)

Not to mention the way it invalidates evidence and often leads to further police work in the case of mistaken identity or criminal damage when people decide to go smash the windows at the alleged pedos house only to find his wife and kids are in there and he’s done a midnight flit.

Honestly it’s horrible what they do and the lives they ruin. They should be arrested.

When they've got a capture they go into overdrive.
One I saw the man clearly had learning disabilities and had the mind of a child hand the evidence to police.

Their motives are questionable to say the least.

No. Of course they don't! These groups are a bloody nuisance.

Why wow?

I can imagine a teacher, who knows just how to speak to that individual child and wants to help, being told they've asked leading questions and that the case cant go ahead 🥺

Actually I’ve been a bit unfair. It was a TA who questioned a child and wrote a whole statement with them before any referral was made. With the absolute best intentions I have no doubt. Unfortunately the child did not provide the same information during their interview with me and the CPS wouldn’t charge ( because they would be painted as
unreliable by the defence. It was unfortunately a rape case too. But it goes
to show how a process can be disrupted by
actions of people acting without the relevant knowledge.

The police tend to do a lot of their own undercover operations going on chat sites and being on social media, while I think some of the hunter groups can be good there has been a few instances where the groups have somehow got the wrong person, so while it's s good thing they want to protect children, it should be left to the powers that be in my opinion

The reason I ask is that a few days ago a group of "security" arrived at my neighbour's house. They were shouting "security" but didn't give me "security" vibes, so I googled the company (they all had hoodies on with 'company' name) and they are a paedo hunter group. They were live streaming it, they had all the evidence in hand and the man admitted everything. A large crowd formed, lots of police arrived but one of the company leaders said "the police always work so well with us" which made it sound as if it was a joint operation or something.
There did appear to be an element of excitement from the leaders, it made me wonder what their motivation is. They were asking for likes/follows for the woman who had been the decoy in this operation. How does that work? Would she just be posing as a teen and waiting for men to message her?

well there’s all sorts of issues around entrapment and I wouldn’t think the confession wouldn’t really stand up in court because the obvious defence is they were coerced / frightened into it. It’s possible that the offender goes on to give a full admission to the police and then provides supporting evidence ( on laptops etc ) and the murky processes that lead up to the arrest are glossed over because there’s no trial.

There are all sorts of rules that govern under cover policing and what they are allowed to do. I assume the woman that they are using online either looks very young or they’re using pictures of her when she was a child. Seems weird that they would be exposing her to publicity though… how are they managing her safety ?

I hope they don’t-and I’m sure officially they don’t. But there have been so many examples of bad behaviour from the police recently that we can’t be sure….

They don’t have to wait long. I know someone (slightly) who’s been a decoy.

but one of the company leaders said "the police always work so well with us" which made it sound as if it was a joint operation or something.

I am sure the leaders of the group would love to think it’s a joint operation and I am equally sure the police have a different view.

They must tell the police they're doing it though and the police go along with coming and arresting people. I find it v strange.

Yes there were multiple police cars and a van to take him away. Why do they not just hand the evidence over to the police? There must be some need for recognition with the Dog the Bounty Hunter style arrival and interview with the body cams.

Playing the big men protectors of the community.
I'm sure I've read some of the participants have all sorts of convictions,drug dealing,violence,DV etc.