to think the people 'trapping' the paedophiles aren't doing anything wrong

[LaurieFairyCake]

I realise the police are taking a dim view of this but honestly they admit they don't have enough resources to catch many of them.

'Vigilantes' are talking to them online, arranging to meet - and then calling the police when they turn up (and presenting them with the evidence)

And what if someone actually joins the ranks of this lot and arranges to meet someone but doesn't inform the authorities but just sets him up for a good kicking? Or worse....

As long as they're simply trapping them into turning up at a venue where the police have been told to go, and all evidence is handed to police from that point on, I think it's a public service. The police can't do nearly enough and this is a massive problem.

If they are beating the people up and executing their own justice that's different; that means they are vigilantes. That's the difference and yes, that's illegal and misguided.

It doesn't have to be a slippery slope; there's a clear dividing line there. Do you have the police waiting for them or don't you. Do you lay a finger on them or don't you.

I'm guessing the police carry out due diligence on all transcripts so the cps can prosecute properly

So you really don't care that they assume a role of authority just because they choose too?

You don't care that they are setting themselves apart from the law?

You believe that what has gone before, the reason we don't condone vigilantism, will happen again?

You didn't read the link I posted?

They already are breaking the law, making false accusations. That is what vigilantes do, every time!

This vigilante nonsense is deliberately discouraged by the police because it can actually be difficult for the CPS to build a case off the back of it. Often they are doing more harm than good.

I worry that amateurs collecting information means it won't be admissible in court. If they were going to have these sting operations it should be done by strictly vetted volunteers that have gone through training. Not some bloke who's seen a post on Facebook and decides to bait people in a chat room.

The American TV show To Catch A Predator is really interesting. They have a group who basically hang around chat rooms and social media waiting to be approached. Their methods are very careful, and they work closely with police.

I believe that one of the main problems is that the evidence that they collect is often not acceptable in court so prosecution isn't possible. Quite often these guys act illegally themselves in order to set their trap and then any evidence they collect will be dismissed and the offenders walk free.

I know a local man who has set up a facebook page to do this his target groups are sex offenders and grasses (his words)

Only problem is he's a serious domestic abuse perpetrator with a drug problem (convicted) who chooses people he does not like and labels them with his offensive rubbish that is rarely actually true.

But they are unregulated. If there was a scheme which allowed people who were carefully vetted to be properly trained to do this kind of job then that would be one thing. You would need to undergo DBS checks etc to ensure that you didn't have any previous criminal convictions. Added to that you would be given proper training, and support to deal with the kinds of messages which you know are being directed at under-age children.

But A, you don't need any credentials to be a vigilante. That means that anyone is free to join this group based on their assumed hatred of paedophiles, and reality is that by the time someone takes the law into their own hands it's too late.

And B, even those who believe that they are doing right by the law don't have any support to help them through this kind of situation. The police officers who work in these kinds of roles only do so for a short time - for good reasons - because some of the content is Disturbing, and even when messages are being sent, they know that these kinds of messages will already have been sent to actual children. It takes a certain kind of person to be able to receive those messages, calmly respond to them, and not be affected by them.

I don't think OP wants to address that though, She has already replied with a 'Oh but they are careful and tell the CPS everything' post.

That this is already patently not true is also being ignored.

I am not sure why anyone would think that gangs of people setting themselves up to act outside the law is a good thing!

Well in that case the OP clearly doesn't know what she is talking about.

IMO the people involved in this kind of thing are often criminals themselves. When the NOW were publishing the addresses of paedophiles a journalist did a summary of the people most involved in acting on the information - they pretty much all had extensive criminal records. And as pp have said any 'evidence' they gather is likely to be inadmissable in court.
This kind of stuff should be left to the justice system / authorities, however imperfect they are. We cannot have people taking the law into their own hands, however disgusting the crime.

I've read your link Blanche, I notice that the bloke was copying that American crime show mentioned in another post.

I asked earlier if they were doing anything illegal, your link said that some have hampered investigations. That one this morning who was arrested - the vigilantes had the police there.

That's one specific example Laurie. There is a much bigger issue.

In any case, there is no place for vigilantism in civilised society.

So it seems that there are some who are doing something wrong - which is what my question was.

And some who aren't committing a crime.

I think these groups are only going to grow though. The police resources are so stretched that in all low level crime I've heard of recently the public are being asked to drive round neighbourhoods looking for their stolen bikes, visit pawn shops and cash converters. There's a couple of housing estates that have hired security guards as the police haven't the resources to visit them.

It's a worrying trend.

Surely vigilantes see themselves as dishing out justice, these people (so far) aren't dishing out justice but handing over evidence. I do have my doubts about the sort of people who would do this though.

In a way it's not very different from the TV shows that set up an old lady (actor) in a house and then call a plumber who has a reputation for ripping people off.

What is? Vigilantism or low levels of policing?

And do you have a link to 'that one that arrested this morning'?

fakename - the Daily Mail are calling them 'vigilantes' but you're right, they're not doing anything apart from gathering evidence

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-35449817

This one Blanche

The one that was convicted earlier, not arrested.

I found it... Dark Justice and The Fear Team they couldn't be accused of false advertising, could they?

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3431305/Shocking-moment-paedophile-snared-vigilantes-arrives-meet-fake-14-year-old-girl-bag-condoms-chatting-WhatsApp-begging-naked-pictures.html

And you are fine with the idea because of two cases?

OK. May I die in my sleep, at a ripe old age, before we live in a country that see vigilantism as a good thing.

I didn't want to post a Daily Mail link hence the bbc link. I'm surprised the bbc call them vigilantes, and the judge does

But in the BBC link, in two cases, it was proved that one man thought the young woman that he was meeting was 18, he got a txt, as he was waiting saying she was 15, tried to leave and was charged through the streets. It's destroyed his life and his marital family home (with his children in it) had briks thrown at it.

Another innocent man committed suicide.

The Police agree that there has been a distortion of the truth, in some cases.

The worst bit is that it's hampering the Police's operations and stopping convictions from going ahead.

There was a few new 'groomers' discovered, but the rest were known (there are a lot of child sex offenders, living everywhere in the UK) and they were being monitored.