So called 'paedophile hunters'

[motherofdragons33]

Apologies for sensitive subject but am I the only person who finds these so called hunters problematic?

There is a video currently circulating my social media of a 'sting' on a young man from a town not far from where I live. He has allegedly been talking sexually to who he believed was a 13 year old girl but was actually a decoy. The video shows the sting and is 45 minutes long. During the video he faints and his parents are involved, presumably this is a huge shock to them and they seemed confused and were defending their son.

The comments were terrible. Lots of people saying the parents must have known and should be arrested too. Comments about them looking like 'nonces' themselves. This is where I have the issue - people who have no involvement get dragged into the public lynching and have their lives ruined when it's probably come as a horrible shock to them too.

I'm not sympathising with this person of course, if he's done what he's accused of then it's sickening and he should be punished. But is this the right way to go about things? I can't help but feel like this type of Facebook vigilante justice is a bit of a glory hunt and is quite irresponsible. There are many cases where genuine police investigations have been hampered by them. And do the immediate family whether it's parents, spouses, children deserve to be dragged into something they know nothing about?

I have family in the police and friends in the probation service, both of whom regularly deal with crimes of this type.

The 'hunters' cause many times more problems than they solve. Many times. They are a scourge. They often get the wrong person, target the wrong house, or publicise case-sensitive information that can go on to affect crucial potential evidence.

A significant number of them actually turn out to be child abusers themselves. Child abusers often set up complex networks and seemingly helpful 'look at me!' activities to deflect attention from their own activities, and this is one of those.

They frequently target people with learning difficulties or disabilities, again with little to no understanding of how carefully cases need to be built against people with additional needs in order to secure a conviction in the appropriate way. (On the occasions that the person in question has actually committed the crime, which isn't always the case.)

They are almost always narcissists with an inflated sense of their own importance, and a minimal understanding of how case-building happens in police investigations.

The system isn't perfect. (In some police services the framework and investigative support for crimes of this nature are better than others.) But it's not 'broken' either. And lowest common denominator mob justice like this is 100% not the way to 'fix' it.

Well, they seem to be finding a lot more than the police are managing so that’s th problem

how do you know? The police don’t livestream their arrests therefore they aren’t doing anything?

think about it. A police investigation will be done by under cover operators. Telling the public what they are doing and how they are doing it will lead to offenders evading more easily.

there was an article the other day where a vigilante group got involved with an offender that two police undercover units were already on. It just puts the investigation at risk.

which is why I think these vigilante groups tend to catch the more vulnerable end who don’t realise they’re being stung, anyone can watch and see how they operate.

as for the hunters themselves they’re just big bullies. I hate watching the “stings”. They put people at risk. Like others have said there’s no need to livestream. Their tactics also mean fewer actually go to court as the evidence isn’t documented properly. Coercing a “confession” from vulnerable people like that will not stand up.

I suspect a lot of them are paedophiles. It’s much easier to defend your being on a site where child abusers go when you say you’re a “paedophile hunter.” Clearly they get a kick out of child abuse or they wouldn’t be indulging in this kind of chatter.

How would people here feel about their husbands, brothers, sons, fathers, being on the internet pretending to be a sexy 13 year old? Proud? Or repulsed?

What about police officers that do that?
Everything has to come from the paedophile side (language and suggestion of meeting) anyway not the child

What about the children of the person who has had their face, name and whereabouts plastered all over social media on the basis of 'evidence' collected solely by these untrained, unskilled vigilantes? Imagine having to have to go to school knowing that your dad/uncle/brother has been stung for one of these highly emotive crimes. There's a reason why peoples identities are kept private until they have had a fair trial.

Of course the victims are the priority but there are often other innocent people who have their lives destroyed and sometimes even face physical threat when they themselves haven't done anything wrong.

I actually agree that the hunters get a thrill out of it. If not the chat itself then definitely from the accolades, likes and adoration of people who think they are keeping their kids safe. It's a grim way to boost ego in my opinion. I remember the documentary of Stinson hunter and his group who went as far as having merchandise created. How is that purely about protecting children? It's about wanting to be recognised as some sort of hero or celebrity.

I don't have issue with them gathering evidence if they choose to but it should be passed on to police and dealt with in a law abiding way. Videoing their house/other family members puts them at risk potentially including children who could get injured in crossfire.

They are doing it in a control, monitored situation. They have mandated counselling to help them with what is involved in the job. Police in areas like this are highly trained and have to see some horrendous things through their job.

very different to a man sitting in his bedroom deciding to be some sort of saviour while pretending to be a child.

What about police officers that do that?

Officers who do this kind of work undergo a lot of specialist training. They are monitored when interacting online, and have to follow a kind of 'script' which has been developed by child psychologists, lawyers and other experts to safeguard the child at all times, as well as gather crucial evidence in a robust way.

There is a network of support available for the officers who do this work, many of whom find it traumatising and very difficult.

Having them 'outed' as a peado is more than what the police would do behind closed doors in more instances.
Peados are probably more worried about this sort of thing than the police. If anyone Google's their name, they'll know exactly what they are

there are also multiple incidences where their shitty investigative work has “outed” innocent people. And ruined lives. Because a a quick google and they show up as a paedo.

imagine your husband or brother, or son appearing in one of these videos because they’ve got the wrong “tom smith”. Your house is on there, your town.

the police can check online profiles and make sure everything lines up. These vigilantes work on the offender telling them their name and arranging a meet to identify a person. So someone calling themselves tom smith arranges to meet in croydon. If they don’t show they look up a tom smith in that area on the electoral roll and go to that address. So no, they don’t always get it right.

The police officers are highly trained, most only manage to do it for a short time, and many need therapy afterwards.

And they don’t broadcast their findings all over the internet in a “look at me” style.

I suspect these so called paedophile hunters are the same types who get involved in brawling in the local pub or at football matches and who beat up their wives.

That doesn't stop them making graphic texts towards young teens. Possibly younger if they had access to younger.

They're not meeting up for friendship, they are talking about sex to minors.

For these particular individuals? I think you're right for some of them. In general? well, somebody has to do stings for trafficking, CSA. Someone has to see the material and investigate. I wouldn't want that job.

Random vigilantes on the street making it their mission? I question their motives, they do seem to enjoy the power, some of the groups.

I saw one video of a previously convicted offender, he had been caught again, far worse than his previous case.
However, the case was thrown out of court, as the evidence was deemed to be gathered under duress. In the video, they physically restrain, intimidate, chase after him, and corner him down an side street and tackle him to the ground.

Had they just handed the evidence to the police, this awful being would be behind bars, now he is I imagine, back doing what he is doing.

If they stopped at the evidence gathering, and then handed the evidence over, it is a good thing. However, they appear to thrive on the fame and hunt more than the cause.

I get what you are saying. I think the best way forward is to hand the video evidence to the police . To say they won't do anything is slightly unfair, they have dedicated units to trap these people:, but unfortunately with social media and smartphones there are just so many of them at it, it's a very uphill task

In general? well, somebody has to do stings for trafficking, CSA. Someone has to see the material and investigate. I wouldn't want that job

there is no need for “stings” at all.

the only reason vigilantes have to “sting” is they don’t have the resources and legal authority to identify the person behind an online profile.

that and obviously the facebook likes.

yanbu. they’re doing it for their own glory and never show the videos of where they fucked up a police investigation or got the wrong person. I feel like the paedo hunter/ EDL member Venn diagram is more like one circle

🙄 use your brain a little before you speak

Always reminds me of the peaduotrision who was hunted down and killed as someone mistook the title of a child doctor and thought he was a child rapist.

Also I don't know how they differentiate the kids from the adults. When i was a child, I regularly lied about my age online, what if they are talking to an actual child, are they then grooming them?

As far as I'm concerned they can fill their boots.

What difference does that make If they are getting involved with underage children??

*paediatrician

for those who have no issue with this think about this:

Imagine. Your husband, brother, family friend is online, pretending to be your 13 year old daughter, or niece, in order to lure child abusers. Because that’s essentially what they’re doing.It may not be an actual named person they’re pretending to be, but they are pretending to be a child, it could be your child, in order to talk sexily to paedophiles and to then claim the glory of having talked sexily to paedophiles

You’re comfortable with that are you?

Absolutely this!

I always see these in the same way as when people film themselves giving a homeless person a greggs sausage roll (and then say they won’t give money incase it’s used for drugs 🤦‍♀️)

It is extremist behaviour really.

It is also entrapment.

All of this being said, paedophilla is abhorrent and more should be done to help victims

What difference does that make If they are getting involved with underage children??

it makes a difference as procedure for evidence needs to be followed.

vulnerable adults need another appropriate adult present for questioning. They need an assessment as to their level of understanding and competence to answer any charges.

cornering a vulnerable adult and bullying them into agreeing they’re a dirty nonce is a surefire way to get the case dismissed.

i saw a sting with one man who clearly had no understanding of the questions the big man in the “official” hig viz police- like outfit was asking him. He replied yes to every single question. A half decent solicitor will get that thrown out in seconds.