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?

Going through counselling*

The first thing that the judge told us in the courtroom was that vigilante groups act within the scope of the law

He might have done better to say they claim to act within the law

Being a vigilante isn't illegal in itself, but without any proper oversight it's all too easy for the knuckle draggers among their number to indulge their perverted tastes

This is one of many: www.exmouthjournal.co.uk/news/crime/vigilantes-jailed-attack-exeter-8887600

I'd rather it be broadcasted - so we can know the face especially if local, so we can protect our children from said nonce.

@Puzzledandpissedoff

The judge was a she…you might have done better to check your biases. Unless you’re more qualified than a judge, I’m happy to accept that what she said was correct.

we can protect our children from said nonce

You wouldn’t have to protect your children if they were in prison and there’s a much better chance of getting them there if it’s not broadcast.

The stings are broadcast so that if any other paedo hunting teams recognise the person being stung they can add their evidence to build the case with even more evidence

A friend of mine's husband was caught like this. The video posted showed both my friend and their teenage daughters all in shock and all questioning the validity of the "arrest". At that point they had no idea what was going on or what he had done, only that someone with no apparent authority was trying to arrest him. The comments online were more vile towards my friend than they were towards him because of her perceived defence of her husband.

Within a few hours, once she knew what had happened, she'd sent all his stuff to his mother's, but in that moment all she was doing was questioning whether they had the right to behave as they were. She also has to work in the community still.

I can't believe it's legal.

Op I agree. It's an emotive subject and no one wants a child to get hurt but condoning vigilante justice is a very slippery slope that ultimately will lead to more injustice, abuse and cruelty in society.

Unfortunately only a third of all sec offenders don't go to prison. I'm that statistic also adults convicting children age 13 under.

I would rather know what the face looks like if In local area.

The issues I see with this :

1.the effect on any justice actually being done ,be that interfering with an active investigation, the right to a fair trial etc.

2.the effect on innocent family members, wives,parents,children etc. Once the videos ,names and addresses are posted everyone becomes fair game. Everyone wants their pound of flesh too. So family members get threatened,attacked, their homes defiled etc.

3.the comments that incite violence and escalation. You are deluded if you think it stops with the offender, or that his presence is even needed for a violent attack in real life.

1. They get it wrong,sometimes on purpose sometimes not. There have been cases where they targeted certain vulnerable people. There have been cases where the "offender" was 16 and the "victim" 14. There have been cases where they "got" the wrong man but still ran with it. There are other examples too. None of these ended up in court(some i'd say rightly so) ,but the effect on the community and the "offender" have been massive.

5.their motives. Some might think the end justify the means and their motives are irrelevant. I don't believe that.

rocksonrocks I agree the "he" was my mistake, but that doesn't change my essential point - demonstrated by the link - that not all vigilantes act within the scope of the law.
There's no specialist legal knowledge required to appreciate that, though the judge who jailed these particular "vigilantes" presumably possessed it

A selection of other "vigilante" offenders follows; hopefully you're not going to suggest that these, too, were acting within the law?

www.wirralglobe.co.uk/news/20000629.vigilante-jailed-torching-jaguar-thought-belonged-paedophile/
www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/20035589.jail-vigilante-attacked-mechanic-wooden-pole/
www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/local-news/vigilante-fined-throwing-brick-car-26436568
www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/1004198.vigilante-villagers-jailed-attack/
www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/breaking-man-guilty-murdering-convicted-14015773
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8076585/Boss-multimillion-pound-recycling-business-convicted-manslaughter.html

I'd rather it be broadcasted - so we can know the face especially if local, so we can protect our children from said nonce

But it is usually broadcast when an offender's convicted, NC1010; I agree that some who (probably) should have been aren't, but that's why we see so many reports of "such-and-such a paedophile's been jailed"

I also agree that folk who've collected evidence have a value, but only if it's used appropriately, and attacking the wrong person is hardly that

Take a look at some of the faces in the links I posted - do these really look like the sort of people who you want dealing out self-styled "justice"?

Keyboard warriors, button bashes.

From my experience they only do it for what they perceive to be the glory on social media.

Some have already posted that they cause more issues than they solve. For a start the "conversation" is often leading and is limited use in any prosecution. Often they refuse to supply police with the content. When they do, its in no evidential quality. I've had cases where they've arranged a live "sting". Let them go and called police afterwards so all devices were destroyed by the offender which is often the only way the police will be able to get a prosecution.

As for claiming they catch more than the police do, you have no idea what goes on behind the scenes.

@Puzzledandpissedoff I understand the point you’re trying to make, but I think your argument is lacking nuance. The articles you’ve shared have a clear common ground: an act of violence or vindication. That’s of course a crime. Most paedophile vigilante groups don’t enact any violence and are there to record and share evidence of their “sting” with the police. It’s the latter that is within the parameters of the law. I obviously don’t think bricking someone’s car is legal.

Watched paedophile hunter on Netflix earlier and he had managed to get 10 paedophiles arrested.Good for him.

You are absolutely bang on, OP. These are desperate glory hunters who put their desire to gain public adulation from the hard of thinking ahead of the justice they claim to want.

These people appeal to the lowest common denominator. The kind of people who think Tommy Robinson is fighting for the ordinary man on the street; that the world is being taken over by ‘snowflakes’ and ‘woke bros’; who worship Jeremy Clarkson and think saying ‘End of’ validates their argument. These so-called stings are intellectual porridge for the kind of people who’d start a .gov petition to get Jeremy Kyle back on the telly.

I do seek nor do I need validation from anyone. I'm not here to be liked by anyone. Please do not try to change my opinion because it will not work nor will it wash. I feel what I feel end of story.

Case in point.

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/paedophile-hunters-facebook-live-arrest-21381274.amp

www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/stephen-price-barry-paedophile-hunters-18791237.amp

metro.co.uk/2019/11/06/two-innocent-men-arrested-paedophile-hunters-got-wrong-people-11049234/amp/

www.inyourarea.co.uk/news/tunbridge-wells-man-falsely-accused-by-paedophile-hunters-says-his-life-fell-apart/amp/

I bet it doesn’t show you how many potential convictions failed because of his actions.

Fucking hell MN, get your paragraphs issues sorted!!!

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5876149/amp/Disturbing-truth-Britains-growing-army-self-appointed-paedophile-hunters.html

Most paedophile vigilante groups don’t enact any violence and are there to record and share evidence of their “sting” with the police

I know that, rocksonrocks, and in fact I said that there's a value in sharing evidence - after the police always ask for "anyone who knows anything" to come forward and I can't imagine anyone criticising someone for doing that whether they call themselves a vigilante or not

But these aren't the sort I was referring to, and my objection was to the insistence that vigilantes act within the law when a considerable number so clearly don't

Yesterday, a vigilante pedophile hunter was jailed for lifee_ for stabbing an innocent man to death. In a seemingly typical ploy, 42-year-old Darren Kelly was lured to a property in Pitsea, Essex by a 15-year-old girl. But two things went wrong. Firstly, as a spokesperson for Essex Police makes clear: "Mr. Kelly thought he had been speaking to a woman [the 15-year-old girl's mother]. There was no evidence he was interested in underage girls."

Secondly, rather than a dressing-down on camera, Kelly received a beating at the hands of Chris Carroll and three teenagers, who cannot be named for legal reasons. Carroll, 20, then stabbed him with a hunting knife and fled the scene, but forensic detectives pinned him to the crime. Carroll will serve 21 years for murder, but his co-defendants were released without charge

www.theguardian.com/uk/2000/aug/30/childprotection.society

Glad you found that again, IdontWanna; the paediatrician case - which I missed off my list - is the one where people have insisted it "never happened" and is "an urban myth"

Perhaps the confusion between paediatrician and paedophile is a clue to the intelligence level of the type we're discussing?